• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

I'm thinking of abandoning Bernie

TragicMonkey said:
'Sides'? You're already in the wrong. You've fallen into the trap of the two-party system, where politics is necessarily a two-sided war. That's why things don't get better: the two 'sides' are essentially the same. They exist to perpetuate themselves. They can battle eternally, and they want to, because they are parasites leeching off the people. As long as you're distracted by their fighting you're not a threat to their parasitical existence.

Don't vote for 'sides'. Vote for people.
Click to expand...
Well, except for the many significant ways they are not the same, SCOTUS composition being a stark example. In other words, this is sophomoric nonsense of a truly high order.
 
varwoche said:
Well, except for the many significant ways they are not the same, SCOTUS composition being a stark example.
Click to expand...

And yet in most of the fundamental ways they are the same. Are either party communist? Fascist? In favor of radical change to the status quo? Are either planning to implement true universal health care? Restructure the economy? Nationalize industries? Make sweeping regulatory reforms? Create new agencies? Restructure command of the military? Alter the Constitution? Redivide the separation of powers between three branches? Create a fourth branch? Eliminate a current branch? Form more parties? Abolish political parties? Take federal control of areas that are currently in state control, or relinquish federal control? Add some new states? Merge some existing ones? Void whole swathes of case law? Dissolve any legislatures?

The two American political parties much more alike than they are different, it only doesn't seem so because so much of what is possible (and has been done elsewhere) is literally unthinkable by most Americans.

In other words, this is sophomoric nonsense of a truly high order.
Click to expand...

I shall accept this as a compliment because I'm certain you wouldn't stoop to rudeness.
 
I'll reiterate in other words my earlier sentiment:

Don't be dumb. If Bernie isn't nominated, vote for whomever the Democrats do nominate. The GOP has taken a dip in the crazy lake, and this isn't the time to stand on principles. Do that when you aren't about to give a loon command over thousands of nuclear weapons.
 
Last edited:
uke2se said:
I'll reiterate in other words my earlier sentiment:

Don't be dumb. If Bernie isn't nominated, vote for whomever the Democrats do nominate. The GOP has taken a dip in the crazy lake, and this isn't the time to stand on principles. Do that when you aren't about to give a loon command over thousands of nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...

If you do that then you will never stand on principles. Choosing pragmatism over principle every single time a choice must be made means you don't have principles, and you are actively building a world that doesn't have principles, either. It's a descending spiral into crapulence, and every spin makes everything a little bit worse.

I don't believe that's a good way to live.
 
TragicMonkey said:
If you do that then you will never stand on principles. Choosing pragmatism over principle every single time a choice must be made means you don't have principles, and you are actively building a world that doesn't have principles, either. It's a descending spiral into crapulence, and every spin makes everything a little bit worse.

I don't believe that's a good way to live.
Click to expand...

And I agree. There's a difference this time, as I see it though. I've never been actually scared by the prospect of a Republican president before, but this time I am. The likely nominees are truly frightening, and I think you guys owe it to the world to keep those guys as far away from the presidency as possible.
 
uke2se said:
And I agree. There's a difference this time, as I see it though. I've never been actually scared by the prospect of a Republican president before, but this time I am. The likely nominees are truly frightening, and I think you guys owe it to the world to keep those guys as far away from the presidency as possible.
Click to expand...

Fear mongering for a $1000 please, Alex!

None of this would be necessary, if the best option were to be chosen!
Feel the Bern!
 
Dog Town said:
Fear mongering for a $1000 please, Alex!

None of this would be necessary, if the best option were to be chosen!
Feel the Bern!
Click to expand...

I don't have to do any fear mongering. The GOP does that quite well already.

And we are talking about the likely scenario where the Bern isn't nominated.

By the way, has anyone else noted all the concern trolling going on here?
 
Last edited:
uke2se said:
And I agree. There's a difference this time, as I see it though. I've never been actually scared by the prospect of a Republican president before, but this time I am. The likely nominees are truly frightening, and I think you guys owe it to the world to keep those guys as far away from the presidency as possible.
Click to expand...

What drawbacks do you see that Sanders has that Clinton does not, in a general election, where all Democratic candidates will be painted as socialists and Hillary brings all the baggage of the Clinton name to the game?
 
uke2se said:
I'll reiterate in other words my earlier sentiment:

Don't be dumb. If Bernie isn't nominated, vote for whomever the Democrats do nominate. The GOP has taken a dip in the crazy lake, and this isn't the time to stand on principles. Do that when you aren't about to give a loon command over thousands of nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...

No one in the current group scares me as bad as GWB did at this same point in the election, not even the same order of magnitude. A lot of stupid and egomania, more than a little psychopathy, but stupid is leading the pack and stupid doesn't have the blessing and support of the dangerously evil this time around (Cruz being the only potential exception I've noted so far). I don't want the GOP to win the White House but I can't vote for another 4 years of conservative-lite either, even if that is what the Democratic party is determined to offer as an alternative to the GOP again.
 
Childlike Empress said:
They were talking about behaviour after your dreadful idol would be nominated by the Democrats. There's reasonable hope that stupid fatalism won't win that particular battle.
Click to expand...

So it wasn't good enough I called you on this ad hom fallacy once already, I have to point it out to you again?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
So it wasn't good enough I called you on this ad hom fallacy once already, I have to point it out to you again?
Click to expand...


I guess I made it clear enough that the "ad hom" isn't against yourself, but your idol, who is, as explained and you promised to digest the evidence for, a war criminal.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
I guess I made it clear enough that the "ad hom" isn't against yourself, but your idol, who is, as explained and you promised to digest the evidence for, a war criminal.
Click to expand...
Do you know the definition of "your"?

Clinton is not my idol. And when you use that false framing it is a transparent attempt to dismiss the arguments claiming the arguer is just following a belief blindly.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Do you know the definition of "your"?

Clinton is not my idol. And when you use that false framing it is a transparent attempt to dismiss the arguments claiming the arguer is just following a belief blindly.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe that HRC is a better candidate for president than Senator Sanders? Which of her suggested public policies are superior and more desirous, in your perspective, to Sanders' policies?

Feel free to support your answers with compelling supportive evidence.
 
Trakar said:
Why do you believe that HRC is a better candidate for president than Senator Sanders? Which of her suggested public policies are superior and more desirous, in your perspective, to Sanders' policies?

Feel free to support your answers with compelling supportive evidence.
Click to expand...

How about that "body of work" as well?
 
Last edited:
Trakar said:
Why do you believe that HRC is a better candidate for president than Senator Sanders? Which of her suggested public policies are superior and more desirous, in your perspective, to Sanders' policies?

Feel free to support your answers with compelling supportive evidence.
Click to expand...
You know I've already answered this. Your disagreeing with my answer is not me not giving an answer.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Do you know the definition of "your"?

Clinton is not my idol. And when you use that false framing it is a transparent attempt to dismiss the arguments claiming the arguer is just following a belief blindly.
Click to expand...


OK, you have been given countless evidence against your weak arguments for that war criminal, so maybe you're right that it is a bit personal, being that you are obviously not willing to change your mind in light of evidence. Trakar provided some I think solid thoughts about why Sanders is so much superior in what looks now like a race against Trump, than Clinton is with all her baggage. You came up with no solid counter-argument, not even a non-solid one like "she's a woman".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom