2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vacante

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The left is not blameless. They spit on the returning soldiers, they told the communists where our troops were in the Vietnam War, they saw pink where conservatives saw red, they wanted God out of the public square. I could go on, just as you can go on with the perceived excesses of the right.

If you were conservative and saw this happening to this country, you want to put the brakes on the "reforms". If your dander was up, you'd want to fight back. And because the left is, in your opinion, changing what is fundamental to be the USA, you possibly got angry. Change may be necessary, but let's talk about it, get a consensus, and implement. But don't ram it down our collective throats.

Everyone is in a hurry to implement "change". Why rush? If it's good, then it will happen. Maybe not tomorrow, but a few years from now. If it "seemed to be a good idea at the time, but not anymore," then it will die a natural death before anything happens

So now that one side has gone aways over there, and the other side and gone way over here, the DMZ is not a safe place to be. The left and the right have fundamental disagreements on the role of the federal government. This is what, I hope, this election is about. The electorate will make their decision and we'll see what happens.

They see themselves as inherently correct, so their continued ramming it down our throats is simply administering justice to those who don't want it. Which is why long term there are few freedoms in this country that aren't at risk, maybe none.

And I disagree that if change is good it will inevitably happen. Change can be good or bad, and often has been as world history shows.

This election, as with other recent elections, hinges less and less on substance and issues. The closer we get to election day, the less we see the candidates and the media giving any measured, honest discussion of the issues. It's more important to them to get the right result than to get there the best way. Results over process, which in the long run is a bad thing for everyone.

 

[Foxton]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Everyone is in a hurry to implement "change". Why rush? If it's good, then it will happen. Maybe not tomorrow, but a few years from now. If it "seemed to be a good idea at the time, but not anymore," then it will die a natural death before anything happens

Don't worry, eventually we'll let you have a chance to sit at the front of the bus. We just need to get used to the idea, feel it out, and get back to you.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Shoot Old PO'd, no need for some pricey gubmint commission. I can tell you what's wrong with conservatives anytime you'd like! Consider it a public service from your liberal friend...

"Shut up, he explained."

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Here's a high beam voter for His Panderness. With an especially enlightened view on the murder of Ambassador Stevens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKKiWUFBXx8&feature=player_embedded

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Here's a high beam voter for His Panderness. With an especially enlightened view on the murder of Ambassador Stevens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKKiWUFBXx8&feature=player_embedded

No WAY! You found a Youtube video of someone saying something radical!?!? I'm shocked. SHOCKED, I SAY!!

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Speaking of nutbars, the Comments responding to this post say it all.

God knows (apparently, since they invoke him every fifth post) what those people will say on election day. "Voter fraud," presumably.

Yeah its sad. As Colbert said last night, Romney and conservatives needs to focus on the big guy and get him across the line. Jesus is a lost cause and will be going Dem.

I've never really spent any time on right wing message boards but there is some bizarre points of view there. One is that the media is lying and that polls are a sham. Polls had Obama ahead of McCain by an average of about 10% and he won by 7%. This time around the race is a bit closer and GOP states that had voted more for Obama have shifted to the GOP (like Indiana), but the swing states haven't moved much from a healthy Obama win.

But if the fringe conservatives like those folks want to understand the upcoming election they should pay heed to Nate Silver's prediction that Obama's an 80%/20% favorite. As Wiki says:

The accuracy of his November 2008 presidential election predictions—he correctly predicted the winner of 49 of the 50 states—won Silver further attention and commendation. The only state he missed was Indiana, which went for Barack Obama by 1%. He also correctly predicted the winner of all 35 Senate races that year.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

No WAY! You found a Youtube video of someone saying something radical!?!? I'm shocked. SHOCKED, I SAY!!

I reiterate what Bobby "the brain" Hennan once said as he looked out on a wrestling crowd: "The trouble with these people is they can breed and they can vote."

There are plenty of low information voters to go around. There, happy now?

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The left is not blameless. They spit on the returning soldiers, they told the communists where our troops were in the Vietnam War, they saw pink where conservatives saw red, they wanted God out of the public square. I could go on, just as you can go on with the perceived excesses of the right.

If you were conservative and saw this happening to this country, you want to put the brakes on the "reforms". If your dander was up, you'd want to fight back. And because the left is, in your opinion, changing what is fundamental to be the USA, you possibly got angry. Change may be necessary, but let's talk about it, get a consensus, and implement. But don't ram it down our collective throats.

Everyone is in a hurry to implement "change". Why rush? If it's good, then it will happen. Maybe not tomorrow, but a few years from now. If it "seemed to be a good idea at the time, but not anymore," then it will die a natural death before anything happens

So now that one side has gone aways over there, and the other side and gone way over here, the DMZ is not a safe place to be. The left and the right have fundamental disagreements on the role of the federal government. This is what, I hope, this election is about. The electorate will make their decision and we'll see what happens.

Pretty interesting/good post. I'd say much of what youre posting regarding Vietnam, etc were fringe people but not in government. Now those fringe people (on the other side) have made it into government.

IMO the US of the 60s was change that was absolutely needed. Much of it was powered through, but who knows how else to get Alabama to respect AAs. Change in some of the 70s was not. Sometimes it was either violent streets and black panthers or change gone to places where it wasn't needed. So my thinking is that much of the change was needed and don't use the broad brush.

Of course, I'm not big on the conservative movement today. Sure its moved a bit further to the right than at any time (for comparison to today look at the big conservative between 1930 and 1970 Eisenhower). But the other issue is that its been infected by right wing media...to the point that solutions are less important than winning and compromise is not an option.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

There are plenty of low information voters to go around. There, happy now?

Thanks for proving something that no one questioned.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

I don't think that's true. First off, example of a mod righty? Joe Scarborough maybe?

Where have all the conservative Scarborough's gone? I may disagree on some issues...but there's a guy who values a balanced perspective, very pragmatic by letting the issues and not ideology drive his perspective, and willing to call out his team when they mess up & not just to show others that 'he's somehow moderate'. I wish congress would pay enough to attract more like him...rather than attracting those rabidly addicted to ideology.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

It's not so much "low information" as it is believing falsehoods that are wrapped in a blanket of hyper-emotion and thereby cleverly disguised as truths. The fringe on both sides of the aisle have this problem - the righties who parrot the Limbaughs and Hannitys, as well as the lefties who tuned into Olbermann every night when he was on TV, and would readily get a room with Maddow (if she swung their way). Someone insists that a human fetus is not a person, and the pro-lifers will scream from the rooftops that they are a child murderer. Someone makes a case for looser gun laws, and the lefties will go into a tizzy about them being a "backwoods gun nut", and proclaim there will more hunting accidents (and who really does that "hunting" business these days anyway?), more public massacres, and more innocent deaths if this person has their way.

This is our right as Americans - to believe what we want to, no matter how ridiculous or absurd the rest of us think it is, or in the face of facts that seemingly debunk our staunchly-held beliefs. This also extends to making fun of everyone who doesn't agree with our point of view (or alternatively, get all butthurt and call them a Nazi or a Commie ).

I used to think that people's political views evolved heavily from what their parents believed and taught them (especially young conservatives). I think this is true until high school graduation, when almost everyone gets at least a little free-spirited when they move off to college and see a little more of the world. The next big leap comes when you get that first job, unchain yourself from your parents' charity (if applicable), and have to fend for yourself. Then you have your first kid, and it becomes all about what you think is best for your kids - this is usually where many ex-liberal ideologues become increasingly moderate, if not eventually outright conservative by retirement.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

I used to think that people's political views evolved heavily from what their parents believed and taught them (especially young conservatives). I think this is true until high school graduation, when almost everyone gets at least a little free-spirited when they move off to college and see a little more of the world. The next big leap comes when you get that first job, unchain yourself from your parents' charity (if applicable), and have to fend for yourself. Then you have your first kid, and it becomes all about what you think is best for your kids - this is usually where many ex-liberal ideologues become increasingly moderate, if not eventually outright conservative by retirement.

I think that is overstated. While there is some evidence of an age arc, the effect of where you start is almost wholly determined by your parents' and neighbors' ideologies. So somebody from a center left family might have a tendency to go hard left as a college student, center left as an adult, and centrist as a retiree, while somebody from a center right family might have a tendency to go centrist as a college student, center right as an adult, and hard right as a retiree.

And of course it's all tendencies undone constantly by individual cases. As I've gotten older and taken on more responsibilities I've moved farther left. It was easy to be libertarian when everybody I knew was a A student working their way to a great job. Having kids, meeting people from other backgrounds, and -- for lack of a better word -- growing up has made it impossible to carry those simplistic libertarian viewpoints into adulthood.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Well, this is embarrassing. Fox News spent the day spreading the meme that the polls are wrong because COMMUNIST LIBRUL BIAS BRAINWASHING SATAN. And then the Fox News poll came out.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

I think that is overstated. While there is some evidence of an age arc, the effect of where you start is almost wholly determined by your parents' and neighbors' ideologies. So somebody from a center left family might have a tendency to go hard left as a college student, center left as an adult, and centrist as a retiree, while somebody from a center right family might have a tendency to go centrist as a college student, center right as an adult, and hard right as a retiree.

And of course it's all tendencies undone constantly by individual cases. As I've gotten older and taken on more responsibilities I've moved farther left. It was easy to be libertarian when everybody I knew was a A student working their way to a great job. Having kids, meeting people from other backgrounds, and -- for lack of a better word -- growing up has made it impossible to carry those simplistic libertarian viewpoints into adulthood.

I believe it was Pauline Kael who said: "I can't understand how Nixon won, nobody I know voted for him."

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Conservatives today would find Eisenhower and Reagan to be RINO's. Obama doesn't even qualify as a liberal half the time. In fact he's more conservative in many waves than GW. So, I rest my case. Oh, I knew Bob would side with Old Pio. Both posters who espouse their supposed middle of the road rhetoric on here every day and go nuts with faux outrage every time someone calls them what they are, radical.

 

[Handyman]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Well, this is embarrassing. Fox News spent the day spreading the meme that the polls are wrong because COMMUNIST LIBRUL BIAS BRAINWASHING SATAN. And then the Fox News poll came out.

I was told the polls dont matter

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

No WAY! You found a Youtube video of someone saying something radical!?!? I'm shocked. SHOCKED, I SAY!!

I assume we'll have a similar response to the next time someone posts a picture of some retard saying keep the government out of my medicare or some such stupidity.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Conservatives today would find Eisenhower and Reagan to be RINO's. Obama doesn't even qualify as a liberal half the time. In fact he's more conservative in many waves than GW. So, I rest my case. Oh, I knew Bob would side with Old Pio. Both posters who espouse their supposed middle of the road rhetoric on here every day and go nuts with faux outrage every time someone calls them what they are, radical.

The analytical prowess of a gerbil.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

That's funny cause when I think of conservatives the last thing I think of is less government power. Seems to me they spend all their time on what women do with their bodies, which two people are getting married, and who is voting in an election.

Perhaps so....that's the problem with labels, no? they conceal and divide as much as they reveal and explain.

While a significant minority of people may be ideologically consistent; I suspect most people are not. My own inclination is to be an empiricist or a pragmatist. I'm comfortable with being wrong, admitting mistakes, learning new things. I'm okay with using a pencil and eraser.

One thing that I've noticed empirically is that rule number one for people in power is to remain in power. I do not trust the government to watch out for me; I am not upset that people in government would have as their first priority to watch out for themselves...after all, that's human nature. I do find it sad when people become vested in one side or the other "winning"....do you really think either candidate cares about us? In their own way, Romney and Obama each are primarily about stroking their own egos, no?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

I think that works both ways.

It does seem that, when it comes to politics, both the left and the right are moving to the extremes, while at the same time people who actively identify with either the left or the right are dwindling in number. There are almost no "blue dog" Democrats left; there are few "RINO"s left. Yet surveys of party affiliation also find fewer people identify with either party.

For every Koch there's a Soros, for every Corzine there's a McMahon. More ideological litmus tests at either extreme and lots of big money to stir them up and keep them roiling.

Back when we had to walk uphill both going to school and also coming home, barefoot through the snow, politics was an occasional thing. Now it seems we can't escape it.