In the words of George Costanza....you gotta have the big salad! 😀
The New Lounge
- Thread starter hpnole
- Start date
In the words of George Costanza....you gotta have the big salad! 😀
Lol why are you moving away from DeSantis? He's just a more extreme Rump, which judging from your responses here would be your ideal candidate.
As for Vivek, he's literally just a younger, richer DeSantis. Which means, hilariously stupid and an extremely poor choice to lead the country.
Imagine wanting to restrict adult Americans ability to vote based on something like age. Imagine wanting to restrict any demographics ability to vote. I wonder why specifically we should restrict the 18-24 age group?
Perhaps it is because that group is more educated and involved in politics and skews heavily blue? Nah. Couldnt be that. Republicans would never do something so underhanded.
Should we also restrict the 65+ age group? Cognitive decline is very real and is surely just as much of an impediment to making rational choices as being a young adult, right?
Perhaps it is because that group is more educated and involved in politics and skews heavily blue? Nah. Couldnt be that. Republicans would never do something so underhanded.
Should we also restrict the 65+ age group? Cognitive decline is very real and is surely just as much of an impediment to making rational choices as being a young adult, right?
The age to vote should be raised from 18 to somewhere around 22 or 24. They haven’t lived, and most are as clueless on our country as @eldritchorifice is.
No way should any restrictions be put on those 65+. They’ve earned their right to have a voice.
No way should any restrictions be put on those 65+. They’ve earned their right to have a voice.
What you said does not address why it is a hoax at all. You identified possible corruption and hypocrisy, neither of which impugns the bottom line that humans burn fossil fuels, greenhouse gases come from burning fossil fuels, and greenhouse gases are instrumental to creating climate change. Ergo, humans contribute to climate change.
Demonstrating one positive thing President Biden's administration has done means you are 100% wrong b/c you have gone all-in on the idea that the number is zero. As radical as you think I am (you don't know the half of it), even I can name positive things that President Trump did despite his being my personal choice as the worst or second-worst POTUS ever (tough call between him and President Buchanan): 1- Rx prices dropped; 2- opioid epidemic got attention; 3- prison reform; 4- no new wars. That you refuse to acknowledge one single solitary positive thing that President Biden has done (or that President Obama did, iirc) reveals you as a complete conformist to the decorum of President Trump, which you tried so hard to distance yourself from during his tenure, claiming your support was strictly about policy, policy, policy.
There isn't the first sign that you will engage as a rational human being, so why should I waste my time in the way you want me to waste my time, answering your loaded, rhetorical, bad faith questions about anything good President Biden has done?
"How many politicians who push climate change initiatives that cripple the economy and hinder travel and famous people have to prove to be hypocrites with their private jets, million dollar yachts and gas guzzling SUVs in order for you to question their motivations?"
It's a pretty bad look, and yet...
Dismissing someone's point because they're an imperfect messenger, including speciously hypocritical, is the very definition of an ad hominem attack.
Yikes. I could possibly get on board with that regarding mandatory retirement (provided we guarantee healthcare, housing, reasonable sustenance), but not voting. Just like "innocent until proven guilty" means it is better for guilty people to go free than for innocent people to be jailed, it is better that that some compromised votes count than that any legitimate votes don't. In each scenario, the former is not acceptable, but any solution that endangers the latter is far, far, far less acceptable.
Uh, just because someone hasn't lived doesn't mean they are unaware of what policies could positively impact our country. And again, being 65+ and potentially with severe cognitive decline would make one just as clueless as being 18 would.
And I'd argue that those who have managed to make it 18 have earned the right to have a voice as well. Fwiw I'm not in favor of making it harder for any demographic to be able to vote. If you have the ability to vote young you're more likely to be active in democracy itself. If you can vote when you're old you might actually use your vote to show you somewhat care about the next generation.
Give me voter ID and stop the ballot harvesting and I’ll be happy.
The people who scream the loudest don't even believe that climate change can be controlled by humans. They are laughing at us.What you said does not address why it is a hoax at all. You identified possible corruption and hypocrisy, neither of which impugns the bottom line that humans burn fossil fuels, greenhouse gases come from burning fossil fuels, and greenhouse gases are instrumental to creating climate change. Ergo, humans contribute to climate change.
Demonstrating one positive thing President Biden's administration has done means you are 100% wrong b/c you have gone all-in on the idea that the number is zero. As radical as you think I am (you don't know the half of it), even I can name positive things that President Trump did despite his being my personal choice as the worst or second-worst POTUS ever (tough call between him and President Buchanan): 1- Rx prices dropped; 2- opioid epidemic got attention; 3- prison reform; 4- no new wars. That you refuse to acknowledge one single solitary positive thing that President Biden has done (or that President Obama did, iirc) reveals you as a complete conformist to the decorum of President Trump, which you tried so hard to distance yourself from during his tenure, claiming your support was strictly about policy, policy, policy.
There isn't the first sign that you will engage as a rational human being, so why should I waste my time in the way you want me to waste my time, answering your loaded, rhetorical, bad faith questions about anything good President Biden has done?
"How many politicians who push climate change initiatives that cripple the economy and hinder travel and famous people have to prove to be hypocrites with their private jets, million dollar yachts and gas guzzling SUVs in order for you to question their motivations?"
It's a pretty bad look, and yet...
Dismissing someone's point because they're an imperfect messenger, including speciously hypocritical, is the very definition of an ad hominem attack.
TW #1: The word "cis"
TW #2: Unrepentantly liberal cis woman with a nose ring who is not in the kitchen
Around the 22:30 mark: "There are working class folks in both parties who have historically benefitted from union membership, and who have understood the power that comes from labor organizing. And while the solutions that Democrats and Republicans believe in are drastically different... one thing that [stands] out as a major unifying force is that we all -- Democrats and Republicans, Black and white -- feel incredibly taken advantage of and that despite all of our hard work, we can't get ahead. And meanwhile we watch millionaires and billionaires and government and big business make decisions that are contrary to our well-being in every single way, from the air we breathe to the use of the taxes being taken from our paychecks. We watch as our representatives play the stock market and our judges fly in private jets and billionaires literally ****-off to space while our dollar is able to buy less and less at the grocery store. When you step back and look at it as a whole, the answer is pretty clear: We have more common interest than I think either side wants to admit. And organizing our labor and equalizing the power between laborers and big business could make many of those common interests come to fruition, and maybe even heal some of the brokenness we're experiencing en mass in this country. But it would take a major ego check from both sides. It would require Democrats to stop demonizing Republicans gay-hating, gun-slinging, uneducated hillbillies and recognize the humanity and common interests in working-class Republicans in our shared struggles. It would take Republicans setting aside their "everyone for themselves" mentality and recognizing that when one group of laborers wins, we all win. It would require them to see the humanity in Democrats -- yes, even the trans ones and the Black ones. Our division only hurts us in the long run. The only people who win while we're all down here duking it out over culture wars and wedge issues are the 1%, who sit atop their pile of money and do not give a *** about us. That is, until we start organizing... Interacting with the enemy on an even playing field and working toward a common goal forces you to see that they're just humans, trying to exist in the world in the way that makes the most sense to them."
TW #2: Unrepentantly liberal cis woman with a nose ring who is not in the kitchen
Around the 22:30 mark: "There are working class folks in both parties who have historically benefitted from union membership, and who have understood the power that comes from labor organizing. And while the solutions that Democrats and Republicans believe in are drastically different... one thing that [stands] out as a major unifying force is that we all -- Democrats and Republicans, Black and white -- feel incredibly taken advantage of and that despite all of our hard work, we can't get ahead. And meanwhile we watch millionaires and billionaires and government and big business make decisions that are contrary to our well-being in every single way, from the air we breathe to the use of the taxes being taken from our paychecks. We watch as our representatives play the stock market and our judges fly in private jets and billionaires literally ****-off to space while our dollar is able to buy less and less at the grocery store. When you step back and look at it as a whole, the answer is pretty clear: We have more common interest than I think either side wants to admit. And organizing our labor and equalizing the power between laborers and big business could make many of those common interests come to fruition, and maybe even heal some of the brokenness we're experiencing en mass in this country. But it would take a major ego check from both sides. It would require Democrats to stop demonizing Republicans gay-hating, gun-slinging, uneducated hillbillies and recognize the humanity and common interests in working-class Republicans in our shared struggles. It would take Republicans setting aside their "everyone for themselves" mentality and recognizing that when one group of laborers wins, we all win. It would require them to see the humanity in Democrats -- yes, even the trans ones and the Black ones. Our division only hurts us in the long run. The only people who win while we're all down here duking it out over culture wars and wedge issues are the 1%, who sit atop their pile of money and do not give a *** about us. That is, until we start organizing... Interacting with the enemy on an even playing field and working toward a common goal forces you to see that they're just humans, trying to exist in the world in the way that makes the most sense to them."
Little difference from a poll tax or literacy test, which might sound good in theory, but which were absolutely applied with prejudice and used as tools to oppress, as SCOTUS rightly determined 60ish years ago. Now that SCOTUS has rolled back the Voting Rights Act, states have acted quickly to suppress the vote among populations that don't historically support the majority party in those states.
Why should the government keep the poor from prosperity? Is the question you should ask.Because why should the poor have any voice at all?
You saying that last sentence screams it’s the right choice. You can’t even answer basic clinical and/or biology questions.
Okay stop, your virtue signaling doesn’t work here. You believe in big government which means more dependence aka more economically enslaved people.Because why should the poor have any voice at all?
You just suggested a return to banning non-property owners from voting. If you think the power to lift the poor should be left to the non-poor, you are deifying wealth -- idolatry -- and favoring a monarchy based on money. It's unAmerican and blasphemous.
It’s because it can’t. You really believe our actions overrule the Sun? That’s some ignorance right there.
TW: Black woman talking about her life experience
"...[H]ow to create a single story[:] show a people as one thing, as only one thing, over and over again, and that is what they become.
It is impossible to talk about the single story without talking about power... Like our economic and political worlds, stories too are defined by ... [h]ow they are told, who tells them, when they're told, how many stories are told... [They] are really dependent on power.
Power is the ability not just to tell the story of another person, but to make it the definitive story of that person...
...The consequence of the single story is this: It robs people of dignity. It makes our recognition of our equal humanity difficult. It emphasizes how we are different rather than how we are similar."
As I quoted from the prior video I posted, "We have more common interest than... either side wants to admit... Democrats [need to] stop demonizing Republicans [and Republicans need] to see the humanity in Democrats... Interacting with the enemy on an even playing field and working toward a common goal forces you to see that they're just humans, trying to exist in the world in the way that makes the most sense to them."
"...[H]ow to create a single story[:] show a people as one thing, as only one thing, over and over again, and that is what they become.
It is impossible to talk about the single story without talking about power... Like our economic and political worlds, stories too are defined by ... [h]ow they are told, who tells them, when they're told, how many stories are told... [They] are really dependent on power.
Power is the ability not just to tell the story of another person, but to make it the definitive story of that person...
...The consequence of the single story is this: It robs people of dignity. It makes our recognition of our equal humanity difficult. It emphasizes how we are different rather than how we are similar."
As I quoted from the prior video I posted, "We have more common interest than... either side wants to admit... Democrats [need to] stop demonizing Republicans [and Republicans need] to see the humanity in Democrats... Interacting with the enemy on an even playing field and working toward a common goal forces you to see that they're just humans, trying to exist in the world in the way that makes the most sense to them."
People have to take drivers ed before they can get a license and a person can do just as much damage at the voting booth as on the streets . If voters had to take a literacy or civics test, the Dems most loyal constituencies would be gutted
People who have something to lose will vote based on logic, not feelings. We have evolved into a nation of whiney brats who focus on unimportant, social nonsense. Just like the government planned. You always talk about the disenfranchised being on the losing end but you never realize that it is democratic policies that keep them from rising out of their holes. Take government out of financial decisions and put it in the hands of the working man and it will work itself out. But instead they give crumbs the the bottom of society and give them just enough that they will feel like the government is taking care of them, but not enough to make it where they can take care of themselves.
1. Driving isn't a right.
2. The reason such "common sense" measures aren't allowed is because they are inevitably applied unfairly. SCOTUS has confirmed this repeatedly.
3. I think you'd be surprised at how both major parties' base groups would be gutted.
If I have 18 minutes to watch this later, I will. Going by your quote and what you posted, I don’t take any issues with the message. I am not sure of the context until I hear her message, but I am not sure that, even though I respect the POV, I am not sure I am on the same page as to who creates the story.
Now you want to control the methodology through which people are allowed to decide how to vote?
Is property the only thing anyone has to lose?
Put control in the hands of "the working man"? Except when it comes to unions, right? And "the working man" who doesn't own property? And "the working man" who can't pass a literacy or civics test?
You're willing to destroy foundational democratic principles in favor of an oligarchy because you disagree w/ the policies of the Democratic Party. That's pathetic, and again, inherently anti-American.
I am committed to raising the critical thinking of all voters and opposing the suppression of any voters. That absolutely includes the people who are unlikely to ever vote the same way I do.
Well, that's a start. I am far more aware of how the first video is likely to fall flat with most posters here than how the second one might.
Rather than arguing over who is creating the story, I think we're more likely to find common ground around the idea that people should have primary control over their own story and that people on both sides feel encroachment upon that control.
It's not by accident that I posted these videos together. I think the message you seem open to from the second one is present in the first, too, despite the more abrasive delivery and narrator.
Uneducated and emotionally deranged people are destroying our country because they have been programmed to vote based on feelings. I know you don't believe that indoctrination is real, but it is playing out right in front of our eyes. That's why I think voting restrictions are necessary. You can call it un-American all you want.Now you want to control the methodology through which people are allowed to decide how to vote?
Is property the only thing anyone has to lose?
Put control in the hands of "the working man"? Except when it comes to unions, right? And "the working man" who doesn't own property? And "the working man" who can't pass a literacy or civics test?
You're willing to destroy foundational democratic principles in favor of an oligarchy because you disagree w/ the policies of the Democratic Party. That's pathetic, and again, inherently anti-American.
I’m not sure when exactly, but imagine a burner on a stove that the temperature very slowly gets turned up. That’s what the people that control the media have been doing to us. Over decades.
Donald Trump got elected because he made people aware of how corrupt DC was. I’m one of those.
And I’ll vote for him again. When both parties in DC oppose him, that tells me all I need to know.
They know that he knows their hands are all in the cookie jar.
Donald Trump got elected because he made people aware of how corrupt DC was. I’m one of those.
And I’ll vote for him again. When both parties in DC oppose him, that tells me all I need to know.
They know that he knows their hands are all in the cookie jar.
Which people?
Sure, indoctrination is real. I bet we see it in different places. I bet neither of us is 100% wrong.
If we care about the quality of voters, we bear some responsibility for improving the voting pool, raising or/and educating the next generation. Everyone approves of some kind of teaching about civics, history, critical thinking, health/PE, and character traits like "responsibility," "integrity," "respect," "courage." (Not comprehensive lists! lol) I don't support improvement through imposed subtraction.
The moment you need to call her “black”…..all while being a suburban Caucasian SJW…..🤦🏽♂️
