Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I'd vote for the third party that would inevitably be formed be all the people like me who would likewise ditch the GOP (some of my family already did refuse to vote for Romney over his lack of conviction on the issue, and I would have done so as well had I been aware of some of the last-minute things the Romney campaign put out on the subject).
edited 25th Nov '12 2:33:06 PM by EdwardsGrizzly
<><![]()
![]()
Then why don't liberal pundits or candidates make the point?
Honestly, as much of a none issue I think hypocrisy is, the majority of the American public think it's a huge one. Why don't opponents of the Republicans jump all over the point?
edited 25th Nov '12 2:36:44 PM by OhnoaBear
"The marvel is not that the Bear posts well, but that the Bear posts at all."![]()
![]()
if you honestly think any significant portion of the Go P Base is that devoted to abortion above all other issues that theyd rather never be relevant in politics again than compromise, then well Uh..good luck to ya.
![]()
actually. My guess on why is pretty simple. Liberals already realize. Moderates wont likely care. republicans would assume it was a liberal lie anyhow. or claim that bigger government in the case of moral issues wasnt the same thing as business deregulation anyhow.
edited 25th Nov '12 2:33:53 PM by Midgetsnowman
Voting based on a single issue is a great way to make yourself irrelevant. There is a reason the Greens ended up adopting a generally socialist platform; being a singe issue wonk on the environment just doesn't drum up enough support to get voted into any office.
@Oh no: They kind of are now, by dint of just stating actual facts themselves. Such as Obama's "read the transcript" response to Romney declaring he hadn't said Benghazi was a terrorist attack or something. Part of the problem is that even if Dems and others call out the lies, the Republicans have a media machine in action, and has had for decades, that can and will continue spinning all these things in the Republican's favor. And most people don't have the time to invest in figuring out the truth.
And the liberals don't? Claims of media bias in either direction of American Politics really raise my dander.
"The marvel is not that the Bear posts well, but that the Bear posts at all."![]()
The "liberal" media machine has nowhere near the influence or breadth of News Corp.
Not to mention. Even the "liberal": media, is only liberal by US standards. which is to say, nowhere near extreme left enough for me.
edited 25th Nov '12 2:42:59 PM by Midgetsnowman
If you were aware that a legal, sometimes even government-funded practice was killing 1 in every 6 children upon reaching age 10, would that not be the most important political issue to you? If not, I weep for the state of whatever moral code you subscribe to.
As long as people continue to be willfully ignorant of that fact that people like me have a completely good-faith, honest understanding that unborn babies are people with the same right to life as a 10-year-old, of course our position will make no sense to them. If you are at all capable of grasping this fact of how we think, then our position should make instant sense.
I'm not trying to start another abortion debate. I'm just asking you to make an attempt to actually understand what our position is before you criticize it.
edited 25th Nov '12 2:45:14 PM by EdwardsGrizzly
<><![]()
As much as I would actually love to rebut that some, the topic is one that is far too sensitive to lead to a polite discourse for too long so let's leave it at that.
And MSNBC has been around for only a little shorter time.
Combined with fictional media's trend towards liberal sensibilities on the whole and it ends up fairly reprisentative actually.
Of course, I only pay attention to the TV news so I can have a soundtrack for my net surfing.
"The marvel is not that the Bear posts well, but that the Bear posts at all."Grizz has a point there. I mean, I may think he's fundamentally wrong by comparing a 10 year old to a fetus, but that's the axiomatic point where arguing doesn't work one way or the other. Abortion being totes important to these people is not irrational.
But people like me will just smile wickedly and say "Go ahead and fall on your swords."
![]()
![]()
Rebut the reasonableness of our position, or rebut the idea that our position is not inconsistent with being a Very Big Deal?
Because it's the latter, not the former, that I have a problem with in this thread.
![]()
Since you are aware that you are incapable of understanding how we think, please refrain from making snide comments about how much we care about one thing or another.
Thank you for recognizing that fact. Sometimes I think you and me are the most like-minded diametrically opposed enemies that have ever existed...
edited 25th Nov '12 2:56:25 PM by EdwardsGrizzly
<><@Bear: What fictional media does is not important at all when it comes to the news. Why? Because the vast majority of us don't expect truth from fictional media, where as we do from the news. Because that's what news is supposed to be. TRUTH. SO yeah, don't bring up fiction into this because that's not at all what we've been talking about.
MSNBC has been fairly conservative, really. Rachel Maddow is one of very few liberal presenters on that channel. (I may be getting this wrong because after a while all the letters start sounding the same to me.)
![]()
I mean "rebut" as a general response, but I may be misapplying the term.
Since others have weighed in, I may as well: I, personally, am not ignorant of the validity of your opinion. In point of fact, I tend to share your opinion. I am against the imposition of that opinion on every person in this country when there is empirical evidence that the earliest stages of pregnancy have more in common with sushi than they do with living humans.
edited 25th Nov '12 2:57:50 PM by OhnoaBear
"The marvel is not that the Bear posts well, but that the Bear posts at all."![]()
![]()
Except you can't really ignore the influences that fiction have on the development of basic morality from which we derive all our opinions. Especially since we are posting on a board hosted by a site devoted to the categorization of trends in fiction. If we ignore general bias in fiction, then how could anyone hope to respond to the Conservative love of Ayn Rand?
@Ace
Same.
Although I try to be bi-partisan by laughing at liberals for there love for Karl Marx.
edited 25th Nov '12 3:09:07 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

Obama 'drone-warfare rulebook' condemned by human rights groups
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016