[Ibon]

It's getting old locked in polarity defending ones party, ones ideology, ones pet position. Not only old, its dumb. In the spirit of moving forward I suggest a new orientation.

In dialogue with others you look not to "win" an argument but rather to search for common ground. You assume that your position and party are valid but negotiable. If the other party is fixed and locked in you back away and break off the dialogue and do not feed the polarity. You can even say that you are not interested to debate who is right or wrong but are more interested in searching for common ground. You only continue the dialogue when you see a crack in the willingness to explore the complex nature of the topic instead of just defending tired old positions.

If we all start to promote this new orientation we stop feeding the stupidity. We start getting mature. We start interacting intelligently.

[Newfie]

Sage advice.

[Cog]

if you want to compromise your principles to reach consensus that is fine for you. don't expect others to do the same

[dinopello]

Well, that kumbaya moment didn't last long

I think it's very optimistic to assume that any kind of new orientation would be possible in an online, anonymous forum. Our local online forums are the same way with people just trying to one up the other and who knows who is a 13 year old kid just causing trouble for fun.

In-person community meetings are totally different. When you sit in a room with 5, 20 or hundreds of your neighbors and try to come to consensus on various things, people tend to be a lot less extreme and more willing to take a position of accepting a consensus outcome that might not be, in their opinion, optimal.

[Cog]

the only extremists on this board are liberals who want to make me accept their point of view by compromising my principles.That is never going to happen

[AgentR11]

Problem with the "consensus" argument, is that a lot on the left think consensus means that those on the right should accept half of the restrictions/taxes they want to implement.

Consensus means nothing of the sort.

[dinopello]

Problem with the "consensus" argument, is that a lot on the left think consensus means that those on the right should accept half of the restrictions/taxes they want to implement.

Consensus means nothing of the sort.

That's right. Consensus is when you are handcuffed together, standing on a railroad track and there is a train coming. One has the principled position that they must go right, and the other has the principled position that they must go left. If they don't reach consensus, they will die.

[Cog]

nonsensical tripe.

[AgentR11]

If they don't reach consensus, they will die.

While I don't agree with the comparison... consensus might mean, we go left, but I lefty gives righty full and absolute control over all the policy issues lefty cared about. That would be a reasonable consensus, no?

Otherwise, if you're just asking righty to go left and submit to 50 years of horror and suffering until he dies... well, might as well just deadlock at let the train do its work.

Still, absolutest, binary forced choices are at the heart of why consensus can not be reached. Consensus is reached by understanding and accommodating the needs and priorities of your opponent while moving policy in a way that serves your interests. Unfortunate, in our mindset, victory means our opponent must suffer abject defeat with his cultural and social priorities destroyed and discarded. thus.... death-match politics.

[hvacman]

the only extremists on this board are liberals who want to make me accept their point of view by compromising my principles

Cog, actually I frequently find you have great potential on this forum to change opinions, including mine. In some areas, you are very knowledgeable - your principles are backed by solid information, which you share. And, I have to admit, you have solid writing skills and can be very witty and entertaining, which can not be said for many on the forum. You frequently take the tack that others are suffering from some fuzzy thinking and you share what you believe is solid information, sometimes bluntly, sometimes more tactfully, that supports your own position. And I thank you for that. I do learn something. But sometimes...and I'm guilty of this too... we all are...our principles are not really, really grounded...and that would include you. And that usually is when we all resort to the cliche's. It takes some humility to realize that our beliefs may, just may, be based on some fuzzy thinking or incomplete understanding. And that humility is where the real power lies. I think that is the attitude that Ibon asks us all to consider in the dialog. Chest-thumping, testosterone-laden diatribes don't do anyone any good.

It really doesn't take much to change the dialog. Before actually posting, just re-read your draft and edit to eliminate the following words: "extremist, left, right, liberal, conservative, always, never". Resorting to cliche'd sweeping emotional nouns or modifiers are a sign of weakness, not strength, in persuasive writing.

So if you want to pontificate, go ahead, but it will not influence anyone else's actual beliefs - just continue to maintain the fences between us. If you want to persuade and actually change another person's opinions, reflect on your own communication style and consider Ibon's recommendations for a new orientation. I'm all ears....

[Plantagenet]

California is a trend leader in the USA. Always has been. Looks at whats happened in California over the last 20 years----the whole US is going to go the way of California over the next 20 years.

California is now a "majority minority" state, thanks to the rapid growth in the number of Hispanics. Hispanics vote strongly democratic. As a result Ds dominate the state----every California statewide office is held by a D, the state legislature has a supermajority of Ds, both Senators are Ds, and a large majority of the Congresscritters are Ds.

California has achieved consensus---they're almost all Ds.

Demographics is destiny---the same thing is going to happen across the US. Hispanic populations are growing rapidly across the US while the population of European-Americans is stable or even slightly declining. The result will be a growing majority of D voters and a permanent shift to D majorities and D control of more and more states and eventual permanent D control of the Congress and Presidency. When Texas flips to a hispanic majority, and politically flips from R to D, the Rs will never win another presidency. That will happen very soon----and then more and more states will inevitably follow the pattern set by California and Texas.

Then we'll all live in high-tax D states whether we like it or not. Then we will have the consensus that some people want so much..

Be careful what you wish for

[Cog]

here in the United States of America, we do not live in a democracy we live in a constitutional republic. this is the point at which liberals go off the rails immediately.

[Ibon]

Then we'll all live in high-tax D states whether we like it or not. Then we will have the consensus that some people want so much..

Be careful what you wish for

You assume that hispanics as a demographic are genetically born to be democrats. Having lived and worked in Latin America for over 30 years I can assure you that politics in this region have swung back and forth in quite extremes between what we consider liberal or conservative. In addition there is the tendency to be lured into populism.

It is a huge mistake for republicans to assume that hispanics are tied to the hip of the democrats. It's not only a mistake but an amazing opportunity lost and staring them right in the face. It wouldn't take much policy wise to turn this around.

[Plantagenet]

Then we'll all live in high-tax D states whether we like it or not. Then we will have the consensus that some people want so much..

Be careful what you wish for

You assume that hispanics as a demographic are genetically born to be democrats.

I don't assume that at all. But its a fact that about 66% of Hispanics currently vote D, just as it is a fact that about 90% of blacks currently vote D.

These are well known demographic facts....there is no point in pretending otherwise.

Having lived and worked in Latin America for over 30 years I can assure you that politics in this region have swung back and forth in quite extremes between what we consider liberal or conservative. In addition there is the tendency to be lured into populism.

It is a huge mistake for republicans to assume that hispanics are tied to the hip of the democrats. It's not only a mistake but an amazing opportunity lost and staring them right in the face. It wouldn't take much policy wise to turn this around.

Obviously Rs aren't assuming that Hispanics are locked into being Ds. In fact, if you look at the presidential race there are two Hispanic presidential candidates on the Rs side---Sen. Ted Cruz and Sen. Mario Rubio ----and one rationale for their campaigns is that they can attract their fellow Hispanics to vote for them.

Its certainly possible that Rubio or Cruz will attract more Hispanics to vote for Rs----just as it is possible that Trump will alienate many Hispanics from the Rs. Its also possible that a political event or some other major event will change the current demographic political alignments, just as many blacks switched from voting R to voting D after the voting rights act passed in 1964.

But the reality right now is that most Hispanics vote D. Its been that way for decades in California. If that pattern continues then we will see more states across the country become solidly D like California thanks to the growing Hispanic vote. Its also a reality that when Texas flips to Hispanic majority it will become solidly D at the same time, and the Rs will locked out of the presidency. Even now, with the current demographics, its almost impossible for an R to be elected president, and that situation is continuing to trend against the Rs as the Hispanic voting block grows.

Cheers!


The Hispanic population in the US will double in 30 years-----this will help bring political consensus by swinging more power to the Ds

[Cid_Yama]

Cog, actually I frequently find you have great potential on this forum to change opinions, including mine. In some areas, you are very knowledgeable - your principles are backed by solid information, which you share.

hvacman,

Please.

Ibon, you fantasies about common ground are nonsense. These guys acted as the minions of corporate energy. As far as I'm concerned they sold their souls to the Devil, and were instrumental in the eventual extinction of most complex life on the planet.

And you want us to make nice with them. Loathe doesn't even come close to my feeling. They are the lowest form of filth.

They are like the clerks who did the paperwork at the concentration camps. They didn't actual do anything to anyone. But they participated in mass genocide just the same.

[Cog]

There you go hvacman, Cid has pretty much made the case that I am an abhorrent human being not worthy of further social intercourse. In his world, I am a camp ground guard, wanting to commit genocide on everyone that I don't agree with. In my world, I want people to do that what they wish to do, without compulsion or government edict. That makes me some sort of monster to the left.

This is the stark contrast that we have on this board and on any board for that matter.

[Ibon]

There you go hvacman, Cid has pretty much made the case that I am an abhorrent human being not worthy of further social intercourse. In his world, I am a camp ground guard, wanting to commit genocide on everyone that I don't agree with. In my world, I want people to do that what they wish to do, without compulsion or government edict. That makes me some sort of monster to the left.

This is the stark contrast that we have on this board and on any board for that matter.

Well Cog, I suggested something in the opening post, not to get sucked into the polarization. Along comes someone equally polarized like Cid and you are right there like the perfect dance partner ready and willing to engage in dumbed down dialogue.

You do have a choice.

[Ibon]

Ibon, you fantasies about common ground are nonsense. These guys acted as the minions of corporate energy. As far as I'm concerned they sold their souls to the Devil, and were instrumental in the eventual extinction of most complex life on the planet.

Yawn. Do you realize how very much alike your response is to an anti-abortionist of the far right?