politics thread

[Stymietee]

BLACKS ONLY: Political Meeting in Georgia Bans White Reporters from Entering

Racism that never gets talked about and should be stopped

 

[gkekoa]

I see where you're coming from and it's a good POV looking back, however, at the time there weren't any people of color in the United States as they were either considered property and not human/people or in the case of Spanish, living in territories not associated with the United States.

Not all black people were property. As a matter of fact, some black people owned “property.”

Oh...and what they were considered by democrats, doesn’t make it true. They were always people.

 

[gkekoa]

OK, but can you source that for me?

We aren't 100% anything. Electing representatives isn't the sole determinant in establishing what this country is.

Republic- a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.

There is no source for what should be. If we are 50 individual states, each state should hold equal power. Otherwise, we are simply America or the un-United States of California.

 

[gkekoa]

We should absolutely use science, in fact science is exactly what's used in forming the legal definition of the term "human being. " and why abortion is and should remain legal.

Correction ole' buddy, at the time biblical and therefore moral argument was EXACTLY the basis upon which slavery became legal. So contrary to you assumption, slavery was indeed in line with existing morality standards in this country. Further, and I know that you didn't ask, the same biblical/ moral standards continue to fuel reasons to denote differences in color today including reactions pro and con to the same.

There's a reason why I cannot accept you argument, because it's not true. Conservatives never fought in favor of humanizing what was considered property. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from but I would love to see (actually read) that from which you draw historical reference. Care to share?

Finally, you actually wrote this..."If you believe it is up to the mother/father (father’s get no say), then you believe four year olds should be allowed to be killed."

I never said that the father gets no say, you did, however, it is factual that males who have reached a certain age probably won't have a say while men will always have meaningful input. ( I hope that you appreciate the differences) The 4 year old thing is just nonsense and is unrelated to my premise.

Science didn’t play a part in the decision on abortion. We can all agree science determined a fetus is life. We can all agree that science calls that species Homo Sapien. To kill that species is called murder.

There isnt a single text that states white man superior. There isn’t a single text saying to own another person.

Sure...it is called the Republican Party.

The four year old thing is absolutely related. You said the mother/father should make the decision. Sorry, but if a fetus is not a baby, then there is no mother/father. If it is the mother/father’s choice, then why is four different than conceived? Again though, if a person believes that life begins at conception, then shouldn’t they be mad when that life is taken?

 

[Toadman005]

Interesting, but even more so because the fact is...McCain and Graham did this and the jackass cult leader has flock believing BS about the nonsense "deep state" and his made up enemies list.

Or McCain was part of it. Splitting hairs, there.

 

[Rowdy]

Interesting, but even more so because the fact is...McCain and Graham did this and the jackass cult leader has flock believing BS about the nonsense "deep state" and his made up enemies list.

Yea like when he claimed he was bugged? How made up was that? All the libs claimed he was. Hopefully we see the list soon. #allwaysthesmartestmanintheroom

 

[Toadman005]

Condescending?? OK, I'll take your interpretation. Maybe this is a generational difference at play. I call it constructive criticism, you want to call it condescension, that's fine, just understand that I'm not of the generation that finds a personal attack in any and every thing that's said (written) to, for, about, and against me.

I did show my work when responding to the original poster. Did you read that or are you one who doesn't follow the entire conversation?

Now before we get into Omar and what she said or didn't, answer this...what can be said about Israel or the Germanic Jewish people that wouldn't be considered anti-Semitic?

Well, then you can take my criticism of how you come across - pompous and condescending- constructively, and work to be more self aware.

I do not always follow every single post, no, and given you waited days to reply, it took me a moment to even recall what you were talking about. Regardless you suggest I was using false facts in a post I made that was purely an opinion.

I'll gladly discuss Omar. As for your question, either can be criticized, if the criticism is valid and fair. Racist stereotyping is generally frowned upon, and is not, in my eyes, valid or fair criticism.

 

[skinsdad62]

Joe Bastardi: Climate change agenda is being driven by hysteria, not facts

Things climate alarmist won’t read

 

[skinsdad62]

People did this to trump too ! It was wrong then and it’s wrong now

 

[Sportster 72]

I smell a DNC hit job on old Uncle Joe. He was smart enough to stay out of HRC's way 2 years ago.

People did this to trump too ! It was wrong then and it’s wrong now

 

[ehb5]

Actually, it is exactly for that reason. Without the electoral college, only a handful of states would rules for all other states. TBH, every state should count as one vote, population be damned.

We are 100% a republic. We elect representatives. There are democratic principles but the people can’t strip the rights of others, regardless of vote.

Am I missing something (I may be - I'm jumping in in the middle here), but how does a popular vote strip the rights of people?

 

[ehb5]

Me coming back to this thread after 2 weeks...

 

[ehb5]

So im curious about a couple things that can maybe lead to some less hostile discussions than we're used to having (lol who am I kidding)...


How possible do you all think it is to change somebody's mind on something in a thread like this?

Has your mind been changed because of anything said here?

What's the best way to actually change somebody's mind in a thread like this?


Who are the definite non Trump voters pulling for in 2020? Any favorites in the field?

Are there any of you who are torn between voting for the Dem, Trump, or a 3rd party candidate and if so who who would make you vote each way?

 

[Sharkinva]

So im curious about a couple things that can maybe lead to some less hostile discussions than we're used to having (lol who am I kidding)...


How possible do you all think it is to change somebody's mind on something in a thread like this?

Has your mind beenchanged because of anything said here?

What's the best way to actually change somebody's mind in a thread like this?


Who are the definite non Trump voters pulling for in 2020? Any favorites in the field?

Are there any of you who are torn between voting for the Dem, Trump, or a 3rd party candidate and if so who who would make you vote each way?

Drive by posting here

How possible do you all think it is to change somebody's mind on something in a thread like this?

Not at all.

Has your mind been changed because of anything said here?

What i think of some people has been changed for damn sure.

What's the best way to actually change somebody's mind in a thread like this?

YOu cant, you can simply show your point of view. But I think the country is so polarized that us vs them will continue to grow.

Who are the definite non Trump voters pulling for in 2020? Any favorites in the field?

Pete Buttigieg with Kamala Harris as his VP would be AWESOME.

Are there any of you who are torn between voting for the Dem, Trump, or a 3rd party candidate and if so who who would make you vote each way?

I will never vote for Trump again. And as we have the EC in full effect, voting 3rd party is a vote for Trump. So no thanks.


\Ghost

 

[Stymietee]

Science didn’t play a part in the decision on abortion. We can all agree science determined a fetus is life. We can all agree that science calls that species Homo Sapien. To kill that species is called murder.

There isnt a single text that states white man superior. There isn’t a single text saying to own another person.

Sure...it is called the Republican Party.

The four year old thing is absolutely related. You said the mother/father should make the decision. Sorry, but if a fetus is not a baby, then there is no mother/father. If it is the mother/father’s choice, then why is four different than conceived? Again though, if a person believes that life begins at conception, then shouldn’t they be mad when that life is taken?

1. Do you make this stuff on the fly? (Take note of the science involved) Here's the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade...

Majority Opinion
On Jan. 22, 1973, the Supreme Court handed down their ruling, holding that a woman's right to an abortion falls within the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave a woman a right to abortion during the entirety of the pregnancy and defined different levels of state interest for regulating abortion in the second and third trimesters.

• In the first trimester, the state (that is, any government) could treat abortion only as a medical decision, leaving medical judgment to the woman's physician.
• In the second trimester (before viability), the state's interest was seen as legitimate when it was protecting the health of the mother.
• After the viability of the fetus (the likely ability of the fetus to survive outside of and separated from the uterus), the potential of human life could be considered as a legitimate state interest. The state could choose to "regulate, or even proscribe abortion" as long as the life and health of the mother was protected.

2. What was true then as it remains today, there's picking a choosing from old and new testament. This is undeniable as evidenced by this...

Passages referencing and condoning slavery are common in the Old Testament. In one place, we read:

"When a slave owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner's property." (Exodus 21:20-21)

Then contradicted by this...

“Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession” (Exodus 21:16).


Clearly greedy, selfish, soulless slavers selected one over the other because one served them while the other did not.

3. The Republican party? That's your reference? I know that you are a person of faith but you're absolutely taking that belief thing to new heights with this response.

4. Good point...(fetus not a baby) and I stand corrected. Please amend my original position to read "couple involved" instead of "mother and father." BTW: I do appreciate your support on this issue as you're finally agreeing that there is no mother/father because a fetus is not a baby.

If a person "believes" that that life begins at conception, that is their right and I support that right...for them! Anyone who "believes" that to be untrue also gets my support. I'm not sure why the believing couple would become angry as they likely would try to bring that issue to term.

 

[Stymietee]

Republic- a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.

There is no source for what should be. If we are 50 individual states, each state should hold equal power. Otherwise, we are simply America or the un-United States of California.

de·moc·ra·cy
[dəˈmäkrəsē]
NOUN

1. a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
   "capitalism and democracy are ascendant in the third world"
   synonyms:
   representative government · elective government · constitutional government · popular government · self-government · government by the people · autonomy · republic · commonwealth
   • a state governed by a democracy.
     "a multiparty democracy"
   • control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.
     "the intended extension of industrial democracy"
   • the practice or principles of social equality.
     "demands for greater democracy"

What's your point, other than to slowly agree with me?

 

[Stymietee]

Not all black people were property. As a matter of fact, some black people owned “property.”

Oh...and what they were considered by democrats, doesn’t make it true. They were always people.

Are we talking about slavery in this country, correct? I am aware of the fact that there were a few slave owners who themselves were people from the continent, but, how is it supportive of an argument in favor of this human wrongdoing?

See, when you dip into absurdity, you begin to lose credibility. People of all stripes owned human property, this was NOT limited to one political party or the other.

 

[Stymietee]

Or McCain was part of it. Splitting hairs, there.

Wah, wah, wah, everyone is against me, weak assed, I'm the victim Trump BS!! I wish that SHE would grow a pair and stop being such a pussy!

 

[Stymietee]

Yea like when he claimed he was bugged? How made up was that? All the libs claimed he was. Hopefully we see the list soon. #allwaysthesmartestmanintheroom

He made that shit up too! Stop believing the BS that's he feeds you or risk finding yourself in some far-away place about to drink poison kool-aide, Jim Jones style!

BTW: There's no doubt that he is... #allwaysthesmartestmanintheroom considering who attends his rally's, but that says more about them, than that low IQ dude!

 

[Stymietee]

So im curious about a couple things that can maybe lead to some less hostile discussions than we're used to having (lol who am I kidding)...


How possible do you all think it is to change somebody's mind on something in a thread like this?

Has your mind been changed because of anything said here?

What's the best way to actually change somebody's mind in a thread like this?


Who are the definite non Trump voters pulling for in 2020? Any favorites in the field?

Are there any of you who are torn between voting for the Dem, Trump, or a 3rd party candidate and if so who who would make you vote each way?

1.How possible do you all think it is to change somebody's mind on something in a thread like this?

Highly unlikely, yet still possible for those who still employ some objectivity.


2. Has your mind been changed because of anything said here?

Sure, there have been some interesting points made here. More peripheral than core beliefs though.


3. What's the best way to actually change somebody's mind in a thread like this?

Literally? Well, I suppose that taking a dump into someone's hat moments before they put it on their head would cause the wearer to realize how much of a shithead they actually are.


4. Who are the definite non Trump voters pulling for in 2020? Any favorites in the field?

I'm actually waiting for the field to crystalize more. In fact, I don't think that the current field is set yet, especially on the Republican side. Bill Weld and John Kasich are both exploring challenges on the right. I like Kasich and on the Dem side no definitive favorite yet but any ticket must IMO include Harris if she doesn't capture the top spot.


5. Are there any of you who are torn between voting for the Dem, Trump, or a 3rd party candidate and if so who would make you vote each way?

Fuck Trump, he was a weak assed slimy sucker baiting, conman before fooling too many in the country with his BS, and he remains a weak, ball-less, low IQ, mass of shit now! (that's my nice version)

Politically, I am an independent who remains fiscally conservative and socially progressive. As an independent , I would love to see a country where this majority actually elects a 3rd party independent since the two party system needs a swift kick in the asshole!