Random Politics

Okay . . . let's try this again.

Moderators: Shirley, Sabo, brian, rass, DaveInSeattle

User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

At this point and seeing the direction this country is going, I'm pretty much with Steve on this one. If they are going to get away with electing people the likes of potus and moore, then fuck it. My scruples can take a hit if it means another vote for saving this country. Maybe preventing this country from being cemented into a donor class and fuck everyone else should be the left's abortion.
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8439
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: Random Politics

Post by Steve of phpBB »

mister d wrote:What if there was credible evidence a Dem candidate raped a dozen women back in the 70s? Same logic; odds are he's done raping so you hold your nose and support him because we need Senate seats?


Same scenario (closely divided Senate, alternative is a Republican holding the seat, Republicans holding other branches and promoting batshit horrible policies)?

Yes.

If it were a state where Democrats appointed a replacement, I'd want him to win and resign or be rejected by the Senate. And I'd want him prosecuted too.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29048
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Random Politics

Post by mister d »

But, if you can't get your ideal scenario, you would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent.
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
Shirley
The Dude
Posts: 7517
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:32 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Shirley »

Steve, you're actually arguing that voting for a pedophile because he happens to be in your party is the more mature and sophisticated position? What the fuck?
Totally Kafkaesque
User avatar
GoodKarma
The Big Lebowski
Posts: 1508
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:14 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Random Politics

Post by GoodKarma »

A few months old, but I think this contains an important point and why I'm optimistic about America despite Trumps win (and Roy Moore's upcoming win):

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... urce=atlfb

Basically, society is moving (and, IMO, has always) moved towards liberalism...I believe we have 200+ year history of that. In the end, these a-holes end up on the wrong side of history.

All of the whatabout-ism, scandal, etc. is all just noise.
I would like expensive whiskey.
We only have beer & wine...
What am I, 12?
User avatar
EnochRoot
The Dude
Posts: 6192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 6:18 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by EnochRoot »

Shirley wrote:Steve, you're actually arguing that voting for a pedophile because he happens to be in your party is the more mature and sophisticated position? What the fuck?


It's politics. The man isn't important. The seat is.
Noli Timere Messorem
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8439
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: Random Politics

Post by Steve of phpBB »

EnochRoot wrote:
Shirley wrote:Steve, you're actually arguing that voting for a pedophile because he happens to be in your party is the more mature and sophisticated position? What the fuck?


It's politics. The man isn't important. The seat is.


Yup. It's not "because he happens to be in my party." It's "he will provide votes to accomplish goals I want to accomplish." Or "if he loses the other guy will enable horrible things to happen."

I would hope the past nine months have made it clear that the Democratic Party does way better things than the Republican Party does, for tens of millions of people.

If it's a House seat, where there's no real difference between the Rs having a 47-seat majority and a 45-seat majority, then who holds the seat is much less important, and refusing to vote for a pedophile doesn't immiserate people.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8439
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: Random Politics

Post by Steve of phpBB »

mister d wrote:But, if you can't get your ideal scenario, you would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent.


Yes, I would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent in the closely-divided US Senate with Rs holding the House and the White House.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
A_B
The Dude
Posts: 23323
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Getting them boards like a wolf in the chicken pen.

Re: Random Politics

Post by A_B »

Steve of phpBB wrote:
mister d wrote:But, if you can't get your ideal scenario, you would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent.


Yes, I would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent in the closely-divided US Senate with Rs holding the House and the White House.



That makes you reprehensible as a person.

That makes you Art Briles. He, too, wanted those guys available because they would help his platform.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

A_B wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
mister d wrote:But, if you can't get your ideal scenario, you would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent.


Yes, I would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent in the closely-divided US Senate with Rs holding the House and the White House.



That makes you reprehensible as a person.

That makes you Art Briles. He, too, wanted those guys available because they would help his platform.


So, if every other winning football team had a similar situation as Baylor did, but no other schools did anything about it, why should we care if Baylor did anything about it?

If you want a better hypothetical, this is basically three of the five power conferences ignoring rape allegations and not suspending players while the other two do the opposite. But every year, the four teams in the playoff are come from the three conferences that don't suspend players. Except it's not football and actual livelihoods are at stake.
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
A_B
The Dude
Posts: 23323
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Getting them boards like a wolf in the chicken pen.

Re: Random Politics

Post by A_B »

Giff wrote:
A_B wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
mister d wrote:But, if you can't get your ideal scenario, you would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent.


Yes, I would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent in the closely-divided US Senate with Rs holding the House and the White House.



That makes you reprehensible as a person.

That makes you Art Briles. He, too, wanted those guys available because they would help his platform.


So, if every other winning football team had a similar situation as Baylor did, but no other schools did anything about it, why should we care if Baylor did anything about it?

If you want a better hypothetical, this is basically three of the five power conferences ignoring rape allegations and not suspending players while the other two do the opposite. But every year, the four teams in the playoff are come from the three conferences that don't suspend players. Except it's not football and actual livelihoods are at stake.


Yeah...fuck all the people who are okay with rapists and pedophiles and sexual harassers on any level. Maybe I wasn't clear (I was). This is not a hard issue. Trying to justify it looks bad.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
User avatar
The Sybian
The Dude
Posts: 18872
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey

Re: Random Politics

Post by The Sybian »

Steve of phpBB wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
It's about choosing someone for an office. And in the general election, it's about whether the office goes to one candidate or the candidate from the other party. So if Alabama were voting for a high-school teacher, Moore would be in appropriate. But as a Senator?



I get your argument, and don't completely disagree, but this line bothered me. Preying on underage girls does make someone unfit for Senate, especially since he used his position as a prosecutor to molest a vulnerable child in the courthouse for her custody hearing....


I agree the guy is unfit for the Senate because he's batshit crazy and disregards the law and is a hateful bigot. But the child molestation allegations from the 1970s or 1980s don't really sway me, because I don't think electing him as a Senator would lead to him molesting more teenaged girls. (If it did, that would matter to me.)


I see it as showing how he will abuse his position for personal gains. I can't fathom anything more immoral or heinous than a prosecutor molesting a child in a courthouse during her custody hearing. That's right up there with priests and Sandusky. He abused his position as a government attorney to molest a vulnerable child, why would we believe he wouldn't abuse his Senate seat for immoral or illegal purposes? I'm not so much concerned with him raping Senate pages (though I wouldn't let any near him), but abusing his position as a Senator. This is why I am happy Conyers resigned, and I'm still on the fence about whether Franken should resign.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29048
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Random Politics

Post by mister d »

This is depressing as fuck to read.
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
EnochRoot
The Dude
Posts: 6192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 6:18 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by EnochRoot »

The Sybian wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
It's about choosing someone for an office. And in the general election, it's about whether the office goes to one candidate or the candidate from the other party. So if Alabama were voting for a high-school teacher, Moore would be in appropriate. But as a Senator?



I get your argument, and don't completely disagree, but this line bothered me. Preying on underage girls does make someone unfit for Senate, especially since he used his position as a prosecutor to molest a vulnerable child in the courthouse for her custody hearing....


I agree the guy is unfit for the Senate because he's batshit crazy and disregards the law and is a hateful bigot. But the child molestation allegations from the 1970s or 1980s don't really sway me, because I don't think electing him as a Senator would lead to him molesting more teenaged girls. (If it did, that would matter to me.)


I see it as showing how he will abuse his position for personal gains. I can't fathom anything more immoral or heinous than a prosecutor molesting a child in a courthouse during her custody hearing. That's right up there with priests and Sandusky. He abused his position as a government attorney to molest a vulnerable child, why would we believe he wouldn't abuse his Senate seat for immoral or illegal purposes? I'm not so much concerned with him raping Senate pages (though I wouldn't let any near him), but abusing his position as a Senator. This is why I am happy Conyers resigned, and I'm still on the fence about whether Franken should resign.


Pearl clutching doesn't do you any good. Do right by your own and to others.

I was saying that I'd hope the Democrats get behind the candidate to keep the seat. There is not higher score to obtain here. The seat is all the matters.

Once he's elected, then investigate the crap out of him until he resigns in disgrace, or arrested and taken away in handcuffs, in which case the governor of his state will select his replacement.

The GOP do this every single time. Remember, there are no style points ever awarded.
Noli Timere Messorem
User avatar
The Sybian
The Dude
Posts: 18872
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey

Re: Random Politics

Post by The Sybian »

EnochRoot wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
It's about choosing someone for an office. And in the general election, it's about whether the office goes to one candidate or the candidate from the other party. So if Alabama were voting for a high-school teacher, Moore would be in appropriate. But as a Senator?



I get your argument, and don't completely disagree, but this line bothered me. Preying on underage girls does make someone unfit for Senate, especially since he used his position as a prosecutor to molest a vulnerable child in the courthouse for her custody hearing....


I agree the guy is unfit for the Senate because he's batshit crazy and disregards the law and is a hateful bigot. But the child molestation allegations from the 1970s or 1980s don't really sway me, because I don't think electing him as a Senator would lead to him molesting more teenaged girls. (If it did, that would matter to me.)


I see it as showing how he will abuse his position for personal gains. I can't fathom anything more immoral or heinous than a prosecutor molesting a child in a courthouse during her custody hearing. That's right up there with priests and Sandusky. He abused his position as a government attorney to molest a vulnerable child, why would we believe he wouldn't abuse his Senate seat for immoral or illegal purposes? I'm not so much concerned with him raping Senate pages (though I wouldn't let any near him), but abusing his position as a Senator. This is why I am happy Conyers resigned, and I'm still on the fence about whether Franken should resign.


Pearl clutching doesn't do you any good. Do right by your own and to others.

I was saying that I'd hope the Democrats get behind the candidate to keep the seat. There is not higher score to obtain here. The seat is all the matters.

Once he's elected, then investigate the crap out of him until he resigns in disgrace, or arrested and taken away in handcuffs, in which case the governor of his state will select his replacement.

The GOP do this every single time. Remember, there are no style points ever awarded.


I get it, and I'm torn. And I know that having a conscience is what kills the Dems. The GOP will rally around ANYBODY that serves their purpose. Fuck, look at how much they hated Trump during the Primaries, and all fell in line. Totally agree, this is what keeps the GOP in power. When everyone else immediately called for Franken's head, I said it was pointless, because the GOP will claim the high moral ground if Franken quits, all the while continuing to back Moore. They will label the Dems the party of sex offenders, while the Dems expel sex offenders and the GOP continues to welcome them. The GOP is light years ahead in the propaganda game, and I agree, doing the right thing ends up hurting Dems.

I'd like to think doing the right thing and playing clean would eventually win out, but it won't. The GOP will continue to smear Dems for things they are much worse on, while convincing their base they are the Party of Family Values and Responsibility.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
User avatar
Jerloma
The Dude
Posts: 7050
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:10 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Jerloma »

Jimmy Kimmel and Roy Moore got into a Twitter fight about Christian values and then in his monologue, he says "I'll tell you about Christian values, Roy. In my church, they teach me that it's not okay to force yourself on underage girls." Of course that got a huge applause.

Besides the irony of him being a Catholic, is there any other context besides religion where someone can say they had to be taught not to force themselves on underage girls and not be considered a sociopath?
And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness. - God
User avatar
The Sybian
The Dude
Posts: 18872
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey

Re: Random Politics

Post by The Sybian »

An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

FWIW, I'm not happy at all I feel this way. In fact, it pisses me the fuck off I even have to type these words. I just see what's happening to our country thanks to the other side not giving a shit about societal norms and think why don't we fight on a level playing field?

Let's be fucking hyperbolic about what they're doing to this country because it's worked for their side for years now. Will mister d tell his kids as they're going off to work at 5:00am instead of school when their 14 that at least their dad didn't vote for someone with troubling accusations against him?
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

I'm sure knowing we wouldn't dare vote for anyone like that will warm the hearts of DREAMERs as they're deported back to countries they haven't been to since they were a year old.
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

A_B wrote:
Giff wrote:
A_B wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
mister d wrote:But, if you can't get your ideal scenario, you would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent.


Yes, I would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent in the closely-divided US Senate with Rs holding the House and the White House.



That makes you reprehensible as a person.

That makes you Art Briles. He, too, wanted those guys available because they would help his platform.


So, if every other winning football team had a similar situation as Baylor did, but no other schools did anything about it, why should we care if Baylor did anything about it?

If you want a better hypothetical, this is basically three of the five power conferences ignoring rape allegations and not suspending players while the other two do the opposite. But every year, the four teams in the playoff are come from the three conferences that don't suspend players. Except it's not football and actual livelihoods are at stake.


Yeah...fuck all the people who are okay with rapists and pedophiles and sexual harassers on any level. Maybe I wasn't clear (I was). This is not a hard issue. Trying to justify it looks bad.


Seriously, fuck right off dude.
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
A_B
The Dude
Posts: 23323
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Getting them boards like a wolf in the chicken pen.

Re: Random Politics

Post by A_B »

Giff wrote:
A_B wrote:
Giff wrote:
A_B wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
mister d wrote:But, if you can't get your ideal scenario, you would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent.


Yes, I would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent in the closely-divided US Senate with Rs holding the House and the White House.



That makes you reprehensible as a person.

That makes you Art Briles. He, too, wanted those guys available because they would help his platform.


So, if every other winning football team had a similar situation as Baylor did, but no other schools did anything about it, why should we care if Baylor did anything about it?

If you want a better hypothetical, this is basically three of the five power conferences ignoring rape allegations and not suspending players while the other two do the opposite. But every year, the four teams in the playoff are come from the three conferences that don't suspend players. Except it's not football and actual livelihoods are at stake.


Yeah...fuck all the people who are okay with rapists and pedophiles and sexual harassers on any level. Maybe I wasn't clear (I was). This is not a hard issue. Trying to justify it looks bad.


Seriously, fuck right off dude.


You just fucking admitted you felt bad about the way you felt. Sorry I took a harder stance that doesn't jive with you.
Last edited by A_B on Tue Dec 05, 2017 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
User avatar
EnochRoot
The Dude
Posts: 6192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 6:18 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by EnochRoot »

The Sybian wrote:
EnochRoot wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
It's about choosing someone for an office. And in the general election, it's about whether the office goes to one candidate or the candidate from the other party. So if Alabama were voting for a high-school teacher, Moore would be in appropriate. But as a Senator?



I get your argument, and don't completely disagree, but this line bothered me. Preying on underage girls does make someone unfit for Senate, especially since he used his position as a prosecutor to molest a vulnerable child in the courthouse for her custody hearing....


I agree the guy is unfit for the Senate because he's batshit crazy and disregards the law and is a hateful bigot. But the child molestation allegations from the 1970s or 1980s don't really sway me, because I don't think electing him as a Senator would lead to him molesting more teenaged girls. (If it did, that would matter to me.)


I see it as showing how he will abuse his position for personal gains. I can't fathom anything more immoral or heinous than a prosecutor molesting a child in a courthouse during her custody hearing. That's right up there with priests and Sandusky. He abused his position as a government attorney to molest a vulnerable child, why would we believe he wouldn't abuse his Senate seat for immoral or illegal purposes? I'm not so much concerned with him raping Senate pages (though I wouldn't let any near him), but abusing his position as a Senator. This is why I am happy Conyers resigned, and I'm still on the fence about whether Franken should resign.


Pearl clutching doesn't do you any good. Do right by your own and to others.

I was saying that I'd hope the Democrats get behind the candidate to keep the seat. There is not higher score to obtain here. The seat is all the matters.

Once he's elected, then investigate the crap out of him until he resigns in disgrace, or arrested and taken away in handcuffs, in which case the governor of his state will select his replacement.

The GOP do this every single time. Remember, there are no style points ever awarded.


I get it, and I'm torn. And I know that having a conscience is what kills the Dems. The GOP will rally around ANYBODY that serves their purpose. Fuck, look at how much they hated Trump during the Primaries, and all fell in line. Totally agree, this is what keeps the GOP in power. When everyone else immediately called for Franken's head, I said it was pointless, because the GOP will claim the high moral ground if Franken quits, all the while continuing to back Moore. They will label the Dems the party of sex offenders, while the Dems expel sex offenders and the GOP continues to welcome them. The GOP is light years ahead in the propaganda game, and I agree, doing the right thing ends up hurting Dems.

I'd like to think doing the right thing and playing clean would eventually win out, but it won't. The GOP will continue to smear Dems for things they are much worse on, while convincing their base they are the Party of Family Values and Responsibility.


It sucks. But it's also the reality we live in.

There's a right way and a wrong way to do things...But sometimes the right way doesn't align with how things get done.

The sooner the Democrats learn this simple, irrefutable fact, the better off they'll be.
Noli Timere Messorem
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Joe K »

I don't really think that "having a conscience" and/or respect for societal norms is what hurts the Democrats. Although there's an asymmetry there between the Dems and GOP, the asymmetry that really hurts is with respect to the parties' forcefulness in using the levers of power. I think the Dems could and should mimic the GOP's aggressiveness on pushing sweeping policy changes, judicial appointments, use of the filibuster, etc. But that can all be done without condoning awful behavior by Democratic politicians. I'm not saying that people should never vote for a Democratic candidate who mistreats women (like, say, Bill Clinton). I just think it's possible to match the GOP's Machiavellian use of power without completely disregarding personal ethics or morality.
User avatar
A_B
The Dude
Posts: 23323
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Getting them boards like a wolf in the chicken pen.

Re: Random Politics

Post by A_B »

Jerloma wrote:Jimmy Kimmel and Roy Moore got into a Twitter fight about Christian values and then in his monologue, he says "I'll tell you about Christian values, Roy. In my church, they teach me that it's not okay to force yourself on underage girls." Of course that got a huge applause.

Besides the irony of him being a Catholic, is there any other context besides religion where someone can say they had to be taught not to force themselves on underage girls and not be considered a sociopath?



I would think that "taught" is in the broader sense of a church's ideas and not a class that all the little catholic boys had to take. But, I admittedly have never been a little catholic boy.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

A_B wrote:
Giff wrote:
A_B wrote:
Giff wrote:
A_B wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
Yes, I would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent in the closely-divided US Senate with Rs holding the House and the White House.



That makes you reprehensible as a person.

That makes you Art Briles. He, too, wanted those guys available because they would help his platform.


So, if every other winning football team had a similar situation as Baylor did, but no other schools did anything about it, why should we care if Baylor did anything about it?

If you want a better hypothetical, this is basically three of the five power conferences ignoring rape allegations and not suspending players while the other two do the opposite. But every year, the four teams in the playoff are come from the three conferences that don't suspend players. Except it's not football and actual livelihoods are at stake.


Yeah...fuck all the people who are okay with rapists and pedophiles and sexual harassers on any level. Maybe I wasn't clear (I was). This is not a hard issue. Trying to justify it looks bad.


Seriously, fuck right off dude.


You just fucking admitted you felt bad about the way you felt. Sorry I took a harder stance that doesn't jive with you.


I'm sorry too. Maybe if people took the same stance on this seemingly easy issue to condone, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Sadly, we're in 2017 where one side doesn't give a shit about things they should and that's led to our country going down a path that seems irreversible to a lot of us. So to me the question is do you continue to allow one side to get away with this as they continue to have a majority rule because it's the right thing to do knowing that had you ignored it in your candidate maybe a lot of lives wouldn't be irrevocably changed? I'm dumbfounded I'm making this argument and maybe I should wait until we know for sure Moore wins, but this is sadly how I feel. I don't need anyone trying to condescendingly make me feel like an asshole for feeling this way. I already feel that way. So again, fuck off.

Let me ask this another way: could you hold your nose and vote for Al Franken if you knew for a complete and utter fact him winning re-election meant that exactly 1,000 families didn't have to file for bankruptcy because they had better health coverage? I'm talking Christmas Carol style, you knew the exact names of these families who had to suffer because Al Franken didn't win re-election and the Republican who won
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

Joe K wrote:I don't really think that "having a conscience" and/or respect for societal norms is what hurts the Democrats. Although there's an asymmetry there between the Dems and GOP, the asymmetry that really hurts is with respect to the parties' forcefulness in using the levers of power. I think the Dems could and should mimic the GOP's aggressiveness on pushing sweeping policy changes, judicial appointments, use of the filibuster, etc. But that can all be done without condoning awful behavior by Democratic politicians. I'm not saying that people should never vote for a Democratic candidate who mistreats women (like, say, Bill Clinton). I just think it's possible to match the GOP's Machiavellian use of power without completely disregarding personal ethics or morality.


But you have to get the power first. I'm not going to advocate Al Franken resigning if the Republicans aren't going to advocate the resignations of POTUS or Roy Moore if elected.
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8439
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: Random Politics

Post by Steve of phpBB »

A_B wrote:
Steve of phpBB wrote:
mister d wrote:But, if you can't get your ideal scenario, you would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent.


Yes, I would prefer a known rapist D sitting over his R opponent in the closely-divided US Senate with Rs holding the House and the White House.



That makes you reprehensible as a person.

That makes you Art Briles. He, too, wanted those guys available because they would help his platform.


Art Briles - that has to do with football, right? Entertainment? A TV show?

I'm not okay with hiring pedophiles to make my TV shows better.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8439
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: Random Politics

Post by Steve of phpBB »

Giff wrote:
Joe K wrote:I don't really think that "having a conscience" and/or respect for societal norms is what hurts the Democrats. Although there's an asymmetry there between the Dems and GOP, the asymmetry that really hurts is with respect to the parties' forcefulness in using the levers of power. I think the Dems could and should mimic the GOP's aggressiveness on pushing sweeping policy changes, judicial appointments, use of the filibuster, etc. But that can all be done without condoning awful behavior by Democratic politicians. I'm not saying that people should never vote for a Democratic candidate who mistreats women (like, say, Bill Clinton). I just think it's possible to match the GOP's Machiavellian use of power without completely disregarding personal ethics or morality.


But you have to get the power first. I'm not going to advocate Al Franken resigning if the Republicans aren't going to advocate the resignations of POTUS or Roy Moore if elected.


Franken should resign. The Dems will get to appoint a successor. Conyers should have resigned right away also.

With Menendez, I want the Dems to keep their heads down until the Dem governor takes office. Then he should resign also.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29048
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Random Politics

Post by mister d »

Stepping back, this debate here does kind of perfectly encapsulate how reactionary Ds are right now. Rather than absolutely torch the world and everyone credibly accused, they immediately fall back into defending their own no different than the "morally bankrupt" other side to the point where we're talking about electing pedophiles on our side to not lose group.
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
A_B
The Dude
Posts: 23323
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Getting them boards like a wolf in the chicken pen.

Re: Random Politics

Post by A_B »

Giff wrote:
Joe K wrote:I don't really think that "having a conscience" and/or respect for societal norms is what hurts the Democrats. Although there's an asymmetry there between the Dems and GOP, the asymmetry that really hurts is with respect to the parties' forcefulness in using the levers of power. I think the Dems could and should mimic the GOP's aggressiveness on pushing sweeping policy changes, judicial appointments, use of the filibuster, etc. But that can all be done without condoning awful behavior by Democratic politicians. I'm not saying that people should never vote for a Democratic candidate who mistreats women (like, say, Bill Clinton). I just think it's possible to match the GOP's Machiavellian use of power without completely disregarding personal ethics or morality.


But you have to get the power first. I'm not going to advocate Al Franken resigning if the Republicans aren't going to advocate the resignations of POTUS or Roy Moore if elected.


I hope it hasn't been missed, but I am 100% on board with Trump gone and Moore dropping out.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

mister d wrote:Rather than absolutely torch the world and everyone credibly accused, they immediately fall back into defending their own no different than the "morally bankrupt" other side to the point where we're talking about electing pedophiles on our side to not lose group.


To me, what's happening in DC in the last year and what promises to happen in the future trumps that. Pun intended. My scruples aren't more important than people's livelihoods.
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

A_B wrote:
Giff wrote:
Joe K wrote:I don't really think that "having a conscience" and/or respect for societal norms is what hurts the Democrats. Although there's an asymmetry there between the Dems and GOP, the asymmetry that really hurts is with respect to the parties' forcefulness in using the levers of power. I think the Dems could and should mimic the GOP's aggressiveness on pushing sweeping policy changes, judicial appointments, use of the filibuster, etc. But that can all be done without condoning awful behavior by Democratic politicians. I'm not saying that people should never vote for a Democratic candidate who mistreats women (like, say, Bill Clinton). I just think it's possible to match the GOP's Machiavellian use of power without completely disregarding personal ethics or morality.


But you have to get the power first. I'm not going to advocate Al Franken resigning if the Republicans aren't going to advocate the resignations of POTUS or Roy Moore if elected.


I hope it hasn't been missed, but I am 100% on board with Trump gone and Moore dropping out.


You probably should've voted and campaigned for Hillary then.

(now you get to tell me to fuck off!)

I think what set me off here is the Art Briles comparison knowing how I was a Baylor fan who completely dropped them.
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29048
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Random Politics

Post by mister d »

Giff wrote:To me, what's happening in DC in the last year and what promises to happen in the future trumps that. Pun intended. My scruples aren't more important than people's livelihoods.


The Dems can't exist like that. They are, seemingly by default, the party that looks out for others versus just themselves. That's part of the core of why people align that way whether or not its effective or even true. Electing/enabling pedophiles and rapists fails long-term in every possible way; you objectively fail morally, you destroy your base support and, most cynically, you would get thoroughly destroyed in a no-fucks-versus-no-fucks fight. There's no possible strategic matching on that inherent mindset. The only option, even if it costs the hypothetical election and the 1,000 families, is holding your side accountable and going scorched earth on every sitting R offender and enabler you can. If that fails, we're fucked, but the other path is guaranteed fucked.
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8439
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: Random Politics

Post by Steve of phpBB »

mister d wrote:The Dems can't exist like that. They are, seemingly by default, the party that looks out for others versus just themselves. That's part of the core of why people align that way whether or not its effective or even true. Electing/enabling pedophiles and rapists fails long-term in every possible way; you objectively fail morally, you destroy your base support and, most cynically, you would get thoroughly destroyed in a no-fucks-versus-no-fucks fight. There's no possible strategic matching on that inherent mindset. The only option, even if it costs the hypothetical election and the 1,000 families, is holding your side accountable and going scorched earth on every sitting R offender and enabler you can. If that fails, we're fucked, but the other path is guaranteed fucked.


I could perhaps be persuaded by that. That's why I want the Dems to push out Franken and Conyers.

Luckily for AB (or for us), it wouldn't have mattered who he voted for. Trump won Kentucky by more than half a million votes. So whether he voted for Trump or not, or Clinton or not, the outcome wasn't going to change.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
Shirley
The Dude
Posts: 7517
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:32 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Shirley »

This is awful. I'm going to blame the attitudes on display here as temporary hysteria brought on by Trump.



(and there's no cognitive dissonance at all in thinking that the crimes and deserved punishments of Roy Moore and Al Franken are miles apart)
Totally Kafkaesque
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29048
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Random Politics

Post by mister d »

I’d like to clarify one thing here just to be sure I don’t sit on any high ground ... I would 100% support someone guilty of murder as a positive voting D in this same hypothetical assuming I can legitimately or “legitimately” accept the circumstances of the murder. Murder victims can deserve or contribute to their own murders.
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
EnochRoot
The Dude
Posts: 6192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 6:18 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by EnochRoot »

Steve of phpBB wrote:
mister d wrote:The Dems can't exist like that. They are, seemingly by default, the party that looks out for others versus just themselves. That's part of the core of why people align that way whether or not its effective or even true. Electing/enabling pedophiles and rapists fails long-term in every possible way; you objectively fail morally, you destroy your base support and, most cynically, you would get thoroughly destroyed in a no-fucks-versus-no-fucks fight. There's no possible strategic matching on that inherent mindset. The only option, even if it costs the hypothetical election and the 1,000 families, is holding your side accountable and going scorched earth on every sitting R offender and enabler you can. If that fails, we're fucked, but the other path is guaranteed fucked.


I could perhaps be persuaded by that. That's why I want the Dems to push out Franken and Conyers.

Luckily for AB (or for us), it wouldn't have mattered who he voted for. Trump won Kentucky by more than half a million votes. So whether he voted for Trump or not, or Clinton or not, the outcome wasn't going to change.


Seriously? It was a well-timed hit job meant to distract the Democrats to do exactly what you propose (suggest he step down, argue over it, get sanctimonious about some higher road tripe) so that it dominate the news cycle for a few weeks alongside Roy Moore and the tax heist...er..plan.

You mentioned a few weeks ago (I think it was you) about how responses like what you suggested here is why Democrats tend not to fare well in elections. Case in point.

Is this mic on? Yes? OK. Then turn it up some cuz I'm gonna drop me a #HotTake:

Nobody fucking cares about feelings. There are no higher roads to take. People want jobs. Promise them jobs, and you'll put a Democrat in the White House.

Find a way to make that statement true, and you'll create a wave of change.

Focus that prism.
Noli Timere Messorem
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8439
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: Random Politics

Post by Steve of phpBB »

Shirley wrote:This is awful. I'm going to blame the attitudes on display here as temporary hysteria brought on by Trump.


Just so it's clear, my attitude is that I would rather 20 million people keep their health insurance even if it means I have to vote for someone who has done horrible things. Elections have consequences, and lately, those consequences can be severe.

To me, the attitude that "Too bad about all those people, but I just won't vote for that guy" is more troubling.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29048
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Random Politics

Post by mister d »

So you'd make a really good "fiscal conservative" Alabama voter.
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: Random Politics

Post by Giff »

mister d wrote:So you'd make a really good "fiscal conservative" Alabama voter.


Yeah and they keep winning and are about to sign a tax bill that's disastrous for the vast majority of this country. But you totally burned Steve, man!
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
Post Reply