More specifically, politicians as an identity. Is this a new thing, circa 2016?

A lot of people tie in their favorite political candidate into their identity, just like they would their career, hometown, college, heritage, sports team, etc.

Were there Bob Dole Bros and John Kerry stans, and Obamaites, like there are Bernie Bros and Trumpsters? Is this due to increased polarization, or more charismatic candidates (or something else)?

Is it a bad thing to have politics tied into your identity?

job/class identity, etc.


Obviously people take it too far.


For Obama, since Obama was Black (and most Black people really didn't expect Obama to "cater" too much to Black people) I don't think many people saw "looking up to" Obama as part of their "identity" like struggling whites DEFINITELY look to Trump for their identity. (Obviously, white Democrats didn't think voting for Obama was making them Obama-identified people, for racial reasons - they saw Obama as working for them/serving them - not shaping their "identity").

people left/right who list their political views as their twitter bio

i've known a couple people who seem to have made being a conservative their entire personality. This preceded Trump, but now they've gone full MAGA to where their cultness is incorporated into everything from sports figures they hate (they tend to hate sports anyway which makes it even funnier), to their refusal to watch the Irishman.

But even those are people from my past who i only know through FB and such now. No idea if they do this in real conversation.

Like you have to pick a candidate and ride or die with them.

Right now I am team warren a year out but the truth is, if she doesn't gain momentum again and can't seem to pick up other voters, I don't have a problem switching to someone else.

These people today, and I guess I really only talking about twitter, pick one candidate, declare they are the greatest thing ever, and revile everyone else. Makes it hard to pivot after you been stanning for one candidate and called everyone else evil.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Trump was a direct reaction to Obama and white people's fear of losing their country and Blacks getting ahead of them.

and the usual social media outlets don't let us tailor what we post to particular audiences.

I used to have friends that I could talk politics with, and other friends that I knew I shouldn't try to talk politics with --- it's a waste of time, and just causes tension for everyone.

But nowadays, we hold on to friends in far-flung places thanks to social media. That's great, but it does mean that if anyone wants to talk politics, they do so with everybody they know, including the people they wouldn't have brought these things up with before.

I've lost friends from way, way, way back, when they said things meant for their right-wing crazy friends and facebook didn't know not to show them to me. And I'm sure it's gone the other way. I also have some cousins who I love --- really bohemian, artsy, and smart people. They fervently supported Bernie Sanders in '16 and when he lost they ended up going all in for Jill Stein. That didn't go well between us and we haven't really communicated since. As far as I know we're still basically cool, but I don't really know because we haven't spoken since an OKP-style argument just after election day. And whether we're cool or not, we certainly don't respect one another like we once did.

The funny thing is, people talk about "social media bubbles." (I talk about them a lot, and find them very troubling.) But ironically, this is an example of social media refusing to respect the bubbles that people have always put up in their regular social lives since long before the internet.

Everybody's more open than they used to be, because the technology has forced it on them. And because we haven't generally recalibrated around it, everybody seems more radical than they used to seem.

I'm reminded of the "killer feature" of Google+, back when Google+ existed. You could divide your contacts up into groups (I think they were called "circles" or something), and address particular comments to particular circles. I remember people talking about how revolutionary that was and that it would change the structure of social media. But of course, facebook had won that war before Google+ even came to be. Now that that's all in the distant past, I'm a little surprised that FB, twitter, etc. haven't implemented something like that. It seems like an easy fix for one of the major flaws of the medium.

people use it all the time, but you wouldn't know if they do or not.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

I really wish y'all could go back in time twenty years and read newspapers.

these things aren't new.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg

¨Your mother is Colin Powell¨ - Lurkmode

www.Tupreme.com

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>Is this a new
>thing, circa 2016?

It as old as politics.

>Is it a bad thing to have politics tied into your identity?

The material facts of our lives depend on the political order. Until that changes, the answer is "no".

you shouldn't be asking this as a question.

but a lot of people didn't pay attention in class and here we are.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

https://i.giphy.com/media/dEdmW17JnZhiU/giphy.webp

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

read a book herb.

Almost all of their view, ideas, likes and dislikes were conditioned into them from external sources.

Which is why they get so angry when their views are challenged... it's literally like challenging their identity.

Also, this is nothing new.