He has advocated for shooting protesters in the legs, killing the families of suspected terrorists, "freedom cities" replete with flying cars, buying Greenland, and annexing Canada as our 51st state.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Trump administration says sign language services ‘intrude’ on Trump’s ability to control his image
- Thread starter MarcusGregor
- Start date
- Sep 4, 2005
- 29,371
- 17,600
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Hence the reason I haven't ever voted for him...
But this expectation of "as long as Trump's worse, the moral thing to do is helping our side take power so we can do all of our crazy stuff" doesn't fly with me.
Apart from the fact that it lowers the bar in general, it's a bad incentive structure.
Because as long as you can make a case for why "the other teams worse, so you should just focus on that and only that", it allow the opposing team to cram through a bunch of nonsense in the name of "lesser of two evils".
I don't like that.
It rewards bad behavior. I'd prefer to see one of the parties actually be good, not just a little better than the other party.
It's basically saying "as long as you're not as bad as the worst guy, you can get on a moral high horse", which in a two-party system, isn't saying much.
If a person had two children.
Little Danny gets a bit of a smart mouth and refuses to put his toys away and gives a lot of back sass.
Little Reggie spits at them and kicks them in the nuggets when they won't buy him a toy.
Little Reggie is obviously worse, but telling Reggie "Why can't you be more like Danny at least he doesn't spit at me?" or telling Danny "I'll give you extra allowance because you behaved a little better than Reggie this past week" sets up a race to the bottom that I don't want to be complicit in.
Upvote
0
I see. So, to be clear, the things he does advocate are somehow not as bad as "open borders, defunding police, males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds"? Because it sure looks like you are singling out one side as having off the wall ideas and claiming their need to move towards the middle while saying of the other side "Well, ya, but I didn't vote for him". So my question is how does not voting move either side towards the middle? Just seems like absenteeism. You say "it rewards bad behavior" but not voting does that as well in a two party system. It just does so in a passive fashion.
Upvote
0
- Sep 4, 2005
- 29,371
- 17,600
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
In the eyes of conservative people who make up half of the country (for religious reasons or otherwise), no, the Trump stuff isn't as bad.
Again noting, I didn't vote for him...but from their perspective, he's the lesser of two evils.
I'm singling out the democrats on that because on the key issues that defined the 2024 election, they were the ones who had more of the "off the wall" ideas in the court of public opinion.
And astute democratic "players" know that now, hence the reason why Kamala made a scramble to move more toward the middle (albeit too late), and why people like Newsom (who's the likely 2028 front runner) have moved more toward the center on those issues. They know why they lost, it's not some cryptic mystery.
Biden originally presented himself as a moderate (and cleaned house and won by a large margin), his admin then did a hard left turn immediately after taking office. (and put a bunch of people off)
Trump's numbers between 2020 and 2024 didn't shift a whole lot. It was disenfranchised center-left and centrists staying home during the 2024 election that cost Harris the victory.
Thus the reason why we've seen the push toward the middle from prominent democrats on those issues.
They know they need the moderates and independents to vote (and vote for them) in order to win.
The concept of "swing voters" exists for a reason.
The far-left folks the west coast are always going to vote D, the rural far-right types in East Texas are always going to vote R, that's a given. Nobody's winning or losing elections based on those types of voters. The "Red or Dead" and "Blue no matter who" type voters have been omnipresent for a few decades now.
I've mentioned it before, winning elections is based winning the votes you want to get, not the votes that you're already guaranteed to have. Anyone with a (D) next to their name is winning Cali, anyone with an (R) next to their name is winning Alabama & Texas.
All of the solid blue states still went blue in 2020 despite Biden not being their cup of tea based on the way he was presenting himself in the lead-up. The difference being... me (and people like me) voted for Biden in 2020, because we thought it was a return to moderation. When we opted to "sit this one out" or "vote 3rd party" in 2024, it was the difference maker.
Upvote
0
OK. Understood, you were channeling their perspective.
Everything I have seen in polling was that the reason Trump won was his promises on the economy and the democrats tone deaf response to it. While I agree the off the wall ideas do not help that was not what was the deciding factor and I have a hard time crediting the idea independents thought the democrats more off the wall then Trump and that was why they voted for him.
Upvote
0
- Sep 4, 2005
- 29,371
- 17,600
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Noting again, it's not that a bunch of moderates voted for Trump, it's that a lot of moderates didn't vote for the other team.
The R team gained 3 million voters, the D team lost over 6 million...
That's a lot of people "sitting that one out"
155 million voters came out for 2020
152 million came out for 2024
Evidently I'm not alone on that, I'm joined by 3 million other people.
Upvote
0
Bradskii
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
- Aug 19, 2018
- 24,436
- 16,765
- 72
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
The Dems do not support open borders. They don't support defunding the police (or refunding as it was originally meant to be understood). Problems in sport will be dealt with by those in charge of their own sports and if you don't like Drag Queens reading to children, then you be sure to avoid those events.
But be that as it may, please pay attention here, because it's important. You won't have to vote for anyone else for another three years. So your somewhat trite comparison isn't valid. Notwithstanding that the worst president in the history of your country won't even be on the ballot. So your only decisions you need to make right now are 'Do I support what this idiot is trying to do now, or not'.
And seeing as you've spent more posts than anyone else trying to defend this idiotic claim by Trump that having someone sign for the blind is bad for his visuals, then that's your position.
But honestly, if anyone else spends as much time as you do supporting almost everything he does and then excuses themself by glibly saying 'Oh, but of course...I personally think the man is despicable', then I swear I will lose my lunch.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
