Here's the problem I have with you guys

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jonbig04, Oct 6, 2008.

  1. Its not that 80% of these threads are about some stupid obama or mccain relationship conspiracy.

    Its not that some of you say "there's no such thing as being too right (in the partisan sense)".

    Its not that some of you are too liberal.

    I don't like any of those things. But whats stupid is that you ALL honestly think that this country needs the same policies and leadership all the time. You dont look at our ever changing and dynamic country and say "what policies would be best for our country now at this moment in time"? You vote one way all the time period. Election after election. Look at our economy and country now, as opposed to 8 years ago. Its different in every way...foreign policy and economically. Yet I bet 95% of you will vote now the same way you voted then.

    This isnt a democrat or republican thing, its about your lack of ability to think critically. Why is america like this? We've had great leaders in republicans (lincoln, reagan) and democrats (kennedy, FDR). There have been times when regulation would have stifled the growth and ingenuity of our markets, and there are times when regulation is desperately needed (now). Yet you people vote one way every single time and then you attempt to defend your side without even knowing the issues. This is why America is in trouble, because sheep stick to their ideals and don't care about the issues as long as they get their action movies and monday night football. Because you people are too lazy to find out whats going on and make an active informed decision (even though information is easily obtained) and then hold your leader accountable.

    As a result we have ridiculously incompetent leaders because no one cares enough to make them accountable. Try looking at our current situation, then making a decision. If we still disagree then thats ok, agree to disagree...but I've yet to see anybody at that point. Most of you are just defending your interminable, immovable ideals no matter what situation our country is in. Dumb.
  2. Are you serious??

    Or are you just fucking around?

  3. Of course im serious.
  4. Well, to be the devils advocate there are a large amount of people that are one issue voters. It's ususally either personal beliefs or money such as abortion, gay marriage, capital gains tax, healthcare and ect. Jon you really are a humanistand idealist. You have to understand that people are fundamentally selfish and usually vote for their best interests at the time. Also the average person conservative or liberal is not willing to be an accountant of the country and literally sort out every single issue and than decipher which is the best answer with no bias. They take things for granted and actually expect politicians to do that.

    The only other thing is about the 8 year thing. I called you an Idealist because you simply and not so logically claimed that things were different 8 years ago and now a change needs to be in order. What i did not hear from you is the rough percentage of issues that are on the right track and the ones on the wrong track. You might say all of them are on the wrong track or a good amount of them are. After you figure which ones are on the wrong track you understand which ones are the most important. Of course among recent polls the economy is the most important issue. After finding the importance of the issues you must decide who was responsible for the issue heading in the wrong direction. This would be an example of thinking critically. So the question- Who is most responsible for the wrong track of the economy and who has the best ability of fixing it? Is Clinton responsible because he signed a deregulation bill? Is the republican congress responsible for the first 5-6 years? Is the democratic congress responsible for the last 2 years? Is Bush responsible? Are the financial companies responsible? Is the IQ of people getting loans they can't pay back responsible? Is the idea of the American dream and owning a house responsible? Is it the lack of an education system for lenders and receivers?

    What you are doing is advocating a difference in leadership. You are doing this because you hold certain beliefs which cause you to decide who is the one responsible. Clearly sense you want a change in leadership you are putting the opposite party responsible. You are thus putting yourself into the category that you so disgustingly despised. All your article does is prove the fact that you have a complete lack critical thinking skills because if you did you would realize that people believe in different right answers and there is no universal right answer. Thinking people are ignorant with different views only makes yourself ignorant.

    As you can or can't see there really is no right answer so simply claiming to vote the opposite of the last party is as bad as simply voting for the same party over and over again.
  5. "its about your lack of ability to think critically."

    someone who believes in talking snakes is lecturing the rest of us because we dont think critically. that is funny.
  6. hughb


    Close, but not 100% correct.

    I had originally intended to vote for McCain based on his statements about extending the Bush tax cuts. As a small trader, or a piker if you will, I would have only saved tens, maybe hundreds of dollars, but that was what was important to me. Even though I would rather sit down to lunch with Barack Obama than John McCain, McCain was goign to get my vote.

    However, when California's prop 8 was making national headlines, (prop 8 would amend California's constitution in a way that would ban same sex marriage), McCain said that he supports it. So I changed my mind and decided I will vote for Obama. Now, if I am reading Barack Obama's statements correctly, I will still get a tax break although I'm not sure how, so maybe my tax concerns were a moot point.

    So, in a way you are indeed correct, I am casting my vote based on the single issue of same sex marriage. Neither of them are proponents, but at least Barack Obama is not an opponent.

    I still reserve the right to vote for none of the above. However, I won't waste it by writing in some third party crank candidate.

    Man, I sure would like to have a candidate I can get behind and vote for. I'm tired of voting for the purpose of wanting a candidate to lose. Some democracy.

  8. First of all vhehn, I would think you learned you lesson the last time you argued with me. Secondly if you even read that thread you would know that I am unsure WHAT I believe, so it interesting that you could know, when I don't.
    #10     Oct 7, 2008