If Costanzo had stopped at "I don't think," she would have been right. Anyone voting for trump clearly didn't think it through. When has he ever shown that he thinks of someone other than himself?
They’d have to put Keaton on an apple box for any scenes with Davis as she towers over him. And yeah some couples can overlook the political differences if they are normal candidates on either side. Dare I say that my belief in choosing a candidate is based on policies and principles and personality. Never in my lifetime has there been such a great divide and the choice to go with such a flawed human being would be where I draw the line. He’s so blatantly guilty of huge crimes not the least being a rapist and child sex trafficker. How can anyone think that that is ok without thinking that your partner condones such a thing? That’s just a horrible person. It will manifest in other ways against you and you can see that.
What people misunderstand is that forty years ago... even thirty years ago, I suppose, our political disagreements could be over political things... tax rates, business regulations, balancing the environment against human well-being... what is the best way to help poor people...
You could be conservative without being an irredeemable asshole.
Our political differences now are "should women and gay people have human rights?" "should the government try to eradicate transpeople?" "should we create a brutal, cruel police state for ethnic cleansing America of all non-white Hispanics?" "Should we impose and use the monopoly on violence to impose white Evangelical beliefs on society?" "Should we let millions of people go hungry or go without medical treatment because 'fuck them'?" "Should we let the President do whatever he wants so long as he's one of our own?"
I trust everyone can see the difference between the two, but for the more dense by choice among us, the first set of differences is political, but shares a common reality, morality, and basic understanding of American ideals, law, and democracy.
The second set of differences challenges and discards the fundamental reality, the formerly shared ethics, and the American ideals.
You can be friends with someone who thinks a 10% flat tax might be better. You can't be friends with someone who doesn't share even basic human morals.
Exactly this. My grandmother was a Democrat, my grandfather was a Republican. We had plenty of discussions at family parties about political issues, even the ones that were touchier in a Catholic family, and there were volatile disagreements surrounded by deep love. But there was no one who questioned basic human rights, even if they thought one parent should stay home or if they (shamefully) paid for their sons to go to college but expected their daughters to pay their own way (and also, helped their daughters leave abusive relationships, they weren’t going to put religious dogma over actual people.) They believed in unions even if they thought people in desk jobs didn’t need union protections. They both believed in Civil Rights and respecting people and their work and hung out with recent immigrants. And although several of their kids died before Trump came down that escalator, it’s hard to imagine that the kids wouldn’t all have become more liberal with age the way the living ones did (from “Abortion stops a beating heart” to “No Justice, No Peace, No Fascist Police” in four simple years.)
Honestly, conservative methods have always been sketchy, but none of my Republican family ever believed it was reasonable to use law to force women to remain home or bar Black people from their neighborhoods. They talked the talk and even walked the walk, if reluctantly and imperfectly. But Reagan changed a lot of their ability to deny what policies could do, and the Republicans were slower to accept social change than the Democrats were. But none of the Republican ones were like the hyperfocused fundamentalist religious zealots we have now trying to impose their will on the rest of us.
Was also thinking in response to Gaetz: no one should be friendly to a party that has essentially rubber stamped ending democracy, endorsed corruption, gleefully chimed in on dehumanizing convenient minorities. Modern ‘conservatives’ frequently mainstream a profound extremism. They may be blind to this, or just trying to pretend they are. This is no reason anyone else should be.
Straight, white, cis people, of the teen age variety, are indestructible, at least in their minds.
You know why queer people make up a higher ratio of union organizers than the population at whole? Because they're fighting for their lives, not vacation days. (Ok, vacation days too)
I can barely keep in touch with relatives who think Red, never mind date someone who does.
I heard a "moderate" commentator say that "People shouldn't make politics their whole personality." That's privilege talking, so it's a safe bet that it's a well off, cis, white dude.
This is a good point. I think too a lot of people are following the lead of the frankly hateful creatures elected to Congress who are only there to do social media hits. Protected by Murc's Law they're just free to let their freak flag fly and perform behavior that would get people fired in almost any company.
This of course I think is part of the legacy of Newt Gingrich, but hell even the way AOC is treated now (or hell, Jasmine Crockett by some people) would have been a major scandal in the 90s. It's very grim. But at least as far as the Congress folks, it's possible to upgrade if people can exercise their rights where possible and work to defeat the really nasty people.
Part of what has made this more acute lately is Trump’s whole “the mask is off” thing. In the past, most conservative beliefs were justified as a different way to achieve the same ends as liberals wanted—oppose affirmative action not because POCs were inferior but because that system hurts them more than helps them (today Republicans just go with “if I see a black pilot I know he’s under qualified”). Oppose a liberal healthcare plan because a conservative one with market features would help more people at lower cost (now it’s just “stop giving my money to undeserving leeches”). Trump doesn’t bother trying to appeal beyond his base, so to support him now means embracing darkness.
There’s no way either Bush or Reagan would publicly call Democrats “scum”—Trump, an actual bag of scum, does this all the time. To marry a Trump supporter means marrying someone who thinks it’s ok to call you scum.
Conservative Sam Malone (pro athletes tend to be conservative, small business owners too) could get along with Diane in the Reagan years, but under Trump? She’d have to live with the fact that he backs a rapist bigot who openly dehumanizes people like her. I’d hope the Sam of that scenario would become a Never Trumper.
Correct. I used to believe - I've been voting since 1973 - that Democrats and Republicans wanted the same thing - what is good for America - but have different ways to get there. It's not since Trump that I no longer feel this way. It's back to Newt and Limbaugh. And the Republicans had been running a slow-moving coup since that time (obvious at warp speed with Trump).
I respect your long history of voting and caring about the country. I still believe America is strongest when we debate ideas, not motives. Loving this country means defending the Constitution, free speech, and the right to disagree without questioning each other’s loyalty
If Costanzo had stopped at "I don't think," she would have been right. Anyone voting for trump clearly didn't think it through. When has he ever shown that he thinks of someone other than himself?
They’d have to put Keaton on an apple box for any scenes with Davis as she towers over him. And yeah some couples can overlook the political differences if they are normal candidates on either side. Dare I say that my belief in choosing a candidate is based on policies and principles and personality. Never in my lifetime has there been such a great divide and the choice to go with such a flawed human being would be where I draw the line. He’s so blatantly guilty of huge crimes not the least being a rapist and child sex trafficker. How can anyone think that that is ok without thinking that your partner condones such a thing? That’s just a horrible person. It will manifest in other ways against you and you can see that.
What people misunderstand is that forty years ago... even thirty years ago, I suppose, our political disagreements could be over political things... tax rates, business regulations, balancing the environment against human well-being... what is the best way to help poor people...
You could be conservative without being an irredeemable asshole.
Our political differences now are "should women and gay people have human rights?" "should the government try to eradicate transpeople?" "should we create a brutal, cruel police state for ethnic cleansing America of all non-white Hispanics?" "Should we impose and use the monopoly on violence to impose white Evangelical beliefs on society?" "Should we let millions of people go hungry or go without medical treatment because 'fuck them'?" "Should we let the President do whatever he wants so long as he's one of our own?"
I trust everyone can see the difference between the two, but for the more dense by choice among us, the first set of differences is political, but shares a common reality, morality, and basic understanding of American ideals, law, and democracy.
The second set of differences challenges and discards the fundamental reality, the formerly shared ethics, and the American ideals.
You can be friends with someone who thinks a 10% flat tax might be better. You can't be friends with someone who doesn't share even basic human morals.
Exactly this. My grandmother was a Democrat, my grandfather was a Republican. We had plenty of discussions at family parties about political issues, even the ones that were touchier in a Catholic family, and there were volatile disagreements surrounded by deep love. But there was no one who questioned basic human rights, even if they thought one parent should stay home or if they (shamefully) paid for their sons to go to college but expected their daughters to pay their own way (and also, helped their daughters leave abusive relationships, they weren’t going to put religious dogma over actual people.) They believed in unions even if they thought people in desk jobs didn’t need union protections. They both believed in Civil Rights and respecting people and their work and hung out with recent immigrants. And although several of their kids died before Trump came down that escalator, it’s hard to imagine that the kids wouldn’t all have become more liberal with age the way the living ones did (from “Abortion stops a beating heart” to “No Justice, No Peace, No Fascist Police” in four simple years.)
Honestly, conservative methods have always been sketchy, but none of my Republican family ever believed it was reasonable to use law to force women to remain home or bar Black people from their neighborhoods. They talked the talk and even walked the walk, if reluctantly and imperfectly. But Reagan changed a lot of their ability to deny what policies could do, and the Republicans were slower to accept social change than the Democrats were. But none of the Republican ones were like the hyperfocused fundamentalist religious zealots we have now trying to impose their will on the rest of us.
Bravo! Well said.
Pretty much my thoughts too.
Yep. Was gonna write basically that.
Was also thinking in response to Gaetz: no one should be friendly to a party that has essentially rubber stamped ending democracy, endorsed corruption, gleefully chimed in on dehumanizing convenient minorities. Modern ‘conservatives’ frequently mainstream a profound extremism. They may be blind to this, or just trying to pretend they are. This is no reason anyone else should be.
I imagine Keller and Costanzo are CIS white people, right?
Bingo!
https://www.wunc.org/2025-05-22/majority-of-gen-z-swipe-left-on-dating-people-with-opposite-political-views
Straight, white, cis people, of the teen age variety, are indestructible, at least in their minds.
You know why queer people make up a higher ratio of union organizers than the population at whole? Because they're fighting for their lives, not vacation days. (Ok, vacation days too)
I can barely keep in touch with relatives who think Red, never mind date someone who does.
I heard a "moderate" commentator say that "People shouldn't make politics their whole personality." That's privilege talking, so it's a safe bet that it's a well off, cis, white dude.
And it was.
This is a good point. I think too a lot of people are following the lead of the frankly hateful creatures elected to Congress who are only there to do social media hits. Protected by Murc's Law they're just free to let their freak flag fly and perform behavior that would get people fired in almost any company.
This of course I think is part of the legacy of Newt Gingrich, but hell even the way AOC is treated now (or hell, Jasmine Crockett by some people) would have been a major scandal in the 90s. It's very grim. But at least as far as the Congress folks, it's possible to upgrade if people can exercise their rights where possible and work to defeat the really nasty people.
Just a reminder, tomorrow is the fifth anniversary of the Republican Insurrection of January 6th, 2021. Y'all know what to do...
“𝗕𝗶𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗗.𝗖. 𝗼𝗻 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝟲𝘁𝗵. 𝗕𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲, 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗯𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗱!”
"Ocasio-Cortez is politically engaged and no man’s manic pixie dream girl."
I beg to differ, sir! If I were fifty years younger and single, I would have a poster of her in my bedroom....
Dear Mr. Keller -- your girlfriend is okay with politicians who lie, cheat, steal, are violent, and are convicted sexual offenders. Run away fast.
Part of what has made this more acute lately is Trump’s whole “the mask is off” thing. In the past, most conservative beliefs were justified as a different way to achieve the same ends as liberals wanted—oppose affirmative action not because POCs were inferior but because that system hurts them more than helps them (today Republicans just go with “if I see a black pilot I know he’s under qualified”). Oppose a liberal healthcare plan because a conservative one with market features would help more people at lower cost (now it’s just “stop giving my money to undeserving leeches”). Trump doesn’t bother trying to appeal beyond his base, so to support him now means embracing darkness.
There’s no way either Bush or Reagan would publicly call Democrats “scum”—Trump, an actual bag of scum, does this all the time. To marry a Trump supporter means marrying someone who thinks it’s ok to call you scum.
Conservative Sam Malone (pro athletes tend to be conservative, small business owners too) could get along with Diane in the Reagan years, but under Trump? She’d have to live with the fact that he backs a rapist bigot who openly dehumanizes people like her. I’d hope the Sam of that scenario would become a Never Trumper.
Correct. I used to believe - I've been voting since 1973 - that Democrats and Republicans wanted the same thing - what is good for America - but have different ways to get there. It's not since Trump that I no longer feel this way. It's back to Newt and Limbaugh. And the Republicans had been running a slow-moving coup since that time (obvious at warp speed with Trump).
I respect your long history of voting and caring about the country. I still believe America is strongest when we debate ideas, not motives. Loving this country means defending the Constitution, free speech, and the right to disagree without questioning each other’s loyalty