Is this "peddling right-wing talking points?"

[LAS14]

I have a longstanding interest in how to overcome divisions in society, not to get everyone to have the same opinions, but so we can work together, compromise, make democracy work.

Obama frequently modeled this sort of behavior. Take for instance his repeated observation that Republicans want smaller government. It was said in a respectful manner and it’s something that reasonable, well intentioned people can agree on.

STOP!!! Wait!! I’m not saying all Republicans can be characterized this way. I’m NOT saying that all, or these days even most Republicans can be characterized this way, but I do think we need to start somewhere. We need to find the Republicans who are willing to talk, and then talk.

So what I’d like to do is start a thread (this thread is not it) where we list areas where we might get a conversation going enough to respect (not agree with) each other’s point of view. I have a great story about persuading a friend to vote for Obama.

But my experience is that if I even suggest that the right can be engaged in conversation I’ll be alerted for peddling right wing talking points.

Can you suggest a way to phrase such a post so it would get traction instead of alerts?

I tried to find an Obama quote where he characterized Republicans this way. I feel like I heard it more than once, but maybe I was just very impressed the one time I did hear it. But in my search I found this. How many of you agree with this sentiment?

The strongest democracies flourish from frequent and lively debate, but they endure when people of every background and belief find a way to set aside smaller differences in service of a greater purpose.
BARACK OBAMA, press conference, Feb. 9, 2009

tia
las

[jberryhill]

1. There is not agreement on what the greater purpose is

[guillaumeb]

2. Recommended.

A thread about threads.

My view is that part of the issue is that Trump is so toxic, and so enabled by GOP politicians, that some wish to not engage with the GOP.

I too persuaded a co-worker to vote for Obama over McCain by showing the co-worker, a vet and former POW, how bad McCain actually was on veterans' issues.

[customerserviceguy]

3. I've found

that when someone cannot refute an argument or a different point of view, the easy thing to do is just accuse the poster of parroting right wing talking points, without any further need to deal with the premise of the comment or question.

[world wide wally]

4. All too often, it is just an exercise in futility to try to convert Trump voters.

I would suggest you spend more effort at convincing nonvoters that their lives are on the line.

[teach1st]

5. I'm unsure about the idea because Republicans seem to have stopped listening

But, you might want to start with this transcript and video of President Obama's talk with the House Republican retreat in Baltimore, March 2010:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/transcript-of-president-o_n_442423

I’ve said this before, but I’m a big believer not just in the value of a loyal opposition, but in its necessity. Having differences of opinion, having a real debate about matters of domestic policy and national security — and that’s not something that’s only good for our country, it’s absolutely essential. It’s only through the process of disagreement and debate that bad ideas get tossed out and good ideas get refined and made better. And that kind of vigorous back and forth — that imperfect but well-founded process, messy as it often is — is at the heart of our democracy. That’s what makes us the greatest nation in the world.

So, yes, I want you to challenge my ideas, and I guarantee you that after reading this I may challenge a few of yours. (Laughter.) I want you to stand up for your beliefs, and knowing this caucus, I have no doubt that you will. I want us to have a constructive debate. The only thing I don’t want — and here I am listening to the American people, and I think they don’t want either — is for Washington to continue being so Washington-like. I know folks, when we’re in town there, spend a lot of time reading the polls and looking at focus groups and interpreting which party has the upper hand in November and in 2012 and so on and so on and so on. That’s their obsession.

And I’m not a pundit. I’m just a President, so take it for what it’s worth. But I don’t believe that the American people want us to focus on our job security. They want us to focus on their job security. (Applause.) I don’t think they want more gridlock. I don’t think they want more partisanship. I don’t think they want more obstruction. They didn’t send us to Washington to fight each other in some sort of political steel-cage match to see who comes out alive. That’s not what they want. They sent us to Washington to work together, to get things done, and to solve the problems that they’re grappling with every single day.

And I think your constituents would want to know that despite the fact it doesn’t get a lot of attention, you and I have actually worked together on a number of occasions. There have been times where we’ve acted in a bipartisan fashion. And I want to thank you and your Democratic colleagues for reaching across the aisle. There has been, for example, broad support for putting in the troops necessary in Afghanistan to deny al Qaeda safe haven, to break the Taliban’s momentum, and to train Afghan security forces. There’s been broad support for disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al Qaeda. And I know that we’re all united in our admiration of our troops. (Applause.)

So it may be useful for the international audience right now to understand — and certainly for our enemies to have no doubt — whatever divisions and differences may exist in Washington, the United States of America stands as one to defend our country.

[LAS14]

6. Thanks so much! nt

[Caliman73]

7. Wanting to find common ground is not peddling right wing talking points.

I would hope that people would not alert on that thread.

However, what I see as a problem with the idea at this point, is that Trump and his administration have pulled the conversation so far to the right, that there may be little common ground, especially with his supporters.

There is a much much larger group of people who need to be reached, which is the more than 40+% of people who did not vote in the last elections.

Another thing, Right wingers do not want "smaller government". They would not mind a large government at all. What they want is a government that promotes their desires (to criminalize and oppress women's reproductive choice, to criminalize certain types of immigration while maintaining an exploitable labor pool of brown people, to continue to oppress Black people and maintain their economic dependency, etc...) those things require a pretty big government to maintain.

What they do not want is a strong central government that is responsive to the needs of vulnerable people and which stands against the desire of capitalists to exploit cheap labor for the sake of efficiency and profit.

[stillcool]

8. I always thought of the right and the left...

as business vs. social. You can't have one without the other, and the give and take goes both ways. Maybe once upon a time, in a land far away, government worked like that. Obviously it did, or we wouldn't have had the laws we did. But this sh*t we have now... Emotional outbursts, and the degradation of human beings, are the prime qualities to elect a President. I don't think a person can vote for a Republican without sharing those core beliefs of hatred, bigotry, misogyny, greed, fear etc; Business, unless it's your own, doesn't figure into the equation, and social is now just a dirty word.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. I think the best 'common ground' at the moment is "Trumpism is a danger to the USA"

Trump stand for bigotry, self-interest, and ignoring basic morals like "don't cheat" or "put your country before yourself". Those are things on which an honest Republican would agree. The greater purpose here is "cure the USA of Trump, his controllers, and enablers".