War Room Lounge v69: Oh no not the bees! Edition

Best Nic Cage films. Pick up to 3 (Listed 5 top IMDB, then 5 top box office, & so-on until 20 films)


  • Total voters
    40
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, literally 90%-plus of Republicans are "Democrats" by his definition, and most Democrats are "American Conservatives" by his definition. Seems like the purpose of using that definition is to make a clear exchange of ideas more difficult.

Part of me thinks it's a backlash against the Southern Strategy, or how they benefited from it.

It's common knowledge that Democrats and Republicans swapped ideologies over the years, but the right wing has been adamant that it simply never occurred. Ignore that the "Party of Lincoln" sounds like a bunch of Dixiecrats these days, it never happened. To them, the Southern Strategy is a manifestation of the left wing media and the left wing working in tandem to slander the right wing with all the horrible shit that they supported back then.

So to them, it's just a game. If "they" can do it, so can we. So they push forward this fanfiction in the belief that they're going to change the political landscape, with the total ignorance that the Southern Strategy was not only supported by contemporaneous political writers, but admitted to by the Republican party outright. In other words, there's evidence, hence why it became common belief. Evidence means nothing to them, so they think it's "all the same".

It's pretty sad, but I can't think of any other reason all this shit cropped up from conservative "intellectuals" as of recently.

Can you explain why any of this negates the existence of the nations status quo?

Can you explain how Republicans are maintaining the "status quo" on the following topics?
-Abortion
-The right to protest
-The right to claim asylum
-Birthright citizenship
-The right of immigrants (illegal or otherwise) to legal protections
-The right to a free and independent media

I'll wait
 
And you apparently cannot answer a simple question. Or can you?
Well, here you're trying to twist definitions to fit your preconception. The constitution is a "liberal document" in a sense (mostly because it protects the individual from the state), but in theory it can be a liberal act for a group to either challenge the constitution or to defend it.

For instance, if we were to discover that the militia is not necessary to the security of a free state, we could repeal the second amendment, and that would be a "liberal" position. On the other hand, if we were to convincingly argue that the wording and intent of the second amendment was to give people the right to self defense, we could make a liberal argument in support of the second amendment. Both efforts could be attempts to protect the autonomy of the individual from the state. So we can't define away the problem by slapping one with a label of "liberal" and the other with "conservative."

In practice though, the group of conservatives that most often claims to protect the Constitution and protect the individual from the state is not usually motivated by liberal principles, but rather racism, paranoia, or other ills. I think this is where you're not connected to reality. The fact that America is foundationally liberal means that most stuff under the liberal umbrella of American democracy can be argued from a liberal perspective. That's a game many people on the political right like to play.
 
Can you explain how Republicans are maintaining the "status quo" on the following topics?
-Abortion
-The right to protest
-The right to claim asylum
-Birthright citizenship
-The right of immigrants (illegal or otherwise) to legal protections
-The right to a free and independent media

I'll wait
That isn't even my argument. Wait all you want. Im not making excuses or defending the current right wing bloc. You are fundamentally misunderstanding the conversation i am having here.

Now can you fuck off? I can wait.

In practice though, the group of conservatives that most often claims to protect the Constitution and protect the individual from the state is not usually motivated by liberal principles, but rather racism, paranoia, or other ills. I think this is where you're not connected to reality. The fact that America is foundationally liberal means that most stuff under the liberal umbrella of American democracy can be argued from a liberal perspective. That's a game many people on the political right like to play.

This is the part of your post that actually matters. Once more you are doing what Jack is doing and forcing my hand in trying to defend the the right wing voting bloc and im not here to do that. Left wingers political minds have been absolutely saturated in factional conflict and operates solely along the lines of equity or lack there of. Modern day leftists have made this distinction the decentralization is a form of authoritarianism in an attempt to draw a paralell to figures like Hitler and Mussolini to adherents on the contitution and the ideology associated. When you say "The fact that America is foundationally liberal...." That's all that matters. If people are illiberal in intent it makes not a lick of difference to the fact that American Conservatism, as in the ideology, is steeped heavily in liberal thought stemming from the enlightenment ideals.


Im gonna say this once more. I am not speaking about voting trends, people or how you perceive the current or past american right wing to be. Im talking about what it actually means to be an American Conservative.

Any ways im out. I gotta go to work.
 
the group of conservatives that most often claims to protect the Constitution and protect the individual from the state is not usually motivated by liberal principles, but rather racism, paranoia, or other ills

You and Mr. Jack just can't help yourselves with the bad attempts at mind-reading.
 
You don't have to respond to me. Semantic arguments are a red-flag that you are dealing with a dishonest loon. Instead of trying to frame things as conservative and liberal, maybe you should focus more on what is good and bad, like, "the GOP's policy on ____ is good because____", and then we can have an interesting conversation.

Nothing is stopping you from having that conversation. The leap is something you make and ask me. The GOP does things that i cannot stand and has me fundamentally at odds with them.

If you haven't noticed though i have the entire left wing of sherdog having a meltdown because im reminding them of their own tradition (aka conservatism)
 
Shoops that don't exist, but should:

Muhammad Otter
 
That isn't even my argument. Wait all you want. Im not making excuses or defending the current right wing bloc. You are fundamentally misunderstanding the conversation i am having here.

Now can you fuck off? I can wait.

So again, you're saying that American conservatives aren't actually conservative?

<Huh2>

Hey, I represent the American Gundam Party, we support giant robots, using giant robots to enforce American hegemony, free blowjobs, and cookies every friday. That's about as real as the hypothetical right winger you keep describing.
 
Jason Chaffetz: Ballot harvesting -- California's model to steal 2020

By Jason Chaffetz

The Heritage Foundation calls it the “tool of choice for vote thieves.” The convenient, innovative, and beloved mail-in ballot has been a source of contention due to its vulnerability to manipulation.

During the 2018 midterms, Democrats in California and a Republican consultant in North Carolina used a process called "ballot harvesting" to collect mail-in ballots for voters.

But there was a big difference between the two states, as I discuss in my new book, "Power Grab." In North Carolina, ballot harvesting is illegal. Congress refused to seat the winner of the 2018 midterm election between Republican Mark Harris and Democrat Dan McCready and a special election was held this month to replace him. Though Republican Dan Bishop managed to win the heavily Republican district last week, the history of "cheating" by the previous candidate weighed heavily, making the race far closer than one might expect in a district with an R+8 partisan lean.

In California, by contrast, ballot harvesting was legalized by Democrats in the state legislature. They don't consider it cheating in that state. It was used to flip seven Republican seats to the Democratic column in 2018.

Democrats have long dismissed claims that mail-in ballots are vulnerable to manipulation, pointing to what they call a dearth of voter fraud convictions. Nonetheless, they could hardly ignore the North Carolina race in which a Republican campaign operative illegally collecting ballots allegedly destroyed as many as a thousand ballots supporting the Democratic candidate.

The process of ballot harvesting should be illegal for very good reason. It violates the chain of custody, exposing the ballot to potential manipulation by campaign operatives or nonprofit political groups. They could harass voters to turn in ballots, “assist” them in filling them out, and potentially “lose” ballots that don’t support the candidate the ballot harvester is paid to help.

The indication that ballot harvesting made the difference in California can be found in the vote proportions. Studies of absentee voters have consistently shown they tend to reflect the population or lean slightly to the right. But when ballot harvesting was deployed in California, we saw late ballots break heavily for Democrats.

Take, for example, the race between former Republican Rep. David Valadao and Democrat T. J. Cox in California’s rural 21st district. When polls closed, Valadao led Cox by 6,000 votes — or 8 percent. That margin was wide enough for media outlets to call the race for Valadao.

However, late ballots delivered by third-party groups broke so heavily for Cox that he ultimately eked out an 843-vote victory. The results after ballot harvesting were very different from the polling before the race and since. In a July 2019 NRCC survey, Cox was polling at just 36 percent, while 52 percent said they would support "a potential Republican challenger." Valadao has since filed for a rematch.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported that elsewhere in the state, Orange County voters on election night 2018 were calling the registrar’s office asking if it was legitimate for someone to come to their door and ask if they could take their ballot.

Who was coming to the door? According to a January 2019 Los Angeles Times story, illegal Dreamers were deeply engaged in the process — not just delivering ballots, but helping voters fill them out.

The Times reports on the experience of one Dreamer, Gabriela Cruz, who “found” a voter smoking a cigarette on a tattered old couch behind a group home hours before election day. He politely tried to wave her off until she "reminded him" he had a right that she as an immigrant without citizenship didn’t have. Half an hour later, she was helping the voter lookup candidates as he filled out his ballot by the light of her phone.

What are the implications of activists with an agenda “helping” voters look up candidates and fill out ballots? How many of those activists are willing to turn in a ballot that doesn’t help their cause? Should we be exposing people’s ballots to that kind of temptation?

Election security is more than Russian hackers trying to change votes. We must secure the chain of custody of ballots, validate the identity of the voter, and maintain updated voter lists. Thus far, Democrats have shown no interest in any of that.

Don't be fooled by cries for the Senate to pass so-called "election security" measures coming from the House. These measures are designed to enforce less secure voting processes on local communities, including the very vulnerable mail-in ballot. They are not about election security. They are about election manipulation in 2020.

If we want to get serious about securing our elections, state and local lawmakers and election officials must crackdown on the practice of ballot harvesting. Otherwise, Democrats will use it to manipulate the results of the 2020 elections.

Link

@EL CORINTHIAN

Here's another great example of the constitutional principles of the American right: using empirically baseless allegations of voter fraud to further ballot restriction policies that are empirically proven to weaken the democratic representation of minorities by purging hundreds of thousands of valid votes that just happen to be in low income and racial minority districts. Yet they universally oppose universal voter registration and election day holiday designation. Kind of strange that these super liberal guys who care about the constitution would be so flippantly corrupt about disregarding the central tool of one's constitutional rights.
 
Nothing is stopping you from having that conversation. The leap is something you make and ask me. The GOP does things that i cannot stand and has me fundamentally at odds with them.

If you haven't noticed though i have the entire left wing of sherdog having a meltdown because im reminding them of their own tradition (aka conservatism)

I don't think anyone is melting down. If anything, it's rare and good to see a right-winger who is trying to make a point rather than just screech about how much he hates liberals or something. But your point is somewhere between trivial and wrong.
 
That isn't even my argument. Wait all you want. Im not making excuses or defending the current right wing bloc. You are fundamentally misunderstanding the conversation i am having here.

Now can you fuck off? I can wait.



This is the part of your post that actually matters. Once more you are doing what Jack is doing and forcing my hand in trying to defend the the right wing voting bloc and im not here to do that. Left wingers political minds have been absolutely saturated in factional conflict and operates solely along the lines of equity or lack there of. Modern day leftists have made this distinction the decentralization is a form of authoritarianism in an attempt to draw a paralell to figures like Hitler and Mussolini to adherents on the contitution and the ideology associated. When you say "The fact that America is foundationally liberal...." That's all that matters. If people are illiberal in intent it makes not a lick of difference to the fact that American Conservatism, as in the ideology, is steeped heavily in liberal thought stemming from the enlightenment ideals.
He'll be dead in less than ten.

Ironically, he works at a factory, making sense.

See you later.


Im gonna say this once more. I am not speaking about voting trends, people or how you perceive the current or past american right wing to be. Im talking about what it actually means to be an American Conservative.

Any ways im out. I gotta go to work.

 
@EL CORINTHIAN

Here's another great example of the constitutional principles of the American right: using empirically baseless allegations of voter fraud to further ballot restriction policies that are empirically proven to weaken the democratic representation of minorities by purging hundreds of thousands of valid votes that just happen to be in low income and racial minority districts. Yet they universally oppose universal voter registration and election day holiday designation. Kind of strange that these super liberal guys who care about the constitution would be so flippantly corrupt about disregarding the central tool of one's constitutional rights.

This is me: conservatism is to maintain the status Quo aka Classical liberalism if we are following the dictionary definition of conservatism

This is @Jack V Savage @Falsedawn @Fawlty @Trotsky : So what you're saying is modern day right wingers are upholding classical liberalism even though they are not and are just authoritarian assholes!

Me: No

You guys: WELL YOU ARE ANY WAYS

me:ok
 
I don't think anyone is melting down. If anything, it's rare and good to see a right-winger who is trying to make a point rather than just screech about how much he hates liberals or something. But your point is somewhere between trivial and wrong.
Not according to truth, the dictionary, simple logic and history.
 
empirically baseless allegations of voter fraud

The piece I posted makes it clear that ballot harvesting is fully legal in CA now and is not the same as "voter fraud". Try again, Mr. Trot.

to further ballot restriction policies that are empirically proven to weaken the democratic representation of minorities by purging hundreds of thousands of valid votes

Let's see this "empirical proof". Not just a link dump, but the actual data and your actual analysis of it.

they universally oppose universal voter registration

States administer elections. That's a huge advantage of our system over others (decentralization) and it would be foolish to surrender it because of your implication that minorities are supposedly worse at producing IDs than the majority.
 
BRB, I'm going to go teach my cat algebra. Fill me in on the progress of this discussion when I get back after he's mastered it.
 
This is me: conservatism is to maintain the status Quo aka Classical liberalism if we are following the dictionary definition of conservatism

This is @Jack V Savage @Falsedawn @Fawlty @Trotsky : So what you're saying is modern day right wingers are upholding classical liberalism even though they are not and are just authoritarian assholes!

Me: No

You guys: WELL YOU ARE ANY WAYS

me:eek:k

I literally asked you if you were saying that American Conservatives weren't actually conservative, and you threw a sperg fit.

You have a really warped view of what you say and how people are responding to you.

Even this fanfic you just wrote, I love how you portray yourself as eternally calm even though this discussion only restarted because you quoted me and sperged out because I responded.
 
Not according to truth, the dictionary, simple logic and history.

None of those things support your argument. And you were explicitly saying to disregard the dictionary and history. Where your argument is trivial is that you're using a private definition that doesn't apply to the real world. Where it's wrong is when you suggest that that private definition applies (as you have denied doing but as you do here when you invoke the dictionary and history--there's no logic involved in this kind of discussion).
 
I literally asked you if you were saying that American Conservatives weren't actually conservative, and you threw a sperg fit.

You have a really warped view of what you say and how people are responding to you.

Even this fanfic you just wrote, I love how you portray yourself as eternally calm even though this discussion only restarted because you quoted me and sperged out because I responded.
I didn't read any of what you wrote.

<{MingNope}>
 
Go to work, bud. We can always come back to this imho fwiw.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top