You're partially right. We have at least two sides. One side is CLEARLY delusional. Fueled by conspiracy theories and lies. We also have other sides, but the two sides that get the most attention are the only sides that matter. We have one side that is most definitely delusional, other sides maybe have members who might be, but one side is DOMINATED by delusion.
I just wanted to note that the "other side" that I'm not on, also believes basically the same thing with regards to my side.
The republicans have espoused a dangerous ideology that not just allows but welcomes factual untruths and a worrying disconnect from rational thought.
There is a need for political parties of various philosophical bents to push and pull in different directions based on reasoned and informed decisions.
Once you give up that core grounding you basically invite fanatism and I don’t see what possible positive outcome we can expect from this.
Of course it isn't enough. That's why the media outlets in question will make up facts, or really slant things to appear to carry sufficient factual weight, and then the reasoning from there comes out to the desired conclusion. Not that there is usually much reasoning going on, it is mostly emotional arguments.
As if the dems didn't do the same? Let's be honest with ourselves, both extremes are very dangerous, and polarization is continuing. The far left will kill people if left to their accord: https://cdn.cnsnews.com/styles/article_big/s3/2021-01/Arthur...
In fact, doing so is probably harmful.
Calling a huge portion of the country delusional with no basis or fact is precisely what is driving this division. Both sides have a lot more in common than you might imagine. Far more than what they disagree on.
But today we're not really arguing over the margins; the question before us today is "should we live in a democracy where the people decide the outcome of elections?" 90% of Democrats and Republicans will agree that yes! We should!
Let's secure our democracy, then we can go back to arguing over the tax rate.
For them, "group strength" and tribalism is more important, so their behaviour is not is not delusional within that paradigm.
Thats what no one understands
There may or may not have been fraud in any of the states. But once they certify their Electors, that's it as far as I can see. I honestly don't know if there is a remedy even for clear fraud if the state goes ahead and certifies the results. In theory a state doesn't even need to hold a public vote. The legislature could just appoint the Electors. The founding fathers clearly wrote the constition to give the power of electing the president to the states. Allowing any level of the federal government to override that seems to be a conflict of interest.
1. I'm a Republican because of policy X.
2. I'm a person that thinks carefully about facts and reason.
3. Trump is the Republican candidate -> President.
4. I voted for the Republican. I must have done that because of #2 (and not just #1.)
5. Trump speaks the truth - he speaks for the people, people like me.
6. Trump believes election fraud is a problem. Combine #4 and #2 and the linked perceptual flaws of selective focus, imagining that election fraud could happen, allowing myths/stories to guide my responses to the things I read... plus I'm carefully thinking about facts and reason, and I voted for Trump, and most of the people in my social network also voted for Trump... it must be the plurality of the nation. My peers are also carefully thinking about facts and reason, and I'm sure the news networks I follow do as well...
This is super simplified and skipping about a thousand steps, and yet, it's really not hard to see almost anyone getting somewhere they never thought they'd end up after years of reading and listening to mostly facts that agree with what Trump tells his believers.
That's probably easier to believe happened than "I want to be an extremist and I want to violently attack Congress when they attempt to certify an election, even though it was a legitimate election."
[0] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/pieces-mind/201208/f...
Which set of conspiracy theories? The crazy ones that Trump was a Russian asset and everything surrounding that nutbaggery for four years?
How about the current nutbaggery from the other extreme that this election was stollen through voting machine manipulation, ballot stuffing, discarded Trump ballots by postal workers, etc.
It's hard for me to get upset at either side when it all looks so insane.
[1]: Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election, Volume V.
[2]: Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election, Volume I.
> The Senate Intelligence Committee assessed that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort's "high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services" was a "grave counterintelligence threat".[15] The foremost individual was Manafort's employee Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian.[15] The committee identified Kilimnik as a "Russian intelligence officer"; describing that Manafort and Kilimnik had a "close and lasting relationship" even through the 2016 election.[18] Manafort repeatedly tried to "secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik", including "sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy".[18]
> The Senate Intelligence Committee introduced a new allegation regarding Kilimnik, that he "may have been connected" to the Russian military intelligence's hack and leak of Democratic Party material. However, the report's discussions on this topic are redacted.[19] Manafort's connection with the Russian hack and leak operation is "largely unknown", but possible, given "two pieces of information" the committee found; the details of such information were also redacted.[18]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_...
BTW, this report was released by Senate Republicans. As soon as this matter is cleared up, you can call it nutbaggery.