And America Continues to Show it's True Colors. . .

D'Snowth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
40,651
Reaction score
12,811
I'd normally agree, but you only read one report. He's grabbing and groping too, allegedly. The "hugging" thing was his statement; not the statement of his accusers. He seems like a creeper.
Well, that's true, and so far, I've yet to hear/read any of the actual allegations from his accusers, but nevertheless, the news really only reported his statement as a post-script to their report on Charlie Rose, and sadder still, even he's like, "What I did weren't 'wrongdoings.'"

But still, I think it's sad that we've gotten to this point. Again, I'm even seeing new studies and things that are discouraging parents from hugging their own kids, because it teaches kids about consentual physical contact, and that they should only hug their kids if they come to them for hugs first. That's just sad. I mean pets are even the same way: if you don't show much or any affection to them, they eventually grow into aggressive or reclusive animals that want nothing to do with their humans. My last bunny was like that: her previous owners hardly had anything to do with her, so when I adopted her, she hated it when I'd try to pet her or rub her or anything.
 

LittleJerry92

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
17,323
Reaction score
7,657
My cat sadly wasn't socialized with other people during her kitten years. As a result, she hates visitors. :sigh:
 

jvcarroll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
2,001
As I said in a previous post, when I vote in an election, I'm going to consider the candidate who can win this time around, not the one who might influence things 4 to 12 years down the line. This I do know: one sure way to get a Trump reelected in 2020 is to have a progressive 3rd party candidate there to "make a statement."
Well, if neither of them are good - then you should vote third party instead of not voting (as long as that third party candidate stands for enough that you believe in). That's what I'm saying. It's not a wasted vote. The only wasted vote is one that's not used. Period. I like most of your posts, but this cynicism,I do not. I thought we progressives were better than the republicans on that point. :stick_out_tongue:
 

jvcarroll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
2,001
Well, that's true, and so far, I've yet to hear/read any of the actual allegations from his accusers, but nevertheless, the news really only reported his statement as a post-script to their report on Charlie Rose, and sadder still, even he's like, "What I did weren't 'wrongdoings.'"

But still, I think it's sad that we've gotten to this point. Again, I'm even seeing new studies and things that are discouraging parents from hugging their own kids, because it teaches kids about consentual physical contact, and that they should only hug their kids if they come to them for hugs first. That's just sad. I mean pets are even the same way: if you don't show much or any affection to them, they eventually grow into aggressive or reclusive animals that want nothing to do with their humans. My last bunny was like that: her previous owners hardly had anything to do with her, so when I adopted her, she hated it when I'd try to pet her or rub her or anything.
That's a different topic altogether, but yeah. That's a bad thing.
 

Censored

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
557
Well, if neither of them are good - then you should vote third party instead of not voting (as long as that third party candidate stands for enough that you believe in). That's what I'm saying. It's not a wasted vote. The only wasted vote is one that's not used. Period. I like most of your posts, but this cynicism,I do not. I thought we progressives were better than the republicans on that point. :stick_out_tongue:
Why should I do that? I'd just be tipping the election to one major candidate over the other. I might as well vote for that candidate directly then. Third party candidates are no friend to the progressives; they can get Republicans elected.
 

jvcarroll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
2,001
Why should I do that? I'd just be tipping the election to one major candidate over the other. I might as well vote for that candidate directly then. Third party candidates are no friend to the progressives; they can get Republicans elected.
Oh, geez. I'm using your example. NO, you wouldn't *only* be tipping one equally bad" candidate over another by voting 3rd party. Again IF you found someone palatable enough to vote for, you'd be sending the progressive party a message that their candidate wasn't good enough. In NUMBERS, even if they're not enough to win, it still makes a difference. The next time out, they'd either try to clean up their act and better speak to important issues or find a candidate who does. I'm sorry to say this, but such extreme absolutism demonstrated here is why so many of us progressives lose elections. It also makes us as bad as the republicans. I don't cite much substantial progress under that sort of cynical and limited mindset. That's the very death of democracy. Even if we don't vote for them, we should encourage as many 3rd party candidates as possible. They help shape the issues candidates address in countless ways. I'm not a fan of 3rd party candidates and I agree with half your argument there, but the rest of it makes me very sad. More progressives used to be out-of-the-box thinkers. :sigh:
 

snichols1973

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
624
Weather people followed those orders out of hate or fear, they are not heroes and should not be honored nor should Confederate soldiers fighting against the United States. That's what the original point was about.
And then you have the watered-down and dumbed-down version from The Simpsons "Much Apu About Nothing", with the episode being just as meaningful in retrospect (if not more so) than when it first aired:

Examiner: All right, here's your last question: What was the cause of the Civil War?
Apu: Actually, there were numerous causes: Aside from the obvious schism between abolitionists and anti-abolitionists, economic factors both domestic and international played a significant--
Examiner: Hey, hey.
Apu: Yeah?
Examiner: Just say "slavery".
Apu: Slavery it is, sir.
 

snichols1973

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
624
Not true. 3rd parties might not win elections, but eventually one will cannibalize one of the other two parties. That's what happens. Also, if a 3rd party even got 20% of the vote, and this is quite possible, it would cause future candidates to take the issues of those disenfranchised voters more seriously over the next cycle. Yes, 3rd parties look useless on the surface and they say elections (usually toward the lesser candidate), they can and do create change. While I am pragmatic, I am not that cynical. It's not my nature.
And let's not forget that Jesse "The Body" Ventura became Governor of Minnesota while running on the Reform Party ticket, serving from 1999 to 2003:

Jesse Ventura - Wikipedia
 

Censored

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
557
Oh, geez. I'm using your example. NO, you wouldn't *only* be tipping one equally bad" candidate over another by voting 3rd party. Again IF you found someone palatable enough to vote for, you'd be sending the progressive party a message that their candidate wasn't good enough. In NUMBERS, even if they're not enough to win, it still makes a difference. The next time out, they'd either try to clean up their act and better speak to important issues or find a candidate who does. I'm sorry to say this, but such extreme absolutism demonstrated here is why so many of us progressives lose elections. It also makes us as bad as the republicans. I don't cite much substantial progress under that sort of cynical and limited mindset. That's the very death of democracy. Even if we don't vote for them, we should encourage as many 3rd party candidates as possible. They help shape the issues candidates address in countless ways. I'm not a fan of 3rd party candidates and I agree with half your argument there, but the rest of it makes me very sad. More progressives used to be out-of-the-box thinkers. :sigh:
Sorry, but you're not the voice of all progressives. It's called a difference of opinion; deal with it.

No, the reason why progressives lose elections is because some pie-in-the sky third party candidate comes around, saying that there's no difference between a Democrat and a Republican.
 
Last edited:

Censored

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
557
Oh, geez. I'm using your example. NO, you wouldn't *only* be tipping one equally bad" candidate over another by voting 3rd party. Again IF you found someone palatable enough to vote for, you'd be sending the progressive party a message that their candidate wasn't good enough. In NUMBERS, even if they're not enough to win, it still makes a difference. The next time out, they'd either try to clean up their act and better speak to important issues or find a candidate who does. I'm sorry to say this, but such extreme absolutism demonstrated here is why so many of us progressives lose elections. It also makes us as bad as the republicans. I don't cite much substantial progress under that sort of cynical and limited mindset. That's the very death of democracy. Even if we don't vote for them, we should encourage as many 3rd party candidates as possible. They help shape the issues candidates address in countless ways. I'm not a fan of 3rd party candidates and I agree with half your argument there, but the rest of it makes me very sad. More progressives used to be out-of-the-box thinkers. :sigh:
Ok, in 2020, we'll all send a message to the Democratic candidate by voting for some third party progressive. Trump will get elected again, but hey, just think of the progress we'll make in the next 4 years.
 
Top