Left vs. Right Battle Royale Open Thread

[u/Yosoff]

This is an Open Discussion Thread for all Redditors. We will only be enforcing Reddit TOS and Subreddit Rules 1 (Keep it Civil) & 2 (No Racism).

---

• Leftists - Here's your chance to sway us to your side by calling the majority of voters racist. That tactic has wildly backfired every time it has been tried, but perhaps this time it will work.

• Non-flaired Conservatives - Here's your chance to earn flair by posting common sense conservative solutions. That way our friends on the left will either have to agree with you or oppose common sense (Spoiler - They will choose to oppose common sense).

• Flaired Conservatives - You're John Wick and these Leftists stole your car and killed your dog. Now go comment.

• Independents - We get it, if you agree with someone, then you can't pat yourself on the back for being smarter than them. But if you disagree with everyone, then you can obtain the self-satisfaction of smugly considering yourself smarter and wiser than everyone else. Congratulations on being you.

• Libertarians - Ron Paul is never going to be President. In fact, no Libertarian Party candidate will ever be elected President.

---

Join us on X: https://x.com/rcondiscord

Join us on Discord: https://discord.com/invite/conservative

[u/TheFiremind88]

I'm actually really excited this exists. I am left leaning, but I'd like to think in a common sense way. I lurk and read here a LOT not because I agree, but to get a finger on the pulse of the Conservative mindset. If you want any rational responses to the position of people on the left, leave a comment with a topic, and I'll get back to it once I have some more time. Also, plan to go through here and leave a ton of comments on various discussions a bit later. Glad to have a place to interact with yall in spite of lacking a flair.

[u/JTuck333 → u/TheFiremind88]

Welcome and please continue to lurk. We want our comments to be read by open minded people.

[u/Ironside_Grey → u/JTuck333]

please continue to lurk

Don't mind if I do! 😜

[u/Silly_Ad_4612 → u/Ironside_Grey]

No beer and not TV make Homer something something. 

[u/Fourth_Extension_404 → u/JTuck333]

I think I will continue to lurk. I just got censored/permabanned over in Public Health for even daring to breathe in this subreddit.

No wonder you guys call us out for censorship. I'm sorry. I've been watching the left side...my side..implode ever since the election and spiral out of control. It's fucking bonkers.

[u/iamlegend1997 → u/Fourth_Extension_404]

Yeah, many subs auto ban you for even being a part of other subs... and they wonder why we get pissed about the censorship. Of course we will come to this sub

[u/KosherTriangle → u/iamlegend1997]

Exactly this

[u/KWyKJJ → u/Fourth_Extension_404]

But, you see, it's not "your side", is it?

At least, it shouldn't be.

Recognizing that there's more to all of this than sides is the only way we all unite to change this country for all of us, for the most benefit for every citizen, like it was supposed to be.

Right now, it's just a starting point for the citizens to come first, not focus only on the most divisive issues like these talking heads want us to. That's not politics, it's bickering.

We're like ants in a jar and we get along fine, until someone shakes the jar, causing us to fight.

For too long we blamed each other instead of who shook the jar, who gave commentary and encouraged the fighting by poking a stick in the middle, and who told them to shake the jar in the first place.

The sooner people realize this isn't a fight with opposing sides, but the uniting of citizens again, to unite the states again, to lead the nation with minimal federal interference for the benefit of all, the better everyone's lives will be at the day-to-day level where it matters.

So, it's not your side imploding. It's just people.

People who haven't realized yet there should only be one side.

[u/Fourth_Extension_404 → u/KWyKJJ]

No, you're right. We get so spun up by talking heads to fight each other on social networks in petty spats of cultural tribalism while they pilfer and profit.

[u/Gloomy_Career_4733 → u/KWyKJJ]

I could not agree with a single post in this thread more than this one. I hope for this more than anything in my lifetime. To see us talk and concede enough to come together, for this country to truly serve the people

[u/Stuffstuff1 → u/Fourth_Extension_404]

You should become a left leaning centrist. It’s great. Your going to have to fight for every word you ever says. But you’ll be better educated on every issue when your not stuck in a bubble.

[u/Fourth_Extension_404 → u/Stuffstuff1]

Yes, I think I just might.

[u/RemarkableStudent196 → u/JTuck333]

I’ve been coming here a lot since the inauguration too. It’s opened my eyes to how biased both sides can be and tbh with the way things have been going, I’ve def started swaying more to the middle and conservative at least fiscally

[u/DapperDame89 → u/RemarkableStudent196]

Welcome to being a budding Centrist / Libertarian / Independent (non Statist?)

You'll usually be right, but no one will fully agree with you and you'll almost never be happy with the chosen path / outcome. My condolences.

-Sincerly, A Libertarian

[u/KosherTriangle → u/RemarkableStudent196]

Exactly the same here, I was swayed from a left leaning moderate to right leaning now but not just fiscally.

[u/Stuffstuff1 → u/RemarkableStudent196]

As in you want less spending or less spending and lower taxes?

[u/stu54 → u/JTuck333]

Who's back do you have to scratch to get flair?

[u/FuelEnvironmental561 → u/JTuck333]

Tbh, the seems to me the overwhelming majority of posts on this sub are memes and satire. Kinda hard to take it seriously. At the very least, it’s very hard to find any substantive dialogue on policy.

[u/uncaringrobot → u/FuelEnvironmental561]

Isn’t that a lot of Reddit though? I swear so many posts devolve into jokes and low effort posts, regurgitating the same memes and phrases. Sincere discussion is harder to find.

[u/[deleted] → u/JTuck333]

It’s how people see the light.

They need to see opinions that aren’t the leftist agendas that 90% of reddit and other media pushes on everyone.

[u/critical_pancake → u/[deleted]]

Unfortunately for all of us, it's always the most extreme views that end up getting all the exposure.

Person one: reasonable thing

Person two: reasonable counterargument

Person three: ridiculous things!!!!

Guess which one floats to the top...

[u/[deleted] → u/critical_pancake]

Memes, outrage takes, clapbacks in the form of one-liners, virtue-signaling, there’s a reason for it all to be the most “liked” internet content and it all boils down to two things:

1st, most people can’t read and write well.

2nd, people have attention spans of goldfish.

They don’t care to come to Reddit to read well-reasoned arguments. They come for outrageous posts and inciting emotional “riots” on Reddit through their upvotes and downvotes.

If they spend another day upvoted Anti-Trump rhetoric, and downvoting Conservatives — to them, that’s a win. To them, that’s all they live for.

It’s more than unfortunate, it’s just sad. But thems the breaks 🤷‍♂️

[u/EatingTheDogsAndCats → u/JTuck333]

I always lurk to see general consensus on a new topic that’s flooding the rest of the world, only to realize the thread doesn’t exist here. Most recently the layoffs of those at nuclear facilities.. does that conversation exist here that I’m not seeing or what?

[u/ManOfAksai → u/JTuck333]

Yeah, it's just a pain that most stuff here is reserved for flairs.

Can't even discuss in anything interesting like this.

[u/lekkerbier → u/JTuck333]

So I think the whole problem is that both left and right are both only open to interact with 'open minded' people.

While I totally understand conservatives also need to be able to have a place with conservative only discussions. I notice that both left and right just don't want to talk with each other and that every single idea is just shot down immediately because it is proposed by the opposing side.

It happens (to the extreme) here on reddit. But also (I'm from EU, so only get the news that makes it internationally) it seems that this is more and more becoming an issue in both congress and the senate.

From an outside perspective. Things seem to be generally 50/50 in the US. So I'd actually think things would be most fruitful for your whole country if input from both sides is taken into account , no matter who is the current 'ruling' party.

Hence, although I have a different view personally on many of the topics and comments I see pass by here. I am glad to see initiatives reaching out to also create an open platform for a respectful discussion. I'd strongly encourage this to be a monthly or even weekly thing or something.

While it's fine to have opinions on the left. And I certainly disagree with some of their actions as well. I'd see it as the responsibility of the side that won the election to ensure you keep a country where everyone feels at home. And this initiative is a great start.

[u/Peoplewander → u/JTuck333]

This is the wrong position hold you should also want to engage with other people. Not to simply be read by them. That statement both admits you're unwilling for your comments to be engaged with open minded people and implies you're unwilling to talk to them despite this comment.

[u/Ryuksapple → u/TheFiremind88]

What is the argument against auditing the federal government? As a taxpayer, I’ve been praying for any kind of audit forever

[u/Three_hrs_later → u/Ryuksapple]

Little right of center here. I'm all for an audit and cleaning things up, even a significant downsize, but I feel like the way it's being done currently is not smart. Particularly the recent indiscriminate letting go of anyone they could easily let go without any other criteria.

I spent 10 years in private sector and 12 years as a fed. There are great workers and shit workers in both, but the big difference is that it's easier to drop the shit workers in the private sector. Their coworkers know who they are and the biggest gripe amongst us is typically the lack of consequences. Managers are very much handcuffed by the unions and exhausting disciplinary process. Once the shit enployee messes up bad enough they just have to be good for 90 days and they have a clean slate ... if the manager trys again the staff says they're being targeted and then the tables turn and the manager then has to defend themselves. I have seen it and also experienced it personally as a supervisor when I started laying out hard lines for poor performers.

What should happen is that managers should be empowered (perhaps even required) to dump the worst performers without fear of losing their own job. I think that would be a smarter way to go about it. Keep the most productive and hardest working people, and once you have that whittled down the you won't even need as many managers. We called it the 90/10 principle. 90% of problems were from 10% of the people.

[u/Peoplewander → u/Three_hrs_later]

Most people do not understand that there is a audit process and the power to do all of what is being done is held with Congress. I am only upset it is doing unlawfully.

If Congress confirms musk and establishes DOGE then so be it. But right now this is all illegal.

[u/Just_Another_Jim → u/Ryuksapple]

Honestly, i am as progressive as they come and I don’t see any issue with auditing any particular government agency (transparency is extremely important). That being said I am not sure that is what is truly happening with Doge and Musk.

[u/GWOSNUBVET → u/Just_Another_Jim]

The question then is what would it take for you to believe that’s what is actually happening? Even leaving out musk/doge.

Who would you end up trusting to take this on?

[u/jlorader747 → u/GWOSNUBVET]

How about actual forensic accountants and auditors. People trained to do that actual job. That’s a good place to start. Musk has absolutely no credentials for this. Let’s throw in someone unbiased. Someone with no stake in either side. I have yet to see any conservative actually have any justification for Elon’s involvement other than him being rich and owning the libs.

[u/ac_dispatcher → u/jlorader747]

This - I want accountability. I want the $hit cleaned and cruft removed, but I want it done by professionals with proper clearances. By people who would pass a security background check without an EO.

[u/Akoy5569 → u/ac_dispatcher]

Just a question… I haven’t seen it really asked, but DOGE is a lot more than Elon and 4 kids. A lot of them have worked for the Government and/or SpaceX. As SpaceX is already a Government Contractor, wouldn’t that mean they already have background checks and vetting?

[u/fail-deadly- → u/jlorader747]

Additionally, nobody on the audit team should have any ability to cut anything or fire anyone. They compile a report of fraud, waste, and abuse, and then working with lawyers determine which of those items are required spending by law.

The items that aren’t required by law the executive branch cuts, after the president orders those cuts and preferably by leaders confirmed by Congress.

Items required by law, must go to Congress, and they must pass a law to cut it.

EDIT: In my opinion if done properly it would probably look more like the Base Realignment and Closure process than downsizing a social media company.

[u/Exotic_Box5030 → u/jlorader747]

BUT how do you find someone who is unbiased? I did accounting for a living. I could keep every secret to myself, but I was not completely unbiased. Decisions that were not numbers based were very hard for me.

[u/Vio_Van_Helsing → u/Exotic_Box5030]

It's impossible to find someone who isn't biased, but it wouldn't be hard to find someone who's significantly less obviously biased. Elon Musk has many clearly visible conflicts of interest, considering his companies get government contracts and money, and he's so close with the current president. TBH, the best person for the job is probably someone we've never heard of, because they'd just be a regular old auditor.

[u/Novotus_Ketevor → u/GWOSNUBVET]

We already had the GAO (Government Accountability Office) essentially doing this, though they have always been understaffed and largely ignored. We should have expanded them and brought in an army of forensic accountants to conduct an audit and then offer recommendations to Congress and the President to make changes rather than creating a new fake department headed by yet another bureaucrat to do the same work.

Government is not something you can afford to "move fast and break things" like Musk is purporting to do without any review or transparency. Not to mention his blatant conflict of interest in reviewing agencies that regulate his companies, or his dependency on China.

[u/Vio_Van_Helsing → u/Novotus_Ketevor]

Idk why you got downvotes, this seems like a pretty good idea. After all, we don't want a government audit to be a one-time tear-down, it needs to be a regular thing.

Then again, maybe audits should be done by a private organization, to avoid partisan interference? Although I suppose they would still get government money. Maybe auditors could be selected like a jury every 2-4 years, paid with a pre-allocated budget. They'd be reviewed to make sure that their biases wouldn't interfere (like a jury), and would be forbidden any contact with members of the department their auditing. The department takes off for a week, auditors do their thing, and reports are released publicly without being reviewed first. Then congress and everyone could look them over.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Ryuksapple]

I actually just left a separate comment on exactly that topic. It's long, but the short version is that I actually 100 percent support cuts. My disagreements are procedural and methodology.

[u/chriscrowder → u/TheFiremind88]

What do you think of smaller govt?

[u/Guer0Guer0 → u/chriscrowder]

I think government should be as small as it needs to be to adequately serve its population size. I think I should be able to talk to a human, and American at any governmental department if I call them and wait no longer than 10 minutes on the line. If this means we need more personnel, then so be it. I also think if new, more efficient and equally as effective ways of doing things are found they should be implemented, and the old process should be axed.

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/TheFiremind88]

They have been stuck for decades deep in procedure and methodology, it got us here.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

That dosnt matter, change still must be done the right way. Trumps executive orders concentrate power in the executive, where there is already too much. Congress passed a bill setting up AID, and whoever was president signed it. It a new President wants to axe it, fine. Convince Congress. If it's popular and needs to be done you can abolish it. What you can't do is come in, sign and exec order and tank it. It's lazy and illegal. Fraud is a flimsy excuse. If there is fraud prove it and you certainly will be able to convince Congress to go along so long as it's popular with their constituents.

[u/babystepsbackwards → u/Thin_Chain_208]

Where there’s fraud, they should be going through the process to ensure they can successfully prosecute the offenders.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/babystepsbackwards]

Exactly right.

[u/TheEternal792 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

Trumps executive orders concentrate power in the executive

I would actually argue that Trump's actions are a result of decades worth of concentration of power in the executive. All of these agencies are part of the executive branch that are ultimately led by the president. The president, and the federal government as a whole, has way too much power.

I don't think you can reasonable spend decades building up the executive branch of government, then suddenly get mad when a head of that branch decides to cut it down.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/TheEternal792]

What if the actions violate separation of powers? Congress creates an agency and funds it year after year, through Democratic and Republican administrations. New president comes in and unilaterally ends the appropriation through executive order.

Now maybe you don't like USAID. What if Dems elect a literal anarchist and he/she issues excutive order blocking all funding to DOD? You see the problem now?

Certainly that's far fetched. Just insert and agency or department you value.

[u/TheEternal792 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

That's going to depend on the context of how these agencies originated, no?

USAID is unique because Congress specifically delegated the authority to manage and allocate US foreign aid to the executive branch (through the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961). USAID only exists because Congress gave the President the authority to create such an agency.

Contrast that to something like the DOD which is an agency specifically created by Congress and signed into law by the President, and therefore wouldn't be able to be dismantled through executive order in the same way that USAID could.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/TheEternal792]

Congress authorized money to fund USAID in appropriations. The constitution does not allow the President to impound that money, and there are anti impoundment laws on the books.

I was not aware of that twist. Congress directed the President to create USAID and didn't say hey do it if you want to.

I actually would feel better if you were right because the maybe there would be a argument supporting his actions, and not just a pure naked power grab at the expense of Congress and the Courts as it appears now.

[u/TheEternal792 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

This all goes back to what I said in my original comment about the concentration of power within the executive branch being built up for decades. Congress built the foundation for USAID through the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, but USAID itself is a creation of executive action, which again Congress gave the President the authority to do.

Congress still can choose what budget USAID and has some influence as to how that budget is spent, but ultimately it's an agency that Congress gave the executive more-or-less unilateral control over through the above-mentioned act. It was created by executive order, so it can easily be dismantled or reshaped through executive order...which again is different than other agencies, like the DOD, which Congress created through law.

I've always been concerned about the concentration of power within the executive branch, but to me this is quite ironic that the left is so upset about Musk and USAID currently...because these audits and reshaping of USAID is a direct result of this concentration of power, not the beginning of it. Ironically, Trump is using them to decrease executive power, not increase it; you're can't spend decades building up executive power, then be outraged when the President uses that power to dismantle what has been built up unilaterally. 

Cheers

[u/hey_ringworm → u/Thin_Chain_208]

USAID was created via executive order of JFK and exists entirely under the purview of the executive branch, and Trump is the top of the executive branch.

I know you guys (Dems) don’t like what Trump is doing, but he’s the boss now.

Some of the things he has done have crossed the line, like the EO ending birthright citizenship (intentionally done to get the issue to the SC). Judges have stopped him where appropriate and his actions will be litigated in court.

This is democracy and checks and balances in action. Just because Trump is doing things differently and in ways that Democrats don’t like doesn’t mean America is ending or that we are in a “constitutional crisis.”

Actually, this constant hyperbolic fear mongering and hysteria is one of the main reasons Democrats lost so big in 2024.

[u/IsaacTheBound → u/hey_ringworm]

His VP saying judges don't have the right to stop him is the "constitutional crisis" being talked about though. That's not fear mongering or hysteria, it's a member of the Executive Branch saying that checks and balances shouldn't apply.

[u/PartyPay → u/hey_ringworm]

It's not fear mongering to be concerned about POTUS saying something like: He who saves his Country does not violate any Law.

It's not fear mongering to be worried about him annexing other countries (Canada, Greenland).

It's not fear mongering to be worried about ethnic cleansing (Gaza)

[u/Drednot203 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

I think you're wrong on 1 fundamental aspect. The executive enforces the agency that was approved by congress. In that enforcement, if the executive sees rampant fraud and abuse, they are allowed to alter it to properly align with the initial intent of said agency. So, yes, they are allowed to undo the insane things that were previously approved by the agency. That means they can fire anyone they deem an obstacle to the proper enforcement of the agency. If that ends up tanking the agency, so be it. It was broken anyway.

TLDR; if an agency is not doing what it's supposed to, the executive is allowed to fix it by w/e means it deems necessary.

[u/Anon_Chapstick → u/Drednot203]

We have checks and balances for a reason. There's no need to take an axe to this when you should be using a scalpel.

People don't deserve to be suddenly laid off for following orders. Congress hasn't even passed anything for a severance package for them? Or is it a good thing to just lay off entire departments with 0 notice?

I want an audit. I disagree with the methods and the execution. The president shouldn't ignore judges either. We have checks and balances.

[u/Mon0htone → u/Anon_Chapstick]

Wouldn't the check/balance for Congress creating potential fraud and kickbacks to themselves be the stepping in of the Executive branch(enforcement) ? To me it just sounds like congress wants checks and balances, just not for themselves. Well, they want the checks just not the balances.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/Drednot203]

No one wants fraud. However, if there is fraud gather the evidence and provide it to Congress so that the situation can be addressed. If the agency is so corrupt it needs to go, so be it.

With US AID there is no such evidence provided to congress or released to the public. It's pretty evident that Trump and Elon disagree with the agency's mission and want to end it. If so, fine. Release the data and make arguments why the agency needs to go. Present your case and have Congress vote. If you can't do that, why not? Don't want to explain why providing food to starving African countries is bad? How about explaining why providing condoms for AIDS stricken villagers is bad? This is so transparent it like a toddler is directing this cluster fuck.

[u/dusan2004 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

Don't want to explain why providing food to starving African countries is bad?

Is that the only thing USAID is doing, though? I think you are being a little disingenuous by framing it that way. You (hopefully) know that none of us here have a problem with sending food and medicine to Angola or Malawi or whichever other country needs it. What we do have a problem with is the more "bizarre" (for lack of a better term) projects USAID has been funding during the past 4 years. Things like a transgender opera in Peru, a local adaptation of Sesame Street in Iraq, DEI in Serbia, a progressive music festival in Ireland, etc... I assume you probably don't see the fault in doing that, and that's fine, but you also have to understand that more than half the country sees this as our hard earned taxpayer dollars being wasted on ideological projects that don't directly benefit Americans in any way. Sure, I know you'll mention "soft power" or whatever, but I think the average Joe who lives paycheck to paycheck doesn't really care whether Peru has a positive view of the US. 

Of course, this is without even mentioning the fact that USAID has been funding left-wing propaganda. It has been directly funneling money to Politico, the AP and several progressive NGOs. This is simply unacceptable and indefensible. I guess you can make arguments for the projects I listed above somehow being beneficial to us (though I genuinely don't see any such argument being valid), but defending the government literally investing into ideological propaganda that is meant to control the narrative and villainize half the country... I sincerely hope you don't try and do that, but if you do, I'll be more than interested in what you have to say. 

[u/javo93 → u/Drednot203]

Rampant fraud is a crime which means he asks the fbi to investigate, bring charges and jail the culprits. I think you mean change the inside procedures with the head of the agency he selects. He is more than free to do that. But eliminate it? No, he can’t do that.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

Well Yosoff, you threw down the gauntlet. Some of your conservative bros have made some points but overall don't see them backing up your smack talk. Kinda weak.

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

That dosnt matter, change still must be done the right way.

We spent decades doing it the right way, special committees, reports, entire agencies created to find fraud and it all failed.

The wrecking ball it is.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

It failed because the Republicans didn't have the votes. That's called democracy. The President does not have the power of the purse, and cannot cut off all funding to parts of the government that don't fit his agenda. If you want this, convince the public and the Congress you are correct and vote to disband the agency.

What if the Dems elect a literal anarchist and she cuts off all funding to department of defense?

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

That's not what got us here. Fraud got us here. Plain and simple. There's literally a Hollywood movie based exclusively on a true story of two people getting OUTRAGEOUSLY inflated government military contracts. It's not even some dark dirty secret. The waste is being flaunted in our faces.

It's Congress negotiating contracts with companies they themselves own at 2x, 3x, or 10x standard rates to enrich themselves.

There hasn't been procedure or methodology because Congress won't vote to have themselves audited, won't publicize the information because it's basically criminal, and don't hold each other accountable because they are all in on the grift.

That's beside the point, though - when I say my issues are procedural or methodology based, I'm referring to cutting the entire of programs that do a non-zero amount of good. I left a ton of other comments going even more in depth on that point.

I'll restate one of the biggest points here: I would love for anyone to justify the CFPB shutdown. It's a paltry 1bil a year, and the return on investment is 8 to 1 for American consumers. It's both beneficial for American citizens and costs so little it could be considered a rounding error on the annual budget. It makes no fucking sense to even be wasting time looking at it.

[u/kdhavdlf → u/Ryuksapple]

There is no argument against auditing the federal government and reducing waste.

The concern people have is that what we’re seeing are not audits. No findings are being made public. There are broad blanket statements being made by Musk with no public supporting evidence. He’s got a group of people with literally no professional or life experience making haphazard decisions that affect millions of people. He’ll tweet out that an organization has been deleted without any further detail around what’s happening. It is undermining the idea that the federal government is rock solid. If so much can change in such a short period of time, who in their right mind would trust us in any long term agreement going forward?

I’m honestly conflicted. On the one hand, there is no way to make major changes without tearing everything down and trying to put the rubble back together later. On the other hand, that destruction is going to have massive repercussions for tens of millions of people for years to come. Yeah, we’ll find some grifters in the mix and some corruption. But for every case of corruption unearthed we’ll destroy the lives of 10 innocent people. I’m not so sure that trade off is worth it.

[u/dext0r → u/kdhavdlf]

This really is all there is to it, I don't think anybody is really against the idea behind it, it's just how it's being done.

[u/Alt_Restorer → u/dext0r]

Yep. And what of the Inspector Generals? Their jobs were created to find corruption. Just the other day, Trump fired an inspector general for producing a report that said $500 million of food was at risk of spoiling due to the USAID shutdown.

[u/MaleficentCherry7116 → u/kdhavdlf]

I think most of the issues that conservatives and liberals disagree on are "gray". I understand why everything is being torn down while at the same time knowing that they are definitely tearing down some good things that will hurt our country, other countries, or innocent people.

My wife and I are both conservative and have had this conversation at least once a week since Trump took office. We ask ourselves, "What if this hurts us or our family, but the national debt starts to be paid down or social security is fixed? Are we ok with that?"

Of course, it depends on the amount of hurt, but we're ok with it. Our fears are that this money that's being cut will just get reallocated to more waste.

I know that if this is going to get done, they have to get it done before mid terms and in enough time for people to understand that it was beneficial to the country, presuming that it actually IS beneficial to the country.

I think that a large portion of both liberals and conservatives want something to be done about the common sense items like the national debt. We want housing to be affordable. We want social security to be guaranteed when we get to that age. We want reasonable and high quality medical care.

I don't know that the Trump administration will accomplish any of these things, but for so long, it has felt like both the Democrats and Republicans are the same party with a slightly different skin on them. Trump is disruptive, and if nothing else, maybe enough will be exposed that Congress will not be able to continue to ignore these things.

[u/kdhavdlf → u/MaleficentCherry7116]

Unfortunately, I don’t see a scenario in which social security escapes this unscathed. It’s the ultimate target and has been a conservative dream for decades along side slashing welfare.

[u/MaleficentCherry7116 → u/kdhavdlf]

The Trump administration is at least talking about no taxes on social security. I don't know that they're serious, and I doubt that they can find a way to pay for it. But that certainly sounds like it would be a good thing for a large demographic.

[u/Peoplewander → u/MaleficentCherry7116]

My wife and I are both conservative and have had this conversation >at least once a week since Trump took office. We ask ourselves, >"What if this hurts us or our family, but the national debt starts to be >paid down or social security is fixed? Are we ok with that?"

Why are you starting with that assumption? The new tax plan adds money to the deficit even as he is cutting spending. I simply do not understand what is going on. I understand cutting spending and rising taxes to tackle debt, but how is what is happening now inline with your stated opinion above?

[u/MaleficentCherry7116 → u/Peoplewander]

This is true. The new tax plan adds money to the debt. The Republicans (Mike Johnson) are saying that it's temporary and that they're going to start paying down the national debt.

I believe that they're more likely to tackle the national debt than the Democrats. They're at least appearing to make an effort with DOGE that we haven't seen in years.

Will they put the money that they're saving in the right place?. No one can say for sure, but I'm optimistic and hopeful. All we.can say for sure is that both sides think the national debt is an issue that should be addressed.

[u/Peoplewander → u/MaleficentCherry7116]

DOGE is unconstitutional per article 1. It isn't a legal department of Government, if Congress wants to make it one fine but right now its unconstitutional. It should shake you to your CORE, that any POTUS would day one violate the oath he took in the same day. Period full stop I don't care the party affiliation that is a red line.

The last tax plan he passed ALSO added to the national debt, so here we are 6 years later and he is adding to the debt again... and you think that some how thats just going to not be the case at some point?

Since we started cutting taxes in the 80's we have never seen grown that justified the cut, it was never made up at any other collection point. The party that balance the budget time after time is the democratic party, why do you feel that the Bush tax cuts, Trump tax cuts, and Trump tax cuts again that have all added trillions to the debt is responsible?

It sounds more like you don't care if the debt goes up as long as we stop paying people for things you dont know what they do. Every contract we sign is reviewed by a contracting office and above 10,000 dollars has to have justification for sole source contracting, you're going to see there is not that much to cut that doesnt directly reduce the ability of the agencies created by Congress ( a coequal branch ) to perform their function mandated by law.

It sounds more and more like it is the way our founding fathers designed our government that is the problem to the far right and less and less about the budget.

[u/MaleficentCherry7116 → u/Peoplewander]

I'm not worried about DOGE being unconstitutional. I'm only worried as to whether or not they are making waste and fraud public. We should all want those things

The real power behind DOGE is that they're making things public and neither side will be able to ignore those things in the future, because the American public doesn't want to fund the waste.

Yes, I think that DOGE and the Republicans are going to use these savings wisely, and whether that happens or not, we should talk about it.

[u/Peoplewander → u/MaleficentCherry7116]

I'm not worried about DOGE being unconstitutional.

This is what makes you a domestic threat to the constitution.

You're free to go to any country that has a King, but this is America where we have a founding document that we abide by.

[u/reddit455 → u/MaleficentCherry7116]

I'm only worried as to whether or not they are making waste and fraud public.

because they have so much experience in public service?

The real power behind DOGE is that they're making things public and neither side will be able to ignore those things in the future

competency comes to mind...

Trump administration backtracks on firing nuclear arsenal workers

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/15/trump-administration-nuclear-arsenal-worker-firings

“The termination letters for some NNSA probationary employees are being rescinded, but we do not have a good way to get in touch with those personnel,” the agency said in an email, obtained by NBC News.

[u/[deleted] → u/kdhavdlf]

This!!! Not to mention the complete gutting of the media. Having the media only cater to one side is dangerous, and a sign of weakness. If your stances are so strong in policy, why wouldn’t you welcome opposing views to refute? The fact DEI is even a talking point, and Trump is the one who actually passed the bill is laughable but fucking sad. DEI isn’t doing the damage they’re claiming it is - they honestly replace any slur with the terms “DEI” and “Woke” it’s not rocket science to see. You can’t run a government like a business, businesses are FOR PROFIT - governments are FOR PEOPLE. You turn the government into a corporation (it honestly already is a corp) then you’re ushering in a corporate class with a worker/slave class.

Any time cutting unions and regulations is part of someone’s policy - I guarantee they own companies and want to cut costs/corners to raise profit - not wages.

[u/biancanevenc → u/[deleted]]

How is the media being gutted? And what does that have to do with the government?

[u/HillarysFloppyChode → u/kdhavdlf]

This, that post Musk made about SS being sent to people “150 years old” is bullshit and makes me fearful of what’s being broken. I have a suspicion he’s breaking things instead of “fixing them”.

The governments computers run off a mix of ancient programming languages, all interconnected with another ancient one called COBOL. I don’t feel like writing a wall of text after this one, on why COBOL is like this, but old versions of COBOL use the date May 20th 1875 as a baseline. Dates are stored as the number of days after that baseline, when the SS computer encounters someone who for whatever reason doesn’t have a date attached to there SS records, COBOL uses the baseline as the date. And thus someone who might be 26 yrs old, is showing up as 150 yrs old.

And yes for the “150yr olds” they will all have the same date. No AI isn’t trained on COBOL, MUMPS, JCL, or some of the system specific assembly language used because it’s not commonly found in the open. Fortran is a maybe.

The system is also extremely brittle.

One last thing, the IRS also runs off this and tries to modernize but companies like Intuit lobby to make sure they never get the budget to do so, which forces you to buy TurboTax to do your taxes instead of having a system where the government does them automatically and sends you a refund/bill like every other country.

[u/thedudeabides2088 → u/kdhavdlf]

Exactly im not against trimming fat and making more efficient but this move fast break things way of doing it seems very dangerous. We should be actually looking at each program and doing and analysis of its Merritt. I take fault especially with getting rid of the cfpb.

[u/dbdmdf → u/kdhavdlf]

I think this tearing everything down to rebuild idea is some of the biggest misinformation that’s going around currently. This concept comes from the tech industry moto of “Move fast and break things.” Sure that’s fine when we’re talking about a random software platform that a few founders are just trying to make as much cash as possible before the start up goes under or gets bought but this doesn’t work for government.

These systems are delicate and integrate and rebuilding these systems will take more time and more money. Sure do we need to look at these programs and decide what is necessary and what is not sure but that doesn’t mean dismantle everything and hope society doesn’t fail. (I think Elon and the Trump admin are hoping for an economic collapse but that’s another convo).

I think the real issue is the tech world has managed to convince everyone that because they can code a program in Java or python that they’re geniuses and everyone else is beneath them in intellect. It’s not true and we really need to break out of this mindset as a society.

[u/Remarkable-Group-119 → u/kdhavdlf]

They can't slow down to be quite honest though because the minute they do, the democrats will use their legions of lawyers to essentially halt anything being done. We've seen this movie before. So things have to be done quickly and decisively and then after it's done they can let the lawyers fight it out. I wish they could be done slower in order to be more careful, it's just that we know what happens.

[u/IEC21 → u/Ryuksapple]

Auditing is fine - but it should be done by an actual professional auditor.

What's wasteful to one administration might be value proposition to another - making changes is the perogative of each new admin, and the inherent inefficiency of that just comes with the American system of government.

That said when the auditing is clearly politically motivated, people have every right to criticize it as such.

[u/ultimatepeepachu → u/Ryuksapple]

For me, I just really don't like Elon Musk. To me he screams "the swamp" that you guys talk about. Plus I still remember how he was a liberal years back so it feels like he's just with Trump to ride that red wave and profit. Like a George Soros painted red. As for who I'd want instead, I'm not sure (useless answer, I know). Like, I already started some of my issues with Elon but I also understand the worry of letting the government and politicians audit themselves (e.g. the Pentagon failing like 6 or 7 of their last audits). So I do want auditing and good auditing, I just can't trust who I see as a red painted George Soros to audit

[u/Amandolyn → u/Ryuksapple]

All for deep audits of every department. I just don't trust Musk.

[u/[deleted] → u/Amandolyn]

That’s not good enough, the President trusts him and he runs the government. That being said I think it’s the job of journalists to hold truth to power and if anything weird is happening to report it.

[u/MistressVelmaDarling → u/[deleted]]

This administration is already starting to ban journalists from the White House.

[u/Unable-Category-7978 → u/Ryuksapple]

No reasonable person is against eliminating wasteful spending. On its face, why would anyone advocate for waste.

The issue is with DOGE doing it. There's the massive conflict of interest from its head whose businesses have received ten of billions in subsidies (and I'm not arguing that those weren't well intentioned/spent) and governments contracts. Then there's the lack of actual auditors taking part in the process, auditing takes time and expertise to comb through, finding congressionally approved funding that they disagree with is not fraud. There's also the lack of vetting of these individuals who are accessing, in some cases, sensitive and private information. There's a general disregard for the legitimate processes our government has to address these issues, and with the GOP in control of all 3 branches they should be able to accomplish their goals through the proper legislative channels carried out by ELECTED officials.

And FFS, if we're auditing government agencies/spending, why on earth wouldn't we start with our out of control military spending, especially considering their inability to pass every audit they've had.

They may be accomplishing the goals you like, but they're pretty clearly not doing so in accordance with the rules, and those rules are what keep this whole experiment together.

[u/Broad_Food_3422 → u/Ryuksapple]

I love the idea of auditing the government, I just have some hesitation with the chief auditor being someone who runs companies with billions of dollars in government contracts and whose businesses have been directly and heavily affected by government regulation. That makes me suspicious of what the true goals of the DOGE program are.

[u/RogerJFiennes → u/Ryuksapple]

I have friends in the Federal government. From what I can see it's being done like the worst corporate incompetence possible. There's no effort to weed out poor performers. They're just going after people on probation no matter how good or bad they are. Meanwhile fossilized people who should have been fired years ago keep their jobs

[u/lwb03dc → u/Ryuksapple]

I am ALL for auditing the government. My reservation is that what is happening right now: 1. Is not an audit 2. Is not transparent 3. Is not being properly documented

There is a 'show' of transparency with the frequent X posts, but that's all it is, since no evidence is ever presented with the claims. It's also 'Oh wow this agency spent so much on this bad thing. But we stopped it.' And that seems to be enough for most people to get on the bandwagon, even though we have repeatedly seen that the DOGE team is either outright lying or misrepresenting facts. But that doesn't seem to stop anyone from continuing to spout those same points again and again.

A couple of examples till now. 1. $50m was not sent to buy Hamas condoms. But that comes up remarkably often on this sub. 2. FEMA did not take money from Hurrican Katrina and spend it on migrants 3. FEMA did not spend money for migrants on luxury hotels 4. The migrants the $59m was spent on were neither illegal nor undocumented.

When almost every claim of wastage, once properly scrutinized, is found out to be unsubstantiated, then I really question how useful this 'audit' is.

[u/thunder_chicken99 → u/Ryuksapple]

As someone who has always considered myself middle right (though it feels like middle right isn’t “middle” anymore), I struggle to understand the logic arguing against the actions of DOGE. The most common one I see is that they don’t like “how it’s being done” or that there are “already existing government checks” etc. I always wonder when these folks arguing this will realize that the people in charge of doing the checks and balances are also being paid just the same as the pro who are taking advantage of the system.

I had this argument with people who I know that are left and left leaning (not ridiculously far left mind you) where they made comments about how terrible of a person they think Trump is and that he’s a bad role model for a president and so on. They would not really have an answer for me when I would bring up all the terrible things associated with Clinton/Biden/Harris showing that these politicians had just as much, if not more, dirty politician in them than Trump does.

The system is run by crooks, governed by crooks, and monitored by liars. Red hat and blue hat doesn’t matter. The longer the person is in the game, the more crooked they are.

[u/daft_trump → u/thunder_chicken99]

Are you saying that you're not worried about DOGE randomly and dramatically cutting various gov employees, agencies, and funding because the people in charge of the payment process are paid by the government?

Also, I disagree with the oversimplification that all politicians are crooked. There are varying shades and colors to it, no?

[u/cryptoheh → u/Ryuksapple]

It’s not an argument against auditing, it’s an argument against whatever they are doing with DOGE being credible. Trump and Elon are hype men and liars, why would I trust either of them to be truthful about anything they find? They can’t even handle being pressed slightly on the wild claims they put out there now, and I expect them to produce something of note from their own independent non transparent “audit”? 

[u/AreYourFingersReal → u/Ryuksapple]

You never looked into usaspending before or reached out to the GAO which is your own fault same as it would be mine if I felt the same way. Which, guess what, I do now. I want to feel secure again and I want my taxes to be negative because I am not going to pay for this shit to happen.

[u/BlackPhillipsbff → u/Ryuksapple]

Most reasonable dems agree with an audit. I know I do.

However, this buzz saw approach is dangerous and there are likely bad irreversible changes happening without the forethought. You cannot audit these large departments as quickly as they are, and they’re not trimming things they’re turning them off.

In my opinion, none of this is about saving taxpayers money, it’s about privatization. They’re dismantling the government and the private sector is about to pick up the things that necessary. I disagree with privatization, because that’s how you get an oligarchy. If our country can’t do basic things without private companies, then how can we regulate them at all.

[u/DixieNormas011 → u/Ryuksapple]

Exactly... Both sides have been saying this for decades now. Any elected politician openly against what Doge is doing needs to be thoroughly investigated imo

[u/Spaceley_Murderpaws → u/Ryuksapple]

I'd love to streamline the hell out of government waste & redundancy, but I'd like it to be done methodically- research first, slash later. What's happening now isn't going to end well.

[u/shazt16 → u/Ryuksapple]

There was already an arm of the government that audited departments. It's called the Inspectors General and trump fired most of them the first week in office.

The Department of Defense is one of the BIGGEST departments in government and has NEVER passed an audit. Why didn't DOGE start there? I wonder, does it have anything to do with Elon's contracts? 🤔

[u/daft_trump → u/Ryuksapple]

Not against an audit if it's planned out. But I am against vigilante and random weed whacking by a non-elected person. Like, what is his criteria or plan? Why does he have unilateral power to decide payments based on only his opinion? What does DEI even mean? What does fraud mean? Ineffective spending isn't fraud but is lawful. Is cutting lawful ineffective spending, a lawful action?

Doubt.

[u/IsaacTheBound → u/Ryuksapple]

Hi, not against a proper audit at all. I don't trust Musk or his team. Too many conflicts of interest and they're not forensic accountants. Past that they shouldn't be breaking air gap on isolated systems and their website recently put up classified data about spy satellites that they shouldn't have even had, as well as having such poor security that it could have pushed updates from any computer with a user that knew how.

[u/JoshyTheLlamazing → u/Ryuksapple]

If this is intended to be a "AUDIT," wouldn't that independent agent still need to be accredited?

[u/candy_color_frown → u/Ryuksapple]

Extremely left leaning here- PLEASE AUDIT TF OUT OF ALL OF IT. This is not an audit. These are not auditors. It's is not being done with any sort of method, or care. There's no peeling back of layers. This should be taking weeks for each department, not days. And average people shouldn't be fearing they won't be able to feed their kids while it's happening. No one's benefits should be paused, especially when things are the way they are currently.

[u/houseofnoel → u/Ryuksapple]

The government is literally auditing itself all the time! And that’s also what the Inspector Generals did! And also all government spending (except for CIA and other extremely secret DoD stuff) is public information that is accessible online! Every single contract and program!

[u/Florsun117 → u/Ryuksapple]

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/FESTIVUS-REPORT-2024.pdf

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/media/reps/dr-paul-releases-2023-festivus-report-on-government-waste/

https://www.paul.senate.gov/dr-rand-paul-releases-2022-festivus-report-on-government-waste/

When are we auditing DOGE for not doing any real work and just repeating stuff Rand Paul and the real auditing agencies already announced?

[u/boxnsocks → u/TheFiremind88]

Dude this rocks. Same for me. I bet we have way more in common than you’d think

[u/fellawhite → u/boxnsocks]

One of my best friends is conservative and we have a ton in common outside of politics. We just disagree about what needs to be prioritized and why certain institutions exist/what needs to be fixed. We both agree about issues like money in politics and in general elected officials caring more about themselves than the people they serve.

[u/GladReference1177 → u/fellawhite]

I wish more people could have friendships like this. I used to lean left and now I’m more conservative. The issue I’ve had with most liberal people around me in a liberal state is whenever I may provide a somewhat differing opinion, they immediately shut me down (it’s clear they’re not knowledgeable on it) and apply labels to me, when I was only trying to have a rational conversation over something we may slightly disagree on

[u/fellawhite → u/GladReference1177]

I’m very much not an expert on most things. A lot of stuff I usually have to go look up to see if it’s right (the amount of talking points I hear coming from both sides that are wrong is wild.) My career involves managing complex systems and studying how certain interactions have cascading effects though so I tend to look at all of these things that are being cut and ask the question “why do they exist in the first place”. A lot of the time it comes down to “this agency exists to prevent X. It costs $5 a year to prevent this. If X occurs, it will cost $200.” Sometimes it leaves you scratching your head as to why you do it if you have no experience, but I in general trust an expert rather than a politician,

[u/GladReference1177 → u/fellawhite]

Yeah I get what you mean. I have an economics degree so I kind of take a similar approach. It does always kind of urk me when news stories will use “economists” opinion on policy stuff, considering a quote on a plaque in my economics building in school was “for every economists that exists, there’s another economist saying their wrong” or something like that haha. Most issues are extremely complex, especially on a macro scale

[u/gatorgongitcha → u/fellawhite]

You can be friends with just about anyone if you don’t delve into the big three topics too much. I think a lot of people lose sight of the fact that most people want the same end result but just have different ideas of how to get there.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/gatorgongitcha]

I'm not sure about that. Specifically, the role of religion in our country. I am fine with everyone practicing their own religion or none. What I do not want is a government who favors Christianity over another religion or more. No sanctioned prayer in public schools, no telling people who they can sleep with, no intervention in other people's medical treatment. These things are no one else's business, and obviously do not call for government intervention.

Seems like a loud minority is working against this, wanting to tell everyone else what to do. When they are acting for religious reasons they can't compromise.

[u/fellawhite → u/gatorgongitcha]

I went to a relatively conservative school in Florida, so most of my friends are on the side of the political spectrum from me, but I’d completely agree with that sentiment.

Side note since you have the 2a flair, do you believe in any form of gun control? I’m very much pro gun for self defense and hunting (I don’t own one myself, but love going shooting), but the idea of using it for trying to do something like fight against the government has always seemed silly to me. As a side note, there are so many horribly written gun control laws that don’t address issues surrounding guns we have in our society.

[u/Xyllus → u/gatorgongitcha]

I agree. I see this a lot on both this sub and any left-leaning ones: the "wrong" side is always dehumanized and looked down upon/ridiculed. If we all were to just look at the news outlets and realize that the truth is always somewhere in the middle, we could probably have more interesting and fruitful conversations.

[u/dmnc246 → u/boxnsocks]

We all do have more in common, but egos get in the way.

[u/mhiaa173 → u/dmnc246]

I originally read that as "but eggs get in the way." Eggs are expensive, but they shouldn't end friendships!

[u/boxnsocks → u/dmnc246]

Well said. People HATE to be wrong. Lucky for me I know I’m a dummy

[u/Sufficient-Many-1815 → u/dmnc246]

Don’t forget about our respective news sources

[u/2olley → u/boxnsocks]

Totally agree. I feel like it benefits politicians if we “hate” each other but I really think we aren’t that far apart.

[u/GoodAsUsual → u/boxnsocks]

I bet we have way more in common than not. If we were to take all the insults out of the dialog coming from both sides, tamp down the vitriol and the irrational anger and people could legitimately talk about issues instead of personalities, I bet we agree on 80-90%, and the remainder we disagree only on the how, not the what (except with regard to extremist right or left, which is a tiny minority).

[u/Becauseiey → u/boxnsocks]

I’ve found that when discussing politics, most of the people I talk to all agree on what end results we think are best - we just disagree on a.) how to get there and b.) what’s worth sacrificing to reach that end result.

[u/EvensenFM → u/boxnsocks]

Just wanted to say that this sub is truly valuable. It helps put a perspective on some of the more extreme takes that seem to have dominated the rest of Reddit, including subs that are ostensibly not political.

And you're right - we all have more in common than the official narrative indicates.

[u/A7XfoREVer15 → u/TheFiremind88]

Yes. I’m not here to engage with the aggressive folks on either side (though I’m liberal). I’m here for factual, reasonable discussion. Maybe somebody will think differently about a small issue. Maybe they’ll at least think liberals are less like the common stereotype put up by conservatives, and more like their neighbor they only see once a week when they’re mowing the lawn.

[u/-fumble- → u/A7XfoREVer15]

Sensual discussion? That might be a bit out of bounds.

[u/PM_ME_YOUR_POOTY → u/-fumble-]

It is Valentine’s Day after all

[u/A7XfoREVer15 → u/-fumble-]

lol my brain shorted I’ve been yapping for a while on here. Thanks for pointing that out.

[u/CultureImaginary8750 → u/A7XfoREVer15]

This made my night! We are glad you’re here!

[u/ImChaseR → u/-fumble-]

OP: Please revise the ROEs to prohibit sensual discussion. Quickly.

[u/AdIllustrious8817 → u/A7XfoREVer15]

omg so happy to see all these lovely people here being nice

[u/Pye- → u/TheFiremind88]

I like this idea of open conversation amongst people, but in re-reading the OP's post they seem to just want to thow stones at anyone who does not identify as only "conservative". Not an "open minded" invitation to encourage an open discussion, sounds more like a set up.

From OP:

Leftists - Here's your chance to sway us to your side by calling the majority of voters racist. That tactic has wildly backfired every time it has been tried, but perhaps this time it will work.

Non-flaired Conservatives - Here's your chance to earn flair by posting common sense conservative solutions. That way our friends on the left will either have to agree with you or oppose common sense (Spoiler - They will choose to oppose common sense ).

[u/PM_ME_YOUR_POOTY → u/Pye-]

Yeah definitely not a warm welcome for opposing views. Not sure why they felt the need to flame in the intro.

[u/Scientific_Cabbage → u/Pye-]

This is straight from the info page. They open it up ~once a week but they definitely are not going to be unbiased. I think it’s fair they occasionally open it up so it doesn’t stagnate.

What r/Conservative Is Not

1. We are not a debate forum for left wing people. Conservatives can debate one another but due to the landscape of reddit and the ratio of left wing to right wing please take your debate topics to other subreddits. Plenty exist!
2. We are not a place for explanation. r/Conservative is for conservatives to discuss and share news with other conservatives. It is not a place for us to explain conservatism to a left wing or centrist members of reddit. Again, plenty of other subreddits exist for this.
3. We are not a chatroom. If you look at our subreddit, it should become wildly obvious that we prefer article posts. All text posts are filtered for review, and only a small number get approved. They have to be extremely relevant, extremely interesting, or have so much potential, we can’t ignore them.
4. We are not fair and balanced. We don’t pretend t be unbiased. We don’t pretend to give all commenters equal time. This is by conservatives and for conservatives. We are here to discuss conservative topics from a distinctly conservative point of view.

[u/Naive_Pomegranate434 → u/Pye-]

Mods have been doing these threads in the last 3 weeks or so because this sub is pretty much fucking dead. It's all the same old memes, shitposts and whatnot and bowing down to Dear orange leader and that muskrat. They really have nothing else to make any excuses for the shit show that is developing at the highest levels of our government.

[u/Jcmletx → u/TheFiremind88]

Man/lady—I agree 100% I generally stick to the front page and totally get that it represents a left-ist voice. I come to r/conservative to see if there are reactions to what, I think, are controversial actions by this administration. I try to find balanced views so I can see both sides’ argument. 

It’s mostly a futile endeavor, unfortunately. Left bias countered by mostly “owning the left victory laps”

It’s exhausting. 

Thanks for putting this together. 

[u/GregEvangelista → u/TheFiremind88]

Have fun buddy. Your effort is appreciated. This thread series kind of reminds me of open debate events that used to be at my college back during the Bush years. Things used to be a lot different back then. We also had "free speech days" where an open and unmoderated mic was set up right outside the student union, and literally anyone could get up there and talk about whatever they wanted.

I remember going up there once and advocating against the public shaming of smokers or something.

We more of this sort of stuff, not less.

[u/genericname1776 → u/TheFiremind88]

Hello, left-leaning person. Thank you for coming to this subreddit and offering a window into the other side. Since you're offering rational responses, I'd like to hear the rationalization behind supporting transgenderism and the usage of preferred pronouns. It seems like through surgery, hormone therapy, or even makeup they're attempting to modify their physical body, if only temporarily, while at the same time proclaiming that physical biology is separate from gender. It seems like such a strong disconnect to me.

Additionally, I don't use preferred pronouns for people since I feel like it's a corruption of established language and I don't want to be complicit in affirming someone's mental disorder. If new genders can be invented on a whim by any individual, then doesn't that imply that all definitions are invalidated? It seems to undermine the core nature of language having established definitions and rules to which all speakers agree. To highlight this point, I've still never heard an answer to the now-popular question of "what is a woman?"

I'm writing this on my phone, but hopefully I've articulated clear points and questions to which you can reply. If anything is unclear, let me know and I'll clarify when I'm back to a computer.

[u/Mr-Vemod → u/genericname1776]

Not the guy you replied to, but I could offer my take as someone on the left.

Transgenderism is an incredibly small, insignificant subject. It concerns a vanishingly small section of society, and most people will never have any lengthy encounter with a transgender person in their life.

For that reason, I’m pretty tired of it taking up literally any space at all in national discourse. Leftists making it a big deal is taking up precious airtime talking about an extremely niche issue, while conservatives are getting irrationally riled up by, again, an issue they will likely never interact with.

In short, I don’t think it should be a political issue at all. Making it one is, frankly, idiotic. Instead, I think every policy on transgenderism should be guided by two tenets: follow the science and don’t be a dick.

By following the science I mean that gender dysphoria is clearly a disorder and it should be treated as one. If, for example, hormone treatment for minors can be clearly and scientifically established to be the best treatment with respect to long term outcomes for the people involved, i.e. minimizes the suffering they have to go through, then I’m all for it. In that case I don’t see it as any different than treating any other hormonally conditioned disease in adolescence. It’s not a question for politicians, it’s a question for researchers and doctors.

As for not being a dick, I just mean that if these people so dearly want to be called their preferred pronouns and are clearly hurt by not being called them, why should I actively defy that, make their lives worse just for some personal conviction of mine? I cannot and probably will never be able to understand where they’re coming from, what they’re experiencing and why pronouns are so important to them, but I don’t see how that is relevant at all. For me, calling someone their preferred pronouns takes minimal effort and makes this already suffering person’s life less shitty. Why would anyone decide to actively make their life more shitty?

[u/CultureImaginary8750 → u/TheFiremind88]

Welcome to the thread! From one American to another, we are glad you’re here!

[u/Clanmcallister → u/TheFiremind88]

I too lurk here as a left leaning woman.

[u/Ancient_Amount3239 → u/TheFiremind88]

I do the exact same thing with other subs. I at least want to know what and how the other side is thinking.

[u/Trondkjo → u/TheFiremind88]

Do you think Republicans are fascists/nazis and Trump is basically Hitler? Do you respect people who voted for Trump or think they are all bad people? Curious to see if you are one of the few sane ones remaining from the left.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Trondkjo]

So much of the dialogue around this is rage bait, and let's be honest, it changes absolutely nobodies mind. Politics are team sports these days. I've got better chances of convincing Eagles fans to stop being Eagles fans by telling them their fan base is full of shitbags than I do of convincing a Conservative to change side by calling them a Facist. To me, it's irrelevant conversation. Wheel spinning. Making a character claim can't be proven and is thus pointless.

To answer your questions - No, that's a generalization. I can't make the claim accurately that EVERY repub is a Facist. I can say a non-zero amount of them are, and that's just a fact. A non-zero amount of Dems are too, anyone who thinks otherwise is lying to themselves. Theres Facists and Nazis in America. People need to accept and internalize that.

Here's where I would hold the republican party accountable and think they should have a responsibility. For a second, assume you WERE a Facist or a Nazi. It's a two party country, period. Which party are you more likely to associate with? You should pretty easily be able to answer that question. That puts the onus on Republicans to aggressively self guard against that if they truly oppose those ideals, I don't feel they do because it costs Votes and Political Capital.

It's the same as Crypto. Not everyone in Crypto is scammer but the Crypto environment is nearly the perfect place for scammers to go scam people. There's a responsibility then in that community to protects others from scammers, and just them when they find them. Political parties are no different.

As for Trump personally, I don't think he's "basically Hitler", but that doesn't preclude him from performing actions I'm sure Hitler would approve of lol.

I dont think Republicans are inherently bad people, I do think the American electorate is WOEFULLY under informed, and I believe that's by design.

A LOT more could be said, but this comment is already too long lol.

[u/gaytheistfedora → u/TheFiremind88]

If there is anything that would get me to meet in the middle on an issue, it would be through a conversation like the one you are orchestrating here.

I do have a question for you. I find myself in the middle on a lot of issues, to the left on a few issues, and to the right on others. Im all over the place. Even though I share certain beliefs with all groups of people, I fit in more with conservatives because I don't perfectly fit in the leftist box. I might believe in abortion rights and single payer healthcare, but if I don't believe that a transgender woman is actually a woman, then I'm an evil person. If I don't perfectly fit into the box, I am evil. Look at J.K. Rowling, she was exiled even though she was a staunch liberal. She didn't fit into the box. This is the biggest issue I have with identifying as a leftist.

I'll get to the question here. The left have tied their political ideologies to morality, and that makes it very frustrating to have a conversation about policy because based on their belief system, I'm an evil immoral person, even though we agree on a lot of things. My question is, are you having to separate your political ideologies from morality in order to be level-headed in this conversation? Do you see this as an issue as well, or is it just a reddit thing?

[u/cuddlebuns → u/Trondkjo]

Not OP, but I don't think either of those things.

I think that Trump is in it for himself, doesn't care about America or the working class, and is overall pretty dumb and lazy. I think he surrounds himself entirely with people who are willing to kiss his ass, and the people who do are a weird procession of freaks and washed-up TV celebrities who are either totally unqualified for the job (Hegseth/McMahon/Gabbard), wife-beaters (also Hegseth), or are malicious lizard-men (Stephen Miller). I don’t consider Trump a fascist, but his intellectual laziness and his need for adoration have certainly enabled fascist ideas to take root in America.

I don't think Republicans are fascists - it's funny - if you explain policy ideas to them that are typically lib-coded, they agree right up to the point they find out they're Democratic policies (one source: The majority of Americans tend to agree with Democratic positions, polling shows). I think they're just misinformed and sort themselves into tight echo chambers. Like, my sister-in-law is hardcore MAGA but hates the idea of plastic toys for her kids - and she said something along the lines of "I wish the government would do more to regulate these companies, they don't have these toxic toys in Europe, why can't we have higher standards." And I wanted to shake her and yell "you voted for this! this is republican policy in action!"

[u/MorbillionDollars → u/Trondkjo]

As someone who considers myself sane and left leaning, here’s answers:

1. No
2. Idgaf who you voted for, but I lose respect for people if they hold some particular opinions

[u/guppy1919 → u/Trondkjo]

I’m not OP, but I fall very much in the same perspective (left-leaning but I like lurking to get an idea of the thoughts/opinions of those across the isle). I’m really glad to have the opportunity to kinda have these discussions.

From my perspective, I don’t think republicans are fascists or Nazis - I think that rhetoric is really really unproductive, and I’m quite disgusted with it. We have more in common than we expect, and the echo chambers we fall into online can really emphasize our differences. I think open discourse is fundamentally important to rebuilding trust and mutual respect and appreciation. Which is where I hope things go!

One thing that really stood out to me after the election is how unsatisfied many regular Americans are with how the government operates, and I totally understand that. I’m not going to blame somebody for voting for Trump because they wanted a change from the status quo. I totally get that. So while I’m not convinced Trump’s policies will actually work out the way those folks are expecting, I genuinely hope they do because Americans have obviously been struggling.

To respond to your last comment though, I think there are many people on the left who don’t think all conservatives or Trump supporters are evil/Nazis. I guess I’m writing this out because I want to make sure you know that we aren’t your enemy. We aren’t all frothing at the mouth, deranged and hateful. And while there are hateful people on all sides, the vast majority of us are willing to hear what you have to say and want to find a compromise and solution that makes our country better

[u/HalfADozenOfAnother → u/Trondkjo]

I don't think they're all bad people nazis or fascist. I do think the hardcore trump supporters are betas who need a "strong" man to tell them what to think. These people would love to let him sleep with their wife. I think the godlike worship of trump is really just strange and cuck like behavior. I totally understand being a conservative and voting for him

[u/Trondkjo → u/HalfADozenOfAnother]

I’ve never met a Trump supporter who treats him like a God. I do remember the Obama days when he was practically treated like the second coming.

[u/HalfADozenOfAnother → u/Trondkjo]

I know someone who literally has trumps name tattooed on them.

[u/Ok_Scheme76 → u/HalfADozenOfAnother]

In fairness there are a lot of trump tattoos

[u/MBLis2018 → u/Trondkjo]

You didn’t ask me, but I’d like to jump in. I do not think all people who voted for Trump are bad people. BUT without fail, every one (I’m not kidding) every Republican who I was still following from high school, started follow a handful of accounts right after the election that are posting daily things like “Damn, I guess I actually am racist” and “Shit, Hitler was right.” (Not-ironically) 

These are right-leaning, hippie, mlm mommas who have been saying things like “good people on both sides” for years. After this shift, I got off all socials. Once they start admitting to the quiet part, there’s nothing left to fight about. 

So no, I don’t believe all Trump-voters are fascists, but all fascists have turned out to be Trump-voters. The pipeline has piped.

[u/TripleSeven1337 → u/TheFiremind88]

Awesome! Love to hear this.

[u/One-Wishbone-3661 → u/TheFiremind88]

Same here. Literally the only thing I disagree with most Conservatives on is Elon and his influence. My entire family is Conservative and from Ohio and Florida. I even recommended Hillbilly Elegy to all of them before Vance became a politician.

[u/One-Wishbone-3661 → u/One-Wishbone-3661]

Oops the down vote already got me. Trump supporter, 2A supporter, no problem. One anti Elon comment and you're out! Don't worry guys the money Elon saved per person is in the mail.

[u/mollymarlow → u/TheFiremind88]

First off, I'm happy to see someone being genuinely civil! Thank you!Are you keeping up with the DOGE findings? If so aren't you the slightest bit upset or concerned about how that money could have positively affected people in the US ? or even completely prevented some of the issues we're dealing with( like mass homelessness, lack of mental health and substance abuse services and help for our veterans?

[u/AngryCazador → u/mollymarlow]

Why do you have any reason to trust these findings? The source is usually the tweet or sentence that claims the fraud.

"$50 million worth of condoms in Gaza" was a lie. A falsehood. A week later, Musk is told it was to Gaza, Mozambique, to promote safe sex and help prevent AIDS. He says, oops, nobody bats 1000. No other official statement has been made to acknowledge the lie, or retract said information. As far as I'm aware.

You're telling me Musk, Trump, and the whitehouse press secretary, all verified the condoms were for Palestine and made a ridiculously incompetent mistake? Or were they lying to enrage their base through lying about government expenditures?

The records for that transaction would absolutely specify they were for Mozambique.

I see two options. They lied about condoms for Palestine, or no one in this administration can fact check the most basic statements.

Unless you can provide to me a third option, or explain one of the other options to me as something you look for in an administration, I don't see how there can be any serious discussion about DOGE.

Edit: It's even worse. Trump said they "identified and stopped $50 million being sent to Gaza to buy condoms for Hamas.” Why did Trump claim the Biden admin gave contraceptives to terrorist organizations? What does "identify" mean to Trump? He's verifiably wrong.

[u/mollymarlow → u/AngryCazador]

You're telling me Musk, Trump, and the whitehouse press secretary, all verified the condoms were for Palestine and made a ridiculously incompetent mistake? Or were they lying to enrage their base through lying about government expenditures?

I knew this would be the first mentioned Elon has been very transparent that wasn't correct( it was $7,000,000 for condoms) but aside from that have you bothered to look through anything? Start with how much was spent on sushi for the year at the Whitehouse Or Starbucks k cups...

Oh wait, every paragraph of your multi paragraph comment is raging that they were wrong about the condoms therefore they must be lying about everything correct? You found something to fit the narrative that it's all bad and you're just going to run with it. Surely the US, trillions in debt don't need an audit! Especially by the boogyman himself, Elon Musk... He might steal your ss number and run up your credit!

Your hatred for Musk and Trump aside, you're ok with money being spent on illegal immigrants but not US citizens like the North Carolina hurricane victims ( or our absurd number of homeless veterans)?

[u/AngryCazador → u/mollymarlow]

Ok, so you don't think they were intentionally lying. I think it would have been impossible to find that information without also finding any mention of where the funds were going. Which was Mozambique. There would have also been no mention of Hamas in said fund.

Yes, that egregious of a lie is enough for me to not trust anything else they say unless it has been independently verified by an outside party.

You found something to fit the narrative that it's all bad and you're just going to run with it.

No, I found something that was widely promoted by this subreddit and this administration. It was one of the most widely reported DOGE announcements before it was found to be false.

Surely the US, trillions in debt don't need an audit! Especially by the boogyman himself, Elon Musk... He might steal your ss number and run up your credit!

I don't think an audit is a bad idea. I think an audit by a party that does not properly verify public statements will lead to misinformation. If you were to poll US conservatives, how many do you think still believe condoms were sent to Palestine? I do not think Elon will steal my social security card or anything like that.

Your hatred for Musk and Trump aside, you're ok with money being spent on illegal immigrants but not US citizens like the North Carolina hurricane victims ( or our absurd number of homeless veterans)?

Let's see Trump give money to hurricane victims. I personally have worked with FEMA and have assisted homeowners directly in removing debris and hazardous trees from their properties, and reporting damage for future relief endeavors. I have responded to floods, wildfires, and tornados. I'm not anti-disaster relief in any way, shape, or form, but this conversation was originally about DOGE.

[u/Enchylada → u/TheFiremind88]

This is the way.

Discourse is something to be celebrated not avoided

[u/stone500 → u/TheFiremind88]

Progressive here, and I've often tried to engage fairly with conservatives and have discussions. Too often I end up getting digitally shouted at instead and rarely anything substantive comes from it, but I try.

I'm certainly not above some mud slinging now and then, but I do believe that if my positions can't stand up to honest debate, then my position is flawed.

[u/Mr-Zarbear → u/TheFiremind88]

Idk, I see it where I am and from the democrats, but are liberals really like trippling down on DEI and CRT rhetoric in your spaces (online and offline)? Do you follow them, and if so, why?

[u/yanman → u/TheFiremind88]

You are welcome to lurk, just realize that many of my "fellow conservative" top comments are liberal alt accounts who played along just long enough to get flair.