|
Sorry for exercising my right to vote for someone other than one of the dirtiest people in politics?
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:44 |
|
|
Lessail posted:So you don't have anything to back that up with? Care to back up the DNC making GBS threads on the youth? Because your dumb rear end posts already prove my point exactly. Bonus round, this poo poo: Cugel the Clever posted:It's an integrity issue. People look at Bernie Sanders' record and see a relatively consistent, if somewhat lackluster adherence to a set of principals whose relevance is greater than ever. Clinton, on the other hand, has so obviously has twisted and turn whichever way voter opinion has taken her that her assertion that she stands for the same policies is fundamentally untrustworthy, to say nothing of the oceans of corporate money she bathes in. edit: oooo double bonus round: Cugel the Clever posted:Ha, excuse me for not realizing you weren't defining 'not vote' normally, rather than 'not vote for Clinton'. I'm not voting for Clinton, regardless. Sorry that the only responses I get on my criticism of her resemble that of A Winner is Jew, above. It boggles the mind how party hacks will handwave such blatant corruption as 'just the way the system works'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Ha, excuse me for not realizing you weren't defining 'not vote' normally, rather than 'not vote for Clinton'. I'm not voting for Clinton, regardless. Sorry that the only responses I get on my criticism of her resemble that of A Winner is Jew, above. It boggles the mind how party hacks will handwave such blatant corruption as 'just the way the system works'. Voting for the candidate who won the primary isn't corruption. Sorry about your meme preference though? Cugel the Clever posted:Sorry for exercising my right to vote for someone other than one of the dirtiest people in politics? You don't have a right to be grossly incorrect, dude.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
@Jarmak: Seriously. Do you have a factual objection to the portrayal of history by that quote?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Ha, excuse me for not realizing you weren't defining 'not vote' normally, rather than 'not vote for Clinton'. I'm not voting for Clinton, regardless. Sorry that the only responses I get on my criticism of her resemble that of A Winner is Jew, above. It boggles the mind how party hacks will handwave such blatant corruption as 'just the way the system works'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Ha, excuse me for not realizing you weren't defining 'not vote' normally, rather than 'not vote for Clinton'. I'm not voting for Clinton, regardless. Sorry that the only responses I get on my criticism of her resemble that of A Winner is Jew, above. It boggles the mind how party hacks will handwave such blatant corruption as 'just the way the system works'. This is beautiful. Kaffee: Did you order the Code Red? Col. Jessep: I did the job I... Kaffee: *Did you order the Code Red?* Col. Jessep: *You're Goddamn right I did! Boon fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Mar 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Why is a politician changing their stances on political issues to better reflect the attitudes of their constituents considered by so many to be a bad thing? Isn't that like exactly what they're supposed to do? I thought republicans were the ones who voted for rigid ideologues.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Why is a politician changing their stances on political issues to better reflect the attitudes of their constituents considered by so many to be a bad thing? Isn't that like exactly what they're supposed to do?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Ha, excuse me for not realizing you weren't defining 'not vote' normally, rather than 'not vote for Clinton'. I'm not voting for Clinton, regardless. Sorry that the only responses I get on my criticism of her resemble that of A Winner is Jew, above. It boggles the mind how party hacks will handwave such blatant corruption as 'just the way the system works'. This is why we rightfully shouldn't give a gently caress about the youth vote, besides the fact that this correctly shows how they are completely unreliable unless they get literally everything they want (and then still), I'd also rather not have our countries leadership decided by people who base their vote for president on "well gently caress you dad". TheDeadlyShoe posted:@Jarmak: Seriously. Do you have a factual objection to the portrayal of history by that quote? what?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Care to back up the DNC making GBS threads on the youth? Because your dumb rear end posts already prove my point exactly. Where did I talk about the DNC? Nice to see you don't have anything to back up your claims, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Seriously quit bitching about pandering and get out and vote and get other people your age to actually loving vote. It's like herding god drat cats. The reason there's a gently caress the young vote attitude is because young people are fickle and lazy and just don't vote. This has been true pretty much forever and will pretty much always be. Chomp8645 posted:You don't see how this sounds a hell of a lot like a self fulfilling prophecy? Boon posted:I'm not exactly old (29), but I'm not college age anymore either. In my experience, it's not a matter of being lazy, but rather disinterested. It's hard for a young person to conceptualize how these overarching ideas directly impact them or their future because, to be perfectly honest, the worldview is so narrow. They just don't have the world experience or are only beginning to understand the world. Spatula City posted:This is a failure of our education system. School is utterly failing to teach children civic engagement. I'm 25, and have had the same experience back at college. Just about NO ONE in high school stressed the importance of voting. No teacher talked about current events in politics, nobody tried to make it interesting to hook us. People talk about voting being this civic duty and expect it to be innate that people will vote, instead of looking at it as a taught and learned value of the man made system of politics. fishmech posted:[...]gently caress you if you're a youth who refuses to vote, it's that simple.[...] A Winner is Jew posted:Why shouldn't the democratic party poo poo on the youth vote though? Jarmak posted:No it doesn't, since the youth vote considers not getting everything they want to be the same as getting poo poo on. fishmech posted:[...]you people are just being whiny pricks, upset that people rightfully call you out on refusing to vote.[...] Jarmak posted:Then you're a good example of why we shouldn't be upset the youth isn't voting. Ho. Lee. Schitt. Can we put away the acid vials and wipe the spittle from our mouths yet? This is getting ridiculous, folks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Everytime I think the words "President Trump", I imagine them being written on one of these.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Lessail posted:Where did I talk about the DNC? Nice to see you don't have anything to back up your claims, though. he says, in response to me posting a bunch of quotes that back up my claims
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:he says, in response to me posting a bunch of quotes that back up my claims Where did I talk about the DNC? And you didn't. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Rodenthar Drothman posted:First off: Can you stop whining and start voting? You can pretend all you want that people aren't voting because no one's trying to get them to vote, but I have actively worked to get people registered and voting each election cycle, and most of them still don't do it!
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Voting for the candidate who won the primary isn't corruption. Sorry about your meme preference though?  Mr. Wookums posted:I too will vote for whoever has an R next to their name in the general to spite people who are not as pure as us, fellow B.Bro.  Jarmak posted:This is why we rightfully shouldn't give a gently caress about the youth vote, besides the fact that this correctly shows how they are completely unreliable unless they get literally everything they want
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Why is a politician changing their stances on political issues to better reflect the attitudes of their constituents considered by so many to be a bad thing? Isn't that like exactly what they're supposed to do? The question is: What motivates a politician who changes with the wind? Neither greed nor untempered ambition inspires a lot of trust. Anyone running for President is going to be ambitious. And anyone who survives in politics for decades is going to end up changing their stances. But there are degrees of both, and its fair when comparing Sanders to Clinton to award points to Sanders for consistency and for knowing he's actually for things because he believes in them. @Jarmak You posted this: quote:It's an integrity issue. People look at Bernie Sanders' record and see a relatively consistent, if somewhat lackluster adherence to a set of principals whose relevance is greater than ever. Clinton, on the other hand, has so obviously has twisted and turn whichever way voter opinion has taken her that her assertion that she stands for the same policies is fundamentally untrustworthy, to say nothing of the oceans of corporate money she bathes in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:@Jarmak: Seriously. Do you have a factual objection to the portrayal of history by that quote? Do you have a factual objection to me calling you a loving geek for this post
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:As if I'm under an obligation to vote for whoever won the Democratic primary Oh you're going to vote third party 
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:As if I'm under an obligation to vote for whoever won the Democratic primary Ok, if you love Trump so much go ahead and do it!
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:I'm sorry that asking for a candidate not best buddies with Wall Street is too purist for you? How about this, rather than get in an uproar over my lack of reverence for your sacred cow, persuade me that the Clintons' relationship with monied interests is tolerable. You shouldn't need a reason other than George W. Bush. My whole family supported Nader in 2000 and all we were left with is shame, regret, and more shame.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Ha, excuse me for not realizing you weren't defining 'not vote' normally, rather than 'not vote for Clinton'. I'm not voting for Clinton, regardless. Sorry that the only responses I get on my criticism of her resemble that of A Winner is Jew, above. It boggles the mind how party hacks will handwave such blatant corruption as 'just the way the system works'. So when Bernie doesn't get the nomination you're going to passive-aggressively support the GOP instead? Congrats on being everything that posters were just making fun of. Cugel the Clever posted:Sorry for exercising my right to vote for someone other than one of the dirtiest people in politics? What else have you learned from talk radio?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:
I did not post that edit: I quoted that Jarmak fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Mar 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:Not an empty quote. Purity Uber Alles, comrade.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:As if I'm under an obligation to vote for whoever won the Democratic primary I don't like Clinton, but if she wins the primary, the alternative is a million times worse. Vote Bernie in the primary if you want (I did), vote Hilary in the general if she's the nominee.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Also if you vote for the Greens you're really dumb. Their platform is full of trash, and would be actively much more harmful than beneficial if they were ever to take office.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Yeah, Clinton isn't even close to the dirtiest person in politics. Look at the dumpster fire that is Republican-run state governments, or the entire Tom DeLay Congress, or...any of that poo poo. I give the Clintons a partial pass on Wall Street deregulation in the 90s, because they lean technocratic and all the experts were saying that deregulation was the way to go. It was the wrong choice, in part because the experts were corrupt. But it was the expert advice. @Jarmak: Oh for fucks sake. You quoted it, called it 'this poo poo'. It's not complicated. It happened this page.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Ha, excuse me for not realizing you weren't defining 'not vote' normally, rather than 'not vote for Clinton'. I'm not voting for Clinton, regardless. Sorry that the only responses I get on my criticism of her resemble that of A Winner is Jew, above. It boggles the mind how party hacks will handwave such blatant corruption as 'just the way the system works'. I want to print this post out and frame it
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Oh you're going to vote third party  If you guys tried a hundredth as hard to have a discussion as you do defending your team's honor, you might be a bit more persuasive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
what happened to this thread
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Keep up that voter outreach No get hosed. You exposed yourself very clearly as exactly what you were arguing against. As I said in one of my first posts on the matter, the amount of time and effort required to get your vote isn't worth it - you're not a rational actor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Empress Theonora posted:what happened to this thread It's your average USPol thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Just because it's a two-party system doesn't mean you can't make a protest vote
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
If you say you're going to vote third party in a presidential election you deserve to get laughed at. Especially this election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Why is a politician changing their stances on political issues to better reflect the attitudes of their constituents considered by so many to be a bad thing? Isn't that like exactly what they're supposed to do? It also helps (me, at least) to consider that the views expressed by politicians are like items selected from a menu of what's in the realm of possibility for anyone who actually wants to get elected and stay elected. That menu changes over time. It becomes pandering when someone always chooses the most popular item regardless of any previous choices, but if someone chooses the leftmost electable view at the time and changes as further left views become electable, that's really not the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Empress Theonora posted:what happened to this thread 
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Ah so the problem isn't just not voting, it's also voting wrong!
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
As evidence your third party canidate joined the democratic party for this election because third party is worthless and he knows what's at risk.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
The problem isn't that the DNC is intentionally turning off youth voters the last two midterms, it's that they barely tried to get anyone's vote. They didn't so much turn moderate as curl up in a fetal position while crying "I hate Obama too! You can vote for a Republican just don't hurt me!" I remember the attitude of the Michigan Democratic Party in 2008 being "Yeah, people are getting weary of Jennifer Granholm and are ready for a change as her term limit comes up. You know what? We'll sit this one out. Oh, Virg Bernero wants to run? Good luck buddy."
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:44 |
|
|
Empress Theonora posted:what happened to this thread Somebody implied they didn't want to vote for Hillary. Chaos reigns.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2016 21:02
|
|