- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Populism (and Dobbs) is the basis for "muh democracy" rants and ravings from the DEMs
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:17 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:17 am to AggieHank86
quote:
FFS, SlowFlow is not arguing the MERITS of Dobbs. He is arguing the PERCEPTION.
And who is driving the perception?
1
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:17 am to the808bass
quote:
You’re arguing that every political response i
No
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:21 am to the808bass
quote:
I think you’re communicating poorly in the original post. That’s leading to the conflict in the thread
The conflict in this thread is the population of this board can't get past the word "abortion".
Abortion is to the poli board like a flame to a moth.
quote:
If I said that “politicians on the left and right are both capable of trying to consolidate power for their parties and positions in ways that might impinge upon liberty,” I’m not sure I’d get much disagreement.
If you said it? Likely little disagreement.
If 2015 SFP said it? Likely little disagreement
If 2022 SFP said it? People would flip out, talk about how I've "changed", etc.
I have to include specific attacks on DEMs/Leftists in my OPs now or risk being called a Leftist supporting their policies. I did that in this one, too, but abortion rings stronger than even assumptions and personal attacks on me. But that doesn't mean my point isn't wrong.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:21 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The question isn't if you think it will happen.
The question is if you want it to happen.
What was the point of a lifetime of voting to get judges in place if you don’t want them to change the bad precedent that motivated you to vote in the first place? If you are a conservative you want stronger states rights. Don’t be ashamed when you get them, celebrate and explain why it’s great.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:21 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Excluding opposing populations from voting
I can't even take this seriously.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
60% of our population believing something means "almost nothing" in a democracy? REALLY
Because it's only 60 percent because of a group that is never going to vote any other way
Math hard for you?
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:23 am to AggieHank86
quote:
For some reason, many posters just cannot accept that stupid people vote based upon their perceptions, not based upon reality.
I don’t even think it’s that legitimate. Stupid people (most voters) vote on the faulty perceptions of others who feed them information.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:23 am to STEVED00
quote:
And who is driving the perception?
People value their perceived rights in this country.
Just because people believe in a policy you disagree with doesn't mean they're dehumanized robots. That's just a tactic by in-groups to make out-groups easier to disrespect. Nobody is forming their personal beliefs about abortion based strictly off the media
If we're dehumanizing, I can say you only support pro-life stances because your perception is driven by other institutions. That way, your personal policy preference is also now irrelevant. Does that make you feel better? Of course not.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:24 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The conflict in this thread is the population of this board can't get past the word "abortion". Abortion is to the poli board like a flame to a moth.
Which is why someone who was trying to communicate the point you say you’re trying to communicate would have used a different example.
You didn’t because the OP is really a whine about abortion pretending to be about something else (as your posts are demonstrating).
quote:
Without Dobbs the GOP would be approaching like 57 Senate seats after this bloodbath next week and taking over several purple states' governorships and SOS. It would be such a bloodbath you'd have DEMs in purple states who would have to start considering breaking party allegiance or risk losing in 2024.
This post was edited on 11/5/22 at 9:26 am
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Excluding opposing populations from voting has "nothing" to do with winning elections?
Where is this being proposed?
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:25 am to cssamerican
quote:
If you are a conservative you want stronger states rights.
I want a weaker federal government, sure.
I don't want to create 50 little tyrannical states. There has to be protections for individuals from state action whether it's from DC or your state capitol.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Nobody on the right has proposed voter ID laws? Rolling back MIV in states? Shortening early voting? NOBODY?
Why did you ignore the rest of my post on that topic? Not having voter ID allows fraud to occur. Those aren’t authoritarian measures they’re common sense to ensure election integrity.
Authoritarian would be things like barring certain people from voting who tend to vote for the opposition.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:26 am to the808bass
Again with the rehash. You people jjst cannot stay on topic.
The McCloskey’s did not own the gate. It belonged to the neighborhood association. The crowd entered the neighborhood through an open, undamaged gate. This is on video. Thus, it was damaged in one of two ways. Either the crowd went back and damaged the gate, despite having not done so much as knocking over a trashcan anywhere else in the entire neighborhood, or the McCloskey’s went back and damaged it during the night to support the lies that they had already told regarding the crowd destroying the gate to gain entry into the neighborhood. Yes, I think that the latter is more likely.
Rittenhouse committed two homicides/“ (aka “murders”). He was (correctly) not CONVICTED, because he established the elements of an affirmative defense (self defense). That is the way affirmative defenses work. I am sorry that the law confuses you to such an extent.
The McCloskey’s did not own the gate. It belonged to the neighborhood association. The crowd entered the neighborhood through an open, undamaged gate. This is on video. Thus, it was damaged in one of two ways. Either the crowd went back and damaged the gate, despite having not done so much as knocking over a trashcan anywhere else in the entire neighborhood, or the McCloskey’s went back and damaged it during the night to support the lies that they had already told regarding the crowd destroying the gate to gain entry into the neighborhood. Yes, I think that the latter is more likely.
Rittenhouse committed two homicides/“ (aka “murders”). He was (correctly) not CONVICTED, because he established the elements of an affirmative defense (self defense). That is the way affirmative defenses work. I am sorry that the law confuses you to such an extent.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:26 am to AggieHank86
quote:
No, Raymond, I stand by my ACTUAL position on each of those points, most of which you mistepresent.
Clearly you stand by nothing, and none of your shitty points are misrepresented, as supported by other people in this thread. I’ll have to remember to add this one to the list for next time:
The Far Right obsession with the fictional nation of Wakanda
quote:
But I am not going to relitigate them on every fricking thread on this forum.
You have no problem “relitigating” other things infinitely many times on this forum, yet suddenly are too ashamed of these to talk about them any more.
quote:
Why are you insistent upon derailing every thread?
I’m insistent on pointing out the stupidity of pseudo intellectuals that are not nearly as smart as they think they are.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:26 am to SlowFlowPro
Ummm when you have such poor discernment between the options, polls like this are utterly useless.
Big difference between people that believe in unlimited abortion and those that are comfortable with limited abortion timeframes like 10-12 weeks. Instead, this poll conflates the two and people likely are assuming one = full restriction with maybe rape, incest, etc while the other = every other option.
This is awful polling trying to force a narrative not actually get a true read on people’s opinions/beliefs.
Big difference between people that believe in unlimited abortion and those that are comfortable with limited abortion timeframes like 10-12 weeks. Instead, this poll conflates the two and people likely are assuming one = full restriction with maybe rape, incest, etc while the other = every other option.
This is awful polling trying to force a narrative not actually get a true read on people’s opinions/beliefs.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:27 am to AggieHank86
Thank you for supporting my post.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:28 am to Turbeauxdog
quote:
I can't even take this seriously.
Because you want to ignore data?
Basically every study on this finds voter ID laws benefit Republicans.
Now you can argue whether or not that's a good thing (or other points like election security), but the fact remains that voter ID laws exclude DEM voters.
Felons having their voting restricted? Excludes DEM voters disproportionately.
Restricting early voting periods? Excludes DEM voters disproportionately.
Restricting mail in voting? Excludes DEM voters disproportionately.
Restricting ballot harvesting? Excludes DEM voters disproportionately.
Just because these are facts doesn't make a judgment on the merits of the policies either way. But the facts are the facts.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:28 am to Antonio Moss
quote:There is certainly some truth to this, but those implanted perceptions BECOME their perceptions.quote:I don’t even think it’s that legitimate. Stupid people (most voters) vote on the faulty perceptions of others who feed them information.
For some reason, many posters just cannot accept that stupid people vote based upon their perceptions, not based upon reality.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:29 am to Geauxgurt
quote:
This is awful polling trying to force a narrative not actually get a true read on people’s opinions/beliefs.
I wonder what a poll would say that asked “Do you support the rights of the unborn?” Or “do you support the ability to terminate a pregnancy up to the very moment of birth?”
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:29 am to SlowFlowPro
No the media is the one driving it in that it is their “right”. Also the vast majority of the 60% u mention live in an area where they still have the “right” to abortion.
Page 5 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News