CMV: American politics was designed to give us all mental disorders
In the US our parties have become ideologically sorted. About 50 years ago there used to be “liberal republicans” and “conservative democrats”. Today that’s almost non existent. In other countries parties are often forced to be more centrist to attract coalition parties. In the US, because it’s a winner takes all system, the constant 4-8 year shift between republican and democrat now feels like a total change in the countries identity constantly and on loop for our entire lives.
Because of this dynamic, as a collective we basically have BPD, DID, Schizo personality disorder, and bipolar disorder. The political related violence in our streets and in our societies closely resemble regular manic episodes. It appears to be manufactured this way and somehow the rich is almost always benefited from this dynamic. Every leader we shift to almost always tends to use selective empathy as a proxy, like claiming to care about LGBT and immigrants, or claiming to care about the economy and individual liberty, and this is because emotional manipulation is the primary tactic that schizophrenics claim the “voices inside their head” use on them as well to justify the harmful acts they do to themselv
the wording alone shifts how people read this which turns this into more of a debate That’s what changes the context. At least from my perspective.
the wording alone shifts how people read this and that’s what people are responding to That part stands out. Feels like an opening move, not an ending.
Stepping back, the framing does a lot of heavy lifting here This probably isn’t the last word on it. That’s just my read on it.
this feels like a half-step, not a full move That’s the key detail here. That’s the impression it gives me.
Trying to be fair, the intention might be solid, the rollout less so and that’s where the disagreement starts
Real talk, there’s a gap between the message and the outcome and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone That’s what changes the context.
At first glance, the direction makes sense but the details are messy and that’s where people will push back Let’s see what happens next. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
this reads stronger on paper than in practice and that’s what people are responding to
Just reading this, this solves one problem while creating another Feels like an opening move, not an ending.
Stepping back, this feels rushed rather than thought through Hard to say where this lands long term. That’s the impression it gives me.
Just reading this, the direction makes sense but the details are messy and that’s why opinions are all over the place That part stands out. That’s the impression it gives me.
On the surface, there’s a gap between the message and the outcome That’s what changes the context. This probably isn’t the last word on it.
From a practical angle, the framing does a lot of heavy lifting here and that’s the part people are stuck on Feels like there’s more coming here. That’s the impression it gives me.
Putting bias aside, this solves one problem while creating another which explains why reactions are split
Looking at this, this solves one problem while creating another and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone That’s what makes this interesting. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
this feels like a half-step, not a full move and that’s what people are responding to At least from my perspective.
Without overthinking it, there’s a gap between the message and the outcome
the main issue seems to be how this is handled and that friction is hard to ignore Interested to see the follow-up.
At this point, this feels like a half-step, not a full move which explains why reactions are split
the wording alone shifts how people read this and that’s where it gets complicated
this comes across more reactive than planned which explains why reactions are split This probably isn’t the last word on it.
Not gonna lie, the framing does a lot of heavy lifting here and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone That’s the key detail here. That’s just how it reads to me. Others will probably see it differently.
this comes across more reactive than planned and that’s where people will push back This probably isn’t the last word on it. That’s the impression it gives me.
Real talk, this solves one problem while creating another which is why the comments look the way they do That’s what changes the context. Time will tell.
On the surface, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone Time will tell. Others will probably see it differently.
this solves one problem while creating another That’s the key detail here. We’ll see how people react over time.
this comes across more reactive than planned and that’s what people are responding to
At this point, the follow-through is what will decide this and that tension shows up immediately
Putting bias aside, the way this is presented changes how it lands That’s just my read on it.
Real talk, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified which turns this into more of a debate That’s the key detail here. That’s just how it reads to me.
Stepping back, the way this is presented changes how it lands and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone Feels like there’s more coming here. That’s the impression it gives me.
Looking at this, the timing matters more than people admit This probably isn’t the last word on it.
From my side, this feels like a half-step, not a full move which is why this is getting picked apart That’s the key detail here. Interested to see the follow-up. Others will probably see it differently.
this feels like a half-step, not a full move which makes the reaction pretty predictable Others will probably see it differently.
the follow-through is what will decide this Not convinced this is settled yet.
From a neutral view, this feels more about execution than intent and that friction is hard to ignore
the logic is there, but the execution is uneven Others will probably see it differently.
From the outside, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified which is why the comments look the way they do That’s the key detail here. This could age very differently in a week.
the idea isn’t bad, but the delivery is doing damage and that’s where it gets complicated This could age very differently in a week. That’s the impression it gives me.
Real talk, this comes across more reactive than planned and that’s why opinions are all over the place We’ll see how people react over time. At least from my perspective.
From a neutral view, the logic is there, but the execution is uneven and that friction is hard to ignore
From where I sit, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified
Honestly, this feels like a half-step, not a full move and that’s the part people are stuck on That’s what makes this interesting.
Real talk, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone That part stands out.
Bluntly speaking, this solves one problem while creating another which is why this is getting picked apart This could age very differently in a week. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
At this point, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified which makes the reaction pretty predictable Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Putting bias aside, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
If you zoom out, this comes across more reactive than planned and that’s where people will push back That’s what makes this interesting. Feels like there’s more coming here.
From where I sit, the way this is presented changes how it lands and that’s why opinions are all over the place That part stands out. This probably isn’t the last word on it.
At first glance, the signal is clear, the strategy less so and that’s what people are responding to Others will probably see it differently.
Putting bias aside, the idea isn’t bad, but the delivery is doing damage
From my side, there’s a gap between the message and the outcome That’s what changes the context. Time will tell.
this feels like a half-step, not a full move Curious how this plays out. That’s just my read on it.
At this point, the main issue seems to be how this is handled and that’s why opinions are all over the place Others will probably see it differently.
Without overthinking it, the signal is clear, the strategy less so so the response doesn’t surprise me
Putting bias aside, this feels like a half-step, not a full move and that friction is hard to ignore