Is it useful to give thanks to the cold-hearted, just to keep them from becoming colder?

[Soen Eber]

This phrase suddenly came to me, and I understand, now, its message from listening to the news on the drive home.

The growing separation Republicans face over immigration enforcement, shutting down Greenland threats, and now, for the first time, Trump has fronted a foreign aid bill to promote health and democracy: an obvious soft-power play to counter Chinese influence. We've done it before, to blunt Russia.

To distance themselves from Trump's madness? Knowing how the world really works? They're sure to get blasted with death threats from the crazies, that's why they got on board the crazy train in the first place. IT. WAS. THAT. BAD.

Are there any prospects out there that are worth a "Thank you"" message to? People who can acknowledge reality in the face of Trump, even if they full-heartedly support him with fingers crossed behind their backs?

It is politics, after all. It's how it's played.

 

[Isabeau]

To answer, the title question, and from lifelong experience, no.
You can do so in the beginning, for those who may simply be ignorant, and to help them save face, but after, no.

If you do, it will only embolden them, and will only reinforce their initial beliefs.

Not giving them thanks won’t make them any colder.
They're already as cold as they can be.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Giving bullies what they demand totally makes them go away. Really. Foolproof plan.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I'd need more context, I think, before committing myself. In general, if I'm trying to persuade someone to change their mind, I'll start by emphasising the areas on which we do agree, and trying to explore those in order to lead my interlocutor to see that our common ground tends to lead to other conclusions. It sounds, though, as if you may be talking about thanking Republican legislators who've gone against the party line by criticising Trump and ICE. In that case, I guess it does not harm to thank them, even though you might think it's too little, too later, in order to provide some sort of counterbalance to all the threats and abuse that they must be receiving from the army of red-hatted flying monkeys. Can't hurt any.

 

[Veritable Quandry]

I always say you can only reason with reasonable people.

Too many MAGAts say they want a discussion when they are looking for a fight. And I will not "debate" the right of people to simply exist. People like Charlie Kirk wanted to portray themselves as just wanting to debate, but when the question is "Why don't we just kill the gays and Jews" I don't see that as legitimate debate.