By David Futrelle
The most heartening thing in the news today — I mean, aside from ex-Trumper Sam Nunberg’s live TV meltdown — is this story by Mimi Montgomery in Washingtonian magazine about the sad plight of right wingers in D.C., none of whom are apparently able to find anyone who wants to get into their pants.
Yep. In these politically fraught times, it seems no sensible person wants to have anything to do (in bed or out) with those who like, much less work for, that orange thing in the White House.
In a city as overwhelmingly Democratic as DC, the combination of lingering anger over Hillary Clinton‘s loss and President Trump‘s existence makes it tricky for conservatives to date across party lines.
“A lot of times you’ll connect with someone [on an app] and they’ll Google you, find out you worked for Trump’s campaign, and then it’s pretty much all downhill from there,” says a Trump Administration official.
Aww. Let me play you a little song:
But actual White House staffers aren’t the only ones suffering:
People who work in right-wing media say they don’t have it any better.
“The political divide has gotten so wide that a lot of younger liberals don’t have any interest in meeting conservatives,” says a reporter at a conservative media company. Working for a right-wing publication is such an obstacle to dating in DC, he doesn’t put his employer on any dating apps and avoids talking about it until meeting someone face-to-face, he says.
Maybe this will cheer you up a little bit:
No matter how hard they may try to hide their perverse political proclivities, there are always clues. One self-described “moderate conservative” tells Washingtonian that he
once brought a woman back to his place, and while checking out his bookshelf, she noticed some books by conservative thinkers, he says. “She was like, ‘Oh no. First question: Did you vote for Trump?’,” the reporter says. He told her no, but that he was conservative. “She was like ‘I have to get out of here. I can’t see you,’ and left.”
Let’s listen to the song that’s already playing in your head:
While conservatives complain that all the liberal hotties lump Trump true-believers in with “principled” conservatives, one progressive woman assured the Washingtonian she’s perfectly capable of distinguishing between dudes who want “lower marginal tax rates” and those who believe no “woman should have a right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.”
Generally, it’s not that hard to tell.
Most of the self-identifying progressives I talked with said they could tell how far right a man or woman leaned based on their dating-app photos—”Make America Great Again” hats are an obvious tell, but some also listed photos of US flag paraphernalia, hunting gear, or fratty beach parties as turn-offs.
But sometimes stealth conservatives can slip past liberal filters.
When she first moved to DC, a former Obama White House staffer who now works at the Aspen Institute was set up on a date with a Republican who worked on Capitol Hill. “We had a really nice time, but at the end of the date, he told me he didn’t believe in global warming,” she says. “I started laughing, because I’m from Colorado and didn’t realize people actually didn’t believe in global warming. But he was serious.”
They didn’t go out again.
Evidently, it’s those on the left who are doing most of the rejecting.
Republicans say it’s liberals who are more likely to turn down someone across the aisle. “Democrats are usually more vocal” about their opposition, the Trump staffer says, and therefore quicker to demonize all conservatives.
“I feel like they look at me and are like, here’s a tall white dude with brown hair wearing loafers, and he probably has a picture of Reagan and the NRA in his bedroom or something,” says one of the reporters from the conservative media company. “I just think they have a very hyperbolic view of what a conservative is.”
Yeah, I don’t think that’s it. I think the problem is that you are all fucking terrible. (And probably terrible at fucking to boot.)
Is there a bingo square for “troll insinuates he’s fapping to an avatar”? Or shall I just roll my eyes?
I’ll roll my eyes anyway. It’s good exercise.
Time’s up, you pretentious, patronizing prick.
My older sister – a liberal ecowarrior atheist – just married a pro-Trump conservative small business owner. It’s extremely awkward trying to have a conversation in this guy’s presence, because A LOT of what my family talks about is political, or would be construed that way by someone of the opposite opinion. I mean, I’m a liberal feminist bisexual pagan geek, and if you tell me I can’t mention any conservative ‘hot button’ issues, I basically have to just shut up entirely because my entire existence is a hot button issue to some people.
Not that this guy is awful or angry and shouty or anything, and I doubt he’d be belligerent. However, it leaves me at a loss because I feel like I can’t say ‘boo’ around him. Like even in an everyday ‘what are you up to these days’ conversation, telling my family that I was a delegate in the local level of this year’s Democratic conventions felt like I was laying out landmines.
I figure people who can date/marry across party lines must be extremely good at agreeing to disagree. Either that or they never actually communicate at all.
Ever watch Greg and Dharma?
And Kupo, that angry response with that cute avatar is just so really adorable , you know , like a furiously barking Pomeranian dog hehehe
Or they respect their partner and their partner’s right to their own opinions. It isn’t difficult.
So the third game in the “Zero Escape” Trilogy, “Zero Time Dilemma” has a puzzle that’s the Monty Hall problem, except with ten doors. (which makes no difference, in fact having more doors makes explaining the concept easier). What is kind of interesting is that the game plays “fair”, which is to say you can make the “correct” choice to switch and still open a door that contains nothing, because there still is a nonzero chance that your first choice was correct (you die and reload a lot in this game, in fact it’s explicitly part of the game that you do need to redo parts).
You should tell him that thanks to Trump and his FCC cancelling net neutrality, his small business is about to have to pay more to do business online and will be less able to compete with larger businesses who can buy better speeds.
It’s difficult to do that when your partner’s opinion is that laws should be passed to restrict your access to medical care, for example. When one side is oppressing the other, it’s way more than just an opinion.
I’ve actually dated and been engaged to a conservative male. Keyword being been. I started to find out stuff about him I didn’t like (ie his fondness for white supremacy movements, general hatred of LGBT+ anything, and his extreme sexism) so I started to actively dump him but he’d always emotionally manipulate me to be with him. He also started to become abusive and threaten me. After the fifth jab at my looks and his threats to yank out my iud because he wanted kids I told him to stay away from me and my family or I’d call the cops on him. He backed off and I’ve never dated a conservative since
Also brief intro new here I love the site keep up the good work!
Wait. So you are saying “White genocide” is actually happening???And the main cause for it is WAAAAAAAAAAIT FOR IT: White Males?
This is just too good to be true.
On a more serious note, what did these people seriously expect? The Alt Right is nothing more than a collective of organized abusers and bigots. Do they seriously think that women would want to put themselves at risk of domestic violence by dating people who think it is okay to resort to abuse and gaslight, in order to achieve political goals?
Shadowplay, the whole ‘agreeing to disagree’ comment was about that respecting of opinions you mention. It seems to me agreeing to disagree implies a basic level of interhuman respect to begin with.
@flexitarian haruspix
Oh! My bad, I apologise completely for misunderstanding. “Agreeing to disagree” has always been something of a loaded statement for me, so I read it with my own built in prejudice against it showing.
Sorry about that!
Shoo, troll, shoo! Get out of my religion! No-one wants you there! You’re stinking the place up already! Don’t need yet more problems like you on top of what we’re already dealing with in cleaning the place up! >:|
And keep in mind there’s no such thing as a small dog; some of the larger ones just come in travel-sized packages. They’re just as smart and dangerous to a stupid human as the big ones are.
@Redsilkphoenix
I don’t think he’d like Mog when he’s angry.
Aww cry me a river. Women realizing that you’re a horrible human being that voted for woman-hating jackass and not wanting to be in your presence is not oppression.
@Shadowplay
No worries, just wanted to clear that up. 😀
@Kupo
Yes, exactly that. Especially because the parts of conservative ideology that don’t directly attack my rights (or the rights of others) are so inextricably tied to the parts that DO. Like, theoretically supporting lower taxes and ‘small government’ doesn’t necessarily mean you have to demonize immigrants, welfare moms, and the LGBTQ+ community, but that’s what conservatives are like now. In an argument, it quickly becomes difficult to separate the actual substantive beliefs from the toxic blather about social issues, and what could have been a debate begins to feel very much like a personal attack, even inadvertently.
I get that Washington can be insular, but it’s really high time for its political class to wake up to the fact that one of their two political parties is comprised of the most loathsome people on the planet. These are not principled Whigs of yore disagreeing about a marginal tax rate, these are gun-humpers, Bible-thumpers, conspiracy theorists, racists, sexists, preppers, truthers and any number of people you wouldn’t want near the levers of power.
The John Birch Society has captured one of the two national parties in the US and it’s not the Democrats. The distinction is now so clear that if you have an (R) after your name, in my book that makes you a bad person. Canada’s not far behind, if the Conservative Party’s antics are any indication. Sure, in the halls of the Capitol or Parliament Hill, your opposition might be affable and wear a suit and tie just like you, but you’re not going to be the one who suffers from right-wing “policy” such that it is. So it remains an abstraction to those on the cocktail party circuit.
One one hand, it’s nice to have all the terrible people so clearly marked, but on the other hand, it means anybody who is not a complete scumbag has to shove into a single party and jostle for a leadership position. In a world without Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh, the Clintons would have made excellent Eisenhower Republicans against the Bernie Sanders Democrats and that would be where the political discussion started and ended. But it isn’t. There’s a reality show asshole in the Oval Office and that’s cool with wayyyy too many in Washington.
Yeah, I’m not going to ever date a right winger. The fact that they want me dead is just a complete and total turn off. Being a polyamouros pansexual trans woman pagan NB definitely means I avoid all of them.
Honestly, conservatives, what did you expect?! You’re supporting a political regime that disenfranchises, abuses, robs and even kills the most vulnerable members of society, and you’re complaining that nobody wants to get in a relationship with you?! You should be grateful you’re not getting spat on everywhere you go!
Being a gay man primarily attracted to MOC has shielded me from encountering the worst of the worst. Oddly enough, though, both of my husbands have been staunch private sector/corporate/small business owner types, while I was a career civil servant and union member.
I’m still undecided as to whether ‘hehehe’ is a more tedious affectation than ‘tsk tsk tsk’.
I am an atheist and I am exceedingly vain, but I’m not convinced the two are related.
They both grate, but in different ways.
Katamount,
I agree with your assessment of the two parties as they are today. The Clintons would have made acceptable Eisenhower Republicans. Which means I would usually disagree with them , but would not feel they were actually attempting to destroy the country.
Back in the old days, I occasionally voted Republican in local elections, usually for jobs that required some actual ability, when the Republican had done a good job. The highest seat I ever voted Republican for, however, was Lt. Governor, and that was a guy who had done a great and very non-partisan job on something else for several years, whose Dem opponent was an asshole. Can’t do that now. Can’t vote Republican. If the choice is between a Republican and a Libertarian, I don’t vote.
The truth is that the Republican party operatives have, for a long time now, decided that winning was the most important thing. In furtherance of this, they have accepted racism, encouraged rightwing religious nut jobs to become politically active by pandering to their ideas with a rampant dishonesty that is appalling, and become anti-science to encourage those with very poor educations to vote for them.
And now they are reaping what they sowed. If it didn’t involve coming so close to ruining my country, it would be fun to watch.
BTW, Texas is having primaries today. When it is time for your state primaries, GO AND VOTE.
Ehehehe just makes me think of this guy
http://img2.hungertv.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/mutley-300×453.jpg
So I guess if that’s the image he was looking to invoke, well done.
I’m putting JDSM in moderation for general annoyingness for at least several hours and probably forever, unless there is a huge outcry from folks who want him around.