Several races...

[Pringles]

2 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

I disagree with the first part

So if I hypothetically supported Adolf Hitler you wouldn't have a qualm with who I am? 

 

2 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

That's exactly what I have said lol these are made up problems, which I am criticizing. Just these problems are taken seriously by too many people nowadays.

Quote

Then why are you perceiving it as such a problem against the "natural order" or however you want to describe it, of society? You are clearly bothered by it. Just as much as those who you claim are pushing it. 

 

3 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

It doesn't bother me the way you might think here. I don't care, but I just find this whole race and sexual stuff too much nowadays. There's no need to include blacks or gay couples in like half of all ads. Yeah, it's not representative as well but that's not even the main point. It just seems too political correct and that fails it's purpose, as it creates even more hate and division in the long run. I also don't think TV should be used trying to educate people.

Sure, I think the sexual and race stuff can be a bit much in the modern day as well. But how is it really that big of an issue for you? Do you advocate censorship of ideas you disagree with in this case? For some people it's good to have those discussions with I guess. I get tired of hearing about the drama associated with all of it. That's where my qualm lies.

But the way you said it earlier clearly has a racist undertone in it. Other people see it. Maybe it's not what you intended. But it's how I perceived it. Where is the problem? Is the problem because you see black people in the Ads?

TV has the potential to "educate" or "influence" anybody who watches it. It always has. Not sure what the point is there. I can go watch the news and I am getting "educated." 

I can watch Stark Trek and learn a moral lesson. I am getting "educated." 

 

[DakotaHale]

I will also admit that outside of Ohio races I don’t even know who most of the non-incumbents are lol.

[Cenzonico]

8 minutes ago, Patine said:

You're an American. It's a commercial tort. The answer is obvious. Sue for big money!

😎

[Pringles]

1 minute ago, DakotaHale said:

The same vilification and discontent that arises when discussing Boebert and MTG should also arise when discussing AOC or Omar IMO. I support them only as a counter to the other squad.

Sure. But that is absolutely no excuse to support either of them. I support neither the squad, nor the republican soccer moms. I criticize both. I never want to see them run. I wish they'd all quit, lose, whatever. 

To support one though draws the battle lines that you're contributing to a lesser state of affairs in the conduct of our politics. Do we really want a future of where it's AOC vs MTG? I sure as Hell don't. 

[Hestia]

2 minutes ago, DakotaHale said:

The same vilification and discontent that arises when discussing Boebert and MTG should also arise when discussing AOC or Omar IMO. I support them only as a counter to the other squad.

There is no equivalency. I wouldn't vote for Omar in a primary, but she is probably the most controversial member of the squad. MTG has said worse anti-Semitic things than her, even. AOC is absolutely no way similar. That's just a lame excuse.

[Hestia]

Just now, Hestia said:

There is no equivalency. I wouldn't vote for Omar in a primary, but she is probably the most controversial member of the squad. MTG has said worse anti-Semitic things than her, even. AOC is absolutely no way similar. That's just a lame excuse.

I will add, at least Omar apologized. MTG has not. 

[Pringles]

2 minutes ago, Patine said:

Maybe you're a REALLY, REALLY HUGE Volkswagen fan who thanks him for bringing them onto the market? 😛 

Yeah... he also did some good things for animals rights. Right? Not so bad....

[Cenzonico]

6 minutes ago, DakotaHale said:

The same vilification and discontent that arises when discussing Boebert and MTG should also arise when discussing AOC or Omar IMO. I support them only as a counter to the other squad.

The GOP retard squad and the Dem squad are both absolute dog shit. But the GOP squad believes our democracy has been infiltrated by the QAnon deep state and have a history of (for a lack of a better term) interesting remarks. The Dem squad is just really dumb and should not be taken seriously. They both are bad, but objectively speaking the GOP squad is all-around worse than the other. Either way, the hope is that we don't get to a point where we have an election where we have to choose between AOC v MTG. And if that day ever comes, then we really need to destroy the duopoly 😛.

[DakotaHale]

Just now, Cenzonico said:

The GOP retard squad and the Dem squad are both absolute dog shit. But the GOP squad believes our democracy has been infiltrated by the QAnon deep state and have a history of (for a lack of a better term) interesting remarks. The Dem squad is just really dumb and should not be taken seriously. They both are bad, but objectively speaking the GOP squad is all-around worse than the other. Either way, the hope is that we don't get to a point where we have an election where we have to choose between AOC v MTG. And if that day ever comes, then we really need to destroy the duopoly 😛.

Omar has a history of interesting remarks as well if you look into her

[Pringles]

1 minute ago, Cenzonico said:

The GOP retard squad and the Dem squad are both absolute dog shit. But the GOP squad believes our democracy has been infiltrated by the QAnon deep state and have a history of (for a lack of a better term) interesting remarks. The Dem squad is just really dumb and should not be taken seriously. They both are bad, but objectively speaking the GOP squad is all-around worse than the other. Either way, the hope is that we don't get to a point where we have an election where we have to choose between AOC v MTG. And if that day ever comes, then we really need to destroy the duopoly 😛.

I will storm the Capitol for Eugene if we get to AOC vs MTG

[Cenzonico]

Just now, DakotaHale said:

Omar has a history of interesting remarks as well if you look into her

Yes that is true, but then you compare it to what someone like Marjorie has said and it starts to get more dicey. 

[DakotaHale]

2 minutes ago, Pringles said:

I will storm the Capitol for Eugene if we get to AOC vs MTG

We must secure the existence of Eugene and a future for Eugene1/2/3/4/5…

[ShortKing]

Even as a conservative, it has become clear that the institutional guardrails in the GOP have failed to curtail some of the worst folks seeking public office. MTG and Paul Gosar have associated with white nationalists and Matt Gaetz is under investigation for sex with a minor. Ilhan Omar has a history of controversy and corruption that shouldn't be ignored or minimized but to justify supporting folks like Boebert and MTG by pointing to folks on the other side like Omar only serves to ensure that more folks like MTG and Omar get elected. 

[ConservativeElector2]

12 minutes ago, The Blood said:

Hey, @ConservativeElector2, since you refuse to support Don in part because of his mentioned support for LGBT rights, I just want to know how you feel about Boebert's view on the issue.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/lauren-boebert-lgbt-age-21-b2049628.html

Like I said it depends on what Coram sees as LGBT rights. As I said a down-to-earth approach about more inclusion, is nothing I would not be supportive of. I just don't agree with the notion of too much which is seen often nowadays. Like LGBT people being mandatorily preferred when it comes to jobs or stuff like that. You know what would be weird? An employee saying "I would never give a gay person a job". That's just stupid and ignorant. But If a better qualified non-LGBT person is chosen over an LGBT person it's not a hateful act for me. You have to look on qualifications not on sexual orientation and yes I would hire LGBT people if they are qualified. 

Boebert's statement is actually pretty weird and I don't get what point she likes to make. Those who say they are gay shall say so. I would also not force anyone to come out. Whatever is best I guess

[DakotaHale]

2 minutes ago, Patine said:

 

The fact is, the problem of only two PARTIES ever win more than a few token offices on all levels and Government, and the electoral system is strongly stacked to keep that state of affairs, which still retain partisan culture, organization, and base views and common policies, and a long history of betrayal of the trust, crimes of state, corruption, lack of accountability and transparency, war crimes and supporting horrible regimes abroad, etc. is still a fundamental problem. Real, viable, and strong alternatives to the Republican AND Democratic Parties are what is needed to revive the moribund American electoral system. As I said to you, @DakotaHale, once, "Monty, give me Door Number 3, and DON'T make it guaranteed to be a goat, AGAIN!"

What are your thoughts on the UK’s and Swiss political systems?

[ShortKing]

I don't think a multi-party system would even make that big of a difference. Most multiparty systems end up with two major parties anyway and you're told a vote for the Lib Dem instead of Labour only serves the Tories or that a vote for the NDP is a wasted vote, etc. Plus, we just watched France have an election where there were some half a dozen candidates representing different parties to take on Macron, and none of them were even approaching decent lol.

[Hestia]

1 minute ago, ShortKing said:

I don't think a multi-party system would even make that big of a difference. Most multiparty systems end up with two major parties anyway and you're told a vote for the Lib Dem instead of Labour only serves the Tories or that a vote for the NDP is a wasted vote, etc. Plus, we just watched France have an election where there were some half a dozen candidates representing different parties to take on Macron, and none of them were even approaching decent lol.

GERMANY 😂

[DakotaHale]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

And calling her Anti-Semitic is odd, as Somalis, like Jews, Arabs, Assyrians, Amhara, Tigrayans, and some others, are a Semitic people. But, unfortunately, the term Anti-Semitic is used far more in a political sense than a sense of true cultural bigotry nowadays (although the latter does definitely still happen - and it is still odd, by definition, when Arabs and Somalis get accused of it).

Saying “I am a proud anti-semantic and Obama is a Keynesian” sounds like a really racist statement if you read it too fast.

[Rezi]

1 minute ago, ShortKing said:

I don't think a multi-party system would even make that big of a difference. Most multiparty systems end up with two major parties anyway and you're told a vote for the Lib Dem instead of Labour only serves the Tories or that a vote for the NDP is a wasted vote, etc.

Will always be a problem with FPTP. This is why Proportional representation is based.

[ConservativeElector2]

24 minutes ago, Pringles said:

So if I hypothetically supported Adolf Hitler you wouldn't have a qualm with who I am? 

Hitler is always the extreme example and I guess I would cease contact with anyone who's supporting Hitler. But you cannot compare today's politicians with him. The whole Trump is Hitler stuff for example is weird.

Quote

Sure, I think the sexual and race stuff can be a bit much in the modern day as well. But how is it really that big of an issue for you? Do you advocate censorship of ideas you disagree with in this case? For some people it's good to have those discussions with I guess. I get tired of hearing about the drama associated with all of it. That's where my qualm lies.

But the way you said it earlier clearly has a racist undertone in it. Other people see it. Maybe it's not what you intended. But it's how I perceived it. Where is the problem? Is the problem because you see black people in the Ads?

No? That's just hyper political correct for my taste. What's the reason to do it besides political correctness? I don't get it myself. Like you said it's not even representative here and I don't feel black people in Austria suffer in any way. 

In a political discussion not everything needs to be a big issue. We are talking about examples. I don't see why you are pushing this point of drama.

[ShortKing]

3 minutes ago, Patine said:

Well, in France, you're only looking at the Presidency in the Second Round as of the last two election. En Marche didn't exist in the 2012 Election, and the FN very rarely gets to the Second Round. Plus, the Parliamentary Elections are often a VERY different story, and the political term, "cohabitation," was a French innovation. The, "wasted vote," dynamic you preach in for the LibDems in the UK or NDP in Canada, is American political thinking superimposed on other electoral systems, and doesn't fully show a complete understanding of the situation here, or in the UK. And there are multi-party systems that are VERY dynamic, without the infamous instability of Israel - or the Weimar Republic. Your views of multi-party politics seem a bit stereotyped. I am not accusing you of deliberate misrepresentation to force a disingenuous point, mind - just probably lack of a full and complete understanding.

Erin O'Toole himself told supporters that Justin Trudeau wants them to vote for the People's Party, warning that splitting the conservative vote would only help Trudeau. Perhaps he would be a more appropriate audience for lectures against superimposing American political thinking on the situation in Canada?

[Pringles]

3 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

Hitler is always the extreme example and I guess I would cease contact with anyone who's supporting Hitler. But you cannot compare today's politicians with him. The whole Trump is Hitler stuff for example is weird.

No? That's just hyper political correct for my taste. What's the reason to do it besides political correctness? I don't get it myself. Like you said it's not even representative here and I don't feel black people in Austria suffer in any way. 

In a political discussion not everything needs to be a big issue. We are talking about examples. I don't see why you are pushing this point of drama.

I'm not comparing Trump to Hitler. I'm using your own logic when it comes to deciding who to vote for. 

Again, I do not understand why you are so bothered and treat these things as an attack on you, or a grand political conspiracy, whatever. 

I'm just taking the things you say and responding to them. It's not a point of drama. It's what you said. If you cannot see why people would recoil at it, then I dont know what to tell you.

[The Blood]

23 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

Like I said it depends on what Coram sees as LGBT rights. As I said a down-to-earth approach about more inclusion, is nothing I would not be supportive of. I just don't agree with the notion of too much which is seen often nowadays. Like LGBT people being mandatorily preferred when it comes to jobs or stuff like that. You know what would be weird? An employee saying "I would never give a gay person a job". That's just stupid and ignorant. But If a better qualified non-LGBT person is chosen over an LGBT person it's not a hateful act for me. You have to look on qualifications not on sexual orientation and yes I would hire LGBT people if they are qualified. 

 

Okay, I just don't know what you're going off about here. I know some colleges have been called out for using minority quotas for applicants, and I don't support every attempt at affirmative action, but what in the world are you talking about companies' hiring practices favoring LGBT people? Because that is not a common hiring practice, my sexual preference and identity have never been considered for any job I've applied for. Any company doing that would be immediately called out for an invasion of applicants' privacy by considering their sexual preference or identity in hiring. Obviously people should be hired based off merit, any company not doing that is an outlier and not representative of how most companies handle hiring. And that's not what most supporters of LGBT rights want, I don't believe Don supports that and I know most reasonable people don't either.

Edited April 25, 2022 by The Blood

[ConservativeElector2]

1 minute ago, Pringles said:

I'm not comparing Trump to Hitler. I'm using your own logic when it comes to deciding who to vote for. 

Not you and I didn't say that you do it 😛 but others

2 minutes ago, Pringles said:

Again, I do not understand why you are so bothered and treat these things as an attack on you, or a grand political conspiracy, whatever. 

Attack on me? Do I? I think that's exaggerated. Like I said I dislike political correctness, especially if it gets way too much. It has nothing to do with Black people in particular, as it's just an example from what I'm observing. I had said the same thing if it were another ethnicity.

[ConservativeElector2]

15 minutes ago, The Blood said:

Okay, I just don't know what you're going off about here. I know some colleges have been called out for using minority quotes for applicants, and I don't support every attempt at affirmative action, but what in the world are you talking about companies' hiring practices favoring LGBT people? Because that is not a common hiring practice, my sexual preference and identity have never been considered for any job I've applied for. Any company doing that would be immediately called out for an invasion of applicants' privacy by considering their sexual preference or identity in hiring. Obviously people should be hired based off merit, any company not doing that is an outlier and not representative of how most companies handle hiring. And that's not what most supporters of LGBT rights want, I don't believe Don supports that and I know most reasonable people don't either.

Within my university for example women and disabled people are hired on a preferred basis. Another university prefers colored people. I think that's a wrong approach, maybe disabled people can be excluded here. I don't know how hard it's for them to find a job so maybe this programs can be justified?! I guess I've read the demand to include LGBT people on top when hiring somewhere, but maybe I am wrong Idk. 

 

Different topic. Regarding marijuana legalization, I would also like to add, that my opposition does not include medical marijuana.