|
GlyphGryph posted:I've got a question: Why is it that the Democratic party has completely written off the evangelical vote, and how was it that Carter was able to take it? Is it really all just Jerry Falwell's fault, and is there anything stopping a charismatic liberal evangelist from doing the same thing in reverse? Abortion, same sex marriage, and not allowing creationism in public schools have lost the evangelical block to the GOP for at least the current voting generation.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:26 |
|
|
ElrondHubbard posted:There have been numerous examples to the contrary during this thread, but setting them aside, doesn't that make it worse? There have been cases of pro-Sanders posters admitting that Bernie faces an uphill battle, but the moment that battle is quantified and deemed almost insurmountable by another poster, they become defensive and even aggressive. this is pretty simple: because its insanely binary and not at all reflective of the actual uncertainty of the future and the reason people loving hate punditry and people like fishmech.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:But it's not, and you professed your desire to have an old lady suck on your balls but not have it considered a fetish. That's fine, fetishism is different things to different people, but grannies are definitely off the beaten path. im gay
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
TEAYCHES posted:jill stein can suck my ballsack 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
Spatula City posted:I think if Jeb gets the nod and then loses, that'll probably be the tipping point. 2020 will be even more of a circus. Nah, he'll just be the latest person to fail conservatism. The increasing insanity of the Right isn't because they aren't getting their favored brand of lunatic elected. It's because the country is changing and it scares them. Demographics, technology, and social norms are all in a state of flux, and the change happening doesn't directly benefit them. Especially since the average GOP voter is an older white guy, and now he fears that the gay black nurse at his eventual assisted living facility is going to do things to him with atheist, Muslim iPads. GlyphGryph posted:I've got a question: Why is it that the Democratic party has completely written off the evangelical vote, and how was it that Carter was able to take it? Is it really all just Jerry Falwell's fault, and is there anything stopping a charismatic liberal evangelist from doing the same thing in reverse? Abortion and prosperity gospel aside, Carter just happened to be running for President as a devout Southern Baptist just as the religious right was drawn into politics from the self imposed wilderness of apathy. The cultivation of the religious right into a voting block was a long con by social and economic conservatives to convince people that Jesus wanted them to vote conservative. Prior to the late 70s evangelical christians, as a group, held no cohesive political ideology because they generally saw politics as of the world. Their focus, as their preacher was happy to point out, was god's kingdom, not man's. It took time and effort to mobilize them into a solid voting block and get them on the conservative side. Abortion, sexual promiscuity, changing social norms, and other such issues of the 60s and 70s were instrumental in this effort. Carter got their vote because they had not yet congealed into a solid voting block. They had come around to the idea that they should be politically involved, but had yet to become hard line single issue voters. Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and others, like Pat Dobson, were instrumental in turning the evangelical voter to the Republican Party. As such the state of the field right now does not encourage Democrats or liberals to raise up a christian army to besiege the polls. Liberal evangelicals are in highly limited supply, and the social issues of the party are at odds with Conservative evangelical trends. Perhaps in a decade or so there will be another change. Young evangelicals are supposedly turning away from the anger and prosperity con that the older evangelicals have eaten up. They care about global warming, don't see gays as hateful abominations that must be smitten with vigor, and are wondering what ever happened to the whole being your brother's keeper, helping the poor and sick, and loving your neighbor as yourself things that Jesus guy kept talking about. Or it could just be a temporary blip before they double down on the gospel of Supply Side Jesus. TEAYCHES posted:if this were d&d we could get into a long pedantic argument about what calling someone a fetishist means, refuting eachothers points paragraph by paragraph Are you physically required to mention how D&D or un-D&D things are every 3 posts or so?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Nah, he'll just be the latest person to fail conservatism. The increasing insanity of the Right isn't because they aren't getting their favored brand of lunatic elected. It's because the country is changing and it scares them. Demographics, technology, and social norms are all in a state of flux, and the change happening doesn't directly benefit them. Especially since the average GOP voter is an older white guy, and now he fears that the gay black nurse at his eventual assisted living facility is going to do things to him with atheist, Muslim iPads. same quote:Are you physically required to mention how D&D or un-D&D things are every 3 posts or so? thats an exaggeration imo
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Are you physically required to mention how D&D or un-D&D things are every 3 posts or so? It's one of the conditions of his parole. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MjFYHilo6Y
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
If this election has taught me anything, it's that Internet slapfights between candidates is endlessly more amusing than Internet slapfights between goons,
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
I read last week's NYT coverage at work last night, and one thing stood out from their article on Sanders: he's attracted a lot of young former libertarians. This a) is awesome and good, b) explains a lot about how insufferable Sanderistas are online. The article was about how he's attracted a lot of volunteer talent with technical skills that would cost other candidates big bucks. Certainly not just ex-libertarians, but relatively privileged young people who are enthusiastic about using their technical skills to participate politically in a meaningful way instead of just signing a cheque.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:I read last week's NYT coverage at work last night, and one thing stood out from their article on Sanders: he's attracted a lot of young former libertarians. he should get a blimp
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
I wonder what happened to the Google Ron Paul blimp. IIRC they bought it outright instead of renting or whatever sane people do if they need a blimp. It must be somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
NOTinuyasha posted:I wonder what happened to the Google Ron Paul blimp. IIRC they bought it outright instead of renting or whatever sane people do if they need a blimp. It must be somewhere. Hey, if you rent a blimp, that money's gone forever. If you buy a blimp, then you have a BLIMP. And if you get someone from your organization into the top administration of the Strategic Helium Reserve, then all the other pieces come together.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
No Rand, for the last time, you can't borrow daddy's blimp.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
Martin O'Malley will introduce a plan Monday to make buying or possessing a handgun illegal for anyone under 21.quote:Martin O’Malley is calling for a ban on teenage ownership of handguns in a new gun violence prevention plan that the former Maryland governor says will reduce gun deaths and draws a contrast on guns with Bernie Sanders.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
Spooky Forum Ghost posted:Martin O'Malley will introduce a plan Monday to make buying or possessing a handgun illegal for anyone under 21. This is a wonderful way to ensure the party will find a way to exclude him from any televised debates. I can already hear the wheezing howls of "WE LET PEOPLE FIGHT IN THE ARMY AT 18, ROBBLE RABBLE"
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:24
|
|
|
Spooky Forum Ghost posted:Martin O'Malley will introduce a plan Monday to make buying or possessing a handgun illegal for anyone under 21. O'Malley's gonna get buried before the first debate 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:This is a wonderful way to ensure the party will find a way to exclude him from any televised debates. I can already hear the wheezing howls of "WE LET PEOPLE FIGHT IN THE ARMY AT 18, ROBBLE RABBLE" Let's make that 21, too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:O'Malley's gonna get buried before the first debate Yeah, people will lose their drat minds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:33
|
|
|
Spooky Forum Ghost posted:Martin O'Malley will introduce a plan Monday to make buying or possessing a handgun illegal for anyone under 21. I thought a lot of states already did this? Rifles at 18, handguns at 21? Maybe that was just Colorado, I dunno, I dont gun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
Spooky Forum Ghost posted:Martin O'Malley will introduce a plan Monday to make buying or possessing a handgun illegal for anyone under 21. O'Malley been on the internet too long.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
Spooky Forum Ghost posted:Martin O'Malley will introduce a plan Monday to make buying or possessing a handgun illegal for anyone under 21. The guy in some thread who talked about the liberal tendency to propose totally irrelevant minor restrictions on guns that gets 0.5% of the country to nod their heads and pisses off 40%.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:This is a wonderful way to ensure the party will find a way to exclude him from any televised debates. I can already hear the wheezing howls of "WE LET PEOPLE FIGHT IN THE ARMY AT 18, ROBBLE RABBLE" To be fair it is incredibly stupid that apparently if you're and 18-20 year old O mailey supporter, he thinks you are smart enough to vote for him as President but won't understand proper handgun usage. The cut off for any responsibility given the way our society functions at the moment should at most be 20. 21 is too drat high. This is also the dumbest most useless restriction I have ever seen. SirKibbles fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:O'Malley's gonna get buried before the first debate You say that like he hasn't been buried already.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:This is a wonderful way to ensure the party will find a way to exclude him from any televised debates. I can already hear the wheezing howls of "WE LET PEOPLE FIGHT IN THE ARMY AT 18, ROBBLE RABBLE" You can join the military at 17 with permission from your parents. Not just sign up for ROTC or DE but actually ship to boot (and potentially graduate) while still legally a minor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Spooky Forum Ghost posted:Martin O'Malley will introduce a plan Monday to make buying or possessing a handgun illegal for anyone under 21. O'Malley's only running to pull Bernie further left
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 06:56
|
|
|
Something Else posted:O'Malley's only running to pull Bernie further left I don't know, this seems like a really dumb hill to die on/push for. Most states are already 'be 21 to buy a handgun' but there are family/gift loopholes. I just don't see the reason to make it an issue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:I read last week's NYT coverage at work last night, and one thing stood out from their article on Sanders: he's attracted a lot of young former libertarians. This is literally me. Also 100% of my Paulite Facebook friends post Sanders articles now. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:24
|
|
|
i'm glad libertarians figured out that you don't have rights if you are in poverty
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:25
|
|
|
 New ABC/Washington Post poll   
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
I remember having vague respect for Ron Paul as a teenager, but never supported him because I've always been economically leftist. Now, looking at his positions again... he's an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
I think it was because someone explained libertarian to me as "freedom, privacy, constitutionality, pacifism, pro gay marriage" but left off the part at the end where everything's privatized until American citizens die of starvation and easily treatable illnesses.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
a 40% change between bernie and hillary in six months. another half of that and bernie is ahead, assuming support for joe biden is split somewhat evenly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:38
|
|
|
Bernie Sanders is the left's Ron Paul - posted every other page
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:43
|
|
|
Scott Walker is going back to his roots: AP Exclusive: GOP's Walker proposes vast union restrictions quote:MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker on Monday will call for sweeping restrictions on organized labor in the U.S., seeking to replicate nationwide his successful effort as Wisconsin's governor to curb the power of unions. When you are polling at 2%, throw 100lbs of red meat at the base and see what happens. Montasque fucked around with this message at 07:55 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
Montasque posted:Scott Walker is going back to his roots: Can't do it Scott. It's Illegal!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 08:07
|
|
|
Rocks posted:Ben Carson has a movie about him???!!! Why Several pages back but I figured it was worth replying. Carson was a pretty big deal as a surgeon plus he had the whole "overcame obstacles to became successful" angle. The thing that made him famous was successfully separating twins who were conjoined at the head. quote:In 1987, Carson successfully separated conjoined twins, the Binder twins, who had been joined at the back of the head (craniopagus twins). The 70-member surgical team, led by Carson, worked for 22 hours. Both twins survived.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
Montasque posted:Scott Walker is going back to his roots: Yep. It's interesting to see which candidate thinks what Hail Mary pass will work. I'm disappointed there is no moon base/death star talk yet. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 08:27
|
|
|
Elon Musk wants to nuke Mars. Gingrich/Musk 2016
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 08:35
|
|
|
Nietzschean posted:Elon Musk wants to nuke Mars. Gingrich/Musk 2016 The Martians are prepared for that. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 09:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:26 |
|
|
ElrondHubbard posted:There have been numerous examples to the contrary during this thread, but setting them aside, doesn't that make it worse? There have been cases of pro-Sanders posters admitting that Bernie faces an uphill battle, but the moment that battle is quantified and deemed almost insurmountable by another poster, they become defensive and even aggressive. Political junkies and fatalists are making their arguments based on facts, statistics, and historical trends. They aren't doing it out of some conspiracy or irrational hatred of Bernie, they're just a reflection of how difficult the road ahead is for him as well as how far he's come. Even David Axelrod and the Sunday show crew we like to make fun of so much have stopped saying that Bernie has no chance from what I heard today. They said the Hillary is still the statistical favorite to win but that Bernie is a serious challenger, which is true IMO. The professional Very Serious People are now less serious than our own version I guess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 09:39
|
|
