OOTB's Political Thread . ..

[bluetoe]

C-S-A! C-S-A! C-S-A!

Traitors who owned human beings deserved to lose, and lose bad. The or THE, or united or United... The United States won and you're salty 160 years later.

Mobs rule in the states, last I checked. Every governor is elected by popular/mob vote. Every state office, for that matter. They never needed an electoral college (electors) to appease slave states, within respective states' elections. It's still mob rules. Self-governing means the mob rules. The candidate with the most votes wins.

I like how you don't mind posting like a retard. I like how you virtue-signal for no reason at all. I really like how you create clumsy little strawmen when you are too dumb to put forth a coherent string of words about much of anything actually being discussed.

Heels Noir must have left you in charge of being butthurt for him. I have to say, you're doing a great job.

 

[carolinablue34]

nothing much other than maintaining enough States power to resist mob rule.

Define mob rule in this case. Mob rule against what?

 

[strummingram]

I like how you don't mind posting like a retard. I like how you virtue-signal for no reason at all. I really like how you create clumsy little strawmen when you are too dumb to put forth a coherent string of words about much of anything actually being discussed.

Heels Noir must have left you in charge of being butthurt for him. I have to say, you're doing a great job.

I like how easy you make it for me to demonstrate how wrong you are about everything.

 

[bluetoe]

I like how easy you make it for me to demonstrate how wrong you are about everything.

yes, I'm wrong about everything you make up because you make it up that way.

 

[strummingram]

yes, I'm wrong about everything

I know.

 

[bluetoe]

Define mob rule in this case. Mob rule against what?

primarily, against electing the President on a simple majority. As you know, for example, Trump was elected electorally and not by a simple majority in the popular vote. And then legislatively, it's only a good thing that the States are represented as they are such that we aren't subjected to a majority of votes centered in urban areas.

 

[bluetoe]

I know I'm butthurt. You're just too much for me to deal with and I resent how you always make me look stupid.. .

I can't argue with this.

 

[Heelicious]

so what i took from that is when the s goes down on tuesday, the people that will have won the majority, will be election deniers…the people who voted for them, are essentially election deniers…which means in 2024, no election will be deemed “credible” because the loser, if a denier, will not concede…therefore, here we go again.

and if trump decides to run again, which i fully expect, then nobody can stand in his way even if he loses again…he’s not going away when the “denier” voter & candidate are the majority in power?…it’s really a great plan.

i personally think trump would be more powerful if he didn’t run and just played the system like he’s done the last two years, especially…either way, i’m here for it.

People on here act like the primary / only thing Rs are running on is “election denying” - a lazy gimmick charge by the left for Rs asking questions about events that occurred in 2020 that were shady and abnormal AF by any objective person’s standards.

But - two points - I’ve NEVER heard election denial brought up by any current R candidate without the mfing snakes / roaches / maggots in the media bringing it up - or some D candidate that has exactly zero positive other issue to run on

These “election deniers” who will win on Tuesday won’t win because of election denial issues no matter how often media / leftist candidates scream it.

They will win because the Rs will kick the Ds asses on issues voters care about - crime, economy, kids, border, inflation- beat them so bad they will still feel the burn into 2023.

 

[carolinablue34]

primarily, against electing the President on a simple majority. As you know, for example, Trump was elected electorally and not by a simple majority in the popular vote. And then legislatively, it's only a good thing that the States are represented as they are such that we aren't subjected to a majority of votes centered in urban areas.

I have to dissent here. That's not 'mob' rule. That's simply a majority exercising their will. That's precisely why the President should NOT be elected by an electoral college. I mean that's just pure democracy in action. And it's a big example of why a lot of people in blue areas are pissed off. Exhibit A: McConnell fails to hold a vote on Obama's pick for SCOTUS in 2016. Trump gets elected electorally and not with a popular majority (only one Republican has managed that since 1988). 3 justices later, a string of politically motivated rulings has now ended right to an abortion, increased religious encroachment in public schools, dismantled part of the Voting Rights Act, and now appears poised to hand state legislatures the right to override the will of their own citizens during national elections and draw their own gerrymandered maps without any interference from Courts.

Putting aside the flaws of the left for a moment, that right there is what fear against 'mob rule' gets you. The cultural conservatives are in the minority on vast array of topics from LGBT rights, abortion, health care, and many others. Such people are threatened with complete irrelevance in a decade or less. So now they are doubling down and trying to entrench their power before it slips away. Before my generation and the one below mine becomes the largest voting bloc.

The state of this country has many causes and what I just stated is just one element of it. But 'states rights' is often another thought stopping cliche used to justify just about anything- kind of like "You just got to have faith.", (to discount arguments against religion) "God works in mysterious ways." (to discount the problem of evil), "If you are poor then you don't work hard enough." (to discount the unfairness of our economic system), and "Those who can't do, teach" (to discount the wisdom of those with an education, who often push against these kinds of mindsets). People who do not seek truth and instead want to follow a worldview that is comfortable to them use these to stop conversation on uncomfortable topics.

 

[gunslingerdick]

truth

 

[Heelicious]

I have to dissent here. That's not 'mob' rule. That's simply a majority exercising their will. That's precisely why the President should NOT be elected by an electoral college. I mean that's just pure democracy in action. And it's a big example of why a lot of people in blue areas are pissed off. Exhibit A: McConnell fails to hold a vote on Obama's pick for SCOTUS in 2016. Trump gets elected electorally and not with a popular majority (only one Republican has managed that since 1988). 3 justices later, a string of politically motivated rulings has now ended right to an abortion, increased religious encroachment in public schools, dismantled part of the Voting Rights Act, and now appears poised to hand state legislatures the right to override the will of their own citizens during national elections and draw their own gerrymandered maps without any interference from Courts.

Putting aside the flaws of the left for a moment, that right there is what fear against 'mob rule' gets you. The cultural conservatives are in the minority on vast array of topics from LGBT rights, abortion, health care, and many others. Such people are threatened with complete irrelevance in a decade or less. So now they are doubling down and trying to entrench their power before it slips away. Before my generation and the one below mine becomes the largest voting bloc.

The state of this country has many causes and what I just stated is just one element of it. But 'states rights' is often another thought stopping cliche used to justify just about anything- kind of like "You just got to have faith.", (to discount arguments against religion) "God works in mysterious ways." (to discount the problem of evil), "If you are poor then you don't work hard enough." (to discount the unfairness of our economic system), and "Those who can't do, teach" (to discount the wisdom of those with an education, who often push against these kinds of mindsets). People who do not seek truth and instead want to follow a worldview that is comfortable to them use these to stop conversation on uncomfortable topics.

That judge was incompetent corrupt activist wannabe tyrant hack Merrick Garland. Look at what he’s done as AG and be thankful for the dodged bullet. What McConnell had done, was done in the past by Dems and the Dems absolutely sure AF would have done the same if roles were reversed. I guarantee it.

All that BS you say about “loss of rights to abortion”, removing parts of voting rights act (the ease of cheating part?) is just patently false BS.

if you want to get an abortion it still is quite easy and hasn’t changed at all in virtually every blue state. Same with voting rights etc.

These issues were pushed down to the states as the founders and the constitution clearly intends. It’s not a matter of states rights being a cliche. It is the absolute foundation of what the immensely wise founders wrote and ratified into the constitution and bill of rights. To guard against becoming a mob rule democracy. And having individual and state rights trampled.

You don’t like the laws in Alabama? Fine. Work to change them there or move to gos forsaken shthole NY or NJ and you can have abortions at any point in the pregnancy- way more extreme than literally any other developed country in the world.

But don’t act like you throwing a tantrum because you personally don’t like states and individuals having rights vs the overbearing federal government.

You want the constitution changes? Don’t bitch about it. Don’t try to pack the court or some gimmick that will never happen. Work to change your state laws, move to a state you align with, or get cracking on amending the constitution.

Good luck!

 

[carolinablue34]

That judge was incompetent corrupt activist wannabe tyrant hack Merrick Garland. Look at what he’s done as SG and be thankful for the dodged bullet. What McConnell had done, was done in the past by Dems and the Dems absolutely sure AF would have done the same if roles were reversed. I guarantee it.

All that BS you say about “loss of rights to abortion”, removing parts of voting rights act (the ease of cheating part?) is just patently false BS.

if you want to get an abortion it still is quite easy and hasn’t changed at all in virtually every blue state. Same with voting rights etc.

These issues were pushed down to the states as the founders and the constitution clearly intends. It’s not a matter of states rights being a cliche. It is the absolute foundation of what the immensely wise founders wrote and ratified into the constitution and bill of rights. To guard against becoming a mob rule democracy. And having individual and state rights trampled.

You don’t like the laws in Alabama? Fine. Work to change them there or move to gos forsaken shthole NY or NJ and you can have abortions at any point in the pregnancy- way more extreme than literally any other developed country in the world.

But don’t act like you throwing a tantrum because you personally don’t like states and individuals having rights Bs the overbearing federal government.

You want the constitution changes? Don’t bitch about it. Don’t try to pack the court or some gimmick that will never happen. Work to change your state laws, move to a state you align with, or get cracking on amending the constitution.

Good luck!

Remember that part about thought stopping cliches? That's almost everything in this post. Almost everything hard right conservatives use as a 'states rights' issue is used to shut down conversation.

And good God turn off the damn Fox news. It's like Tucker Carlson hired a parrot.

By the way, I'd much rather live in New York than some redneck backwards ass shit stain of a state like Alabama that has no money or prestige other than Nick Saban.

 

[strummingram]

Remember that part about thought stopping cliches? That's almost everything in this post. Almost everything hard right conservatives use as a 'states rights' issue is used to shut down conversation.

And good God turn off the damn Fox news. It's like Tucker Carlson hired a parrot.

By the way, I'd much rather live in New York than some redneck backwards ass shit stain of a state like Alabama that has no money or prestige other than Nick Saban.

He doesn't have to hire anyone. They're volunteering, for free. Tucker gets paid with ratings.

 

[bluetoe]

I have to dissent here. That's not 'mob' rule. That's simply a majority exercising their will.

a majority exercising its will is mob rule. Did you think I meant a crowd was getting a rope and throwing it over a tree limb?

 

[carolinablue34]

a majority exercising its will is mob rule. Did you think I meant a crowd was getting a rope and throwing it over a tree limb?

And what's wrong with a majority exercising its will? As long as those who lost or are the 'minority' in the system are respected and have protected rights under the law.

 

[prlyles]

what, for the 100th time? Just so you can disregard it? Just so you can say 'where's the proof?'

I don’t require proof when someone is stating an opinion but I sure as hell do for something like election fraud.

 

[bluetoe]

I don’t require proof when someone is stating an opinion but I sure as hell do for something like election fraud.

OK. Get proof then.

 

[blazers]

And what's wrong with a majority exercising its will? As long as those who lost or are the 'minority' in the system are respected and have protected rights under the law.

It was clear in your earlier posts begin with your critique of hrc that this is what your were getting at regarding SCOTUS. Bluetoe is being intentionally myopic and argumentative.

 

[bluetoe]

And what's wrong with a majority exercising its will? As long as those who lost or are the 'minority' in the system are respected and have protected rights under the law.

It was clear in your earlier posts begin with your critique of hrc that this is what your were getting at regarding SCOTUS. Bluetoe is being intentionally myopic and argumentative.

presumption is a poor substitute for intelligent discourse. But if that's all you're capable of, work with what you have I guess.

I actually have no idea what you're talking about. If you think I'm being 'intentionally myopic and argumentative' over the fact that we THANK GOD don't have a 'pure democracy' but rather have a republic form of democracy and a political structure wherein the country is comprised of States and that those States themselves have power, then you're just an idiot.

States having power helps save the minority from the 'tyranny of the majority'. For example, DJT would not have been elected except for the electoral college, which was implemented to allow the States to choose a president. Allowing the States to have aa say is still a good idea. Having the States represented in the Senate is another way that the majority is not allowed to freely run roughshod over the rest of the country. The Bill of Rights affords certain protections to individuals but it does NOT help in areas not specifically outlined, especially when those protections are subject to the interpretations of .those who want to satisfy the most people rather than protect the few. The Senate is based on some very good ideas dating back to the early Romans. You remember them don't you? Civilization that lasted a thousand years? Toga parties?

Most people live in urban areas at this point. There is a different mindset in the city and certainly conditions are different in the city than they are in rural areas. Heavily urbanized States should not be allowed by simple majority to hold sway in the lawmaking bodies or the choice of president over those States and those areas that are more rural and extremely vital to our interests. State power is thusly vital as well. It goes on and on.

One could write a book on the subject and oh yeah, that's right....tons of books and papers have. been written and untold conversations have taken place. But all of a sudden we're having a discussion here on why States rights, in a country comprised of States, is good for us and 'pure' majority rule is bad, like we're in third grade and just finding out about these things.

So I'm being myopic and argumentative? I think the ones being myopic and argumentative so suddenly are the ones about to get their asses handed to them. It's more a matter of 'waaaa, I'm not getting my way so I'll complain about it like a child....'.

 

[Heelicious]

Remember that part about thought stopping cliches? That's almost everything in this post. Almost everything hard right conservatives use as a 'states rights' issue is used to shut down conversation.

And good God turn off the damn Fox news. It's like Tucker Carlson hired a parrot.

By the way, I'd much rather live in New York than some redneck backwards ass shit stain of a state like Alabama that has no money or prestige other than Nick Saban.

Ok I’m done.
What logical people call common law, rule of law, legislation and justice, individual and states rights constructed and upheld in constitution and BOR and court cases over 200+ years - you call cliches. No point in arguing.

I don’t even live in Alabama but I’ll take the laws and the people, the safety, the way people collectively treat others in AL or FL or any red state any day of the week over those in any blue state - especially urban areas of blue states like CA WA OR NY NJ. Living with the violent mental disorder drug addicts in a tent in their own trash and feces - what’s not to like?

 

[blazers]

presumption is a poor substitute for intelligent discourse. But if that's all you're capable of, work with what you have I guess.

I actually have no idea what you're talking about. If you think I'm being 'intentionally myopic and argumentative' over the fact that we THANK GOD don't have a 'pure democracy' but rather have a republic form of democracy and a political structure wherein the country is comprised of States and that those States themselves have power, then you're just an idiot.

States having power helps save the minority from the 'tyranny of the majority'. For example, DJT would not have been elected except for the electoral college, which was implemented to allow the States to choose a president. Allowing the States to have aa say is still a good idea. Having the States represented in the Senate is another way that the majority is not allowed to freely run roughshod over the rest of the country. The Bill of Rights affords certain protections to individuals but it does NOT help in areas not specifically outlined, especially when those protections are subject to the interpretations of .those who want to satisfy the most people rather than protect the few. The Senate is based on some very good ideas dating back to the early Romans. You remember them don't you? Civilization that lasted a thousand years? Toga parties?

Most people live in urban areas at this point. There is a different mindset in the city and certainly conditions are different in the city than they are in rural areas. Heavily urbanized States should not be allowed by simple majority to hold sway in the lawmaking bodies or the choice of president over those States and those areas that are more rural and extremely vital to our interests. State power is thusly vital as well. It goes on and on.

One could write a book on the subject and oh yeah, that's right....tons of books and papers have. been written and untold conversations have taken place. But all of a sudden we're having a discussion here on why States rights, in a country comprised of States, is good for us and 'pure' majority rule is bad, like we're in third grade and just finding out about these things.

So I'm being myopic and argumentative? I think the ones being myopic and argumentative so suddenly are the ones about to get their asses handed to them. It's more a matter of 'waaaa, I'm not getting my way so I'll complain about it like a child....'.

tl;dr

also - i noticed @carolinablue34 repeating similar points that were clear, and it appeared you were being close-minded or obtuse, so I replied to her, not you.

 

[bluetoe]

tl;dr

^^^intentionally myopic, lol

 

[blazers]

Ok I’m done.
What logical people call common law, rule of law, legislation and justice, individual and states rights constructed and upheld in constitution and BOR and court cases over 200+ years - you call cliches. No point in arguing.

I don’t even live in Alabama but I’ll take the laws and the people, the safety, the way people collectively treat others in AL or FL or any red state any day of the week over those in any blue state - especially urban areas of blue states like CA WA OR NY NJ. Living with the violent mental disorder drug addicts in a tent in their own trash and feces - what’s not to like?

Alabama is lowest in almost every metric related to healthcare, education, crime. Montgomery and Birmingham have their share of people with violent mental disorders, drug addicts, homeless too. Good luck.

 

[blazers]

^^^intentionally myopic, lol

100% . I'm not wasting my time on your drivel.

 

[nctransplant]

She was asked if she’d concede if she lost. Her reply: I’ll going to win the election and I’ll accept that result. That’s not exactly encouraging coming from someone who doesn’t believe Biden won.

And GTFO with those false equivalencies. Did Democrats actually try to prevent Bush from taking power leading up to the certification? No. Did they run on a campaign that Bush was illegitimate? No. Did they encourage rabid imbeciles to storm the Capitol Building? No. No one denied anything in any of those years.

I’m sick of you people giving this “well both sides” do it BS. It’s categorically false.

Over Some Objections, Congress Certifies Electoral Vote (Published 2001)

Congressional certification of Electoral College vote, usually quick and routine, is punctuated by vocal protests reflecting rancor lingering from bitterly contested election; Vice Pres Al Gore, presiding, is forced to gavel down black House members time and again to make official the election...

www.nytimes.com

Just read the second paragraph.

 

[nctransplant]

Thanks @gunslingerdick Yes still here and I think my job might keep me here a couple more years but am looking for houses in original home state of South Dakota near Black Hills.

Such a mass exodus from this state and other blue states. Minneapolis and St. Paul were once great cities. Now gone and not coming back. Destroyed by the mayors, Governor, blm / Floyd riots, Covid over-reaction.

I’m looking forward to getting out of this city and state to a pretty place near a small city, in beautiful. (small) mountains - with way more normal common sense good hearted people who are charitable and help abundantly this who need it but otherwise everyone leaves each other alone. The people and the government. That is the difference between SD and the twin cities in Minnesota. Polar opposites.

Beautiful place

 

[nctransplant]

Alabama is lowest in almost every metric related to healthcare, education, crime. Montgomery and Birmingham have their share of people with violent mental disorders, drug addicts, homeless too. Good luck.

Both cities with Dem mayors, nice try.

 

[carolinablue34]

Both cities with Dem mayors, nice try.

Red state run by Republicans. Nice try.

 

[Heelicious]

Alabama is lowest in almost every metric related to healthcare, education, crime. Montgomery and Birmingham have their share of people with violent mental disorders, drug addicts, homeless too. Good luck.

Thanks for helping make my point. I don’t even live in AL but aren’t you glad you have options to move to a state that has laws and policies and institutions, leaders, community that aligns more with your beliefs and preferences?

Instead of AL, now do FL.
People flock by the 10,000s from the blue northeast states to FL. A massive exodus from shthole high tax corrupt and inept leadership by moron tyrants to a free, open, superbly managed (on Covid, schools, taxes) FL.

Look at the economy, education test scores,
crime in FL compared to say NY, NJ, MD.

It is humiliating for the blue state leaders or should be. No wonder people are leaving in droves from blue states like CA and NY to red states.

You can’t deny and can’t prevent logical people impacted by these states’ moron leaders from voting with their feet. Then the blue state tax base dries up. Same goes for corporate / business exodus (say from CA to TX).

Actually I find it funny and well deserved

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

$100

Deal... we're on. Either of us needs to hit both the PA+AZ senate races to win.

 

[gteeitup]

People on here act like the primary / only thing Rs are running on is “election denying” - a lazy gimmick charge by the left for Rs asking questions about events that occurred in 2020 that were shady and abnormal AF by any objective person’s standards.

But - two points - I’ve NEVER heard election denial brought up by any current R candidate without the mfing snakes / roaches / maggots in the media bringing it up - or some D candidate that has exactly zero positive other issue to run on

These “election deniers” who will win on Tuesday won’t win because of election denial issues no matter how often media / leftist candidates scream it.

They will win because the Rs will kick the Ds asses on issues voters care about - crime, economy, kids, border, inflation- beat them so bad they will still feel the burn into 2023.

for starters, because i just read about him yesterday, but the sec of state race in nevada comes to mind…marchant is running and is saying “i will fix fraudulent elections”…he said the 2020 election was rigged.

 

[carolinablue34]

Most people live in urban areas at this point. There is a different mindset in the city and certainly conditions are different in the city than they are in rural areas. Heavily urbanized States should not be allowed by simple majority to hold sway in the lawmaking bodies or the choice of president over those States and those areas that are more rural and extremely vital to our interests. State power is thusly vital as well. It goes on and on.

Why should rural areas in red states (especially southern ones) be allowed to operate with impunity when it comes to education, abortion, LGBT rights, Voting Rights, etc.?

Better yet, ask yourself why a minority of rural voters should be allowed to get their President over the will of the non rural majority? That's profoundly anti-democratic. It doesn't make any sense and has absolutely nothing to do with 'states rights'.

 

[carolinablue34]

Ok I’m done.
What logical people call common law, rule of law, legislation and justice, individual and states rights constructed and upheld in constitution and BOR and court cases over 200+ years - you call cliches. No point in arguing.

I don’t even live in Alabama but I’ll take the laws and the people, the safety, the way people collectively treat others in AL or FL or any red state any day of the week over those in any blue state - especially urban areas of blue states like CA WA OR NY NJ. Living with the violent mental disorder drug addicts in a tent in their own trash and feces - what’s not to like?

First off, I bet you a lot of money you've never been to any of those states. And if you have, you chose to see the worst aspects of them through a warped lense. I've been to New York, New Jersey, Seattle, Portland, etc. They have their problems like any city. It's really not the apocalyptic scenario you cons make it out to be.

And really? You're going to take the education, crime, mortality, and health care statistics of Alabama? A perpetually poor state with a horrendous track record when it comes to collectively treating others. How do they treat non white minorities? Gays, lesbians, and queer people? Abortion? Their track record isn't exactly squeaky cleans when it comes to those areas and is still pretty awful.

Again, you're using 'states rights' to justify a certain line of thinking. It's an interpretation.

 

[Heelicious]

First off, I bet you a lot of money you've never been to any of those states. And if you have, you chose to see the worst aspects of them through a warped lense. I've been to New York, New Jersey, Seattle, Portland, etc. They have their problems like any city. It's really not the apocalyptic scenario you cons make it out to be.

And really? You're going to take the education, crime, mortality, and health care statistics of Alabama? A perpetually poor state with a horrendous track record when it comes to collectively treating others. How do they treat non white minorities? Gays, lesbians, and queer people? Abortion? Their track record isn't exactly squeaky cleans when it comes to those areas and is still pretty awful.

Again, you're using 'states rights' to justify a certain line of thinking. It's an interpretation.

Are you seriously willing to bet me “a lot of money” I haven’t been to each of those cities and states - and the worst parts of them - some several times?

Seriously name the city or state you think I haven’t spent considerable time in. Make a list of whatever states you want. If I haven’t visited one or all of them on your list - you win. I have the receipts BTW.

Send the list and the $ bet. Or STFU - either way I don’t care

 

[Heelicious]

Beautiful place

Agreed.

I don’t recall where you live in NE. I grew up about 30 miles north of norhern Nebraska border. My first job out of college was in Omaha -‘for a couple years

 

[blazers]

Deal... we're on. Either of us needs to hit both the PA+AZ senate races to win.

Awesome, deal. Talk to you in like 3 weeks worth of counting, recounting, SCOTUS appeals, and maybe some weird run-off

 

[gunslingerdick]

also - i noticed @carolinablue34 repeating similar points that were clear, and it appeared you were being close-minded or obtuse, so I replied to her, not you.

 

[blazers]

Thanks for helping make my point. I don’t even live in AL but aren’t you glad you have options to move to a state that has laws and policies and institutions, leaders, community that aligns more with your beliefs and preferences?

Instead of AL, now do FL.

You started with AL, not me. And yes, i've lived in Montgomery, AL as well as southern CA, and frequently visit NY and Wash St.

 

[nctransplant]

Agreed.

I don’t recall where you live in NE. I grew up about 30 miles north of norhern Nebraska border. My first job out of college was in Omaha -‘for a couple years

Southwest Nebraska. South and west of Kearney about 1.5hrs.

 

[Heelicious]

…is why maybe we need to list our pronouns here amirite?