What's new
By:
Filters

Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire

Status
Not open for further replies.
Term limits are needed bigtime, funny how it seems all americans are for them but alas.... professional politicians will never stand for that.
 
Stoked said:
I’m glad you don’t like the Rs. Good.

And I find little value in the R v D discussion as far as worth. We both have our minds made up on that issue.

As for your worry for the future. On that we agree.
Click to expand...
Seriously you are one of the most disingenuous people on this forum.

You are a dyed-in-the-wool Republican in sheep's clothing.
 
♪alt13 said:
I disagree

The Democrats had contol of all 3 houses early in Obama's Presidency. We weren't worried about our institutions even those of us that disagreed with them on many issues.

The Republicans have since then undermined democracy through intense gerrymandering, adopted bogus conspiracy theories as fact, erased any hint of decency and respect that may have existed, and through the Garland-Kavanaugh event destroyed trust in the most trusted of our branches of government.

The Republicans over the last decade have terrorized America and her institutions. This is what paves the way for fascists. I am more and more worried that Trump may be a mere side note in history. That the worst is still to come. The Republicans have set us on a most dangerous path.

I worry for my children. I worry that they will come of age in a militant fascist society. That guy, that demagogue is out there and our institutions may no longer be strong enough to stop him.

Angry tears
Click to expand...

This cracks me up. You could swap the players and this post would ring true for the other side.

♪alt13 said:
Seriously you are one of the most disingenuous people on this forum.
Click to expand...

I think Stoked is one of the most reasonable and moderate posters here without being a douche. He's been on a tear the past couple of weeks and I hope all is well with him and his family because he hasn't been his normal self.
 
Zombie said:
Look, if you don't think there's a party in the country that does a good enough job of representing your views, don't join one.

But to get all high and mighty over people who do think so, doesn't make you a better or smarter person.
Click to expand...
I haven't.

But I do think it's silly to jump on the team and get emotionally connected to the outcomes of professional politicians. If that's me being all high and mighty (I don't think it is) please understand, I'm not looking down on people for belonging to a political party. I do, however, think they need to really ask themselves if the party represents them more or if they begin to represent the party more.

The Republican party is a pretty fantastic example, at the moment. Go back 10 years... in no way shape or form should today's Republican party appeal to Republicans of 10 years ago. Yet it does. Most people who were Republicans 10 years ago are Republicans today. So those little Republican children followed their party to the place they are in right now. They did not lead their party here. The Party is not here because they wanted, expected or acted to bring it here. They followed it here.

So you are getting all worked up because I started out talking about your team, but step the **** back and look at the ****ing mess.
 
Bulletproof said:
I haven't.

But I do think it's silly to jump on the team and get emotionally connected to the outcomes of professional politicians. If that's me being all high and mighty (I don't think it is) please understand, I'm not looking down on people for belonging to a political party. I do, however, think they need to really ask themselves if the party represents them more or if they begin to represent the party more.

The Republican party is a pretty fantastic example, at the moment. Go back 10 years... in no way shape or form should today's Republican party appeal to Republicans of 10 years ago. Yet it does. Most people who were Republicans 10 years ago are Republicans today. So those little Republican children followed their party to the place they are in right now. They did not lead their party here. The Party is not here because they wanted, expected or acted to bring it here. They followed it here.

So you are getting all worked up because I started out talking about your team, but step the **** back and look at the ****ing mess.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that I'm worked up, simply because I disagree with you.

As for for the Republican party there actually is a way shape and form (actually a fair number of them) that the GOP continues to use to appeal to their members, and have since the parties realigned last century.

The reason I, probably Thriller, and millions of others fight for one party over the other is that we genuinely believe that the dangers presented by the Republican party are better faced within an organized structure. The Republican party's biggest strength is its ability to organize and mobilize, it doesn't make sense to me that neutering the only other major political party is the best way to stop them.
 
If a person disagreed with every other position the Democrats had aside from Climate change, that issue alone would be worth joining the party and working to get more Democrats in office.
 
Zombie said:
I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that I'm worked up, simply because I disagree with you.
As for for the Republican party there actually is a way shape and form (actually a fair number of them) that the GOP continues to use to appeal to their members, and have since the parties realigned last century.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I don't mean to assume you're "worked up" but you have taken exception to my comments. That's what I'm referring to.

So I'd make the analogy of flavor profiles in beer. All beer has a little bittering addition, some beers feature it. Some beers lean towards a malty balance. Some have a roast character. So yeah, last century there were hints within the Republican party of the character it has now taken on, but the balance is not the same. You're talking about an English Golden ale becoming an IPA and saying "Yeah, well there was a bitterness in there from way back, so it's pretty much the same beer." It isn't. The balance has shifted, hard.
 
And "in" before someone like Dutch mentions the Democrats was once the preferred party of the KKK.
 
Bulletproof said:
Sorry, I don't mean to assume you're "worked up" but you have taken exception to my comments. That's what I'm referring to.

So I'd make the analogy of flavor profiles in beer. All beer has a little bittering addition, some beers feature it. Some beers lean towards a malty balance. Some have a roast character. So yeah, last century there were hints within the Republican party of the character it has now taken on, but the balance is not the same. You're talking about an English Golden ale becoming an IPA and saying "Yeah, well there was a bitterness in there from way back, so it's pretty much the same beer." It isn't. The balance has shifted, hard.
Click to expand...
The backbone of the Republican party has been racial grievance since the 1960's, it's safe to say that hasn't changed. I'm not enough of a beer connoisseur to follow the entirely of your metaphor, but I don't think the party has changed as much as you think.

The major difference as I see it, the Trumpian shift if you will, is that they are now much more willing to say the quiet part loud, that didn't use to be the case.
 
Zombie said:
If a person disagreed with every other position the Democrats had aside from Climate change, that issue alone would be worth joining the party and working to get more Democrats in office.
Click to expand...

Just enough to check the Rs. I’d love them to take the House a dead lock the senate.

Except that leads to its own problems.

A **** mountain 5 miles high seems better when compared to a **** mountain 20 miles high. But either way you drown in a **** mountain.
 
Zombie said:
As for for the Democratic party there actually is a way shape and form (actually a fair number of them) that the DNC continues to use to appeal to their members, and have since the parties realigned last century.

The reason I, probably Joe Bagadonuts, and millions of others fight for one party over the other is that we genuinely believe that the dangers presented by the Democratic party are better faced within an organized structure. The Democratic party's biggest strength is its ability to organize and mobilize, it doesn't make sense to me that neutering the only other major political party is the best way to stop them.
Click to expand...

Stop and really think about this. Everybody has a set of beliefs and values and they identify with the party that best represents these. The leadership of BOTH parties play on this and use this to realize their goals. None of which really have anything to do with what the general population wants.
 
Stoked said:
Just enough to check the Rs. I’d love them to take the House a dead lock the senate.

Except that leads to its own problems.

A **** mountain 5 miles high seems better when compared to a **** mountain 20 miles high. But either way you drown in a **** mountain.
Click to expand...
Obviously I'm going to disagree that the Dem party is a **** mountain, I think it could use a lot of improvement.

I also think that there is basically zero chance of another viable party springing up in my lifetime so my time is better spent trying to improve the party from the inside, by voting in primaries and donating to candidates that better reflect my values.

I think this period of American history is just too important to sit on the sidelines.
 
Zombie said:
Obviously I'm going to disagree that the Dem party is a **** mountain, I think it could use a lot of improvement.

I also think that there is basically zero chance of another viable party springing up in my lifetime so my time is better spent trying to improve the party from the inside, by voting in primaries and donating to candidates that better reflect my values.

I think this period of American history is just too important to sit on the sidelines.
Click to expand...

I agree. Sitting it out is foolish to the extreme. But not all of us have the same goal. Hell, some of us aren’t even pulling in the same direction.

Zero chance is more on us than anything. Another party rises when we make it
 
Scat said:
Stop and really think about this. Everybody has a set of beliefs and values and they identify with the party that best represents these. The leadership of BOTH parties play on this and use this to realize their goals. None of which really have anything to do with what the general population wants.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why I'm even replying to you, but your last sentence is objectively not the case. The 'general population' wanted social security for example, they want a better Healthcare system, etc. That's not to say that politicians don't do things that are only in their own best interest at times, but that's hardly an argument for checking out of party politics altogether. How else are we supposed to remove our leaders when they are abusing their position?

You know, aside from guillotines...
 
Zombie said:
If a person disagreed with every other position the Democrats had aside from Climate change, that issue alone would be worth joining the party and working to get more Democrats in office.
Click to expand...
I am currently cheering on team D.

It is important enough for me to full on just want them to win right now. I'll nit pick with the best of them if they do win and end the Trump era and start acting like the people in charge, because I'll always nitpick the people in charge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Top