Not having a dog in this fight, what it really looks like to me is the “haters” started as people who respectfully acknowledged his greatness while also recognizing that there were aspects of him they didn’t like. The real hatred came out when people couldn’t handle this due to sharing a political identity with him.

▲

caminante 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> while also recognizing that there were aspects of him they didn’t like

Except you're not being objective.

Accusing anyone of "falling off the far right cliffs of insanity" is a subjective and negative portrayal.

e.g., I could say and get away with the former, but not the latter when critiquing a co-worker's idea.

▲

hamburglar 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think maybe you’re reading too much into it. I’ll happily acknowledge that I’ve fallen off my own cliffs of insanity at times. It’s hyperbole, not an attack.

▲

Dylan16807 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Except you're not being objective.

Of course "recognizing that there were aspects of him they didn’t like" is not going to be objective. And it's fine for it to not be objective.

> Accusing anyone of "falling off the far right cliffs of insanity" is a subjective and negative portrayal.

Yeah but it's right.

> I could say and get away with the former, but not the latter when critiquing a co-worker's idea.

You have to bite your tongue at work in a lot of ways that don't make sense outside work.

▲

caminante 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Of course! I agree there's no requirement to be objective and the "insanity" take is not unreasonable.

My issue comes someone says they "don't have a dog in the fight" and then proceeds to be highly subjective with paraphrasing.

	▲	hamburglar 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Rest assured, many on the left have fallen off the cliffs of insanity too.