Say something you don't like

[WackyDan]

Scott Walker was interesting. Aside from Rand Paul he was the only Republican that seemed to have promise.

I relished the fact that he dropped out of college and still became prominent and had a successful career in politics. That speaks to a lot of Americans quite honestly in that he was closer to the rest of us than most of the other political hacks would ever be. I was going to love watching the progressives and hard core liberals attempt to attack him on his lack of college education. It would be entertaining.

That said...

Dear Scott Walker,

You decided that abortion for a rape/incest induced pregnancy or abortion to save a woman's life was wrong. In fact you have also stated you support a ban on all abortions.

That sir is where I decided you were going to be an "also ran" and that your political career would end in Wisconsin. That in 2015 an elected official can take such a polarizing view on that old litmus test topic is pretty stupid. I didn't want you to lie either, but part of me thinks you went extreme just to appease the base and that to me is offensive.

 

[Oyeve]

I hate all of em. The least hated is bernie, but they will never vote him in whilst clinton is breathing.

 

[WackyDan]

I'm a true independent but there doesn't seem to be much of a choice so far this year.

Bernie Sanders - Holding gun manufacturers liable for gun deaths is a dumb position.

Bernie is hard not to like. I don't agree with much of his platform, but I always felt he was true to his convictions and I could respect that.

Then the other day happened...

He decided to take a stand on gun control based on current events. This was outright pandering in order to gain support and poll numbers. He now officially is just like any other politician running for president. Fuck him.

 

[Blackjack200]

Bernie is hard not to like. I don't agree with much of his platform, but I always felt he was true to his convictions and I could respect that.

Then the other day happened...

He decided to take a stand on gun control based on current events. This was outright pandering in order to gain support and poll numbers. He now officially is just like any other politician running for president. Fuck him.

Politician reacts to event. Fuck him.

 

[kage69]

I'm a true independent but there doesn't seem to be much of a choice so far this year.

Bernie Sanders - Holding gun manufacturers liable for gun deaths is a dumb position.

Do you think car companies need to held responsible for drunk driving fatalities too?

IMO that's a sensible position from Bernie.

If I had to pick one that I don't like it would be his recent support for an assault rifle ban. He has a record of being pretty level headed about guns, but I had heard he doesn't care for the dreaded AR and AKs - looks like he's out about it now. The last one didn't accomplish much, and doesn't address what crazy people do with handguns. I'd still vote for him though, another AR ban just isn't in the cards and the guy makes too much sense about almost everything else.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

We got some righties in here where are the lefties? Come on guys don't let me down.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

We got some righties in here where are the lefties? Come on guys don't let me down.

I'm a leftie, and I can't stand basically all of the current crop of politicians on either side. Bernie Sanders has some legitimately good policy points, but he's also a complete wackaloon. I feel like if he was given real power, he'd outlaw hairbrushes and mandate 3 hours of drum circles for the full moon. Hillary Clinton is the ultimate political slimeball so I don't trust anything she says. And I still will vote for one of them over whichever jackass the GOP puts forward to push an agenda that says the family I grew up in isn't deserving of the same rights as all Americans. Our political system is so fucking ridiculous.

 

[werepossum]

I'm a leftie, and I can't stand basically all of the current crop of politicians on either side. Bernie Sanders has some legitimately good policy points, but he's also a complete wackaloon. I feel like if he was given real power, he'd outlaw hairbrushes and mandate 3 hours of drum circles for the full moon. Hillary Clinton is the ultimate political slimeball so I don't trust anything she says. And I still will vote for one of them over whichever jackass the GOP puts forward to push an agenda that says the family I grew up in isn't deserving of the same rights as all Americans. Our political system is so fucking ridiculous.

So vote Libertarian. Nobody says you can only vote for one of the two main parties except the two main parties and their mindless sycophants.

 

[BoberFett]

So vote Libertarian. Nobody says you can only vote for one of the two main parties except the two main parties and their mindless sycophants.

Or Green. Or anything. Just stop rewarding the horrible two major parties with your vote, which only convinces them that you want them to continue doing what they've been doing for the past 50 years.

 

[werepossum]

Or Green. Or anything. Just stop rewarding the horrible two major parties with your vote, which only convinces them that you want them to continue doing what they've been doing for the past 50 years.

I don't think I could actually type "so vote Gr-". Um, "So vote for the Gr-". Nope, can't do it.

But agreed, anything is better than voting for the lesser evil just because we believe we have only two choices.

 

[Fenixgoon]

I'm a true independent but there doesn't seem to be much of a choice so far this year.

Bernie Sanders - Holding gun manufacturers liable for gun deaths is a dumb position.

link? i thought that was hillary's position, not bernie's

if so, goddamnit man.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

But agreed, anything is better than voting for the lesser evil just because we believe we have only two choices.

You assume that there's not a great gap between the two evils. I find the Democrats hopelessly incompetent, but that's a million times better than the Republicans, whom I view as legitimately evil. If you had a choice between a bumbling moron, Satan, or a third choice that dramatically increased one of the other's chances of winning, no one would blame you for voting for the moron. Granted, unless you live in a swing state (which I don't), this argument is meaningless. But I'm definitely using the vote I have to keep legitimate evil out of power.

 

[master_shake_]

Ron Paul was the best Republican candidate and every person in the RNC and the peoe who ran the debates acted like he was someone's crazy uncle.

 

[werepossum]

You assume that there's not a great gap between the two evils. I find the Democrats hopelessly incompetent, but that's a million times better than the Republicans, whom I view as legitimately evil. If you had a choice between a bumbling moron, Satan, or a third choice that dramatically increased one of the other's chances of winning, no one would blame you for voting for the moron. Granted, unless you live in a swing state (which I don't), this argument is meaningless. But I'm definitely using the vote I have to keep legitimate evil out of power.

Then please don't pretend to be other than an unthinking partisan tool. If you intend to vote Democrat no matter what, at least be honest enough to own it. This concept of "I don't like the Democrats but I will always vote for whomever they put up" is no different from Jhhnn's position that the Democrats are always correct and no amount of posturing will make it look any smarter.

If one believes that one party is always correct and one party is evil, then one must believe that half the nation is evil. That sort of arrogance is simply breathtaking and no amount of lipstick is going to make it anything more than idiocy.

 

[Blackjack200]

Sorry, it's true. Even David Brooks said it. The Republican Party has lost its way.

 

[TheSlamma]

Sanders - I don't like his tract record of section 8 support. But up until 3 years ago I lived in areas that were covered in section 8 housing so I have a first hand knowledge of why I know that program doesn't work and just creates an endless cycle that can never be broken. My independence day from ghetto neighborhoods began on Dec 26th 2013 and I'll never go back to that crap.

Other than that I align with Sanders more than any other candidate in my lifetime.


No sign of Dave, Jhhnn, senseamp or ivwshane in this thread :hmm:

 

[Blackjack200]

Sanders - I don't like his tract record of section 8 support. But up until 3 years ago I lived in areas that were covered in section 8 housing so I have a first hand knowledge of why I know that program doesn't work and just creates an endless cycle that can never be broken. My independence day from ghetto neighborhoods began on Dec 26th 2013 and I'll never go back to that crap.

Other than that I align with Sanders more than any other candidate in my lifetime.

No sign of Dave, Jhhnn, senseamp or ivwshane in this thread :hmm:

What should replace Section 8? The public housing projects that preceded it were a disaster. Or should the people just be homeless?

I agree, by the way, that Section 8, and the housing program in general need to be improved.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Not to detract I remember Robert Reich suggested an interesting solution in the 90s. Essentially housing projects should have 1/3 people living there for free because they can't pay, 1/3 living for minimal cost because they are working their way out and 1/3 living there to save for a house or pay college debt off. This group would be working people that don't qualify for public housing but they'd be allowed to live there for a small rent payment to basically keep drugs away, report shit that goes wrong and possibly be a role model for someone else. He also said we should spend the paying thirds money to make the places decent to live in. Not sure how practical this is since you'd need 3 times the housing but he has interesting ideas.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

No sign of Dave, Jhhnn, senseamp or ivwshane in this thread :hmm:

I know well spoken guys I'd like to hear from them. There has to be something they don't like. Honestly I thought they'd be fewer conservative guys admitting stuff.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Then please don't pretend to be other than an unthinking partisan tool. If you intend to vote Democrat no matter what, at least be honest enough to own it. This concept of "I don't like the Democrats but I will always vote for whomever they put up" is no different from Jhhnn's position that the Democrats are always correct and no amount of posturing will make it look any smarter.

If one believes that one party is always correct and one party is evil, then one must believe that half the nation is evil. That sort of arrogance is simply breathtaking and no amount of lipstick is going to make it anything more than idiocy.

I don't believe Democrats are always correct and I don't believe Republican voters are evil; I believe that the current crop of Republican candidates for President are evil. There's a difference. I would gladly vote for a Republican in the vein of an Olympia Snowe or John McCain (in the 90s before he started needlessly pandering to a far right wing base). Those people are getting chased out of the party to make way for the Rubios and Cruzes and goddamn Huckabees. Show me a fiscally conservative Republican who doesn't want to implement socially conservative Christian Sharia law policies and doesn't treat compromise as failure and that's someone I could see myself voting for. That candidate currently doesn't exist (on the national scale, anyway).

We're getting off track from the purpose of the thread though. My local congressman, Earl Blumenauer, has a pretty good track record of standing up for poor people, but he's supported a number of free trade agreements which disproportionately negatively impact poor workers and farmers in other countries. He also wears a bow tie, which very few people can pull off (I'm on the fence about how it suits him) and spends an inordinate amount of time trying to make everything bicycle friendly, because he's from Portland and our chief export is smug self-satisfaction.

 

[werepossum]

Sorry, it's true. Even David Brooks said it. The Republican Party has lost its way.

lol Even David Brooks? That's like saying "even Andrew Sullivan". These are people who earn their nuts attacking conservatives whilst pretending to be conservatives. Please don't pretend to be fooled.

 

[Blackjack200]

Yeah, he's definitely no true Scotsman.

 

[BoberFett]

I know well spoken guys I'd like to hear from them. There has to be something they don't like. Honestly I thought they'd be fewer conservative guys admitting stuff.

Despite "liberal" insistence to the contrary, I find that "conservatives" are actually more able to criticize themselves than "liberals". "Liberals" are so sure that the other side is evil that it bolsters their own view of their infallibility. Admitting any kind of fault in themselves would be tantamount to admitting that the other team might actually be right about something. And they won't let that happen. That's not a definitive statement obviously, just an observation based on my experiences.

 

[BoberFett]

Yeah, he's definitely no true Scotsman.

I'm a Democrat and I think Democratic party sucks.

Yep, even BoberFett says so.

 

[werepossum]

Yeah, he's definitely no true Scotsman.

lol Fair enough, although that would work better if it were referencing someone who was regularly conservative. Brooks is simply the new Andrew Sullivan.

Put it this way, the Times always has one supposedly conservative columnist whose main thrust is writing about how conservatives are wrong about, well, everything. On the other hand, the Times has a LOT of progressive columnists, and none of them are anything less than the purest of Scotsmen. Coincidence?