ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 16th November 2017, 09:33 PM   #921
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,379
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
You seem to be far more offended than fuelair is by this matter.

Regardless, "democrat party" is basically a childish attempt at using the English language against the democratic party, so I see no issue with returning the favor, particularly given the major failings fuelair also mentioned.
How in the world is "democrat party" using the English language against the democratic party? This has always boggled me. EC made this point earlier but: Are members of the Democratic Party NOT called Democrats? If so, then I don't see any attack if someone refers to the "Democrat Party," because they are indeed a Party of Democrats.

You guys are just wayyyyyy toooo sensitive.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2017, 09:51 PM   #922
Mumbles
Illuminator
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Personally, I prefer "Repugnican". It seems more appropriately descriptive.
That's a decent one.

The main problem I have is that there are republicans that are also disgusted by Toupee Fiasco*, and are trying to get their party back on the rails. And since our style of government in the US naturally creates 1-2 major parties, I'd much rather see one sane liberal party, and on sane conservative party, than one sane liberal party and one batty white supremacist pro-child-molestation reactionary party.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
How in the world is "democrat party" using the English language against the democratic party? This has always boggled me. EC made this point earlier but: Are members of the Democratic Party NOT called Democrats? If so, then I don't see any attack if someone refers to the "Democrat Party," because they are indeed a Party of Democrats.

You guys are just wayyyyyy toooo sensitive.
You'll note that I called it a "childish attempt". I did not call it "effective". Honestly, when I see it, I just laugh, and dismiss whatever else the person has to say.

*: So, let me discuss "Toupee Fiasco". First, I rarely do this sort of thing with any politician. I never called GWB "shrub", and I think it's kinda pathetic to call Hillary Clinton "Killary" or "Crooked Hillary". I use it, in part, to note that this is the level that the current US president operates at - mistaking flattery for respect, refusing to acknowledge his obvious limits of knowledge and intelligence, confusing Hispanic people from Ohio with "Mexicans", and so on. Honestly, I'd chuckle if someone called him "Toupee Fiasco" directly to his face, since he'd fume over it for days. What can I say, the man has a remarkable ability to inspire contempt.

Last edited by Mumbles; 16th November 2017 at 10:03 PM.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2017, 10:07 PM   #923
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 19,458
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
That's a decent one.

The main problem I have is that there are republicans that are also disgusted by Toupee Fiasco*, and are trying to get their party back on the rails.

<snip>

Not anywhere nearly enough of them (At last count, what? 13%? At best?). And by the current standards of their own party they are RINOs simply for that one thing.

That doesn't get to the root of the problem, though, which isn't Trump. He's just a symptom.

The problem is a party that was capable of putting Trump into office, and that continues by a huge, overwhelming margin to support him.

That party is repugnant, and so, by extension, is its membership. The only way for someone to rid themselves of that stain would be to disassociate themselves from the party. If they continue to support it then they support what it stands for.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2017, 10:13 PM   #924
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,379
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
You'll note that I called it a "childish attempt". I did not call it "effective". Honestly, when I see it, I just laugh, and dismiss whatever else the person has to say.
I understand that you perceive it as a childish attempt to insult Democrats. My question is: What do you perceive the intended insult to be, exactly? "Repugnican," and, "Republicker," are very clear. Demonrat . . . I get it. Those are mildly clever insult-puns. "Democrat," when followed by, "Party," well, I simply don't get how that's perceived as an insult, given that Democrat is what you call an individual member of the party. Improper usage? Sure. But insult on the level of Republicker? Please.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 12:07 AM   #925
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,284
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
How the hell can you take so much offense at someone leaving off "ic" when the members of the Democratic Party are Democrats (without the "ic")? Members of the Republican Party are Republicans. See how those sound the same? Do you maybe see how it might be a reasonable mistake? So how do you end up so offended at two letters being left off with no obvious intentional insult in there that you feel it justifies you constantly verbally assaulting all Republicans with intentionally and obviously insulting terms?

Well, you see, he called me Bob instead of Bobby. So it totally makes sense that I now call him Dickface and Dicksweat and Dicklicker instead of calling him Rick. Yep, totally justified - he called me Bob. The jerk.
Maybe some history will help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet)
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Democrat Party is an epithet for the Democratic Party in the United States, used in a disparaging fashion by the party's opponents. While historical and occasional current usage includes neutral appearances (including, historically, from within that party), the term has grown in its negative use since the 1940s, in particular by members of the Republican Party—in party platforms, partisan speeches and press releases—as well as by conservative commentators.[1] While there is grammatical argument regarding the propriety of use of both of the terms, with ending and without, ongoing use of the shortened term for political ends is a source of irritation to members of the Democratic Party.

<snip>
The term Democrat Party is an epithet for the Democratic Party of the United States,[3][4][5] used disparagingly by the party's opponents.[6] The following appeared in The New York Times in 1984:
The term 'Democrat Party' has been used in recent years by some right-wing Republicans on the ground that the term used by Democrats implies that they are the only true adherents of democracy.[7]
Language expert Roy Copperud said it was used by Republicans who disliked the implication that Democratic Party implied to listeners that Democrats "are somehow the anointed custodians of the concept of democracy".[8] According to Oxford Dictionaries, the use of Democrat rather than the adjective Democratic
is in keeping with a longstanding tradition among Republicans of dropping the –ic in order to maintain a distinction from the broader, positive associations of the adjective democratic with democracy and egalitarianism.[9]
Political commentator William Safire wrote in 1993 that the Democrat of Democrat Party "does conveniently rhyme with autocrat, plutocrat, and worst of all, bureaucrat".[10] Hendrik Hertzberg writes in The New Yorker:
There’s no great mystery about the motives behind this deliberate misnaming. 'Democrat Party' is a slur, or intended to be—a handy way to express contempt. Aesthetic judgments are subjective, of course, but 'Democrat Party' is jarring verging on ugly. It fairly screams 'rat'.[11]
Pollster Frank Luntz tested the phrase with a focus group in 2001, and concluded that the only people who really disliked the epithet were highly partisan Democrats.[12] Political analyst Charlie Cook attributed modern use of the term to force of habit rather than a deliberate epithet by Republicans.[13] Journalist Ruth Marcus stated that Republicans likely only continue to employ the term because Democrats dislike it.[3] Marcus stated that disagreements over use of the term are "trivial",[3] and Hertzberg calls use of the term "a minor irritation" and also "the partisan equivalent of flashing a gang sign".[11]
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 09:26 AM   #926
ahhell
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 615
Even after reading that, I'm still perplexed as to how its suppose to be insulting, "woo, it sound like rat" Ok, I'm also still perplexed why anyone would take offense to it. Its childish at best.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:21 AM   #927
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,691
Here's the thing: Saying "Democrat Party" is childish, but that's not what offends me.

What offends me is that this was widely adopted not just by conservative media types, but by actual legislators, as a way to ridicule their political opposition as part of a larger strategy to delegitimize them altogether. Think about that: grown men and women, paid by taxpayers to conduct the business of the people at the highest level, deliberately and systematically using grade-school taunts in their paid jobs to tear down the very idea that their elected colleagues have a role to play in governing

It's not the stupid pejorative itself that's offensive. It's the insipid immaturity in the service of contempt for the very idea of responsible governance.

And no, I don't belong to any political party. The Democrats have their own deficiencies. But today's Republican Party is mindless and soulless and seems intent on flushing America down the drain. Jennifer Rubin, a conservative writer who harped on H. Clinton so much she earned the sobriquet "Jennghazi", has flat-out said it's "not worth trying" to save a party that "stands for a set of crackpot ideas, unworkable and unpopular policies and a president not remotely fit to remain in office." She's right, and the dimwitted "Democrat Party" slur is just one bit of evidence why this is so.
sts60 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:27 AM   #928
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,705
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
Here's the thing: Saying "Democrat Party" is childish, but that's not what offends me.

What offends me is that this was widely adopted not just by conservative media types, but by actual legislators, as a way to ridicule their political opposition as part of a larger strategy to delegitimize them altogether. Think about that: grown men and women, paid by taxpayers to conduct the business of the people at the highest level, deliberately and systematically using grade-school taunts in their paid jobs to tear down the very idea that their elected colleagues have a role to play in governing

It's not the stupid pejorative itself that's offensive. It's the insipid immaturity in the service of contempt for the very idea of responsible governance.

And no, I don't belong to any political party. The Democrats have their own deficiencies. But today's Republican Party is mindless and soulless and seems intent on flushing America down the drain. Jennifer Rubin, a conservative writer who harped on H. Clinton so much she earned the sobriquet "Jennghazi", has flat-out said it's "not worth trying" to save a party that "stands for a set of crackpot ideas, unworkable and unpopular policies and a president not remotely fit to remain in office." She's right, and the dimwitted "Democrat Party" slur is just one bit of evidence why this is so.
If "Democrat Party" is too offensive, then perhaps you're too sensitive for the hustle and bustle of politics.

Seriously, it's a pathetically micro-aggression for adults to complain about.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:27 AM   #929
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 17,363
Soulless, lol
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:39 AM   #930
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 16,547
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
If "Democrat Party" is too offensive, then perhaps you're too sensitive for the hustle and bustle of politics.

Seriously, it's a pathetically micro-aggression for adults to complain about.
If this is such a minor offense, why then did the republicans start using it as an epithet?

"Ha ha ha, we are going to insult them by saying "democrat party." Aren't we clever?"
"We find that insulting."
"Oh lighten up. What's the big deal? Micro-aggression!"
__________________
I have a permanent room at the Home for the Chronically Groovy - Floyd from the Muppets

Last edited by pgwenthold; 17th November 2017 at 10:47 AM.
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:43 AM   #931
Segnosaur
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,501
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
The main problem I have is that there are republicans that are also disgusted by Toupee Fiasco*, and are trying to get their party back on the rails.
Where are all these republicans?

The Republican voters themselves, who continues to give Trump roughly 80% support?

Or how about the republicans in the Senate, some of whom have made anti-Trump comments, but have had no problems appointing clearly incompetent people to Trump's cabinet?

Yeah, I'm sure that if you look hard enough you might find an actual principled Republican, but its such a tiny minority that it is pretty much inconsequential.
Quote:
And since our style of government in the US naturally creates 1-2 major parties, I'd much rather see one sane liberal party, and on sane conservative party, than one sane liberal party and one batty white supremacist pro-child-molestation reactionary party.
I would too. The question is, how does the U.S. get to that point?
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:44 AM   #932
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,788
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
If this is such a minor offense, why then did the republicans start using it as an epitaph?

"Ha ha ha, we are going to insult them by saying "democrat party." Aren't we clever?"
"We find that insulting."
"Oh lighten up. What's the big deal? Micro-aggression!"
I imagine you meant "epithet".
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:47 AM   #933
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 16,547
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I imagine you meant "epithet".
Looks around...what are you talking about?

thanks
__________________
I have a permanent room at the Home for the Chronically Groovy - Floyd from the Muppets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:49 AM   #934
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,634
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I imagine you meant "epithet".
No, just wishful thinking on their part.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 12:23 PM   #935
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,691
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
If "Democrat Party" is too offensive, then perhaps you're too sensitive for the hustle and bustle of politics.

Seriously, it's a pathetically micro-aggression for adults to complain about.
You're completely missing the point. It's not that it's too offensive. It's (a) that it's so childish that GOP lawmakers are making jackasses of themselves by using it, but (b) much more importantly, it's part - a micro-part - of a long-term strategy not simply to beat the other party, but to delegitimize it altogether.

The former is merely petty and contemptible; the latter is anti-democratic and a micro-symptom of something much more dangerous.
sts60 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 01:08 PM   #936
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,162
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
You're completely missing the point. It's not that it's too offensive. It's (a) that it's so childish that GOP lawmakers are making jackasses of themselves by using it, but (b) much more importantly, it's part - a micro-part - of a long-term strategy not simply to beat the other party, but to delegitimize it altogether.

The former is merely petty and contemptible; the latter is anti-democratic and a micro-symptom of something much more dangerous.
All of which has boop-all to do with how members choose to treat each other on this board.

Again, when was the last time somebody actually used the term as an epithet here?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 01:24 PM   #937
Mumbles
Illuminator
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Where are all these republicans?

The Republican voters themselves, who continues to give Trump roughly 80% support?

Or how about the republicans in the Senate, some of whom have made anti-Trump comments, but have had no problems appointing clearly incompetent people to Trump's cabinet?

Yeah, I'm sure that if you look hard enough you might find an actual principled Republican, but its such a tiny minority that it is pretty much inconsequential.
And here's where we get into important problems. I agree that the folks that are disgusted by Toupee Fiasco are in the minority of Republican voters. And I certainly have disagreements with say, Rick Wilson or Ben Shapiro. This is absolutely not me endorsing their views - but rather me recognizing that the GOP has gone entirely off the rails.

I simply cannot discuss relatively minor points like trans rights when we have guys shouting "Hail Trump, Hail Victory!" while people in the audience throw up nazi salutes. I cannot simply move along to discuss voting rights, and ignore the fact that the current president was a birther.

Yes, republicans in the Senate are also an issue. We can talk about them, if you're in an area that they represent. I do not live in any such area. We sent them packing, long ago.

Quote:
I would too. The question is, how does the U.S. get to that point?
Decades of the likes of Rush Limbaugh, party loyalty over ethics, etc.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 01:52 PM   #938
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,118
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
You seem to be far more offended than fuelair is by this matter.
I'm more baffled than outraged. I find it to be a pretty senseless rationalization for obviously bad behavior.

Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Regardless, "democrat party" is basically a childish attempt at using the English language against the democratic party, so I see no issue with returning the favor, particularly given the major failings fuelair also mentioned.
Oh yes. I can see that it's far, far, far more childish than 'replucker' or 'rethuglican' or 'repugnicant'. Although if I'm going to go in for an insult to democrats, it's definitely going to be 'democrap' or 'demonrat' or the ever-entertaining 'libtard'.

Seriously - there are any number of actually offensive terms that would seem to be at least reasonable as a basis for justifying pervasive and ongoing retaliation. Leaving a couple of letters off of the party name in a way that doesn't even imply an insult seems to be really reaching for a reason to normalize childish insults as de rigeur.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 01:56 PM   #939
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,118
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
That party is repugnant, and so, by extension, is its membership. The only way for someone to rid themselves of that stain would be to disassociate themselves from the party. If they continue to support it then they support what it stands for.
What's the alternative?

You seem to be taking a rather inquisitorial position: If they don't renounce their former beliefs and convert to yours, then they cannot be forgiven and can never be saved. Say hallelujah, praise god almighty! Amen, brothers!
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 02:31 PM   #940
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,788
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
Looks around...what are you talking about?

thanks
A very minor correction. The words epitaph and epithet are not synonyms. That's all.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 02:59 PM   #941
Segnosaur
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,501
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Quote:
I would too. The question is, how does the U.S. get to that point?
Decades of the likes of Rush Limbaugh, party loyalty over ethics, etc.
Sorry, I didn't mean how did the U.S. and the republicans GET to this point i.e. where the republicans have gone off the rails and we're left with one rational party (the Democrats), an another filled with religous nut bags and neo-nazis.

I meant how does the U.S. get OUT of that situation, and get to the point where they again have 2 rational parties that are both able to put forward rational policies, and cooperate when necessary.

Can the Republican party actually be saved? Or is it better to have a split on the political right, followed by a decade or 2 of Democratic dominance until the political right can learn its lesson and reunite into a party which is more rational than today?
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:01 PM   #942
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 8,122
I just don't people's endgame here.

Democracy is a system that, pretty much by definition requires you to have a tipping point of people on your side. If an amount below that tipping point is so vile and inhuman as to not want them on your side... how exactly does this scenario play out in your head?

It really does seem like some people want a perpetual state of moral high ground loserness (that needs to be a word).
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Hating a bad thing does not make you good." - David Wong
JoeBentley is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:14 PM   #943
Segnosaur
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,501
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Quote:
That party is repugnant, and so, by extension, is its membership. The only way for someone to rid themselves of that stain would be to disassociate themselves from the party. If they continue to support it then they support what it stands for.
What's the alternative?
A principled republican should consider the fact that, despite all the rhetoric, the Democrats are not a party of left-wing communists seeking to take everyone's guns and force women to have abortions and vote for them. Even if they didn't agree with all their policies, they should recognize that disagreements about (for example) tax policy and health care are dwarfed by the issues of bigotry and the like. If enough right-wing people do so do so, the republilcans spend a few years out in the political wilderness, maybe then they will realize that catering to evangelicals and bigots is the wrong way to get to power.

On the other hand, continuing to support a party who's president things neonazis are "fine people" just because you like the tax policy sends the message that you are A-OK with bigotry.

Quote:
You seem to be taking a rather inquisitorial position: If they don't renounce their former beliefs and convert to yours, then they cannot be forgiven and can never be saved. Say hallelujah, praise god almighty! Amen, brothers!
What "former beliefs"?

If a former republican said "I voted for Regan/Bush/Romney, but not for trump" then there wouldn't need to be any forgiveness, since they did not exhibit the same bigotry as Trump, lied less, plus they were able to formulate concrete policies.

If their "former beliefs" involved voting for Trump, then they were supporting a bigot, with the knowledge that his policies would involve bigotry. You don't think voting for someone who is going to take away the civil rights of gays and minorities is something that is A-OK?
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:37 PM   #944
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,162
Every candidate's policies would involve bigotry. Obama telegraphed his bigotry during his campaign, and people voted for him anyway. Hillary telegraphed her bigotry too, and still won "muh popular vote!"

Progs are, in fact, colossal bigots. Exhibit A: This thread.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:51 PM   #945
Mumbles
Illuminator
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Sorry, I didn't mean how did the U.S. and the republicans GET to this point i.e. where the republicans have gone off the rails and we're left with one rational party (the Democrats), an another filled with religous nut bags and neo-nazis.

I meant how does the U.S. get OUT of that situation, and get to the point where they again have 2 rational parties that are both able to put forward rational policies, and cooperate when necessary.

Can the Republican party actually be saved? Or is it better to have a split on the political right, followed by a decade or 2 of Democratic dominance until the political right can learn its lesson and reunite into a party which is more rational than today?
Ah. Personally, I'd like to see our system scrapped altogether. Get rid of the electoral college, move towards something more democratic. But at the same time, move to a system that doesn't ignore small towns.

I'm not sure how to do that. Hillary tried, and it's clear that her plan of retraining, and so on was rejected. I don't know what to do with people who insist on passing their jobs down, when those jobs have been replaced by basic machines. Those jobs will not come back, the end.

In the end, it may be best to have the split that you are referring to. But I ill always worry about the wrong side of that split getting control - as we see now with Toupee Fiascoo.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:55 PM   #946
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 8,122
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
In the end, it may be best to have the split that you are referring to. But I ill always worry about the wrong side of that split getting control.
The problem is, and I mentioned this is passing in the Voting Systems thread, is that for this to work you have to have an already agreed upon definition of "the wrong side" and if we had that we wouldn't need elections.

A lot of people really do seem to think that the end goal of a voting system is "Disenfranchise the people who I disagree with."
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Hating a bad thing does not make you good." - David Wong
JoeBentley is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:56 PM   #947
Mumbles
Illuminator
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by JoeBentley View Post
I just don't people's endgame here.

Democracy is a system that, pretty much by definition requires you to have a tipping point of people on your side. If an amount below that tipping point is so vile and inhuman as to not want them on your side... how exactly does this scenario play out in your head?
Easy.

Genocide.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 04:03 PM   #948
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,691
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
All of which has boop-all to do with how members choose to treat each other on this board.

Again, when was the last time somebody actually used the term as an epithet here?
I think I've seen it used here, but I wasn't referring to local (this board) behavior. I missed that context; my bad if anyone here thought I was referring to them specifically.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm more baffled than outraged. I find it to be a pretty senseless rationalization for obviously bad behavior.
I agree that the banality of deliberately saying "Democrat Party" is a lousy rationalization for using it to belittle and delegitimize political opposition.

It's no better than any of the other epithets hurled by one side against another; it's just more passive-aggressive.
sts60 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 04:08 PM   #949
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,691
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
A principled republican...
"Republican". See, I can term-nanny both sides ;-)
sts60 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:39 AM   #950
Kestrel
Philosopher
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,874
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Sorry, I didn't mean how did the U.S. and the republicans GET to this point i.e. where the republicans have gone off the rails and we're left with one rational party (the Democrats), an another filled with religous nut bags and neo-nazis.

I meant how does the U.S. get OUT of that situation, and get to the point where they again have 2 rational parties that are both able to put forward rational policies, and cooperate when necessary.

Can the Republican party actually be saved? Or is it better to have a split on the political right, followed by a decade or 2 of Democratic dominance until the political right can learn its lesson and reunite into a party which is more rational than today?
The real question is can America be saved from the Republican party?

Half of our nation is divorced from realty. They call CNN fake news while sharing entirely made up news stories on Facebook. They look at all the bad things that Trump has done and praise God that Hillary Clinton isn't President.
Kestrel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.