If you disagree

[Barb]

Oh! I was worried for a second there, but then I realized. CG hasn't crawled up YOUR ass and died, so therefore and etc.

Trust. You'd have a different opinion of her, were you in my shoes.

I'm sure my day will come. I'm finding it hard to quake, mind you, but it will come.

No quaking involved. Just disgust. Humor, sometimes.

Honey, the whole point is to point and laugh. If we get all butt hurt over the response, it negates the point, savvy?

 

[BDBoop]

I'm sure my day will come. I'm finding it hard to quake, mind you, but it will come.

No quaking involved. Just disgust. Humor, sometimes.

Honey, the whole point is to point and laugh. If we get all butt hurt over the response, it negates the point, savvy?

Disgust does not equal butt hurt. Savvy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Short memory on you eh?

Obviously nothing, he hasn't been the President at any point so he hasn't been able to uphold some of the things most constitutional watchdogs consider to be tantamount to trampling on the Constitution, but they wouldn't be going anywhere under a Romney administration.

in other words, you dont have any real evidence. You're just sore that your guy was rejected.

You should probably refrain from entering discussions you don't belong in since you clearly have no clue what's going on.

Nor do you.

 

[bobcollum]

^ Still doesn't have a clue.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dude, it's on the page I linked, if you're too lazy to find it or whatever else the problem is, I think I'm about done.

Are you talking about this comment?

See above post.

Question did I respond to it? No I don't think I did and if I did not comment to it I never saw it.

But you say you vote third party? Jake Starkey claims he's a Republican. You two have one thing in common. saying you;re one thing but arguing with Republicans and defending liberals. and being defended by them.

This is where you've managed to go wrong, again.

Why does third party voter equate to Republican in your mind?

I'm a liberal, I vote for third party candidates that share liberal beliefs, but don't go the corporate whore route the major parties always take.

Why is this so tough to understand?

Just say 'okay, I get it'.

Did I respond to that post was my question?

Why does third party voter equate to Republican in your mind?

Ron Paul was a third party candidate at one time.

I'm a liberal, I vote for third party candidates that share liberal beliefs, but don't go the corporate whore route the major parties always take.

You're a liberal true but you'll vote obama as usual.

 

[bobcollum]

Are you talking about this comment?



Question did I respond to it? No I don't think I did and if I did not comment to it I never saw it.

But you say you vote third party? Jake Starkey claims he's a Republican. You two have one thing in common. saying you;re one thing but arguing with Republicans and defending liberals. and being defended by them.

This is where you've managed to go wrong, again.

Why does third party voter equate to Republican in your mind?

I'm a liberal, I vote for third party candidates that share liberal beliefs, but don't go the corporate whore route the major parties always take.

Why is this so tough to understand?

Just say 'okay, I get it'.

Did I respond to that post was my question?

Why does third party voter equate to Republican in your mind?

Ron Paul was a third party candidate at one time.

I'm a liberal, I vote for third party candidates that share liberal beliefs, but don't go the corporate whore route the major parties always take.

You're a liberal true but you'll vote obama as usual.

(@bolded)So because Ron Paul was once a third-party candidate, all third-party supporters align with Ron Paul? This doesn't really make much sense.

I didn't vote for Gore, Kerry, or Obama. In '99 I actually voted for the Libertarian candidate, but I've since grown apart from such an idealistic mindset.

Don't believe me? I don't care, anyone that can't see how this conversation went doesn't matter anyway.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This is where you've managed to go wrong, again.

Why does third party voter equate to Republican in your mind?

I'm a liberal, I vote for third party candidates that share liberal beliefs, but don't go the corporate whore route the major parties always take.

Why is this so tough to understand?

Just say 'okay, I get it'.

Did I respond to that post was my question?


Ron Paul was a third party candidate at one time.

I'm a liberal, I vote for third party candidates that share liberal beliefs, but don't go the corporate whore route the major parties always take.

You're a liberal true but you'll vote obama as usual.

(@bolded)So because Ron Paul was once a third-party candidate, all third-party supporters align with Ron Paul? This doesn't really make much sense.

I didn't vote for Gore, Kerry, or Obama. In '99 I actually voted for the Libertarian candidate, but I've since grown apart from such an idealistic mindset.

Don't believe me? I don't care, anyone that can't see how this conversation went doesn't matter anyway.

Just a troll that is all no need to waste time reading your trollish post

 

[bobcollum]

^ Can't deal with getting smacked down.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Not feeding the troll anymore

bobcollum
This message is hidden because bobcollum is on your ignore list.

 

[bobcollum]

**Claims victory**

 

[syrenn]

Every time I say what I believe or perceive, I am informed that I am [insert all the slams and insults here]. SO. Why would I willingly go there.

Even looking at this thread. If you think my perceptions are faulty because they don't line up with yours, and you think Bill Maher is wrong, and I have the same perceptions he does, then what would be the point? Every person in this thread thinks Bill is talking out his ass.

It's an automatic door slam. I've already spent a year trying to get through to people. I can't really justify the continued waste of time.

sooo, if someone doesn't agree with you, then inYHO, your answer is so post threads with zero content other than a link or graphic?

I asked for feedback. I would have discussed feedback. I got attacks. That's the norm, I get it; this is USMB.

I really would love to know why people would vote against their own best interests.

I really would like to know why it is SO very important to them - I am willing to BET they would be happy for the rich to pay 0% in taxes.

It depends what what individual think of as being ....in their best interest.


Entitlements that other people pay for are defiantly in many democrats best interests. Of course people will vote in their best interest to keep the gravy train of free money coming.

the 49% see that quite clearly. They are the ones working and paying for the ones who are not and hanging on for a free ride....on someone else dime.

That is why they will vote again dems who want more more more more entitlements and programs them.

 

[SFC Ollie]

The rich will vote Republican, the poor won't because the Repubs don't care about the poor. The poor will vote Democrat, who doesn't want the poor to get into that 1% rich list or else they will vote Republican. Thus, both parties screw the poor - am I right?

No, While it is true that many of the poor do vote Democrat, not all of them do.

And did you know that 7 or 8 of the richest people in our Congress are Democrats? I don't think they vote Republican.

Fact is that this is all BS and class warfare and it is meant to get the vote for Obama.....

I hope it doesn't work......

 

[syrenn]

The rich will vote Republican, the poor won't because the Repubs don't care about the poor. The poor will vote Democrat, who doesn't want the poor to get into that 1% rich list or else they will vote Republican. Thus, both parties screw the poor - am I right?

Actually, noomi... the dem's have a vested interest in keeping the poor, poor..... If the poor make it out of being poor they will most likely never vote dem again. Why would they want to have, what they have worked so hart to gain... taken away and given to others?

 

[hortysir]

The rich will vote Republican, the poor won't because the Repubs don't care about the poor. The poor will vote Democrat, who doesn't want the poor to get into that 1% rich list or else they will vote Republican. Thus, both parties screw the poor - am I right?

Actually, noomi... the dem's have a vested interest in keeping the poor, poor..... If the poor make it out of being poor they will most likely never vote dem again. Why would they want to have what they have worked so hart to gain... taken away and given to others?

And I always thought that this whole "giving back" thing was about community.
Whoodathunk it's really about government!!

 

[Toro]

I really would love to know why people would vote against their own best interests.

I think this is a fair question, so I will take a stab at it.

First, I'm going to speak in broad generalizations. I am going to assume Maher's statement in the OP is representative of broad liberal thinking. It may, or it may not, I don't know. But I think it does, though it may not apply for any one specific individual. As a precursor, on many topics, I could say lots of nice things about liberals, so please don't make the assumption that I'm taking broad shots at liberals.

I'm a foreigner in this country, and it took me about a decade to understand American mythology. Now I don't use the term "mythology" in the pejorative sense, but rather defined as a basic narrative which nations and peoples define themselves. The core of mythology are basic truths but often wrapped with contradictions. All nations have them. America is no different. America has its own mythology and ideals.

The basic mythology is that the individual is sovereign. This is what defines America to me. Throughout most of the world, the individual is not sovereign. Sovereignty is conferred from elsewhere, i.e. in the British Commonwealth, it comes from the Queen or King. In America, it comes from the individual.

In the conservative line of thinking, sovereignty of the individual means the absence of government intervention in people's lives. If you believe in the ideal that the individual is sovereign, then it is not in the best interests of the middle class to more heavily tax and regulate the rich to their benefit. Instead, the best interests of the middle class in this framework is for the government to stay out of people's lives - all of people's lives - and not engage in socioeconomic engineering. In this framework, the middle class doesn't want the government to transfer wealth from the rich to them because it contradicts their perception of the American ideal.

A lot of non-Americans don't understand this. There was a poll done by the Pew Foundation a few years ago which asked people in the United States and Europe this question (or something along those lines): What is more important to you, economic security or freedom from government interference. In Europe, people answered two-thirds economic security, one-third freedom from government interference. In America, it was completely flipped. My guess is that liberals would tend to agree more with Europeans.

Even social programs in the United States are heavily weighted towards the middle class whereas in most other countries, they are weighted towards the poor. Though social programs are a contradiction of the American ideal - even popular programs such as Medicare and Social Security - it is not inconsistent with the middle classes essentially transferring wealth from themselves to themselves.

It is my observation - and again, I may be wrong - that many liberals like Bill Maher don't understand this either. Rather, they see it all as a zero sum game, or at least a conflict between the different classes. Conservatives instead see everyone as individuals regardless of their income class. So liberals like Maher view the world through a spectrum that perceives the interests of the middle class to be separate from the wealthy, to which conservatives vehemently disagree. Conservatives argue it is the same - freedom from government intervention in people's lives. And because of this, liberals like Maher fail to understand the American ideal held by so many people.

But like I said, maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Oddball]

I really would love to know why people would vote against their own best interests.

I really would like to know why it is SO very important to them - I am willing to BET they would be happy for the rich to pay 0% in taxes.

I would really love to know how it is "my best interests" get to be defined by someone who doesn't even know me, let alone by socialist/progressive do-gooders seeking to impose their notion of what is "in my best interests" upon me.

 

[boedicca]

They're doing it for your own good, donchaknow.

 

[Indofred]

The 49% may be trying to follow the "American dream" and want to ensure the democrats don't win.
Better of two evils (in their opinion)?

 

[Pho_King]

Every time I say what I believe or perceive, I am informed that I am [insert all the slams and insults here]. SO. Why would I willingly go there.

Even looking at this thread. If you think my perceptions are faulty because they don't line up with yours, and you think Bill Maher is wrong, and I have the same perceptions he does, then what would be the point? Every person in this thread thinks Bill is talking out his ass.

It's an automatic door slam. I've already spent a year trying to get through to people. I can't really justify the continued waste of time.

sooo, if someone doesn't agree with you, then inYHO, your answer is so post threads with zero content other than a link or graphic?

I asked for feedback. I would have discussed feedback. I got attacks. That's the norm, I get it; this is USMB.

I really would love to know why people would vote against their own best interests.

I really would like to know why it is SO very important to them - I am willing to BET they would be happy for the rich to pay 0% in taxes.

I'd really like to know why you think you know what's in anybody else's best interest?

 

[Artevelde]

Kindly explain why.

Maher says the richest 1% all vote Republican. So how come 7 of the 10 richest members of Congress are Democrats.

This is pure stupidity.