That's why I pass every time a fierce political discussion is just about to unleash. I have no reason to believe you and I have no possibility to verify what you're saying.
>Half of Gen Z voters — and 1 in 4 U.S. voters overall — have lied to people close to them about who they're voting for, according to the latest Axios Vibes survey by The Harris Poll.
>Voters 18-27 who came of age during the hyper-polarized Trump era appear to be among the most sensitive to perceived pressure and judgment from friends or loved ones.
In the presented statistics, it's not so much about party as it is about age.
Which tracks with my experience that young people are much more conflict averse.
Also, interesting that men are twice as likely to lie as women. Which goes against accepted logic that women would be more likely to conform socially.
This might have something to do with the fact that young women skew so heavily democratic that there isn't any need to lie; it's already the default position for your social context.
Or it could be that men perceive that their partners are more likely to get agitated over their political choice f it runs counter their own, compared to women who feel that their choice won't have such a big impact on their spouse.
Not odd at all really. Men who are voting Republican aren't going to get interest from people who vote Democrat, so they lie to make themselves look better than they are.
Given that I'm in my thirties, I'm not exactly in the audience being discussed here. But I've become skilled at lying about politics to my small-town coworkers and my older relatives. Telling someone the truth means I respect them enough to take the risk.
Why lie? What's wrong with just saying that you prefer not to talk about politics and refusing to express any opinion? That's what I do with coworkers who insist on trying to engage me in political topics (regardless of whether or not I agree with them.) I have a longstanding policy of never talking about politics or religion in the workplace. There be dragons.
I get forced into political (and yes, religious) conversations. I avoid when I can, but sometimes it's less of a drive-by political swipe and more of a head-on collision into that load of toxic sludge. My coworkers feel comfortable forcing others into those conversations since everyone they spend time with seems to agree. Those that don't get socially shunned. They don't always tolerate silence either, so I find ways to work with them.
Article is clearly one-sided — it mentions a “widely-panned ad” encouraging women to vote their conscience, where pretty much all the panning has come from Republicans.
We have got to stop acting like politics matters more than anything else. Yeah, it's kind of important. But so is having friends and family that you can talk to, and recognizing that they may not agree with you but...so what. People are allowed to have different thoughts, feelings, and opinions, and overall that's a good thing. Which pompous air bag gets to pretend like they're running the country for a few years isn't really a hill worth dying on, no matter how much their breathless funding messages tell you it is.
No. At most a dozen people have died over Trump v. Harris, and possible no one has.
That's exactly the hyperbolic conflation of the present petty squabble with the grand march of civilization, as if they were the same or even closely related, that I'm objecting to.
Not everyone is lucky enough to be able to treat it like sports teams. You can't be friends with someone who disagrees about whether you should exist. It's hard to have a member of your family who thinks having a family like yours should be a crime.
Healthcare policy for example is life or death. You don't always choose the hill you die on. Sometimes you need lifesaving medical care that is considered illegal abortion now. This is politics too and exposure to its risks is not evenly distributed. I'm glad they're not particularly distributed to you right now but some of us experience it differently.
Much of what you cite, being able to have and share opinions, etc., has been illegal in much of the world for at least parts of the twentieth century, e.g., Germany from sometime in the late twenties or early thirties, and definitely from the mid thirties on, until 1945; the Soviet Union for much of its existence; Mao's China; Khmer Cambodia; etc.
Democratic politics with free association and free elections with secret ballots are what it possible for you to hold and share your opinions, especially the unpopular ones.
Which is why it's sad to see all that trivialized in the hyperbole surrounding the present election. Both sides would have you believe that the other side's pompous windbag is a threat to western civilization, and only their pompous windbag can save it. And very few have the guts to say that the emperor is naked, they're both mostly worthless, the president doesn't matter all that much, and the real issue is this: can we maintain a civil society where we listen to and respect each other, even when we disagree? Because that's what really matters, and that's a hill worth standing on and fighting to defend.
If a male has personal beliefs that lead to him imposing himself upon female-only spaces, should that be allowed just because those are his personal beliefs?
Sometimes it's better to prevent people from acting on their personal beliefs, in particular where it adversely affects others.
To give another example, bathroom facilities for disabled people would be practically non-existent if left up to the owners of the space to provide. It's only through legislation that this has been mandated, to the benefit of those with disabilities.
Similarly with female-only spaces, legislation that protects these, for the benefit of women and girls, is becoming increasingly necessary in today's society.
There isn’t a problem with men forcing their way into “female-only” spaces unless you count the guys who sue gyms or bars which have ladies nights. There are people who are lying to you about trans women but that’s not a real threat and those people have caused far more harm to the women they’ve accused or even assaulted after deciding that they must be trans.
It is a very real threat. At the worst, we see cases like this, where female prisoners are raped and sexually assaulted by males who were transferred to women's prisons:
Your plan is to carry a weapon best suited to long range, just in case of a close-quarters attack, at a crowded political rally? Because that sounds like a way to get more people hurt, not fewer, and not necessarily the assailant.
No worries .. the National Review were decent enough to indicate their source and even went the extra yards to include a link (although subtle).
That is sadly becoming less common.
The trick with reading news these days is to train yourself to look to source references, they're often present, increasingly (and annoying!!) not, finding them can be like looking for bent grass and broken twigs when game hunting.
43 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 91.5 ms ] thread>Half of Gen Z voters — and 1 in 4 U.S. voters overall — have lied to people close to them about who they're voting for, according to the latest Axios Vibes survey by The Harris Poll.
>Voters 18-27 who came of age during the hyper-polarized Trump era appear to be among the most sensitive to perceived pressure and judgment from friends or loved ones.
Also, interesting that men are twice as likely to lie as women. Which goes against accepted logic that women would be more likely to conform socially.
Same for the young men, honestly.
Citation needed. Where is that coming from?
Conformity > Specific predictors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformity#Specific_predictors
That's exactly the hyperbolic conflation of the present petty squabble with the grand march of civilization, as if they were the same or even closely related, that I'm objecting to.
Healthcare policy for example is life or death. You don't always choose the hill you die on. Sometimes you need lifesaving medical care that is considered illegal abortion now. This is politics too and exposure to its risks is not evenly distributed. I'm glad they're not particularly distributed to you right now but some of us experience it differently.
Democratic politics with free association and free elections with secret ballots are what it possible for you to hold and share your opinions, especially the unpopular ones.
Which is why it's sad to see all that trivialized in the hyperbole surrounding the present election. Both sides would have you believe that the other side's pompous windbag is a threat to western civilization, and only their pompous windbag can save it. And very few have the guts to say that the emperor is naked, they're both mostly worthless, the president doesn't matter all that much, and the real issue is this: can we maintain a civil society where we listen to and respect each other, even when we disagree? Because that's what really matters, and that's a hill worth standing on and fighting to defend.
I may not agree with a word you say, etc.
Sometimes it's better to prevent people from acting on their personal beliefs, in particular where it adversely affects others.
To give another example, bathroom facilities for disabled people would be practically non-existent if left up to the owners of the space to provide. It's only through legislation that this has been mandated, to the benefit of those with disabilities.
Similarly with female-only spaces, legislation that protects these, for the benefit of women and girls, is becoming increasingly necessary in today's society.
https://4w.pub/male-inmate-charged-with-raping-woman-inside-...
We see unfair competition and lost opportunities from male disruption of female sports, for example:
https://quillette.com/2024/11/01/college-volleyballs-spartan...
We see lesbian women being harassed and attacked by males who they reject, such as:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/04/03/trans-activists-shu...
And many, many more cases like these.
It's a pattern of abusive male entitlement and, even worse, far too many people with power enabling this while ignoring the harms to women and girls.
When I see attacks like the one that happened in my state about a month ago, I completely understand.
https://www.yorkdispatch.com/story/news/crime/2024/09/26/man...
https://www.axios.com/2024/10/30/election-gen-z-voting-lies
as the source.
That is sadly becoming less common.
The trick with reading news these days is to train yourself to look to source references, they're often present, increasingly (and annoying!!) not, finding them can be like looking for bent grass and broken twigs when game hunting.
You can get a lot of bad social pressure if you reject conforming to what people around you push.
And both left and right are very pushy in the us right now.
If i was on the us, I’d probably lie too.