Criticism is not evaluated by where it comes from, but by whether it's true or false. If you don't put truth first, you don't get to have a say in anything anyway.

We criticize them for vastly different things though… The right says they’re communists and we say they’re not communist enough (or at all, really).

You really don't. Its pretty clear by what the critique is, whether or not it comes from a leftist or a right wing nut. Its only difficult to tell the difference if you lack basic comprehension.

Doesn't matter, you get accused of being undercover MAGA anyway. Been there, done that.

Yes, this screenshot is just another “If you don’t understand my unqualified opinion you’re just too stupid to figure it out” hot take by someone thinking they’re the smartest person in the room.

No, criticizing the dems doesn’t automatically mean criticism of anyone to the right of them.

Would depend on the content of the critique Id think, like, if your criticism of the dems is that theyre far too conservative, thats not the sort of thing that someone that considers conservatism a good thing would say. If you give some vague attack on their moral character or intelligence or such, that lines up more with how the right would also criticism them, and therefore invites more confusion.

The primary difference is that Republicunts completely discount any thing that is left wing as impossible to achieve, often by using circular logic that boils down to a faulty appeal to authority (religion), with a light sprinkling of racism and white superiority rhetoric mixed in.

Leftists actually use verifiable data points and publically available economic figures mixed with objective reasoning to levy their critiques.

Reading comprehension includes understanding the implied context of the words, not just being able to pronounce them properly.

It's easy to tell as the right's criticism is they eat babies, they're demon spawn, welfare queens, nothing true just emotionally applied rhetoric. Where as the left would say they're barely better than Republicans in regards to wars and keeping them going in perpetuity, they could pass universal healthcare instead of what the ACA was but through either naivety or incompetence reached out to Republicans to help make a plan "both parties would be happy with" for the Republicans not to vote for it at all.