Fine point, well made. Conservative nationalists are a subset of conservatives. I agree there's plenty of other nationalists.

Also they are somewhat vague concepts and it's all a but messy. People don't fit into handy small boxes.

I would say "Trump supporter" is a perfectly fine designation and tells me everything I need to know about a person.

Well that's a significantly different topic but even 'trump supporter' is a very large messy box. Some bizarrely even include those who wont vote for trump.

And what you or anyone else need to know about a person isn't important is it? It remains a large, somewhat vague and messy box however small and simple anyone cares to imagine it.

Fine people on both sides.

Strange comment but if you think so.

Politically it's not important to judge them as fine or not is it?

You don't get a pass on deplorable opinions by branding them "politics". Shitty politics make shitty people.

I think the focus on the GOP as an indication of conservatism demonstrates a significant oversimplification of politics. The GOP is a political party, not an ideology. The GOP is not really conservative, but serves conservatives interest, in some regards, at least more than the Democratic Party. Lagligt is probably more conservative than I am....but I would not label either of us a GOP'ers. Most Trump supporters are probably Trump supporters for partisan reasons, and are GOP'ers. Mainstream conservatism is essentially classical liberalism which can lead one to voting primarily for the GOP or the DNC.

And your goal is to decide who gets one of your passes or not?

That's nice for you but so what? You get to point and say 'shitty'?

Are you asking why we discuss politics (and therefore need terms to brand different political positions) or why we judge people's character? Those are different questions, but I'd expect a mentally competent adult to know the answer to both.

It's always a litmus test for some of these folks. It's also attempt at validation. Most of these folks lack critical thought, and just repeat what the cool kids say.

I can only assume you are answering the question posed in the thread title, rather than in the post to which you responded.

Yeah, because it's impossible for criticism of lefties to be valid, so lefties have to assume things like this.

No, but the particular criticism you levelled, to wit, one side being brainwashed dumbasses incapable of critical thinking and propaganda-guzzling sheep certainly applies wholesale to right-wingers, not left wingers.

I would not myself classify "most Republicans" as "science deniers." If you wish to do so, then please have that debate with a Republican, not with me.

I'm not sure that what you expect is a help rather than a hindrance.

But as long as we don't confuse you deciding a load of people are shitty with anything serious about politics then we're good. I can leave it in the 'so what' box.

Kewl!

If not "most Republicans," then nevertheless ~all the people they choose to represent them.

I'm not a republican either, but I can still think that most republicans are science deniers. I wasn't classifying you as a republican, I was checking that you agree that most republicans are science deniers. Glad that you do, given you said you don't think most of them believe in anthropogenic climate change (or its severity).

What's the difference? What matters is whom they vote in to power, and what policies they support, not what's in their secret heart.

Since you apparently have no interest in a serious discussion, I'm putting you back on "Ignore".

What would you define as "anything serious about politics", inasmuch as it relates to a fairly apolitical person (in terms of action), such as me?

As brilliant as Sowell is it took him until about only 10 years ago to say the "Fed is a cancer." Milton Friedman was a snake-oil salesmen and a keynesian, just like most conservatives are keyesians without realizing it, because they never talk about gold backing the currency.

Everything is decaying in society because of the Federal Reserve and having gone off a constitutional gold standard. You can't have freedom and prosperity when your currency is a debt instrument.

I am as far right as you can get. I can't stand Bernie Sanders and his supporters, but his supporters are unironically 1000% correct about "income inequality," the problem is they have no idea how it is happening, and it is because we do not have sound money anymore. The issue is not minimum wage, the issue is prices are rising too fast. Rich people paying taxes or not has nothing to do with rent and bread becoming more expensive.

Conservatives mock liberals and say "work harder" or "get better educated, min wage isnt supposed to be a living wage." This is good advice but doesnt get at the root of the problem. There are lazy entitled millenials out there but that is not anywhere near the sole reason 1/3rd of millenials live with their parents. It is harder to save and get ahead today. Liberals are right, but for the wrong reason. Conservaties telling millenials to work harder is like telling a venezuelan to work harder even though that extra money doesnt buy you 1 carton of eggs because the currency is worthless. Of course we arent as far as venezuela yet, but it is the same concept.

"In the absence of a gold standard it is impossible to protect savings from confiscation through inflation, there is no safe store of value." - Alan Greenspan (1966).

All you have to do is look at the various discussions and see how the left attacks classical economics, which has a **** ton of legitimacy. Your response is emblematic. Buying into classic economics would be considered being "brainwashed" and "propaganda (and has repeatedly been used by people here to describe it), despite it having substantial amount of compelling peer reviewed research that validates its legitimacy (not to mention Goofy endless accusing me of essentially inventing classical economics in my head). It's a cult-like tactics to dinigerate anything that goes against the progressive mantra. I use #toxiccult for a reason, and it's not as a pejorative.

Hmm. Maybe there is a god, after all.

Whatever.