734
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Marilyn Lands, a Democrat who made reproductive rights a central part of her campaign, will win a special election Tuesday for an Alabama state House seat, CNN projects.

Her victory serves as another data point for national Democrats, who hope the backlash over strict state abortion laws following the overturning of Roe v. Wade and concerns about in vitro fertilization treatments will help their party in November, even in traditionally Republican areas.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Pan_Ziemniak@midwest.social 1 points 7 months ago

Debate is not for convincing ur opponent, in these cases. The successes ive had w conservatives came from doing the opposite: convincing them that the view im trying to convert them towards is one theyve already held.

Debating them is for the spectators. If ur debating a conservative and no one is around for it, ur just playing into their game and u will get riled up and lose.

[-] petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I would say that if you're in a 1-on-1 with someone, it's just that your goals are different.

You can convince people of things, especially little things, but the higher stakes subjects are difficult because there are strongly felt emotions that go with them.

When you're debating conservatives into viewing trans people as "just fine, actually," you're not really debating whether puberty blockers are safe. You're debating their own feelings of disgust. Or, their insecurity over their own place in society.

So, with that in mind, you'll get less purchase from them with statistics, and you might get a lot more by treating them like they're crazy for thinking any of this is a big deal. Like, they've got their whole "you should be racist too" pitch, and none of it is working on you. This can make them feel, for lack of a better term, weak, and that's useful to you.

And even then, you have to realize that this is a long process. Emotions are not rational, and they will come up again and again and again, and worse, this person is probably member to communities whose sole purpose is to stoke the fires of these feelings---it's difficult.

But anyway, that's a long-winded way of agreeing with you, I think. If you can connect something you believe to something they do (the fear of a 1984 government that'll tell them they can't use some fertilizer, maybe), you'll probably have at least a slightly easier time getting them to listen.

[-] Pan_Ziemniak@midwest.social 2 points 7 months ago

Yeah, i think that is a long winded way of largely agreeing with me xD i especially like, "this is a long process. Emotions are not rational"

Its easier if u can dance this tango with em over long stretches of time. Ive really gotten conservatives to agree with some shockingly far left sentiments, like ending insurance companies, trans rights, instituting a max wage, or the like, but it takes trust that has to be built up over time. Thats what sucks. And if u leave them be without forcing the issue when u can and when theyre open to hearing it, they will inevitably find someone else to listen to, and that will more than likely be someone else rightwing.

this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2024
734 points (99.3% liked)

News

23301 readers
1774 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS