Herschel Walker channeling his inner Travis Henry

#926
#926
RockyTop85 said:
“He facilitated a murder. So what, he’s still a Republican isn’t be?” 😂

Add William of Attainder to the list of politics > murder.
Click to expand...

So what

He payed for it with his own earned money and Warnok votes to spend our money for millions of abortions worldwide.

He gone
 
#927
#927
DonjoVol said:
You do realize there are third party and independent candidates you can vote for right?
Click to expand...
Sure ... but voting for candidates who have no chance of winning the election, seems like a waste of time to me. Voting for Democrats, as a resident of Knoxville, Tennessee, is a stretch in itself.

I have voted for a Republican once. That was Bob Corker for Senate in 2006. Even then, it was only because of how much I disliked his opponent - Harold Ford Jr. ... and Ford's crazy, corrupt family.
 
#928
#928
Caculator said:
So what

He payed for it with his own earned money and Warnok votes to spend our money for millions of abortions worldwide.

He gone
Click to expand...
^^^ This is the epitome of tribalism. ^^^

Literally any form of conduct can be rationalized, as long as it was done by a member of your party, instead of the opposition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ashevolle
#929
#929
Caculator said:
So what

He payed for it with his own earned money and Warnok votes to spend our money for millions of abortions worldwide.

He gone
Click to expand...

No problems, on my end. If you’re good with being laughed at for calling it murder, then I’m good with doing some of the laughing.
 
#930
#930
BowlBrother85 said:
Sure ... but voting for candidates who have no chance of winning the election, seems like a waste of time to me. Voting for Democrats, as a resident of Knoxville, Tennessee, is a stretch in itself.

I have voted for a Republican once. That was Bob Corker for Senate in 2006. Even then, it was only because of how much I disliked his opponent - Harold Ford Jr. ... and Ford's crazy, corrupt family.
Click to expand...
So instead of voting for something/someone who could change our trajectory you choose to only support a politician who is endorsed by a major party machine? That's tribalism like you describe above and didn't seem to like in others
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and RockyTop85
#931
#931
BowlBrother85 said:
^^^ This is the epitome of tribalism. ^^^

Literally any form of conduct can be rationalized, as long as it was done by a member of your party, instead of the opposition.
Click to expand...
I hate to inform you, but every other Republican principle already has been.
 
#932
#932
BowlBrother85 said:
^^^ This is the epitome of tribalism. ^^^

Literally any form of conduct can be rationalized, as long as it was done by a member of your party, instead of the opposition.
Click to expand...
you quoted that from your mirror
 
#933
#933
RockyTop85 said:
No problems, on my end. If you’re good with being laughed at for calling it murder, then I’m good with doing some of the laughing.
Click to expand...
only a communist can trivialize murder and get a good laugh
 
#936
#936
utvolpj said:
So instead of voting for something/someone who could change our trajectory you choose to only support a politician who is endorsed by a major party machine? That's tribalism like you describe above and didn't seem to like in others
Click to expand...
I consider only casting votes among the viable choice of candidates to be a practical application. In principle, your argument is admirable. In reality, that "someone who could change our trajectory", isn't going to get a chance to change anything, if they are polling below 10% the day before the election, which is normally the case with independent/third party candidates.
 
#937
#937
BowlBrother85 said:
I consider only casting votes among the viable choice of candidates to be a practical application. In principle, your argument is admirable. In reality, that "someone who could change our trajectory", isn't going to get a chance to change anything, if they are polling below 10% the day before the election, which is normally the case with independent/third party candidates.
Click to expand...
You're told who the viable candidates are by the DC machines. That's not being practical, it's tribalism
 
#939
#939
utvolpj said:
You're told who the viable candidates are by the DC machines. That's not being practical, it's tribalism
Click to expand...
We know who the viable candidates are through pollsters. I disagree with your assessment that they are all "DC machines." If they were ever wrong, and an independent/third party candidate finished with at least 20% of the popular vote in a statewide election, you would have a point ... but that never happens. It's practical to cast a vote among the candidates who have a realistic chance of winning the election.
 
#940
#940
BowlBrother85 said:
We know who the viable candidates are through pollsters. I disagree with your assessment that they are all "DC machines." If they were ever wrong, and an independent/third party candidate finished with at least 20% of the popular vote in a statewide election, you would have a point ... but that never happens. It's practical to cast a vote among the candidates who have a realistic chance of winning the election.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The reason a good 3rd party candidate cannot gain traction is because of this type of thinking. If enough people shunned the garbage the Rs and Ds force down our throats things would change.
 
#941
#941
BowlBrother85 said:
We know who the viable candidates are through pollsters. I disagree with your assessment that they are all "DC machines." If they were ever wrong, and an independent/third party candidate finished with at least 20% of the popular vote in a statewide election, you would have a point ... but that never happens. It's practical to cast a vote among the candidates who have a realistic chance of winning the election.
Click to expand...
Pollsters don't select the candidates the parties do.

It doesn't happen because the electorate is too tied up in being in the winning team that they ignore how those candidates got there. Your last sentence is a perfect example of the brainwashing they've done. You're convinced that the only proper vote is for one of the approved candidates. It's an absurd way of voting since it very often is in conflict with the desired outcomes. But hey, at least you get to brag to your friends that your team won (even though ultimately we all lose)

3rd parties are also at a huge disadvantage because election rules are set by the 2 parties
 
#943
#943
BowlBrother85 said:
There's the rub. A Democrat won't agree with you, when you say that Biden's character is worse than Trump's.
Click to expand...
So Democrats tolerate decades of direct racism in their elected President? Tell me again about morals when voting.
 
#944
#944
#947
#947
hog88 said:
I disagree. The reason a good 3rd party candidate cannot gain traction is because of this type of thinking. If enough people shunned the garbage the Rs and Ds force down our throats things would change.
Click to expand...
If ... If ... If ... If ...
 
#948
#948
BowlBrother85 said:
In the choice between Trump and Biden? We were stuck with "decades of direct racism" either way.
Click to expand...
How so? The left/media/Sharpton never classified Trump as a racist until he got the forgotten man vote and became a contender. But politely allowed Biden to keep moving forward since 1972. So again, tell me about morals in voting.
 
#950
#950
evillawyer said:
Let me know when Herschel apologizes for paying for the abortion and lying about so much.

Biden apologizes for touting past work with segregationist senators
Biden played key role in pushing US to take hardline stances on crime in 1990s, and now he's apologizing as 2020 looms
Click to expand...
He apologized to get elected, he didn’t apologize because he felt he was wrong. 30 years after the fact. This would have carried more sincerity had he not been up for pandering votes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top