Common political narratives that annoy you

[Vosem]

- That a party that controls half the legislature and most state governments, and came within 4% of controlling the executive, is somehow endangered

- The apartheid analogy; or that opposition to Israel is becoming a more popular position in the US

- That Republicans have problems attracting enough minorities/women

- That support for gun control is increasing, when in reality it's dropping remarkably precipitously

Denial is not just a river Egypt.........

It's also a river in South Africa, but I don't think that's what you meant In any case, pretty much all the data is against the narrative, so I'll let you go do some research and have that speak for itself.

- That a party that controls half the legislature and most state governments, and came within 4% of controlling the executive, is somehow endangered

- The apartheid analogy; or that opposition to Israel is becoming a more popular position in the US

- That Republicans have problems attracting enough minorities/women

- That support for gun control is increasing, when in reality it's dropping remarkably precipitously

Yeah, Israel just denies citizenship to millions of people who reside on land it controls, requires them to have special permits to travel from one town to another and adheres to a national identity that effectively leaves out 30 percent of their population.

I'll interrupt you here to say that these are all characteristics of military occupation generally, which Israel did not invent. The three main differences between Israeli occupation of the West Bank and countless other modern occupations is that Israel is occupying what is basically terra nullis, as it has not been an integral part of a recognized state since the Ottoman Empire, being occupied by first Britain, then Jordan, then Israel; the presence of Israeli citizens who have moved to the occupied territory to live permanently leading to annexationist strains in politics; and the sheer duration of the occupation. While there has long been a majority of Israeli citizens in favor of ending the occupation, this is in practice difficult because of the presence of the settlers and because, even when tentative agreements on borders were reached (at Camp David in 2000), the Palestinians refused to budge without Israel changing its immigration policy. There is also the danger of an extremist government taking over, as in Gaza.

But it's totally not an apartheid state!

It is not. The apartheid state was not like a military occupation. Apartheid's two most prominent characteristics are forced internal movement of populations and the removal of citizenship from ethnic/racial groups who are not in power, neither of which have ever occurred in Israeli history (with the possible exception of the forced removal of settlers from Yamit and Gaza, but that was nowhere near the scale of the apartheid deportations and I think we can agree that, as it was done for the purpose of eventual peace with Israel's neighbors, it was justified).

[TNF]

The silly idea that capitalism works.

Oh, but it does. For a certain kinds of people, of course.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

* That inflation is in any way a danger (both in terms of it being a disaster for us, and in terms of even happening right now)

This is a joke, right? How is the devaluation of currency not a disaster?

Mild expected inflation is not a disaster and can help to stimulate the economy by encouraging people to spend now instead of saving to spend later.  The current economic situation is such that wild or unexpected inflation is not a current concern.

Yes, I know, but what was said was that inflation in any way wasn't a danger, which is dumb.

In the current situation, and especially when compared to...well, the common political narratives... it is certainly true that inflation is in no way a danger.  I don't claim that it is never a problem, I am saying it is not now a problem; has not been a problem for decades; and the incessant hyping of it as a problem is, itself, a problem.

There are so many worse things than the "devaluation of the currency" (lol): I would count deflation, the liquidity trap, and persistently high unemployment among them, just for starters.

I think inflation is a huge concern when you consider that middle-class wages have been comparably stagnant while the cost of goods has grown rapidly.  The buying power of a dollar is much less than it was thirty years ago.

[DC Al Fine]

That liberalism is somehow a neutral proposition.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The assumption that the ideology of an organization follows the source of its funding, and not the other way around.    This assumption is of course only made with regard to organizations one opposes, since the positions of groups one has sympathy with are derived purely from reason and good will.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Oh, here's a big one.

-That the Republican Party's problem with non-whites, the poor, women (particularly single women), young people, urbanites, etc. (many of these groups do overlap) is one of "messaging."

[TNF]

The bizarre notion that government doing anything is "socialism."

The idea that Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, etc. are "socialist states."

"Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East."

"Theodore Roosevelt and basically every Republican until Reagan would be Democrats today."

"Theodore Roosevelt was basically a socialist."

"I support intervention for "humanitarian" causes."

The weird idea that Eugene Debs was some kind of social democrat.

[SWE]

The myth that immigration reform is somehow harmful to the economy

[Comrade Funk]

The National Debt is like personal debt
Globalization is evil
Workers want to be socialists, they just don't understand it

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Oh, here's a big one.

-That the Republican Party's problem with non-whites, the poor, women (particularly single women), young people, urbanites, etc. (many of these groups do overlap) is one of "messaging."

This, also:
- The idea that the main problem with the media is ideological bias (favoring either side) rather than a bias favoring sensationalism, laziness, corporatism, and validating their target audience's pre-existing beliefs.  

- How a lot of Democrats act like Ed Schultz, Bill Maher, Al Sharpton, Michael Moore, etc aren't just as bad as Limbaugh, O'Rielly, Beck, etc (and how many Republicans act like the latter aren't just as bad as the former)

- The idea that Obama is liberal or even moderate on economics (he's basically a 90s Republican on many economic issues)

- The idea that Hilary Clinton is a strong candidate who will do well with rural whites and is capable of making states like AR and NC competitive

- The absurd comparisons between Israel and apartheid

- The idea that drug use is a victimless crime

- The treatment of Libertarianism as a mainstream ideology

- The idea that Ron and Rand Paul were ever Libertarians

- The idea that winning independents and swing voters is more important than turning out the base

- The idea that politicians used to get along so much better in the 80s

- The idea that most self-described "independents" are actually independents.

- People acting like politics is anything like The West Wing or House of Cards

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Oh, here's a big one.

-That the Republican Party's problem with non-whites, the poor, women (particularly single women), young people, urbanites, etc. (many of these groups do overlap) is one of "messaging."

- The idea that Hilary Clinton is a strong candidate who will do well with rural whites and is capable of making states like AR and NC competitive

You don't think Hillary would make NC competitive?

[ElectionsGuy]

Since I'm lazy, I'll just combine what others have said:

"It's the 1 percent vs the 99 percent"

"The rich should pay their 'fair share'"

"All that is needed to create a budget surplus is economic growth"

"The middle class"

That liberalism is somehow a neutral proposition.

-That military spending should not be cut in any significant degree

-That Israel is somehow deserving of our support

- How a lot of Democrats act like Ed Schultz, Bill Maher, Al Sharpton, Michael Moore, etc aren't just as bad as Limbaugh, O'Rielly, Beck, etc (and how many Republicans act like the latter aren't just as bad as the former)

- The idea that Hilary Clinton is a strong candidate who will do well with rural whites and is capable of making states like AR and NC competitive

- The absurd comparisons between Israel and apartheid

- The idea that drug use is a victimless crime

"Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East."

"I support intervention for "humanitarian" causes."

- That a party that controls half the legislature and most state governments, and came within 4% of controlling the executive, is somehow endangered

- That support for gun control is increasing, when in reality it's dropping remarkably precipitously

Also I should add:

"The institution of marriage is key to raising a family"

 - That raising the minimum wage a dollar or two will fix the problem of people living paycheck to paycheck.

 - The notion that we must prevent other "dangerous" nations from getting a nuclear weapon of some sort

 - Cutting military spending, but raising all other spending

 - That Texas, Arizona, or Florida is "trending" to the democrats

 - "This is a christian nation" (basically saying other religions don't belong here)

 Maybe some other ones I can't think of I'll add later.

[Phony Moderate]

"Liberal" as an umbrella term for the left.

[All Along The Watchtower]

"Liberal" as an umbrella term for the left.

Good one.

[Indy Texas]

I'll interrupt you here to say that these are all characteristics of military occupation generally, which Israel did not invent. The three main differences between Israeli occupation of the West Bank and countless other modern occupations is that Israel is occupying what is basically terra nullis, as it has not been an integral part of a recognized state since the Ottoman Empire, being occupied by first Britain, then Jordan, then Israel; the presence of Israeli citizens who have moved to the occupied territory to live permanently leading to annexationist strains in politics; and the sheer duration of the occupation. While there has long been a majority of Israeli citizens in favor of ending the occupation, this is in practice difficult because of the presence of the settlers and because, even when tentative agreements on borders were reached (at Camp David in 2000), the Palestinians refused to budge without Israel changing its immigration policy. There is also the danger of an extremist government taking over, as in Gaza.

***

It is not. The apartheid state was not like a military occupation. Apartheid's two most prominent characteristics are forced internal movement of populations and the removal of citizenship from ethnic/racial groups who are not in power, neither of which have ever occurred in Israeli history (with the possible exception of the forced removal of settlers from Yamit and Gaza, but that was nowhere near the scale of the apartheid deportations and I think we can agree that, as it was done for the purpose of eventual peace with Israel's neighbors, it was justified).

Military occupations generally do not involve the long-term presence of civilians. If you're occupying an area because you think it's dangerous and a threat to your national security, you wouldn't be encouraging civilians to move there. Why would you needlessly endanger your own citizens?

The terra nullis argument implies that just because a piece of land does not officially belong to a particular government, the people who live on that land do not have any rights. Furthermore, that's eerily similar to the arguments Europeans used when colonizing Africa in the late 19th century - "There aren't any organized, Western-style nation-states here. Therefore, all bets are off and we can take whatever we want!"

Forced internal movement of populations...what do you think Deir Yassin and other such events were about? As for the settlers, they were there illegally. I don't see how you can draw any moral equivalency between the two.

Apartheid does not imply removal of citizenship. Particularly when you're talking about Israel, which if it were a person would just now be old enough to get Medicare. But denial of citizenship to out-of-power groups is a very real fact.

[RogueBeaver]

Some Canadian ones:

- Quebec is uniformly left-wing - not true, especially on health and education
- Justin Trudeau is personally popular in Quebec - false, Tom Mulcair is our most popular federal politician
- Moderate Heroism is required to win a federal election
- Mulcair's NDP is ideologically different from Layton's
- Our foreign policy reputation is tarnished
- The BQ is all but dead

[courts]

Oh, here's a big one.

-That the Republican Party's problem with non-whites, the poor, women (particularly single women), young people, urbanites, etc. (many of these groups do overlap) is one of "messaging."

that overlaps a lot with my own pet peeve of 'republicans just need to drop social issues'. its the element of open contempt for the poor and disproportionately poor (re: the above groups).. talking points like the 47%, minorities just want santa claus government, etc.  that really hurts them the most. if they suddenly decided to become 'social liberals'  (lol) without addressing any of the above things then they would actually lose badly. and yes i know, people don't vote on issues. but even american voters aren't quite *that* dense

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I've discussed this before, and I could go on and on about some of these, but here are just a few:

-The Southern strategy was race-based (it had much more to do with suburban moderates than white racists)
-Barack Obama is a socialist, communist, fascist, Muslim, was born in Kenya, etc.
-Moderate Republicans
-Reagan Democrats (there's a reason they're called "Reagan Democrats")
-The Tea Party movement is helping the GOP
-Mitt Romney lost because he was a moderate (also annoys me when said about John McCain, Bob Dole, etc.)
-Clinton gave us peace and prosperity (he compromised with Republicans and took office after the fall of the Soviet Union)
-Republicans are the "party of the rich"
-Jeb Bush would make a good presidential candidate
-Reagan skyrocketed the national debt (overall, as a share of gross national product, FDR increased it much more)
-The segregationists/Dixiecrats joined the GOP (demonstrably false; a few may have, but the vast bulk of them stayed Democrats)
-Bush stole the 2000 election (most of the evidence suggests he would have won by almost any measure)
-Clinton was impeached over sex (it was for obstruction of justice)
-Nixon sabotaged peace talks in Vietnam (he just touted his plan to South Vietnam as being better)
-"Israel is the real terrorist in the Middle East" (they certainly aren't blameless, but they're no worse than the Palestinians)
-"The rich need to pay their fair share of taxes"
-Republicans are anti-immigrant or anti-immigration
-RINOs
-Non-Tea Party Republicans are "moderates"
-Europe is socialist
-Global warming is a hoax, or that humans aren't a factor in it
-Oil companies are evil for making "record profits"
-"Stop giving tax break to companies that send jobs overseas" (high taxes are one of the biggest reasons companies go overseas in the first place)
-John McCain is a socialist/communist (the guy spent years in a POW camp and refused early release while fighting a war against communism)
-Socialism and communism are the same
-Fascism/Nazism is "right wing"

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Oh, here's a big one.

-That the Republican Party's problem with non-whites, the poor, women (particularly single women), young people, urbanites, etc. (many of these groups do overlap) is one of "messaging."

- The idea that Hilary Clinton is a strong candidate who will do well with rural whites and is capable of making states like AR and NC competitive

You don't think Hillary would make NC competitive?

No, I don't.  I doubt she'd over-perform much in rural areas and she'd probably do worse in urban and suburban parts of the state than Obama did in 2012.

[TNF]

- Free trade will create more jobs(points to NAFTA and 1990s, ignores last 14 years)

- Businesses move overseas because of unions, and busting them will encourage businesses to move back (except no matter what, Americans demanding $19.25/hour + benefits will never be able to compete with 3rd worlders earning pennies a day with no OSHA/EPA)

- we have the highest business tax rate in the world (ignoring that yes, the official rate is 35%, but the effective rate is 17%)

- that minimum wage workers are somehow deserving of $15/hour, or that they support families and this will end poverty

- that our education system is fine as is, we just need to bust up those unions!

- being a moderate or independent means you're stupid and have no core values

- that the GOP needs to "focus on women, Asians, and Hispanics" (as opposed to becoming a better and more appealing party overall)

- that in an era of terrorism, cybersecurity, and record national debt we need to spend $650 billion/year on conventional military arms and maintain 700 overseas bases

- raising taxes on higher earners will ruin the economy, as opposed to funding infrastructure, education, and reducing deficits that will actually help the economy

- if you belong to a demographic group(social/economic/geographic/etc.) that gave a majority of its support to one party/candidate, there is absolutely no way in hell you can support the other.

So you're saying people aren't deserving of a living wage then, and that their  families deserve to live in constant privation?

[Franknburger]

The narrative that environmental legislation is bad for / killing business (it kills some, nurtures others, and is in general promoting technological innovation and efficient resource utilization, which isn't bad for business at all).

[TNF]

- Free trade will create more jobs(points to NAFTA and 1990s, ignores last 14 years)

- Businesses move overseas because of unions, and busting them will encourage businesses to move back (except no matter what, Americans demanding $19.25/hour + benefits will never be able to compete with 3rd worlders earning pennies a day with no OSHA/EPA)

- we have the highest business tax rate in the world (ignoring that yes, the official rate is 35%, but the effective rate is 17%)

- that minimum wage workers are somehow deserving of $15/hour, or that they support families and this will end poverty

- that our education system is fine as is, we just need to bust up those unions!

- being a moderate or independent means you're stupid and have no core values

- that the GOP needs to "focus on women, Asians, and Hispanics" (as opposed to becoming a better and more appealing party overall)

- that in an era of terrorism, cybersecurity, and record national debt we need to spend $650 billion/year on conventional military arms and maintain 700 overseas bases

- raising taxes on higher earners will ruin the economy, as opposed to funding infrastructure, education, and reducing deficits that will actually help the economy

- if you belong to a demographic group(social/economic/geographic/etc.) that gave a majority of its support to one party/candidate, there is absolutely no way in hell you can support the other.

So you're saying people aren't deserving of a living wage then, and that their  families deserve to live in constant privation?

Let me explain this view in more detail:

The majority of minimum wage workers are high school and college age. That includes me.

 Those who are supporting a family while working minimum wage jobs don’t need a raise in the minimum wage, they need better training and/or better job opportunities. Raising the minimum wage to $15 dollars would just treat the symptoms, not the cause of the problems.

There is a small iota of truth when economic conservatives claim raising the minimum wage would cost jobs. It wouldn’t lead to runaway inflation or skyrocketing unemployment among adults, but would rather reduce opportunities for said high schoolers/college students to learn valuable skills.

I work for Hearts in Motion, a charity that runs a thrift store and uses the profits for social work here in the US, as well as Guatemala and Peru. We also hire teenagers/young adults to work in the store and learn working skills (a stated mission), and provide paid internships in the office and abroad for medical students. We also run an adoption agency. We have 3 pay rates: $7.25, $7.75, and $8.25.

Raising the minimum wage to $15 would greatly cut into HIM’s ability to function as is. We would all be laid off, and the store would have to rely solely on volunteers (which currently is very unreliable), or cut into the money made for social work.

I support an immediate raise to $8.25 and an inflation index, but $15 is ridiculous for unskilled, routine service jobs. I also support unions and their right to form and negotiate. But minimum wage = minimum skills. This will not solve poverty; better education and jobs will.

That's not true.

I don't disagree that raising the minimum wage will not solve poverty, but it will certainly bring a lot of people out of poverty. Fundamentally you're not going to fix poverty until you remove the root cause of poverty, which is, of course, the ability of the rich to control who has an income and who doesn't. Which either means embracing full employment or a universal basic income policy (or ideally, both).

[TNF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay, I stand corrected on that part. But 20+ is still a huge range. I'll bet most of those 80% are below 30 as well. Got anything on that?

Does it really matter if it's a huge range? Even if the majority of minimum wage workers were college students and teenagers (and there's no evidence to suggest they are), they would still deserve to be paid living wages, (1) because they're our brothers and sisters, our cousins, our neighbors, etc. and (2) because we shouldn't allow the young to be used as cheap labor. Doing so lowers the wages of literally everyone else. I don't my wages to be eroded because some greedy bastard is paying someone $7.25 an hour.

[Mordecai]

Here's a few off the top of my head:

-That the "Tea Party" is a coherent, unified "movement" (let alone a "spontaneous grassroots demonstration of conservative voters." )

-That the 'middle class" is definitive or coherent.

-That American politics is "ideologically polarized."

List your own in this thread.

That Independent voters are actually all that independent, or particularly smart/informed at all relative to anyone else.

*That having more land voting for your side means a damn thing

*That everyone who uses a bicycle to get around rather than a car is an upper-middle-class hipster (the truth is that bike commuters are poorer than average, albeit not by much)

* That inflation is in any way a danger (both in terms of it being a disaster for us, and in terms of even happening right now)

Plenty more I could think of if I tried, mostly along those sorts of lines.

- That a party that controls half the legislature and most state governments, and came within 4% of controlling the executive, is somehow endangered

That the Democrats are center-left and Republicans are center-right. Democrats are centrist and actually closer to center-right than Republicans are. Republicans are right wing, no center.

Repulicans care about women, minorities and poor people.

-That Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Olympia Snowe, Mark Kirk >also Jon Huntsman and Chris Christie etc. are "moderate" Republicans by virtue of not being a Tea Partier

-That an assault weapons ban is constitutional and/or a gun control measure that will actually reduce gun violence

-That nationalism and/or being pro-Western Civilization (for the lack of a better term) is and/or ought to be the exclusive property of the right

Mine are:

- High gas prices are the President's fault.
- If we drilled for oil, gas prices would significantly decrease.
- Minimum wage increases will cause job loss (it's a valid point, but logically inconsistent when most apply it)

"job creators"

The phrase "school choice" as a pretext for privatizing/cutting public education.

-That both Democrats and Republicans are equally unwilling to compromise, and have equally contributed to the gridlock in Washington

-That military spending should not be cut in any significant degree

-That raising the minimum wage will result in any significant number of job losses

-That raising taxes on the wealthy will cause job losses

-That Canada's health care system is worse than that of the U.S.

Oh, here's a big one.

-That the Republican Party's problem with non-whites, the poor, women (particularly single women), young people, urbanites, etc. (many of these groups do overlap) is one of "messaging."

The bizarre notion that government doing anything is "socialism."

The idea that Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, etc. are "socialist states."

"Theodore Roosevelt and basically every Republican until Reagan would be Democrats today."

"Theodore Roosevelt was basically a socialist."

The myth that immigration reform is somehow harmful to the economy

The National Debt is like personal debt
Globalization is evil
Workers want to be socialists, they just don't understand it

- The idea that the main problem with the media is ideological bias (favoring either side) rather than a bias favoring sensationalism, laziness, corporatism, and validating their target audience's pre-existing beliefs.  

- The idea that Obama is liberal or even moderate on economics (he's basically a 90s Republican on many economic issues)

- The treatment of Libertarianism as a mainstream ideology

- The idea that Ron and Rand Paul were ever Libertarians

- The idea that winning independents and swing voters is more important than turning out the base

- The idea that politicians used to get along so much better in the 80s

- The idea that most self-described "independents" are actually independents.

Also I should add:

"The institution of marriage is key to raising a family"

 - That Texas, Arizona, or Florida is "trending" to the democrats

 - "This is a christian nation" (basically saying other religions don't belong here)

-Barack Obama is a socialist, communist, fascist, Muslim, was born in Kenya, etc.
-Moderate Republicans
-Reagan Democrats (there's a reason they're called "Reagan Democrats")
-The Tea Party movement is helping the GOP
-Mitt Romney lost because he was a moderate (also annoys me when said about John McCain, Bob Dole, etc.)
-Clinton gave us peace and prosperity (he compromised with Republicans and took office after the fall of the Soviet Union)
-RINOs
-Non-Tea Party Republicans are "moderates"
-Europe is socialist
-Global warming is a hoax, or that humans aren't a factor in it
-John McCain is a socialist/communist (the guy spent years in a POW camp and refused early release while fighting a war against communism)
-Socialism and communism are the same

- Businesses move overseas because of unions, and busting them will encourage businesses to move back (except no matter what, Americans demanding $19.25/hour + benefits will never be able to compete with 3rd worlders earning pennies a day with no OSHA/EPA)

- we have the highest business tax rate in the world (ignoring that yes, the official rate is 35%, but the effective rate is 17%)

- that our education system is fine as is, we just need to bust up those unions!

- that the GOP needs to "focus on women, Asians, and Hispanics" (as opposed to becoming a better and more appealing party overall)

- raising taxes on higher earners will ruin the economy, as opposed to funding infrastructure, education, and reducing deficits that will actually help the economy

The narrative that environmental legislation is bad for / killing business (it kills some, nurtures others, and is in general promoting technological innovation and efficient resource utilization, which isn't bad for business at all).

Also:

• Both sides are as bad as each other.
• Obama is the same as Bush and Romney.
• That the Democratic Party is far-left.
• That Elizabeth Warren is far-left.
• That the free market will fix all economic problems.
• That the free market should be the solution for everything.
• That government intervention always makes things worse.
• That atheism is a religion.
• The War on Christmas.
• Blaming liberalism and political correctness for watering down Christmas.
• The monopoly that Republicans and Libertarians think they have on "freedom" and "liberty".
• That paleoconservatives actually care about the Constitution and civil liberties.

[SWE]

That voter fraud is a problem