2016 Election Thread

[TheLeviathan]

Smerf - you came out of hiding for that crappy take on politics?

 

[Badsmerf]

Smerf - you came out of hiding for that crappy take on politics?

 

Should make you hesitate before going on another Gettysburg internet address does it? Least it should with what you've written in this thread so far. Just kidding. I enjoy discussing politics with you all.

[Mike Sixel]

Good thing for Obama this isn't a signing contest. but, another great moment for him as an orator.....just now.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Should make you hesitate before going on another Gettysburg internet address does it? Least it should with what you've written in this thread so far. Just kidding. I enjoy discussing politics with you all.

 

You totally lost me on that joke.  Way over my head.

[Mike Sixel]

I'm actually listening to the eulogy right now.......everyone that thinks our President is not a Christian should be required to watch it. I mean, I'm an atheist, so maybe I don't understand what a Christian sounds like.....

[Hrbowski]

 

I'm actually listening to the eulogy right now.......everyone that thinks our President is not a Christian should be required to watch it. I mean, I'm an atheist, so maybe I don't understand what a Christian sounds like.....

Nobody should be required to watch or listen to anything political, if a person wants nothing to do with politics another person should not force them to.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Nobody should be required to watch or listen to anything political, if a person wants nothing to do with politics another person should not force them to.

 

Sigh......do you really think I meant that literally?

[Hrbowski]

 

Sigh......do you really think I meant that literally?

No, but I gave you an answer that I believe you should expect if you talk like that. Freedom is nothing to joke about.

[drjim]

 

I'm actually listening to the eulogy right now.......everyone that thinks our President is not a Christian should be required to watch it. I mean, I'm an atheist, so maybe I don't understand what a Christian sounds like.....

 

He doesn't talk like a conservative evangelical - which unfortunately is all that matters for way too many people. Plus he's a Democrat.

[drjim]

 

No, but I gave you an answer that I believe you should expect if you talk like that. Freedom is nothing to joke about.

 

Dude.

[Hrbowski]

So what do you all think of George Pataki? He seems like he might have a decent chance if he can get support from his own party.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Leave it to a political thread to take me out of a posting hiatus. I don't care to post about baseball much anymore. The forum is bland and devoid of any snark outside of game threads. Pass.

Politics, especially the current political political structure, is much more interesting. I'm very much on the same boat as Brock. I can't support a party that lies through their teeth and outwardly promotes self proclaimed superiority.

I vote libertarian. I voted for a dead candidate in the Iowa Senate race instead of joni earnst because i detest her. Sure, my vote didn't make a difference in the outcome, but it still counted.

Unfortunately, millions of people choose between two manufactured candidates instead of legitimate third party contenders. For some reason they are deemed inappropriate, insuperior, unelectable.. Ect. The climate is changing in the general populace. My generation doesn't identify either party. Picking between two evils has become the status quo, but at some point i believe the cracks will be exploited.

We need big changes. The unrest in poverty stricken communities, the expanding gap in net worth, over populated prisons, humiliating foreign relationships, expanding national debt... Some issues have changed over the years, but the absolute lack of solutions hasn't.

Later in life I'm hoping to get into politics, hopefully with an emerging party that starts solving problems instead of blaming them on someone.

Wholeheartedly agree.  We need more of this in politics.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I'm actually listening to the eulogy right now.......everyone that thinks our President is not a Christian should be required to watch it. I mean, I'm an atheist, so maybe I don't understand what a Christian sounds like.....

 

I think it's pretty easy for non-Christians to sound like what everyone thinks a Christian should sound like, and in general, I find that politicians will do a very good job looking the part to get what they want. 

 

It's a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but most people who claim to be Christians really haven't given their lives to Christ.  As well, a better litmus test to being a Christian involves the body of work post confession, one that one eulogy will not confirm or deny that.

[Badsmerf]

Why does it matter if he's a Christian? I'm not, but go to church with my wife at least twice a month. My morals agree with living that life and making good choices. Being a Christian doesn't stop someone from making bad choices, we have to do that all on our own.

 

I really find it revolting that the Republican party has taken on this ultra Christian identity.

[formerly33]

 

Being a Christian doesn't stop someone from making bad choices, we have to do that all on our own.

I couldn't agree more. While you are not Christian, I am ... but like you, I've had it with this "Christian" thing in politics.

 

I might get it a little from my brother for saying that.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I couldn't agree more. While you are not Christian, I am ... but like you, I've had it with this "Christian" thing in politics.

 

I might get it a little from my brother for saying that.

 

I think we are all on the same page there.  The church has been made to look very hypocritical when it comes to politics as these 'conservative Christians' have shown more of then than not that their true colors are not Christ.  My big complaint with the church is that they look the other way.  I'm of the opinion that you hold your own to a much higher standard, but in politics is often times the opposite. 

[mikecgrimes]

 

 

As much as I don't want kids to hear the f-word, things like this just can't be handled at a political level. To me, it's a lot like bringing religion into politics. Of course freedom of religion means that everyone has the freedom to worship in whichever way they choose, but I wish that the Republican party would stop trying to cram the news that they're the "religious" party down everybody's throats while at the same time arguing that we have freedom of religion, etc. etc. Freedom of religion also means that people have the freedom to be atheist, and supposing you are a Christian Scott Walker, that doesn't mean that you're in God's favor and therefore you or one of your fellow Christian Republican candidates deserves the election. So stop acting like it.

 

But in my opinion, this is like the least of our worries ... and that's why I think it should be dropped. I'm tired of the way the two parties like to banter back and forth about personal things, meanwhile forgetting the big picture and ignoring what's in the people's best interests. This isn't a game. Politicians (not all, of course - I hope - but most) need to stop being so self-centered.

 

And when it comes to the things that do matter, I won't even go there. Both parties are screwed. I don't agree with the Republicans, and I don't agree with the Democrats. I used to think that I'd vote as soon as I turned 18, but now I'm not so sure. I don't find the idea of voting for the "lesser of two evils" remarkably appealing, so I'm probably going to stay out of that. I know people who tell me in so many words that as an adult it's my duty to vote for the freedom of others, but what freedom does voting for either party bring? In my opinion, part of my freedom as an American citizen is the ability to refuse to vote now that I'm 18.

 

I voted for third parties for years, that can work, but nobody that knows how to make it work is involved in third parties.  The place to make an impact is the primary/caucus.  I don't know what your ideal candidate would be, but especially in the large Republican field your ideal candidate could easily win if you and other like minded people participated.  Turnout for primaries is so low that anyone could win with little true support, in fact thats how candidates like Jeb Bush typically coast to victory.  They don't have huge support but their people show up.  I don't care if you or anyone show up in November but every American should vote in the primary (or support third parties) unless you just don't care at all.

[mikecgrimes]

 

of course both parties do this.....which does it more? Which is opposed to marriage equality? Which wants to literally outlaw the F word in public? Which wants to ban abortion, even if the mother's life is in danger? Are you saying that one is not worse at this than the other?

 

The republican party wants to outlaw the f word in public?  It's insane how Democrats cling to something someone said make up what that means and then run with it.  By the way this tea party Republican, you know the one that represents the entire party enough that you can say with 100% confidence we want to ban the F word in pubic supports gay marriage by the way if you were unaware that political issue went away yesterday.  As for killing babies I hope that most mothers would choose the baby over themselves but clearly that is their choice and the Republican party would never make such a law, pretty sure the supreme court has decided that issue as well by the way.

[TheLeviathan]

 

 As for killing babies I hope that most mothers would choose the baby over themselves but clearly that is their choice and the Republican party would never make such a law, pretty sure the supreme court has decided that issue as well by the way.

 

Texas stands as one very obvious example of the falsehood of this.

[mikecgrimes]

Restricting late term abortion and allowing women to die are not the same thing. Doctors still get to be doctors. I know politics are easier if you just make all Republicans evil, and lucky for you a lot of people don't care about the truth, but Republicans are good people most of which care about issues and solutions more then how things play politically. Now if I'm missing something on the Texas law help me out but the Huffington Post didn't inform me of the diying mothers so I think it's safe to say the law doesn't do what you want to say it does.

[mikecgrimes]

So what do you all think of George Pataki? He seems like he might have a decent chance if he can get support from his own party.

. Seems to be a non factor. Maybe throwing his name out there for a future run but doesn't seem he intends to be a 2016 factor. Hard for a new yorker to be much of a factor in GOP presidential politics even gullianni didn't go far.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Restricting late term abortion and allowing women to die are not the same thing. Doctors still get to be doctors. I know politics are easier if you just make all Republicans evil, and lucky for you a lot of people don't care about the truth, but Republicans are good people most of which care about issues and solutions more then how things play politically. Now if I'm missing something on the Texas law help me out but the Huffington Post didn't inform me of the diying mothers so I think it's safe to say the law doesn't do what you want to say it does.

Many state laws ban abortion even if it's the only method to save the woman's life.  No one in this thread has implied Republicans are evil.   We all care about the truth.   We are all good people.  So let's just stop with challenging any of that.   

Abortion, like guns, has become such a stalwart political necessities for Republicans that they will not comprise in any capacity.  Everyone suggests that Roe and Carey (which is the actual law), is a liberal decision--but really it is comprise between liberal and conservative values.  Just like ACA (Obamacare) is a compromise between liberal and conservative values.  The teaparty seems to be against compromising with those whom they disagree which seems like a bad fit for governance and leadership to me.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Restricting late term abortion and allowing women to die are not the same thing. Doctors still get to be doctors. I know politics are easier if you just make all Republicans evil, and lucky for you a lot of people don't care about the truth, but Republicans are good people most of which care about issues and solutions more then how things play politically. Now if I'm missing something on the Texas law help me out but the Huffington Post didn't inform me of the diying mothers so I think it's safe to say the law doesn't do what you want to say it does.

 

Texas is working towards making abortion very difficult to achieve practically by wiggling around the edges of law.  

 

But let's not be mistaken - most tea party Republicans and arch conservatives would like to eliminate abortion altogether and leave only this one scenario left for discussion at the end.  And I'm not really sure where the discussion would go at that point.

 

(And this, by the way, is coming from someone that thinks the abortion issue in general has been co-opted by a whole lot of political nonsense from both sides.  One of greatest moral dilemmas has been reduced to Religion vs. Convenience)

[mikecgrimes]

Implying that Republicans create laws that force a mother to die and straight out calling us evil might be two different things. I can put up with that kind of rhetoric because that's the nature of politics but the fake offense taken because someone noticed gets kind of old.

[Squirrel]

 

Implying that Republicans create laws that force a mother to die and straight out calling us evil might be two different things. I can put up with that kind of rhetoric because that's the nature of politics but the fake offense taken because someone noticed gets kind of old.

Give it a rest and quit feeling so offended. There is plenty of rhetoric on both sides; and the discussion in this thread hasn't provided any rhetoric but has been a pretty reasonable discussion by people who have varying opinions.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Implying that Republicans create laws that force a mother to die and straight out calling us evil might be two different things. I can put up with that kind of rhetoric because that's the nature of politics but the fake offense taken because someone noticed gets kind of old.

 

Republicans are not creating laws that force a mother to die.  They aren't even at the stage of deciding that yet, they are trying (in several states) to erode abortion availability.  And, in some places, are having remarkable success at doing so in spite of what has been decided by the Supreme Court.

 

I would suggest it's a bit naive to think there isn't a sizable portion of the population that would like to see abortion outright illegal.

[Mike Sixel]

The republican party wants to outlaw the f word in public?  It's insane how Democrats cling to something someone said make up what that means and then run with it.  By the way this tea party Republican, you know the one that represents the entire party enough that you can say with 100% confidence we want to ban the F word in pubic supports gay marriage by the way if you were unaware that political issue went away yesterday.  As for killing babies I hope that most mothers would choose the baby over themselves but clearly that is their choice and the Republican party would never make such a law, pretty sure the supreme court has decided that issue as well by the way.

A law was passed to outlaw the F word, yes. Not a joke. And, yes, that law was just proposed in the Senate to bam all abortions, under all circumstances.

[diehardtwinsfan]

The problem with abortion is that it seems that all of the rhetoric ignores the most obvious questions:

 

1)  Is the unborn child alive?

2)  What rights does it have under the constitution?

 

I'm a Libertarian (ex Republican) who will occasionally vote for them when they present a good candidate (see Ron Paul), but I still have quite a few Republican friends/family.  I'd hard pressed to find even one that would ban an abortion in a case where the mother's life is in danger such as an ectopic pregnancy, and that comes from someone who has met his fair share of Right to Life members.  Sure, there may be one or two out there, but to pretend that they speak for the majority or even for a decent sized minority is rather disingenuous and flat out inflammatory. 

 

This really gets into the heart of my problems with politics in general.  It's been much like a grander scale of what Twins Daily threads turned into during the last few seasons where no one is actually listening to each other, just yelling louder.  The worst part is that both major parties know this and have done everything they can to fan the flames because they know it's in their best interest.   Politicians aren't in the market to solve our nations problems.  They are in the market to further polarize the voters to keep them in their nice cushy seats.  Even today's compromises do little to solve problems.  Look at ACA.  It didn't solve the problem that medical providers have zero competition for their services so they can charge what they want.  It didn't get rid of barriers to entry in the field, and it took no one's hands out of the cookie jar.  It simply forced everyone to get insured and added a few subsidies, while doing nothing about the ever rising cost of medicine.  About all it did was allow the uninsurable to get insurance. It accomplished what just about every compromise accomplishes today:  kick the can down the road and let someone else deal with the problem.  That, unfortunately, is what most of every 'solution' in today's political climate does.  At best, it solves a problem for their corporate sponsors.  In reality, the real problems still exist. 

[Mike Sixel]

I agree, that in general, politicians aren't all that interested in fixing the world. We see plenty of actions on both sides that prove that. It was certainly my experience as far back as the 90s and early part of this century, when I used to spend a lot of time around them......they are interested in winning elections and having jobs. Why they choose that job, if they don't really want to actually fix things, is beyond me.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I agree, that in general, politicians aren't all that interested in fixing the world. We see plenty of actions on both sides that prove that. It was certainly my experience as far back as the 90s and early part of this century, when I used to spend a lot of time around them......they are interested in winning elections and having jobs. Why they choose that job, if they don't really want to actually fix things, is beyond me.

 

People that desire power are the ones least qualified to have it.