Anonymous #1 2w

Interpersonally they are, their politics are stupid but most of them have good intent.

10

Anonymous #1 2w

But the current Republican leadership is evil.

5

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

I don’t think hating trans people or immigrants counts as good intent.

1

Anonymous #1 2w

Idk this just a personal experience thing, I feel like you just need to talk to them. Most of them to hate trans people they think A. It’s not real and it’s a mental illness or B. They think it’s fine but it’s gone to far with kids and sports.

9

Anonymous #1 2w

Most of them don’t hate immigrants they think there’s all these gangs, drugs lords and human traffickers mixed in with the good people bc Trump tells them that constantly. Maybe some of the more far right ones are worried about the American culture and that bs.

9

Anonymous #1 2w

Don’t hate trans people*

6

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

You need to re-evaluate if you think that believing someone is suffering from a mental illness when they openly discriminate is excusable as “good intent”

0

Anonymous #1 2w

I don’t need to re evaluate bc I already made the distinction between average republicans and republican leadership. What discrimination are you talking about?

4

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Yeah you do. The position you hold is inherently flawed if you believe that they are capable of having good intent while advocating and supporting systems/modes of discrimination.

-4

Anonymous #1 2w

What specific policy are you taking about so I can speak to the intent?

6

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

There have been bills that attempted to ban gender expression, bills that prevent access to gender affirming care, bills that reaffirm that you can discriminate against transgender people for housing, legal recognition, etc etc. Removal of DEI policies or terms that mention gender identity, etc. It’s not just a specific policy. Do you think I have good intent if I am okay with discriminating against an innocent group?

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

Yes exactly bills. Again Republican leadership vs the average Republican voter. The average American is not that plugged into politics and the bills not passing shows that they probably weren’t that popular. You’re assuming the average Republican is super plugged into politics when the Trump voting base is probably the voting base with the worst political literacy and knowledge.

4

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Republicans bills supported by conservative constituents. I’m not assuming anything, you’re seriously in need of a reality check.

-2

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

The idea that someone can have good intent whilst also being complacent with open discrimination against innocent lives is laughable

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

Ok this turning into a touching grass thing I can’t make you touch grass. I’ll again point out the nuance in these things for you though. 1. There is a group within the Republican Party that is intentionally hatful, there’s Christian nationalist, fascist nationalist, weird authoritarian types in general. 2.the average Republican isn’t one of these people they’re generally uninformed voters from rural areas. 3. The republicans are leading our government if these “bills” were more popular among -

7

Anonymous #1 2w

-republicans they wouldn’t be “bills” they would be “laws”. The truth Trump is he is a big tent politician, he won the popular vote, its tent full of uninformed and hatful people. With the uninformed being the majority.

4

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

No, this is having to turn into a conservation about critical evaluation of one’s belief system. You’re attempting to apply the no true scotsman fallacy here. It just inherently does not work with the premise you presented. The opinion is flawed in nature when applied to the facts of reality.

-2

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

This a great attempt to dismiss the idea that there are instances where conservatives want something very heavily but cannot get it passed due to congress and other voting processes.

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

What’s the Scotsman in this example lol? Instead of rambling what am I saying specially that’s wrong?

3

Anonymous #1 2w

Who’s in charge of congress lol? You realize we’re also talking about the congresses in different states that are also majority Republican but you still can’t point to a law.

5

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

I quite literally am, I didn’t think you’d struggle with what I’m saying. Why are you attempting to dismiss the very real discriminatory behaviors they illicit towards minority groups and claim good intent?

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

Yes you are rambling I’m glad you agree. I’m not dismissing them that’s why I said Republican leadership is evil I’ve been saying this since the start of the convo.

5

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

The filibuster exists. I can, I don’t know why you’re pretending I didn’t just name a plethora of proposed bills/changes/ practices that targeted transgender people.

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

1. Republicans can still pass bills with the filibuster 2. The filibuster doesn’t explain every state congress. There’s a reason you can only name bills.

7

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

I didn’t just name bills. There’s a reason you can’t answer. Intellectual dishonesty to justify a bad and unrealistic opinion lol.

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

You’re also assuming that representatives also follow their constituents and that all constituents are actively following everything their rep does which is obviously not the case.

6

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

You’re assuming representatives are only making decisions outside the knowledge and support of their constituents.

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

The only non bill you named was an eo and the intent of that can already be explained by the Republican narrative I already gave. Instead repeatedly saying I’m bad faith explain how I’m being bad faith. Have we talked before this convo is giving me déjà vu?

3

Anonymous #1 2w

No I’m not assuming that, that’s why I stated that if they were more popular they would be laws not bills.

6

Anonymous #1 2w

I think there’s things that don’t get public attention for example bills and because they don’t get public attention they don’t get a lot of constituent attention.

5

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

No, I also (maybe incorrectly) named laws preventing access to gender affirming care, termination of housing based off identity, removal of funding when terms related to gender are implemented. None of those are “just” bills. Even in this hypothetical where I didn’t bring up anything but bills, that doesn’t dismiss the overall validity of my point, when I say that their support of discrimination against trans people is not “good intent”

-1

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Are bills the only way for political groups to discriminate?

0

Anonymous #1 2w

No you can’t discriminate with a bill a bill doesn’t have the power of law.

3

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

That isn’t the question I asked. Are-evaluating again. Avoiding this sort of bad faith rabbit hole. Is it possible for political groups to discriminate against groups besides laws?

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Ok maybe we’re just having a factual misunderstanding partially. I’m starting to feel like we have talked before lol. Regardless my understanding is for the housing thing you can’t discriminate based off gender identity bc of the Supreme Court. Saying that Republicans have voted against bills like the Equality Act which would give it protection beyond the Supreme Court.

4

Anonymous #1 2w

Genuinely how am I being bad faith? I feel like it’s totally fair to point when an assumption in a question doesn’t make sense. I’ll answer the question- it depends if we’re just talking about congress. You can discriminate with executive orders, court opinions and regulations (possibly).

6

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

That’s just factually untrue. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/economy/for-transgender-people-finding-housing-has-become-even-harder-during-the-pandemic https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/lgbt-housing-instability/ Are groups able to? That’s the crux of the issue I’m arguing against. I don’t know why you’re acting surprised when I claim bad faith when my good faith questions go unanswered

0

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

So discrimination in your eyes, is only possible through some type of enforcement of legal standard?

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Ok you didn’t read this article lol.

6

Anonymous #1 2w

If he’s reaffirming it that means it was already the law.

3

Anonymous #1 2w

This article isn’t about there not being laws to stop discrimination it’s about enforcement of the already existing laws.

6

Anonymous #1 2w

Idk what you mean by “discrimination… is only possible through some type of enforced legal standard”

4

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

You didn’t read these ones lol. https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/executive-action-watch?item=29752 https://translegislation.com/bills/2025/passed

0

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

What do you think discrimination means?

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Links don’t work you have to post the title of the article.

5

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

The websites and titles are in the link? If you’re unable to find it let me know, I’m happy to accommodate.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Yes our disagreement was if there is a law there is one. That was my claim that disagreed with.

6

Anonymous #1 2w

Yeah that’s how I was able to find the articles I’m just saying it’s faster and easier than me reading a link.

6

Anonymous #1 2w

Ok I don’t think going into what is discrimination is super relevant. I agree we went down a rabbit hole let’s bring it back. Do you think the average Republican knows about this HUD choice to not enforce Equal Access Rule? Which I believe Trump did in his first term as well.

6

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

No it’s not. My disagreement is that conservative have good intent while supporting and engaging in discrimination. Don’t strawman my argument please.

0

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Well as long as you found it, that was my goal

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Stop using logical fallacies incorrectly it’s so annoying. I said “my understanding is for the housing thing you can't discriminate based off gender identity bc of the Supreme Court.” You said “That's just factually untrue.” Then you showed me an articles that didn’t contradict what I said. That’s not a strawman, you can’t hide behind your broad point when I’m talking another point.

3

Anonymous #1 2w

Well make it your goal to drop titles.

6

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Your phrasing is vague enough to be misleading. “Our disagreement” ultimately is the thing I just reaffirmed. Factually speaking, housing discrimination still happens and as of 2025 the enforcement of preventing that has been paused by the Trump admin.

0

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

it’s in the link, the title is there in it. I provided everything, just not in the way you wanted. This is a small deflection anyways.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

It’s not misleading you can ask me to clarify, you always prescribe so much bad intent to everything I do it’s so weird. That wasn’t my claim that housing discrimination never happens lol. We can have multiple disagreements at once I made a claim about the current state of housing law and you said it wasn’t true. You failed to show how it wasn’t true, that’s it.

3

Anonymous #1 2w

It’s not a deflection I’m responding to other things you’re saying. I’m just saying it’s annoying.

3

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

The way your language is communicated is on you, again, deflecting. If you acknowledge it’s happening then you acknowledge that conservatives engage and support discrimination and still attempt to justify their beliefs as “good intent”

0

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Say it when that’s the topic then. This isn’t the topic at hand:

0

Anonymous #1 2w

No language works both ways it both has to be communicated and received. Someone can misunderstand or incorrectly understand language, what a weird thing to say. Regardless you can just ask me to clarify or if you didn’t understand me you can say “my bad”. I admit I can be more clear with my wording I do a bunch of typos. The defensiveness in this convo is so weird.

4

Anonymous #1 2w

Some conservatives do, like I already said. But again the Conservative Party has a bunch of people in it.

2

Anonymous #1 2w

We can have multiple topics at once you’re smart enough to handle it.

3

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Deflecting again. I don’t necessarily care for you to defend your inability to communicate.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Not a deflect that was me directly responding to something you said.

6

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

The republican party has most of the support from conservatives. They support their agendas, I’d argue, knowingly. So my point stands, which inherently invalidates yours unless you’re saying it’s possible to harm minorities and have “good intent”

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Are you mentally ill im actually curious do you take medication?

5

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Deflection from the only relevant at hand, not surprised you didn’t understand.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Ofc it’s possible to harm minorities with a good intent. Thats incomprehensible to you? What if a black person attacks with a knife and you defend yourself. You say so much and so little at the same time.

6

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

No, I’m not. Are you?

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Maybe you should get checked out.

1

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Stop deflecting and answer please.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

No I just never had a convo with someone like this where we can’t communicate like normal people, it’s weird. Like if this is a character it’s pretty good.

8

Anonymous #1 2w

I don’t even know what we’re talking about what’s the question?

1

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

You exhibited signs of an illness, you’ve gotten checked out? I’m not saying it’s bad. I just want to make sure you’re able to have this conversation

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

My thumb is broken I can’t scroll up what’s the question? Surely it isn’t the one I already answered.

5

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

It’s not don’t worry. I can repeat it if necessary, but you’re still being waited on to answer.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

It is pls don’t deflect from my thumb being broken. Then repeat it

4

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Have you gotten checked for any mental illnesses in the past month that would inhibit your ability to think critically? And if not, are you willing to acknowledge the fact that you are unwell and should seek it?

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Bro is trying to go through his ramble to find something coherent he can call a question.

2

Anonymous #1 2w

I actually did they found out I have 200 iq, crazy story. Now I feel like you are actually mentally ill bc you are rlly stuck on that jab lol.

4

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

I didn’t ask about your IQ level. Try again.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Hey don’t deflect from my iq level pls.

3

Anonymous #1 2w

Bro just imagined the question it was never real.

3

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Didn’t answer. Try again.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

I thought you were gonna repeat your question lmao?

3

Anonymous #2 2w

Same bro

2

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Go ahead.

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Yeah I already answered this question. they found out I have 200 iq.

1

Anonymous #1 2w

Take your meds you’re forgetting things again. Don’t listen to the voices that tell you not to.

1

Anonymous blue__wave 2w

Didn’t answer. Try again. Hurry up

3

Anonymous #3 2w

I agree my point is that it comes from a lack of understanding and propaganda for most. Like they believe it’s a mental illness or people are trying to “trans their kids”.

1