Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, 1984Echoes said:

If you DON'T vote you still get to reap the CONSEQUENCES of that non-vote, whether you like them or NOT.

You are still missing the point.

You know what, it's fine. Let them pout. Going after Roe doesn't affect me. Going after Obergefell doesn't affect me. Going after Loving doesn't affect me. 

However, if they come for my weed we have problems. 

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

They are definitely coming after yours, and everyone else's, weed.

If they want to take my weed, they will have to pull that joint right out of my really stoned hand!

Or they could just ask for a hit and I’d give it them.  They could also offer me a burrito or possibly a chicken quesadilla and I’d give to them too.

Edited by Hongbit
Posted
26 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

If you DON'T vote you still get to reap the CONSEQUENCES of that non-vote, whether you like them or NOT.

You are still missing the point.

What if they vote Republican?

Posted
5 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

What if they vote Republican?

Then they get the CONSEQUENCES of that vote.

You know...

Like George W. Bush and the consequences of electing him.

Or Donald M.F.J. Trump and the consequences of electing him.

If this is the type of country that someone wants, then by all means, continue to vote Republican.

Or don't vote at all. Because that also will get a Republican voted into office resulting (consequences) in THIS type of government for the United States.

Posted
38 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I didn't vote when I was young either because all the politicians came across as phonies who only cared about themselves.  I still think that, but as I got older and less idealistic, I decided to vote more and chose the politicians that pretended to care about the things I care about.  

 

and you know what? Each time you hold your nose and vote for the guy that is marginally better, you increase the odds that the candidates in the next election are marginally better than that. That's the only way it will ever change.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Hillary wasn't an inspiring candidate but I do know if she were elected Roe would still be in effect today. 

Not sure I can think of anyone in the Democratic party I would not have voted for in preference of Hillary. I voted for her in the general anyway.

Posted
Just now, gehringer_2 said:

Not sure I can think of anyone in the Democratic party I would not have voted for in preference of Hillary. I voted for her in the general anyway.

I don't get why she is so unlikeable but whatever I vote for people who can do the job. 

Posted
28 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

and you know what? Each time you hold your nose and vote for the guy that is marginally better, you increase the odds that the candidates in the next election are marginally better than that. That's the only way it will ever change.

I don't know.  It seems to be getting worse!

Posted
1 hour ago, Motown Bombers said:

I don't get why she is so unlikeable but whatever I vote for people who can do the job. 

The clintons suck, but I voted for her because she wasn't Trump.  

  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I didn't vote when I was young either because all the politicians came across as phonies who only cared about themselves.  I still think that, but as I got older and less idealistic, I decided to vote more and chose the politicians that pretended to care about the things I care about.  

 

As I've gotten older, I've realized that most elections are like this for me. Depending on which primary ticket I take (because, if we are honest, taking the D ticket is a waste of influence in most elections where I live) I may end up choosing between two candidates I agree with on just about nothing because one is clearly better than the other at least temperamentally. Because whether I love either candidate is beside the point... I'm gonna spend the next four years living with one of them, and I want a say in which one it is.

When the Texas State Rep. who was made famous isn't year for putting together the list of books to ban decided to run for DA in my county, it was my duty to go out and vote against him in both the primary and the runoff. Not because I loved his opponents (trust me I dont), but because the alternative did something deserving of being retired (which he was).

In other countries you see this as well... in France, where many political parties do not see eye to eye with the current government, what did almost all of them do when they were eliminated and it became a choice between Macron and Le Pen? They put down their swords, sucked it up, and worked to ensure Le Pen did not win.

Somewhere along the way, and I remember this from when I first started voting, it was sold as this idealistic thing... but the reality is that it isnt. The experience of living where I live has driven that home... sometimes you have to choose options you do not like. Democracy isn't sunshine and rainbows where there's always a perfect choice on the ballot.

Edited by mtutiger
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted

And we've got to keep at it at the grass roots level. A lot of the obnoxious weeds in our state and national level began as council members, supervisors, school board members (if elected), etc.

Got to actually go out and vote at these levels as well. 

Posted
13 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

267 out of 269 Democrats voted to codify Roe. How exactly did Democrats not vote with their leadership? McConnell was only one of 15 Republicans to vote for the gun bill. 35 Republicans literally voted against McConnell but somehow his leadership got them to vote with them. All 50 Democrats voted the same as Schumer so tell me again how the Democrats don't vote with their leadership? 

In the confirmation hearing for Kavanaugh, Murkowski was a no. In the confirmation hearing for Coney Barrett Collins was a number. That's the same number of Republicans voting against McConnell as Democrats voting against Schumer to codify Roe. Only difference is the Republicans had a small margin to work with. 

You have yet to tell me what Pelosi can do after 218 out of 219 Democrats voted to codify Roe. You have yet to explain what Schumer could have done after 49 out of 50 Democrats voted to codify Roe. Instead you blame Biden, when among other ridiculous things, blame him for not getting Republicans to codify Roe.

Maybe Pelosi could start by not campaigning for the only Democratic Pro Forced Birth candidate.

When your team keeps losing, you eventually have to look at why.  The first place to look in these instances is leadership.  At some point you can't keep blaming the other team for winning.  

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

If you DON'T vote you still get to reap the CONSEQUENCES of that non-vote, whether you like them or NOT.

You are still missing the point.

Nope not missing the point

You literally quoted a post about not voting for them and acted like I said not voting and then you act like I missed the point?   Pretty rich there.  You're literally missing it.

Looks like instead of changing people's posts now you're going to just pretend they said something they didn't. 

Feel free to address my post rather than your fantasy of my post

Your point seems to be that you get to say who I should vote for.   My point is blow it out your ass I'll vote for who I want.  Of course my point is right b/c it's my vote, NOT YOURS.

Edited by pfife
Posted
8 minutes ago, Kacie said:

Maybe Pelosi could start by not campaigning for the only Democratic Pro Forced Birth candidate.

When your team keeps losing, you eventually have to look at why.  The first place to look in these instances is leadership.  At some point you can't keep blaming the other team for winning.  

Have you considered that Cisneros lost because her message did not resonate with much of the district that she represents? Particularly those living in Laredo and along the border?

People talk as if the Democratic Party is magically pulling strings to get candidates elected, yet at the end of the day, it's the voters who ultimately decide these elections. 

It was the same damn thing when Biden won the nomination.... for some reason, people seem to just want to marginalize the views or feelings of the voters who maybe aren't hard core progressives and just treat them as sheep being herded by the national party.

Posted

amazing to me that Manchin and Collins are trying to convince their voters and the press that when obvious liars told obvious lies, and when they were warned that obviously these obvious liars are obviously lying, that Manchin and Collins were so stupid they actually believed the obvious lies

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...