It went into effect in Alaska, and the CO gov said he'd support the will of the peeps. We'll see.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
Gentlemen's agreement with AJ. It got so bad at one point that he was getting word from his higher ups and almost had to shut down the board. He agreed to keep it open without mods if we keep it to one thread and followed basic rules like no nudity.
really good question. Because that sort of thing is so hard to find. If only there was something called the internet with like 100,000 different sites at the tip of your fingers for that.
This guy is a former PayPal CEO, also has worked at meta and messenger, and has other tech startups. Solid, all the way Dem and Dem supporter. Until now. Well thought out post with examples as to why and the very basis for his switching over to support orange against cackula. In particular, statements like this one demonstrate why this isn't your grandparents D & R parties.
"This version of the Democratic Party is sidelining moderates and centrists and has adopted an increasingly leftist ideology. This drift to the left has dictated policies from which I’ve found myself estranged."
"This version of the Democratic Party is sidelining moderates and centrists and has adopted an increasingly leftist ideology. This drift to the left has dictated policies from which I’ve found myself estranged."
Wait just a minute! How did you get that video of my wife?Test
Interesting. Thanks for the info.
Who are these "higher ups"?
What's your opinion? Was it a good trade-off?
One of my main objections to the single thread approach is that you can only have one poll per thread. This 1515 page thread has had myriad topics worthy of a poll.
People who think this are idiots.
The Dems are very corporate mainstream on most issues. To their shame.
This op-ed casts Kamala as pretty decent on climate issues, but hardly radical. Obviously better than Trump - who has repeatedly indicated he will go in the wrong direction - and maybe better than Biden, but not as aggressive as the next US President needs to be.
www.theguardian.com
Kamala Harris played a crucial role in passing one of the strongest climate laws in the world | Leah C Stokes
America’s landmark climate law, which turns two years old this month, has Harris’s signature all over it
And yet you're going to vote for the side that is committed to banning pornography by way of punishing those who make it available to the masses. Without a steady stream of Internet T&A and/or a woman in your life, you'd better start working on your memory and imagination.
I clicked on it to read his post. Damn, that's an excessively long explanation for why he's going to the dark side. I wish him well although it's probably not the first bad decision he's ever made..
Hell, no. I scrolled down and saw the dates 2017 and 2019 and "then COVID came." I figured if I want to know his life story I prefer to wait for the movie.
Faithless electors - another reason to change the Electoral College. Why even have these human electors if a state's intention is the "winner take all" approach?
Maine and Nebraska don't use the winner-take-all approach, instead going with a more fair representation approach, but even they could be bitten by faithless electors - i think... since not all states have laws that fine these faithless electors or whatever.
Lemme guess? You got that from Project 2025, which of course Trump has already told you he does not support and in reality doesn't have a prayer of ever becoming reality. But please, carry on with your hand wringing.
Jesus Christ dude, from a long list of truly stupid, try-too-hard posts you've made, this one might top the list.
If 'the masses' includes the underaged, I'm all for limiting access. And if that deprives you of your kiddie porn, too bad for you.
North Carolina has a law currently in effect that requires age verification for access to porn. I have not and will not register for that simply because I don't put my personal info out there so frivolously. But yes, I am 100% behind the law and I hope that it is effective.....effective at limiting the damage done by the mindless likes of you who supports any sort of corrupting influence and then whines 'but but but freedom of speech' and 'but but but censorship' when those with common sense try to reign in the overboard idiocy. You who incidentally are too stupid to realize that your post just outed you as someone who does need porn, probably so you can get excited enough to plow your homely wife.
You remind me of a video I saw not long ago where a man was angrily addressing a school board over the content of books in the school library...or it might have been the town council over what was generally available in the town's public library, I don't remember and that doesn't matter.. He was reading out loud objectionable passages from some of the material in question while they were defending the lack of censorship....and in the same breath they were telling him he needed to stop using such language in that public place. True mindlessness. Your kind of mindlessness.
lol, bullshit....you're worried that you won't have access to the massive amounts of porn that you need to accomplish your marital chores.
ranked choice voting is the right idea, but I think I'd reserve it for the general election. Maybe I'm thinking wrongly, but that in my mind would encourage the formation of and serious consideration for alternate parties while not entirely disrupting the two-party system. We really need to change the system that discourages the same.
I suppose if nothing else, this could get the ball rolling.
Rivals.
Yes, because the board outside of this thread was actually pretty good, although it's mostly dead at this point. The politics crap that was going on before it was combined into one thread either ran off previously good posters or they had to be banned.
I don't think it's a big issue here, because of the smaller number of regular posters. You pretty much know where everyone stands.
Why only the general? Wouldn't you rather have better options than Mark Robinson for gov? What is the benefit of the two-party system, which we don't want to disrupt? Americans should vote, legislatures should legislate, and policy-makers should policy-make on issues, not party.
So Bidenomics and foreign policy seem to going pretty great right now. 4 more years of this and we should be set.
I want options, but there are better ways to provide them than by eliminating them. Duh.
Americans should vote? What a concept.
Policy-makers should policy-make on issues, not party? Rank voting should cause the parties to more seriously address the issues due to the emergence of seriously-considered third parties. But that being said, remember we are talking about elections which entail politicians getting elected. It's what happens after the election that matters.
Case in point? See who is currently flipping her stances just to get elected.
There are benefits in being covered politically in a broader sense, even if the opposing politic prevails. Keep the candidates in the general attuned to the wider viewpont so as to lessen the risk of having Joe Shit the woke rag man become president. Allow as many additional parties as may qualify, and rank voting will promote the worthy ones into serious consideration, which is what we desperately need in order to make the two parties take heed.
Flip flopping would get worse if we had third choice for primaries?
ETA, sorry, that was my initial takeaway while reading your post at a stoplight and it is too long to read a second time. I didn't discern any other con or impact on the necessity of parties.
Last edited:
I suppose maybe you've figured out that my comment was in response to your concern about issues being properly addressed. I was pointing out that issues being addressed leading up to an election don't necessarily mean much. It's how they're addressed after the election that matters, and while I don't want to discard the two-party system, I welcome...and I've been welcoming...the prospect of whatever enhances the development of third parties into actual contenders, largely because this should tend to cause those issues to be taken more seriously both before AND after elections.
The positive possibilities are manifold. Issues being handled in a less political way, better people representing us, issues being actually resolved rather than becoming political footballs, maybe even an increase in honesty and sincerity in politics.
What is being displayed currently is nothing less than disgraceful and ruinous.
Ranked choice voting is something that I don't know enough about and haven't seriously considered as it really hasn't grown legs enough to be an issue in my voting sphere. I need to spend some time looking at it from various perspectives. However, the only regular reference to it that I ever come across is here - with Blaze always being the one pushing it as some brilliant new concept and the way to go forward. Considering his rhetoric and talking point defense of everything D, it makes me immediately suspicious on its face and I naturally assume it's a system that will favor growing government at all levels and having those in charge being even more in charge of our lives. As such, I simply don't believe it will do anything to address your point about politicians (all of them) promising everything to everyone to gain votes and then acting in a fashion that benefits them, their allies, and keeps them in power. Until I study it more, my initial reaction is no thanks.
But that simply doesn't matter my friend, it's begins and ends with anybody but orange. It's only precious feelings over policy.
Looks like Kackula's VP pick is Walz. I'm surprised it wasn't Shapiro.
I'm thinking the theory is that he will keep the left side of things happy while she flippy floppies around to the middle for election purposes.
I'm thinking the theory is that he will keep the left side of things happy while she flippy floppies around to the middle for election purposes.
You should study it more, because it's better than the current setup unless you love the two party system.
ETA: if it was in place this year, your choices probably would be Trump, Haley, Harris and Kennedy.
If Trump said anything close to this, Alvin Bragg and/or the DOJ would already be drawing up the indictment.
Imagine thinking a teenage boy motivated by porn wouldn’t immediately figure out how to use a vpn. It only blocks access for stupid people. If anything itll just push kids to darker sectors of the internet not hosted in the US or just straight dark web material
And if you cant tell the difference between someone reading a book that they chose to read and subjecting everyone to a read aloud story time then I dont know what to tell you.
Last edited:
Explain Bidenomics. Be sure to include the part where US inflation is less than the rest of the worlds at the same time.
Also, please include that Biden’s addition to the national debt being half of Trumps was.
Then explain why you think infrastructure programs are worse than tax breaks for corporations.
Oh wait, you cant do any of that.
I'm going to, but I do recall reading something that it props up candidates that one side of the spectrum would favor (which is why I assume our resident cheerleader for it is a supporter).
And I disagree wholeheartedly on your ranking. I think you've grossly overvalued Haley's popularity. Much of her support (votes) and money came from anyone but Trump people including huge amounts of D's. Their candidate was always gonna be Joe, so they could do anything possible during the primaries to undermine he who must not be re-elected. In a ranked situation, that support would have gone to Biden (assuming there is still an apparatus in place to anoint and push a party's candidate).
The interesting part would have been who emerged after Trump and Biden, but it surely would not have been Harris. Remember, until they officially kicked Joe to the curb, there was no push or love whatsoever for Kackles. She was considered unelectable and would have gotten no money or support. The current surge is just the situation they setup with there being no time for anyone else. It's a win win. If she wins, the D's are thrilled at the possibility of 8 years and Walz thereafter. If she loses, she is done and they don't have to worry about anything other than a fresh start for an actual, good candidate in 2028.
I frankly don't give a damn about other countries. We are the fricken USA. We are supposed to be head and shoulders above the rest. Infrastructure, you mean like all those charging stations that haven't been built?
So I tell you we are in first place but its not first place enough? Globalized economies dont mean shit right?
You know what we do need though? Tariffs! Amirite!?!?
You and gunslinger really trying to one up to see who the biggest dumbass is on the board. You’re the “you should have to take a test to vote” type without knowing that you would fail any test miserably.
Also, love how you just evaded the national debt point.
So you really have no basis at all for your claims about the economy other than what you feel.
Legislators should write and propose stand alone bills. And then the populace should vote on everything significant via referendum. It would be cumbersome but it would truly reflect what the American citizens want versus legislators writing and proposing bills with hidden ways to line their pockets. If you're serious about giving people what they want, and serious about minimizing corruption, this idea is infinitely better than ranked choice or anything else.
I don't need a legislator "speaking" for me. I'll vote for legislators that have good ideas that I like and then speak for myself by voting on the proposed legislation.
