An Op Ed for the two party supporters

[Oddball]

OK, so you actually believe I don't see all your discussions with everyone else. I don't see your high fives with the left, even in this conversation where Mac1958 wrapped himself firmly around your balls to protect you. I don't see you having all the same conversations with other conservatives and libertarians you have with me. It's just me. I imagine it all.

No, it's not just you. Most partisans are trapped in the same mindset, imagining the same horseshit.

No, it's not just him...As it is with Mac the Hack, Trump broke you to the point that you now revel in your Stockholm syndrome.

 

[kaz]

OK, so you actually believe I don't see all your discussions with everyone else. I don't see your high fives with the left, even in this conversation where Mac1958 wrapped himself firmly around your balls to protect you. I don't see you having all the same conversations with other conservatives and libertarians you have with me. It's just me. I imagine it all.

No, it's not just you. Most partisans are trapped in the same mindset, imagining the same horseshit.

There is nothing "Republican" about my questions. Google "partisan" and learn what it means since you keep insisting on using the word.

My question is about your libertarian views. There is a Libertarian Party, but I haven't mentioned the party or their views and they don't own the libertarian philosophy.

What do you even think "partisan" means? Or is it just an insult to you?

 

[bendog]

OK, so you actually believe I don't see all your discussions with everyone else. I don't see your high fives with the left, even in this conversation where Mac1958 wrapped himself firmly around your balls to protect you. I don't see you having all the same conversations with other conservatives and libertarians you have with me. It's just me. I imagine it all.

No, it's not just you. Most partisans are trapped in the same mindset, imagining the same horseshit.

That's true. I doubt the Trump folks are any more into alternative facts than the AOC types. I tend to give them more slack because I think most will change over time, but maybe I'm just projecting.

 

[Rigby5]

The OP initiated a worthwhile topic for discussion. Maybe you should just try to ignore all the ignorant spammers on this board that make discussions impossible.

It's worth rescuing even though he got the basic premise, but then went way too far with his own biased politics.

Worth mentioning though, that so many Americans are looking for some real answers. They must be visualizing some of the worst consequences.

Keep up the good work, you represent the best of this forum.

So you don't think the discussion of agreeing with the parties on some issues and not others making you a blind supporter of the party has anything to do with a thread on the two party system?

I think it does

This is what I don't get about either the OP or your views. I don't see any lack of logic or inconsistency if - for example - a person considers him/her self pro life, but votes gop even though there's the death penalty and Trump's policies in Yemen and in separating children. Nor do I see any lack of logic or inconsistency if a pro-life person votes dem based upon the DP and Yemen and immigration because abortions are lessened even without finding no worst-alternative can never be an abortion.

Absolutely, the MSM and parties try to divide by cutting into the grey areas to gain votes, but they are simply exploiting differences. Imo Trump and RW media have taken it a step further in they are rewriting truth for their own financial interests. Yes the 20 election involved people not voting the way they were expected to, and voting itself was screwed up with covid. But nothing made 20 "an invalid" election anymore then 2016, 2020, 1960 ... to say nothing of 1824 or 1968

Such bigotry in your points.

I'm pro-choice and anti-death penalty, but there is no logical inconsistency in believing in protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. Someone who committed six murders made a CHOICE. A baby didn't make a choice to be conceived. That's not a contraction by Republicans, it's just propaganda by you.

Even dumber is your talking about Republicans separating children from their parents when the parents commit crimes and your silence about Democrats luring them here in the first place and all the kids that are raped, die and sold into slavery because of it.

You're a fucking propagandist, get help

I am also pro-choice and anti-death penalty.
The rational is that since inherent rights of individuals are the only source of any legal authority in a democratic republic, then government can't have the superior authority it would take to dictate on these issues.
Government can't force someone to be a baby factory slave, or to claim executions are defensive.

But since illegals can't vote, your claim democrats lure illegals here, makes no sense?
Nor is attempting to cross the border a crime. Illegal immigration is just a regulatory offense, not a crime.
A crime is against nature, that people to not have to be told is wrong.
But crossing a border is not inherently evil, and it is trying to stop humans from migrating that is unnatural.

 

[dblack]

My question is about your libertarian views.

No, it's not. Your question - the one you appear to be utterly obsessed with - is about affiliation. Completely without regard to my views, you see Democrats agreeing with me, or high-fiving me, or joining me in my criticism of Trump, and that's enough (in your mind) to condemn me. That makes me "the enemy". Whatever. That's exactly the problem with the two-party system and why we should change it.

 

[Oddball]

OK, so you actually believe I don't see all your discussions with everyone else. I don't see your high fives with the left, even in this conversation where Mac1958 wrapped himself firmly around your balls to protect you. I don't see you having all the same conversations with other conservatives and libertarians you have with me. It's just me. I imagine it all.

No, it's not just you. Most partisans are trapped in the same mindset, imagining the same horseshit.

That's true. I doubt the Trump folks are any more into alternative facts than the AOC types. I tend to give them more slack because I think most will change over time, but maybe I'm just projecting.

Opposing leftist lunacy doesn't make anyone a "Trump folk" by any stretch.

People like Kaz and myself have expressed disagreements with Trump on policy and staffing decisions numerous times, and nobody wants to go anywhere near that approach....Just smear, defame, lie, gaslight, and screech RUSSIA!

And yes, you are projecting.

 

[Rigby5]

For over 170 years the Republicans and Democrats have ruled over this country, 100% of the time

That's because their party platforms are 180 degree polar opposites.

What do you propose instead of people taking a stand on one side or the other?

I'm 100% not a Democrat and I'm not an EVERYTHING GOES libertarian, so I vote for the best Republican I can

What good is a platform if they don't stick to it?
Example: Funding Planned Parenthood (abortions) is a pro choice stance. When that funding was put into a bill when the GOP had the house and senate, and Trump as president, somehow it made it through all the way to Trump. And he approved it.

In recent years, one of the most ardent foes of the organization has been Vice President-elect Mike Pence. When he was a member of the House of Representatives, he led unsuccessful efforts to defund the program. As governor of Indiana, he was able to accomplish some of his goals. He also vowed to stop federal spending for Planned Parenthood during the campaign last fall.

Yet federal lawmakers have been stymied in these efforts.

One big reason is that taking away Planned Parenthood's access to Medicaid funding would require a change in the federal law that guarantees most Medicaid patients with a choice to use any qualified provider. The Department of Health and Human Services has repeatedly warned states that have tried to evict Planned Parenthood from their Medicaid programs that they cannot legally do that because such a move would violate that law. And federal courts have consistently blocked states that have tried to end Planned Parenthood's Medicaid funding

That Vow To Defund Planned Parenthood: Easy To Say, Hard To Do

Federal funding for the group that helps supply women's reproductive health care is built into multiple places in the budget, and stripping it out is not as simple as it may sound.

www.npr.org

And that is the point, Pence is against free will.
He wants to use force or economic coercion to prevent people from having their own personal choice over things like birth control, abortion, etc.
That is not just wrong, but evil, and is violation the separation of church and state.

 

[bendog]

OK, so you actually believe I don't see all your discussions with everyone else. I don't see your high fives with the left, even in this conversation where Mac1958 wrapped himself firmly around your balls to protect you. I don't see you having all the same conversations with other conservatives and libertarians you have with me. It's just me. I imagine it all.

No, it's not just you. Most partisans are trapped in the same mindset, imagining the same horseshit.

That's true. I doubt the Trump folks are any more into alternative facts than the AOC types. I tend to give them more slack because I think most will change over time, but maybe I'm just projecting.

Opposing leftist lunacy doesn't make anyone a "Trump folk" by any stretch.

People like Kaz and myself have expressed disagreements with Trump on policy and staffing decisions numerous times, and nobody wants to go anywhere near that approach....Just smear, defame, lie, gaslight, and screech RUSSIA!

And yes, you are projecting.

You are a lunatic if you think vaccines are not better than no vaccines or that social distancing is not helpul, and you are a lunatic if you thing the 20 election was any whackier than some in the past ... although I'd give you as a fact that a decent number of Hillary supporters always thought 16 was illegally tainted.

 

[Oddball]

OK, so you actually believe I don't see all your discussions with everyone else. I don't see your high fives with the left, even in this conversation where Mac1958 wrapped himself firmly around your balls to protect you. I don't see you having all the same conversations with other conservatives and libertarians you have with me. It's just me. I imagine it all.

No, it's not just you. Most partisans are trapped in the same mindset, imagining the same horseshit.

That's true. I doubt the Trump folks are any more into alternative facts than the AOC types. I tend to give them more slack because I think most will change over time, but maybe I'm just projecting.

Opposing leftist lunacy doesn't make anyone a "Trump folk" by any stretch.

People like Kaz and myself have expressed disagreements with Trump on policy and staffing decisions numerous times, and nobody wants to go anywhere near that approach....Just smear, defame, lie, gaslight, and screech RUSSIA!

And yes, you are projecting.

You are a lunatic if you think vaccines are not better than no vaccines or that social distancing is not helpul, and you are a lunatic if you thing the 20 election was any whackier than some in the past ... although I'd give you as a fact that a decent number of Hillary supporters always thought 16 was illegally tainted.

So everyone who doesn't believe exactly as you do is a lunatic....Gotcha.

 

[kaz]

The OP initiated a worthwhile topic for discussion. Maybe you should just try to ignore all the ignorant spammers on this board that make discussions impossible.

It's worth rescuing even though he got the basic premise, but then went way too far with his own biased politics.

Worth mentioning though, that so many Americans are looking for some real answers. They must be visualizing some of the worst consequences.

Keep up the good work, you represent the best of this forum.

So you don't think the discussion of agreeing with the parties on some issues and not others making you a blind supporter of the party has anything to do with a thread on the two party system?

I think it does

This is what I don't get about either the OP or your views. I don't see any lack of logic or inconsistency if - for example - a person considers him/her self pro life, but votes gop even though there's the death penalty and Trump's policies in Yemen and in separating children. Nor do I see any lack of logic or inconsistency if a pro-life person votes dem based upon the DP and Yemen and immigration because abortions are lessened even without finding no worst-alternative can never be an abortion.

Absolutely, the MSM and parties try to divide by cutting into the grey areas to gain votes, but they are simply exploiting differences. Imo Trump and RW media have taken it a step further in they are rewriting truth for their own financial interests. Yes the 20 election involved people not voting the way they were expected to, and voting itself was screwed up with covid. But nothing made 20 "an invalid" election anymore then 2016, 2020, 1960 ... to say nothing of 1824 or 1968

Such bigotry in your points.

I'm pro-choice and anti-death penalty, but there is no logical inconsistency in believing in protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. Someone who committed six murders made a CHOICE. A baby didn't make a choice to be conceived. That's not a contraction by Republicans, it's just propaganda by you.

Even dumber is your talking about Republicans separating children from their parents when the parents commit crimes and your silence about Democrats luring them here in the first place and all the kids that are raped, die and sold into slavery because of it.

You're a fucking propagandist, get help

I am also pro-choice and anti-death penalty.
The rational is that since inherent rights of individuals are the only source of any legal authority in a democratic republic, then government can't have the superior authority it would take to dictate on these issues.
Government can't force someone to be a baby factory slave, or to claim executions are defensive.

But since illegals can't vote, your claim democrats lure illegals here, makes no sense?
Nor is attempting to cross the border a crime. Illegal immigration is just a regulatory offense, not a crime.
A crime is against nature, that people to not have to be told is wrong.
But crossing a border is not inherently evil, and it is trying to stop humans from migrating that is unnatural.

Entering the country illegally is step one of the process to Democrats getting illegals the vote. You know that, cut the stupid shit.

It also doesn't address that Democrats clearly are luring illegals here, which is undeniably true

 

[kaz]

My question is about your libertarian views.

No, it's not. Your question - the one you appear to be utterly obsessed with - is about affiliation. Completely without regard to my views, you see Democrats agreeing with me, or high-fiving me, or joining me in my criticism of Trump, and that's enough (in your mind) to condemn me. That makes me "the enemy". Whatever. That's exactly the problem with the two-party system and why we should change it.

I have made my question very clear. Why do totalitarians respond to your arguments and no one else does. You're just making shit up now

 

[Rigby5]

Your insistence that I am Democrat, or a leftist, or whatever boogieman you're jerking off to at the moment, tells me all I need to know about your judgement and reasoning skills. They've been consumed by your screeching fear and cowardice. And everyone who doesn't join you in your defeat is reminder of what you've sacrificed. No wonder you hate us so much.

The rule has applied since Escalator Day: You're either an obedient Trumpster or you're an Evil Hitler Deep State Swamp Commie.

They simply don't recognize or understand anything else.

False dichotomy. I'm not even a loyal Trumpster, moron. I agree with him only when he's right. Really the only things I agree with him on are fighting back against Democrat tyranny, protecting the border and streamlining business regulations.

But challenge accepted.

I'm not with Trump on that he didn't pull out of Afghanistan, he got us deeper in Syria, he spends too much money, he didn't finish the wall at all costs, he didn't do enough to deregulate business, his trade policies were not based on free trade but warping markets.

Your turn, how are you not a Biden Bigot? You claim you aren't a Democrat, what are they fucking nuts about?

Funny, I am extreme left, but like Trump's attempt to help business, like China tariffs, etc.
The wall actually helps worker wages.
But he did spend too much and did not end wars.
So it seems we agree a lot.

 

[kaz]

OK, so you actually believe I don't see all your discussions with everyone else. I don't see your high fives with the left, even in this conversation where Mac1958 wrapped himself firmly around your balls to protect you. I don't see you having all the same conversations with other conservatives and libertarians you have with me. It's just me. I imagine it all.

No, it's not just you. Most partisans are trapped in the same mindset, imagining the same horseshit.

That's true. I doubt the Trump folks are any more into alternative facts than the AOC types. I tend to give them more slack because I think most will change over time, but maybe I'm just projecting.

Opposing leftist lunacy doesn't make anyone a "Trump folk" by any stretch.

People like Kaz and myself have expressed disagreements with Trump on policy and staffing decisions numerous times, and nobody wants to go anywhere near that approach....Just smear, defame, lie, gaslight, and screech RUSSIA!

And yes, you are projecting.

You are a lunatic if you think vaccines are not better than no vaccines or that social distancing is not helpul, and you are a lunatic if you thing the 20 election was any whackier than some in the past ... although I'd give you as a fact that a decent number of Hillary supporters always thought 16 was illegally tainted.

Trump pushed through the vaccine, not Democrats. You just lie and lie and lie, like all Democrats.

And social distancing isn't necessary if you get the vaccine. Democrats have a power trip for controlling people and you don't want to let it go.

The latest where you morons are requiring 2 year olds to get vaccinated or wear a ask is insane. The vaccine is not safe for 2 year olds and it's not necessary

 

[Rigby5]

The OP initiated a worthwhile topic for discussion. Maybe you should just try to ignore all the ignorant spammers on this board that make discussions impossible.

It's worth rescuing even though he got the basic premise, but then went way too far with his own biased politics.

Worth mentioning though, that so many Americans are looking for some real answers. They must be visualizing some of the worst consequences.

Keep up the good work, you represent the best of this forum.

So you don't think the discussion of agreeing with the parties on some issues and not others making you a blind supporter of the party has anything to do with a thread on the two party system?

I think it does

This is what I don't get about either the OP or your views. I don't see any lack of logic or inconsistency if - for example - a person considers him/her self pro life, but votes gop even though there's the death penalty and Trump's policies in Yemen and in separating children. Nor do I see any lack of logic or inconsistency if a pro-life person votes dem based upon the DP and Yemen and immigration because abortions are lessened even without finding no worst-alternative can never be an abortion.

Absolutely, the MSM and parties try to divide by cutting into the grey areas to gain votes, but they are simply exploiting differences. Imo Trump and RW media have taken it a step further in they are rewriting truth for their own financial interests. Yes the 20 election involved people not voting the way they were expected to, and voting itself was screwed up with covid. But nothing made 20 "an invalid" election anymore then 2016, 2020, 1960 ... to say nothing of 1824 or 1968

Such bigotry in your points.

I'm pro-choice and anti-death penalty, but there is no logical inconsistency in believing in protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. Someone who committed six murders made a CHOICE. A baby didn't make a choice to be conceived. That's not a contraction by Republicans, it's just propaganda by you.

Even dumber is your talking about Republicans separating children from their parents when the parents commit crimes and your silence about Democrats luring them here in the first place and all the kids that are raped, die and sold into slavery because of it.

You're a fucking propagandist, get help

I am also pro-choice and anti-death penalty.
The rational is that since inherent rights of individuals are the only source of any legal authority in a democratic republic, then government can't have the superior authority it would take to dictate on these issues.
Government can't force someone to be a baby factory slave, or to claim executions are defensive.

But since illegals can't vote, your claim democrats lure illegals here, makes no sense?
Nor is attempting to cross the border a crime. Illegal immigration is just a regulatory offense, not a crime.
A crime is against nature, that people to not have to be told is wrong.
But crossing a border is not inherently evil, and it is trying to stop humans from migrating that is unnatural.

Entering the country illegally is step one of the process to Democrats getting illegals the vote. You know that, cut the stupid shit.

It also doesn't address that Democrats clearly are luring illegals here, which is undeniably true

No one has been able to get the vote for illegals.
Even the amnesty program never gave anyone the vote.

No one is luring anyone here.
If you talk to illegals, they are scared of the death squads.
The US has trained, financed, and arm right wing, military dictatorships in almost all central and south American countries.
So no unions, low pay, danger and risk.

 

[dblack]

My question is about your libertarian views.

No, it's not. Your question - the one you appear to be utterly obsessed with - is about affiliation. Completely without regard to my views, you see Democrats agreeing with me, or high-fiving me, or joining me in my criticism of Trump, and that's enough (in your mind) to condemn me. That makes me "the enemy". Whatever. That's exactly the problem with the two-party system and why we should change it.

I have made my question very clear. Why do totalitarians respond to your arguments and no one else does. You're just making shit up now

Exactly. That's not a question about my libertarian views. It's about your obsession with the team mentality and group identity. You can't see outside that box.

 

[Rigby5]

My question is about your libertarian views.

No, it's not. Your question - the one you appear to be utterly obsessed with - is about affiliation. Completely without regard to my views, you see Democrats agreeing with me, or high-fiving me, or joining me in my criticism of Trump, and that's enough (in your mind) to condemn me. That makes me "the enemy". Whatever. That's exactly the problem with the two-party system and why we should change it.

I have made my question very clear. Why do totalitarians respond to your arguments and no one else does. You're just making shit up now

Totalitarianism means centralization, which historically has always been a hierarchy of the wealthy, right wing, elite.
Left wing is always the poor masses, so then has to be the opposite of right wing, populist, decentralized, and stressing the personal liberties of liberalism.

 

[kaz]

My question is about your libertarian views.

No, it's not. Your question - the one you appear to be utterly obsessed with - is about affiliation. Completely without regard to my views, you see Democrats agreeing with me, or high-fiving me, or joining me in my criticism of Trump, and that's enough (in your mind) to condemn me. That makes me "the enemy". Whatever. That's exactly the problem with the two-party system and why we should change it.

I have made my question very clear. Why do totalitarians respond to your arguments and no one else does. You're just making shit up now

Exactly. That's not a question about my libertarian views. It's about your obsession with the team mentality and group identity. You can't see outside that box.

Why your arguments only resonate with totalitarians is not a "team" question. You're just deflecting.

Libertarians believe in MINIMUM government.

Totalitarians believe in MAXIMUM government.

Why would your arguments in support of MINIMUM government appeal to people who want MAXIMUM government? That is an ideology question, not which team they are on. You know that, stop with the stupid shit

 

[dblack]

The OP initiated a worthwhile topic for discussion. Maybe you should just try to ignore all the ignorant spammers on this board that make discussions impossible.

It's worth rescuing even though he got the basic premise, but then went way too far with his own biased politics.

Worth mentioning though, that so many Americans are looking for some real answers. They must be visualizing some of the worst consequences.

Keep up the good work, you represent the best of this forum.

So you don't think the discussion of agreeing with the parties on some issues and not others making you a blind supporter of the party has anything to do with a thread on the two party system?

I think it does

This is what I don't get about either the OP or your views. I don't see any lack of logic or inconsistency if - for example - a person considers him/her self pro life, but votes gop even though there's the death penalty and Trump's policies in Yemen and in separating children. Nor do I see any lack of logic or inconsistency if a pro-life person votes dem based upon the DP and Yemen and immigration because abortions are lessened even without finding no worst-alternative can never be an abortion.

Absolutely, the MSM and parties try to divide by cutting into the grey areas to gain votes, but they are simply exploiting differences. Imo Trump and RW media have taken it a step further in they are rewriting truth for their own financial interests. Yes the 20 election involved people not voting the way they were expected to, and voting itself was screwed up with covid. But nothing made 20 "an invalid" election anymore then 2016, 2020, 1960 ... to say nothing of 1824 or 1968

Such bigotry in your points.

I'm pro-choice and anti-death penalty, but there is no logical inconsistency in believing in protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. Someone who committed six murders made a CHOICE. A baby didn't make a choice to be conceived. That's not a contraction by Republicans, it's just propaganda by you.

Even dumber is your talking about Republicans separating children from their parents when the parents commit crimes and your silence about Democrats luring them here in the first place and all the kids that are raped, die and sold into slavery because of it.

You're a fucking propagandist, get help

I am also pro-choice and anti-death penalty.
The rational is that since inherent rights of individuals are the only source of any legal authority in a democratic republic, then government can't have the superior authority it would take to dictate on these issues.
Government can't force someone to be a baby factory slave, or to claim executions are defensive.

But since illegals can't vote, your claim democrats lure illegals here, makes no sense?
Nor is attempting to cross the border a crime. Illegal immigration is just a regulatory offense, not a crime.
A crime is against nature, that people to not have to be told is wrong.
But crossing a border is not inherently evil, and it is trying to stop humans from migrating that is unnatural.

Entering the country illegally is step one of the process to Democrats getting illegals the vote. You know that, cut the stupid shit.

It also doesn't address that Democrats clearly are luring illegals here, which is undeniably true

No one has been able to get the vote for illegals.
Even the amnesty program never gave anyone the vote.

No one is luring anyone here.
If you talk to illegals, they are scared of the death squads.
The US has trained, financed, and arm right wing, military dictatorships in almost all central and south American countries.
So no unions, low pay, danger and risk.

While I appreciate the ironic humor of turning this thread into yet another partisan pissing match, what do you guys think of the two-party system? Is it a good thing? A bad thing? Just the way it is? Any opinions on the topic?

 

[dblack]

Why would your arguments in support of MINIMUM government appeal to people who want MAXIMUM government?

They don't. They disagree with me vehemently on those issues. You don't see it because you can't. Your too deeply invested in your partisan brainwashing. Outside of recommending therapy, I can't help you with that.

 

[kaz]

I am also pro-choice and anti-death penalty.
The rational is that since inherent rights of individuals are the only source of any legal authority in a democratic republic, then government can't have the superior authority it would take to dictate on these issues.
Government can't force someone to be a baby factory slave, or to claim executions are defensive.

But since illegals can't vote, your claim democrats lure illegals here, makes no sense?
Nor is attempting to cross the border a crime. Illegal immigration is just a regulatory offense, not a crime.
A crime is against nature, that people to not have to be told is wrong.
But crossing a border is not inherently evil, and it is trying to stop humans from migrating that is unnatural.

Entering the country illegally is step one of the process to Democrats getting illegals the vote. You know that, cut the stupid shit.

It also doesn't address that Democrats clearly are luring illegals here, which is undeniably true

No one has been able to get the vote for illegals.
Even the amnesty program never gave anyone the vote.

No one is luring anyone here.
If you talk to illegals, they are scared of the death squads.
The US has trained, financed, and arm right wing, military dictatorships in almost all central and south American countries.
So no unions, low pay, danger and risk.

While I appreciate the ironic humor of turning this thread into yet another partisan pissing match, what do you guys think of the two-party system? Is it a good thing? A bad thing? Just the way it is? Any opinions on the topic?

LOL, that's what you just did, turn it into a partisan pissing match. I am trying to talk ideology with you and you can't move past party.

Which really gets to the two party system, doesn't it? I'm not a Democrat, so you think I'm a Republican.

That is far more the two party system is used in this country, anyone who doesn't agree with your view is typically labeled as the other party. I regularly take positions against our being in the middle east at all, the size of our military, the war on drugs. I'm pro-abortion and anti-death penalty. You're a long time poster and see all that. But I'm not a Democrat, so you just say partisan Republican. That is how our "two party" system really works, you're a perfect example