A reminder to all people of all parties, affiliations, or otherwise.

One thing to remember, to try to think about and understand is that your fellow citizens have voted for, endorsed, supported someone for president based on their own perception of that President, not based on your perception.

Hillary supporters do not necessarily support criminal activities, carelessness with classified materialize, pay for pay, and all other things she has been accused of while at the same time trump supporters do not support racism, sexism, bigotry, or anything else trump has also been accused of.

We are only looking at the world through our own lens and refusing to acknowledge that our viewing device is most definitely different from another's. What has us so enthralled with our own perception that it has become the apparent source of truth and holiness?


We judge people based on what we believe their social and psychological conditioning to be without realizing that we ourselves are judging them due to the very same reasons - media, cultural and family ties and upbringing, community influence and peer groups deeply influence our thought process whether we are willing to admit it or not.

We need to start seeing things from another's point of view - it won't be perfect, there's no real way to cut a lens to match another's even very closely without having lived in their circumstances, but we can at least try to sympathize with each other and see that we are not enemies.

Well, at least that's my perception of that matter - what's yours?

Deadlyhope

a reply to: deadlyhope

I think there's entirely too many threads on this topic worded very similarly to this one.

I always forgot physics 101 the whole Galaxy spins around America.

"Hillary supporters do not necessarily support criminal activities, carelessness with classified materialize, pay for pay, and all other things she has been accused of while at the same time trump supporters do not support racism, sexism, bigotry, or anything else trump has also been accused of".

No, you're not getting away with that.
Where was Trump's investigation? Oh yes, got dropped mysteriously. What about Hilarry's? Ummmm, that's awkward it's still going.
Where was that bigotry again? Oh yes on a NEWS (4% approval and trustworthy ratings) channel full of Leany lefties.
Where was the carelessness? You mean the REPEATED law breaking actions coupled with an elitist mindset of "I'm too important to jail".
The Clinton foundation WILL bring that corrupt ass woman to her knees..... In jail, you watch.

Now release your dirt on Trump or just stop with this tired rhetoric. I dislike them both strongly myself, I really do, but I'm SICK of people just blowing out hot oxygen in the place of facts and evidence, it's disgraceful.

Secondly:
"We need to start seeing things from another's point of view - it won't be perfect, there's no real way to cut a lens to match another's even very closely without having lived in their circumstances, but we can at least try to sympathize with each other and see that we are not enemies."..

Again I disagree, this would only be true if social engineering wasn't a real phenomena - but it is, making that a moot point. How do you sympathise with a manufactured viewpoint that flies in the face of evidence without being ridiculously altruistic? Impossiburu!

a reply to: deadlyhope

It's interesting how you say...

Hillary supporters do not necessarily support criminal activities

which suggests a) criminal activity is proven, so where is the arrest? And b) that with the word 'necessarily' you are suggesting that some or all may support such activity. You then go on to say...

while at the same time trump supporters do not support racism, sexism, bigotry

but you didn't use the word 'necessarily' that time did you? Why is that I wonder? Are you truly saying that no Trump supporter could be racist, sexist or bigoted in some other way?

Interesting use of words when you are telling people not to judge others.

a reply to: Joneselius

Social engineering makes it easier to sympathize with others, not harder.

To know that someone has been manipulated into having their point of view.. What, I should deem them incompetent for being malleable? You're likely much more malleable than you think. People that get their news from Ats, info wars and wiki leaks aren't especially immune to manipulation - in fact in my opinion the people with the clearest eyes likely stay away from the most popular and profit driven sources of news and entertainment including forum boards like this one. I don't pretend to know more than others, why do you?

Why is Hillary or trump most certainly guilty? We know the mainstream media, other nations, other partisan groups all have an agenda against other groups and people...my personal opinion that Hillary should be in jail is not a holy grail of truth, it's an assessment.

Someone making an assessment that Fox news is often just as full of crap as every other station is, and not believing every bad story about Hillary does NOT make them lesser minded than yourself. It means they have lived a different life with different experiences.

You may not allow me to "get away" with this thought process, but I have no allegiance to you or your negative ideaology.

a reply to: uncommitted

You're just reading into it too much. I continued on the same note, in the same paragraph so all things you read between the lines apply to both Hillary and trump, I just felt it would be redundant.

I guess the kkk endorsed trump - they are most definitely racist and bigoted and hateful and people I very much do not agree with nor even support their views, intolerance of that level often escalates to more than just freedom of speech and such, and I do not condone nor accept violence of any kind.

Maybe many criminals did support Hillary, I don't have the statistics, so I can't give a concrete example for either side .. I'm saying that a hillary supporter is not necessarily a criminal because she's been called one, and a trump supporter is not necessarily a racist because he's been called one. Happy with my wording now?

Apologies for being a bit snappy I'm tired as hell

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: uncommitted

You're just reading into it too much. I continued on the same note, in the same paragraph so all things you read between the lines apply to both Hillary and trump, I just felt it would be redundant.

I guess the kkk endorsed trump - they are most definitely racist and bigoted and hateful and people I very much do not agree with nor even support their views, intolerance of that level often escalates to more than just freedom of speech and such, and I do not condone nor accept violence of any kind.

Maybe many criminals did support Hillary, I don't have the statistics, so I can't give a concrete example for either side .. I'm saying that a hillary supporter is not necessarily a criminal because she's been called one, and a trump supporter is not necessarily a racist because he's been called one. Happy with my wording now?

Apologies for being a bit snappy I'm tired as hell

Maybe more to the point you can't make such generalisations based on what name someone voted for or the party they allegedly were supposed to representing.

a reply to: uncommitted

Yes, that is more to the point but, to the point doesn't commonly work. If someone has a preconceived notion about how another person is, a one liner won't always work.. At least such applies to myself.