Recruiting Forum Off Topic Thread III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Which I will continue to do as the two parties send out complete human trash as choices. You can say I am throwing my vote away and I can say you are destroying our country by voting for sheer ineptitude.

I'm not knocking you for voting 3rd party. As I noted, I have done the same. "Throw away" vote is just a political term for voting 3rd party and was not meant as a shot at you. I didn't create the term.

But out of curiosity, what is Trump doing as president that is "destroying our country"? From my POV, the leadership we had from Jan'93 through Jan'17 were 3 excellent examples of sheer ineptitude destroying our country, so to me revitalizing the economy was a reverse of the ineptitude we saw from the Clinton/Bush/Obama disasters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangesoda
If this is true, then we have no control over it, right? We can't decide who runs. We can only control how long try are in it and the system that is around them. If we change the system, then maybe those inclined to have negative intentions will be less likely to run.

I'm not sure what kind of people these are though. I've only met local politicians and they are a diferent breed.
I agree broadly that a system change is necessary, but the kind of changes I'd like to see are not practical and will never be pursued.
 
Name recognition trumps all. It is crazy.

During my lifetime:

Reagan
Reagan
Bush
Clinton
Clinton
Bush
Bush
Obama
Obama
Trump

Out of all these, Obama in 2008 was probably the only one not well known nationally.

The founding fathers assumed that the voting base would be well informed and intelligent. That was over two hundred years ago, now it's a two party popularity contest where yes name-recognition wins out because the voting base is I hate to say it, mostly idiots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gainesvol82
The founding fathers assumed that the voting base would be well informed and intelligent. That was over two hundred years ago, now it's a two party popularity contest where yes name-recognition wins out because the voting base is I hate to say it, mostly idiots.
They also knew that the mass voting public was prone to irrationality and intentionally set it up so only the House of Representatives was directly elected -- the People's House, as it were. My preference would be to repeal the 17th Amendment and also remove direct election of the president. Direct election of the president encourages demagoguery and other assorted nonsense that is foundational to many of the problems we have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bignewt
You're way over-analyzing it. Biden is the likely challenger to Trump in November, so if someone says they will not vote for Trump, the natural assumption would be they will vote for Biden, unless, of course, they plan to throw away their vote on a 3rd party candidate, which admittedly I have done a couple of times (Perot '92 and Paul '08).
He wasn't even talking about the election. It was merely a point about Trump and nothing else.


If the same conversation was about lunch meats, it would go like this:

You said "bologna is good".
He said, "no, bologna is made of frankenmeat".
Then you said, "well turkey sucks".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Sun and bignewt
All politicians lie and cheat so that is an unusual argument. I am really tired of these type debates, my lying cheating politician is better than your lying cheating politician. When we finally figure out that its them against us things will begin to change. There is only 1 side, our side.

i really do understand the sentiment, but its simply not true that all politicians lie and cheat and steal in the same orders of magnitude or in ways that affect the same numbers of people. that argument is the easiest way to cease to be alarmed by any of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: titansvolsfaninga
All politicians lie and cheat so that is an unusual argument. I am really tired of these type debates, my lying cheating politician is better than your lying cheating politician. When we finally figure out that its them against us things will begin to change. There is only 1 side, our side.
Sociopaths probably take up a much larger percentage of all leadership positions than we'd like to acknowledge.

The Gervais Principle at work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gainesvol82
i really do understand the sentiment, but its simply not true that all politicians lie and cheat and steal in the same orders of magnitude or in ways that affect the same numbers of people. that argument is the easiest way to cease to be alarmed by any of it.

If a candidate says what you want to hear you just accept their lies easier than the opposition candidate that says the opposite. We don't need any lying about anything. Hold them accountable for everything.They are sent to Washington to represent their constituents not lie to them.
 
If a candidate says what you want to hear you just accept their lies easier than the opposition candidate that says the opposite. We don't need any lying about anything. Hold them accountable for everything.They are sent to Washington to represent their constituents not lie to them.

yes, that's 100% the way it should be, but its not. to make my point, i'll use a handful of republicans to illustrate that its not partisan bickering to be alarmed by trumps lying; ted cruz and marco rubio do not lie or mislead to the extent that donald trump does. john kasich doesn't. matt gaetz (while being a bit of a bonehead) is not as inherently dishonest as the president. nor do any of their lies impact as many americans as the president's. most republicans are relatively moral, honest people. i disagree with most of their politics, but i don't think they're repugnant humans. trumps lying, narcissism, and selfishness exceed all of them. i believe he is uniquely dishonest.
 
He wasn't even talking about the election. It was merely a point about Trump and nothing else.


If the same conversation was about lunch meats, it would go like this:

You said "bologna is good".
He said, "no, bologna is made of frankenmeat".
Then you said, "well turkey sucks".

Maybe you should have paid closer attention. I jokingly put up an image from Clockwork Orange of Malcolm McDowell being brainwashed and I put up a header saying "You will vote for Trump...you will vote for trump...etc.) and newt responded with something along the lines of there was no way he would ever vote for Trump, so I responded to the effect that Biden was a terrible alternative.

So your bologna comment was just that.
 
yes, that's 100% the way it should be, but its not. to make my point, i'll use a handful of republicans to illustrate that its not partisan bickering to be alarmed by trumps lying; ted cruz and marco rubio do not lie or mislead to the extent that donald trump does. john kasich doesn't. matt gaetz (while being a bit of a bonehead) is not as inherently dishonest as the president. nor do any of their lies impact as many americans as the president's. most republicans are relatively moral, honest people. i disagree with most of their politics, but i don't think they're repugnant humans. trumps lying, narcissism, and selfishness exceed all of them. i believe he is uniquely dishonest.

The only difference in those guys and Trump is, they are not president. Its not possible for an honest man to become president at this moment in time. We had 2 flawed candidates last time and we will get 2 more this time.
 
Maybe you should have paid closer attention. I jokingly put up an image from Clockwork Orange of Malcolm McDowell being brainwashed and I put up a header saying "You will vote for Trump...you will vote for trump...etc.) and newt responded with something along the lines of there was no way he would ever vote for Trump, so I responded to the effect that Biden was a terrible alternative.

So your bologna comment was just that.
May want to check your records. The post he responded to and I was mentioning was from yesterday:
Screenshot_20200330-170019.jpg

You posted the CO gif today:
Screenshot_20200330-170119.jpg

I wasn't even referencing the later posts. Just how non-sequitur your Biden post was when Newt was merely making a point on Trump.


But bologna is gross, just to have my opinion on record.
 
what im trying to tell you is that his business prowess is built on lying to people and cheating, well beyond the scope of normal "business is business". i don't care if you like him or not, i'm telling you your premise is fundamentally challenged.
That's your opinion. Liberal hit pieces are not evidence. I trust the media about as far as I can throw them.

You hate him. I get it. People tend to hate the opposition, I get it. They look for every fault they can find. It's normal human behavior.

Everything he's done has been legal or he would have had charges filed against him. If he hasn't paid a bill, there's a system that allows for legal recourse. If a court finds that he s owes someone then they can force him to pay. There is a system in place.

Trying to argue that he's not a good businessman is ludicrous. Thar man has built an empire that employees 100s of thousands of people.
 
May want to check your records. The post he responded to and I was mentioning was from yesterday:
View attachment 269100

You posted the CO gif today:
View attachment 269101

I wasn't even referencing the later posts. Just how non-sequitur your Biden post was when Newt was merely making a point on Trump.


But bologna is gross, just to have my opinion on record.

Still not sure of your original point. I made a comment to gainesvillevol that I don't like either party or the candidates they give us, so had voted for the businessman who came from outside DC. Newt responded about the businesssman running his business into the ground, but based on the conversations on here the last couple of days it seemed clear newt isn't a fan of Trump as president, so I assumed he won't be voting for him in November, and the logical option would be Biden. So I took exception to this post -

Devo182 said:
Been saying this for awhile...here on VN if you take a dig at the color yellow, then people will jump to you loving green. Almost impossible to make a particular statement without someone taking it tangentially and blowing it up into something that was never said. It's amazing.

Which as I said earlier, is grossly over analyzing what was said. In a 2-party system if someone doesn't like one candidate the logical assumption is that if they vote, they will vote for the candidate of the other major party. Making it about any more than that is just looking for something to get your feathers ruffled about.
 
That's your opinion. Liberal hit pieces are not evidence. I trust the media about as far as I can throw them.

You hate him. I get it. People tend to hate the opposition, I get it. They look for every fault they can find. It's normal human behavior.

Everything he's done has been legal or he would have had charges filed against him. If he hasn't paid a bill, there's a system that allows for legal recourse. If a court finds that he s owes someone then they can force him to pay. There is a system in place.

Trying to argue that he's not a good businessman is ludicrous. Thar man has built an empire that employees 100s of thousands of people.
Yeah the system is hard on the wealthy they always get what they deserve!
 
that's just not true, man. not everyone is like trump.

You mean like when Trump said we could keep our doctor of 30 years, out right lie, when he said our monthly costs for health insurance will go down, it actually doubled with less coverage. Trump is the devil, no wait, those lies are ok. I get so mixed up!
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top