Hot, Bad & Unpopular Takes

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Whenever I see a bio like this my eyes roll into the back of my head:

I agree with this, except illegal immigrants are illegal.

what about illegal aliens?

They should be deported to Mars.

[here2view]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

[Sirius_]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

I don't think that is particularly unpopular around here.

[HillGoose]

This ones a doozy.

I have a severely autistic brother who went through intense therapy to learn how to do just about everything. As a result, my mother became acquainted with a number of mothers of other mentally disabled children. These women, seeing the deep bond my other brother and I have with Harry, often approached us as if we were some sort of autism whisperers or something. I always resented these minivan driving shrills.

Their kids aren’t autistic. They’re basically just a bit off. They are either cruely called or ironically call themselves “spergs.” I sympathize with their plight, I really do. They’ve done nothing wrong and are treated grotesquely. But their overprotective self-righteous parents need to quit appropriating the “spectrum” and inflating the definition of autism. I know this one woman who calls herself an “autism crusader” and sometimes winds up on the local news for her activism. She used to call my mom to vent and cry about her struggles. Her son is almost completely normal. He’s just, in George Carlin’s words, kinda goofy.

Meanwhile my brother can’t tie his own shoes and was basically ripped from our home despite my parents giving it 220%. I never demanded sympathy for my family’s situation. Respect, sure, but never sympathy. And I’m tired of having to expend it on people way more fortunate than us. I also fear it will take away from the resources allotted to those who are literally disabled.

And it’s not that we shouldn’t help those who do have Aspergers. Just don’t do it at the expense of those with DS or autism.

Your mother's friend is not a psychiatrist, she should not be deciding what Autism is and what it isn't.

You are not a psychiatrist, you should not be deciding what is Autism and what isn't.

Leave medicine to doctors.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

I don't think that is particularly unpopular around here.

Except for that fact that campaigning on social issues has won them the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections, and the electoral vote in four of them.  (Trump was only the first Republican since Bush 1 to get over 300 EVs.)  Why would they give it up now, when it's worked so well for them thus far?  If anything, it's Republicans who need to drop the social issues, not Democrats.

[Lechasseur]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

I don't think that is particularly unpopular around here.

Except for that fact that campaigning on social issues has won them the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections, and the electoral vote in four of them.  (Trump was only the first Republican since Bush 1 to get over 300 EVs.)  Why would they give it up now, when it's worked so well for them thus far?  If anything, it's Republicans who need to drop the social issues, not Democrats.

I don't exactly agree with your conclusion: sure, Democrats have won 6 out of the last 7 popular votes in presidential elections but I think the focus on social issues has really hurt them down ballot and has prevented them from dominating the country politically. I'm no socialist (in Europe I support conservative parties all the time), but let's face it, the GOP's economic policies are ridiculous, social conservatism is the only thing that's saved the party. The GOP hasn't been reasonable on economics for at least 25 years now (the GOP's right wing basically turned on Bush Sr because he wanted to manage the deficit responsibly), if it weren't for the Democrats being so insistent on social issues, I suspect the GOP would have collapsed at least 10 years ago.

[Lechasseur]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

I don't think that is particularly unpopular around here.

Except for that fact that campaigning on social issues has won them the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections, and the electoral vote in four of them.  (Trump was only the first Republican since Bush 1 to get over 300 EVs.)  Why would they give it up now, when it's worked so well for them thus far?  If anything, it's Republicans who need to drop the social issues, not Democrats.

I don't exactly agree with your conclusion: sure, Democrats have won 6 out of the last 7 popular votes in presidential elections but I think the focus on social issues has really hurt them down ballot and has prevented them from dominating the country politically. I'm no socialist (in Europe I support conservative parties all the time), but let's face it, the GOP's economic policies are ridiculous, social conservatism is the only thing that's saved the party. The GOP hasn't been reasonable on economics for at least 25 years now (the GOP's right wing basically turned on Bush Sr because he wanted to manage the deficit responsibly), if it weren't for the Democrats being so insistent on social issues, I suspect the GOP would have collapsed at least 10 years ago.

Oh and on this, a lot of my European friends originally thought that the Democratic Party was the reasonable conservative party and the GOP were just for crazy people, but after I told them about the Democrats' SJWness and support of open borders (no one here would support the Democrats' open border policy), they now understand why people vote GOP.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

I don't think that is particularly unpopular around here.

Except for that fact that campaigning on social issues has won them the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections, and the electoral vote in four of them.  (Trump was only the first Republican since Bush 1 to get over 300 EVs.)  Why would they give it up now, when it's worked so well for them thus far?  If anything, it's Republicans who need to drop the social issues, not Democrats.

I don't exactly agree with your conclusion: sure, Democrats have won 6 out of the last 7 popular votes in presidential elections but I think the focus on social issues has really hurt them down ballot and has prevented them from dominating the country politically. I'm no socialist (in Europe I support conservative parties all the time), but let's face it, the GOP's economic policies are ridiculous, social conservatism is the only thing that's saved the party. The GOP hasn't been reasonable on economics for at least 25 years now (the GOP's right wing basically turned on Bush Sr because he wanted to manage the deficit responsibly), if it weren't for the Democrats being so insistent on social issues, I suspect the GOP would have collapsed at least 10 years ago.

Oh and on this, a lot of my European friends originally thought that the Democratic Party was the reasonable conservative party and the GOP were just for crazy people, but after I told them about the Democrats' SJWness and support of open borders (no one here would support the Democrats' open border policy), they now understand why people vote GOP.

[Lechasseur]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

I don't think that is particularly unpopular around here.

Except for that fact that campaigning on social issues has won them the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections, and the electoral vote in four of them.  (Trump was only the first Republican since Bush 1 to get over 300 EVs.)  Why would they give it up now, when it's worked so well for them thus far?  If anything, it's Republicans who need to drop the social issues, not Democrats.

I don't exactly agree with your conclusion: sure, Democrats have won 6 out of the last 7 popular votes in presidential elections but I think the focus on social issues has really hurt them down ballot and has prevented them from dominating the country politically. I'm no socialist (in Europe I support conservative parties all the time), but let's face it, the GOP's economic policies are ridiculous, social conservatism is the only thing that's saved the party. The GOP hasn't been reasonable on economics for at least 25 years now (the GOP's right wing basically turned on Bush Sr because he wanted to manage the deficit responsibly), if it weren't for the Democrats being so insistent on social issues, I suspect the GOP would have collapsed at least 10 years ago.

Oh and on this, a lot of my European friends originally thought that the Democratic Party was the reasonable conservative party and the GOP were just for crazy people, but after I told them about the Democrats' SJWness and support of open borders (no one here would support the Democrats' open border policy), they now understand why people vote GOP.

Frankly Macron is more reasonable than the current Democratic Party (he may be a liberal but he's not an Obama/Hillary/Trudeau type SJW) (and the Democratic Party are probably more extreme on social issues than the PS, at least most certainly more than En Marche who at least have some moderate positions) and then Le Pen is no conservative, she just goes however her advisors tell her to go, which made her hated by both the right and the left, and thus she got destroyed (for exemple my best friend voted Macron, but he would have voted Le Pen had it not been for her policy on the Euro which would have destroyed the French economy.

[Lechasseur]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

I don't think that is particularly unpopular around here.

Except for that fact that campaigning on social issues has won them the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections, and the electoral vote in four of them.  (Trump was only the first Republican since Bush 1 to get over 300 EVs.)  Why would they give it up now, when it's worked so well for them thus far?  If anything, it's Republicans who need to drop the social issues, not Democrats.

I don't exactly agree with your conclusion: sure, Democrats have won 6 out of the last 7 popular votes in presidential elections but I think the focus on social issues has really hurt them down ballot and has prevented them from dominating the country politically. I'm no socialist (in Europe I support conservative parties all the time), but let's face it, the GOP's economic policies are ridiculous, social conservatism is the only thing that's saved the party. The GOP hasn't been reasonable on economics for at least 25 years now (the GOP's right wing basically turned on Bush Sr because he wanted to manage the deficit responsibly), if it weren't for the Democrats being so insistent on social issues, I suspect the GOP would have collapsed at least 10 years ago.

Oh and on this, a lot of my European friends originally thought that the Democratic Party was the reasonable conservative party and the GOP were just for crazy people, but after I told them about the Democrats' SJWness and support of open borders (no one here would support the Democrats' open border policy), they now understand why people vote GOP.

Frankly Macron is more reasonable than the current Democratic Party (he may be a liberal but he's not an Obama/Hillary/Trudeau type SJW) (and the Democratic Party are probably more extreme on social issues than the PS, at least most certainly more than En Marche who at least have some moderate positions) and then Le Pen is no conservative, she just goes however her advisors tell her to go, which made her hated by both the right and the left, and thus she got destroyed (for exemple my best friend voted Macron, but he would have voted Le Pen had it not been for her policy on the Euro which would have destroyed the French economy.

Plus Macron is fine with deporting illegals, which is not the case for the Democratic Party

[Sherrod Brown Shill]

Democrats need to focus way more on economic issues than social issues in 2020.

I don't think that is particularly unpopular around here.

Except for that fact that campaigning on social issues has won them the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections, and the electoral vote in four of them.  (Trump was only the first Republican since Bush 1 to get over 300 EVs.)  Why would they give it up now, when it's worked so well for them thus far?  If anything, it's Republicans who need to drop the social issues, not Democrats.

I don't exactly agree with your conclusion: sure, Democrats have won 6 out of the last 7 popular votes in presidential elections but I think the focus on social issues has really hurt them down ballot and has prevented them from dominating the country politically. I'm no socialist (in Europe I support conservative parties all the time), but let's face it, the GOP's economic policies are ridiculous, social conservatism is the only thing that's saved the party. The GOP hasn't been reasonable on economics for at least 25 years now (the GOP's right wing basically turned on Bush Sr because he wanted to manage the deficit responsibly), if it weren't for the Democrats being so insistent on social issues, I suspect the GOP would have collapsed at least 10 years ago.

Oh and on this, a lot of my European friends originally thought that the Democratic Party was the reasonable conservative party and the GOP were just for crazy people, but after I told them about the Democrats' SJWness and support of open borders (no one here would support the Democrats' open border policy), they now understand why people vote GOP.

Frankly Macron is more reasonable than the current Democratic Party (he may be a liberal but he's not an Obama/Hillary/Trudeau type SJW) (and the Democratic Party are probably more extreme on social issues than the PS, at least most certainly more than En Marche who at least have some moderate positions) and then Le Pen is no conservative, she just goes however her advisors tell her to go, which made her hated by both the right and the left, and thus she got destroyed (for exemple my best friend voted Macron, but he would have voted Le Pen had it not been for her policy on the Euro which would have destroyed the French economy.

Plus Macron is fine with deporting illegals, which is not the case for the Democratic Party

I know this is the unpopular opinions thread but Jesus Christ I can feel the intelligence leaving brain as read this. I agree the Democrats should pivot to economic issues a but pretty much every single reason you have listed (other then electoral benefits) has either been "esjaydubelyous amirite?" or a strawman.

[YE]

Plus Macron is fine with deporting illegals, which is not the case for the Democratic Party

Given that the most recent Democratic president set the record for most deportations and given that Obama deported more people in 2016 than Trump did in 2017 IIRC, I beg to differ.

[Atlas Force]

I’m not all that peeved by incumbency, which is one reason why I’m not a fan of legislative term limits. If a legislator is doing a good job, I say feel free to keep them around as long as possible.

That said, if they’re really not doing a good job, or if they’ve become out-of-touch with their constituents, go ahead and kick them out.

[ASPN]

I’m not all that peeved by incumbency, which is one reason why I’m not a fan of legislative term limits. If a legislator is doing a good job, I say feel free to keep them around as long as possible.

That said, if they’re really not doing a good job, or if they’ve become out-of-touch with their constituents, go ahead and kick them out.

My only concern is that a populace lacking in the political will will probably not care about that. As long as the guy doesn't do anything majorly bad they'll tolerate an ineffectual leader for as long as the person chooses to remain in congress or die. Basically sometimes it good to force the issue in order to get fresh faces in.

As for unpopular opinions? Hm. I honestly believe a world government would probably be the best for the world. Like those shadowy organizations that conspiracies nuts like to talk about but actually real and upfront about it. Make the Earth Federation from star trek a reality.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Our society has a massive problem with treating children like their parents property.

[_]

FvD is better than SP in the Netherlands

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Waving a Confederate flag is not only racist, but treasonous and anti-American.

THIS!!!!!!!!! Glad we can agree on something, Oldiesfreak! People forget that the Confederacy was a treasonous group of rebels

[Atlas Force]

I’m not all that peeved by incumbency, which is one reason why I’m not a fan of legislative term limits. If a legislator is doing a good job, I say feel free to keep them around as long as possible.

That said, if they’re really not doing a good job, or if they’ve become out-of-touch with their constituents, go ahead and kick them out.

My only concern is that a populace lacking in the political will will probably not care about that. As long as the guy doesn't do anything majorly bad they'll tolerate an ineffectual leader for as long as the person chooses to remain in congress or die. Basically sometimes it good to force the issue in order to get fresh faces in.

Fair point.

As for my own unpopular opinions: for every article about Obama>Trump voters there is there should be two articles about Obama>third-party voters and Obama>nonvoters.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Waving a Confederate flag is not only racist, but treasonous and anti-American.

THIS!!!!!!!!! Glad we can agree on something, Oldiesfreak! People forget that the Confederacy was a treasonous group of rebels

People also forget that the flag below was flown by a treasonous group of rebels.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Waving a Confederate flag is not only racist, but treasonous and anti-American.

THIS!!!!!!!!! Glad we can agree on something, Oldiesfreak! People forget that the Confederacy was a treasonous group of rebels

People also forget that the flag below was flown by a treasonous group of rebels.

If you don't see a difference between our founders rebelling against British rule and Americans rebelling and committing treason against their own country, I don't know what to tell you.

[TheSaint250]

The Republican Party isn’t a “white identity” party or some other thing like that.
There are such things as moderate Republicans.
True liberalism by-and-large doesn’t exist in the United States, and that sucks.
“Far-left” and “far-right” are terms that are often misused.
Bernie sucks. Hard.
Hillary sent illegal emails and probably did a bunch of other illegal stuff.
There is no such thing as “wasting your vote.” (Ok, there are some exceptions )
Liking Greg Orman does not mean wanting Kris Kobach to win.
Marco Rubio is a great person.
Gary Johnson would’ve been a good 2016 alternative.
Socialism sucks. Capitalism, while needing some reform, is great.
Being pro-business is not bad.
The fishhook theory is dumb. (Not sure how popular this is, but I just had to get it off my chest)

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Waving a Confederate flag is not only racist, but treasonous and anti-American.

THIS!!!!!!!!! Glad we can agree on something, Oldiesfreak! People forget that the Confederacy was a treasonous group of rebels

People also forget that the flag below was flown by a treasonous group of rebels.

If you don't see a difference between our founders rebelling against British rule and Americans rebelling and committing treason against their own country, I don't know what to tell you.

Not to be pedantic here (I get what you're saying), but our founders were Brits rebelling and committing treason against their own country.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I mean, the problem with the confederates wasn't that they were traitors, the issue was that their cause was being slavery. If the South had managed to annex the Carribbean and Mexico and make them slave states, the North would have been perfectly justified to rebel if slavery was foisted upon them. After all, we commend those who resisted the imposition of the Fugitive Slave Act.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Black Lives Matter is a hate group and a domestic terrorist organization.  Same goes for Antifa and the various alt-right groups.

By extension, that leads to another unpopular opinion of mine: there is not only an alt right, but an alt left as well.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Black Lives Matter is a hate group and a domestic terrorist organization.  Same goes for Antifa and the various alt-right groups.

By extension, that leads to another unpopular opinion of mine: there is not only an alt right, but an alt left as well.

Basically no one describes themselves as "Alt-left", so I'd say the alt-right is much more of a real thing for that reason alone.