Opposing Point of View

[LoneVoice]

Has any opinion, issue or statement voiced to any of you from the opposing point of view, ever had any impact whatsoever in swaying you to that opposing point of view? If so, what?

If either party is never impacted by the other party, then why waste so much time discussing/debating anything? It all turns into mindless shouting and rhetoric spewing...

Foolhardy for Democrats to try to change the negatives of the Republican party. Equally foolhardy for the Republicans to try to change the negatives of the Democrat party.

Both sides may be talking, but neither side is listening...

 

[Moi]

I wouldn't say neither side is listening. I doubt that conservatives, true conservatives, would have supported some of Bush's "compassion" agenda items if they hadn't been listening that this is what the majority of their constituents want. I doubt that democrats would really have passed the Iraq war measure if they didn't think that's what their constituents wanted.

People listen...

 

[LoneVoice]

I wouldn't say neither side is listening. I doubt that conservatives, true conservatives, would have supported some of Bush's "compassion" agenda items if they hadn't been listening that this is what the majority of their constituents want. I doubt that democrats would really have passed the Iraq war measure if they didn't think that's what their constituents wanted.

People listen...

Listen up...
You missed the point...

The question is, are you ever swayed by the opposing point of view?

 

[jimnyc]

Listen up...
You missed the point...

If either party is never impacted by the other party, then why waste so much time discussing/debating anything? It all turns into mindless shouting and rhetoric spewing...

Listen up...
Seems as if your question was directly responded to. Try being a bit more clear on exactly what you're asking. You ended your post with "Both sides may be talking, but neither side is listening..." and that point was also directly addressed by Moi.

 

[tpahl]

Has any opinion, issue or statement voiced to any of you from the opposing point of view, ever had any impact whatsoever in swaying you to that opposing point of view? If so, what?

If either party is never impacted by the other party, then why waste so much time discussing/debating anything? It all turns into mindless shouting and rhetoric spewing...

Foolhardy for Democrats to try to change the negatives of the Republican party. Equally foolhardy for the Republicans to try to change the negatives of the Democrat party.

Both sides may be talking, but neither side is listening...

Yes. I used to be very strongly opposed to gay marriage. I know think that government should have no say in who gets married. I also used to be for affirmative action. I am very much opposed to it now.

Travis

 

[LoneVoice]

Listen up...
Seems as if your question was directly responded to. Try being a bit more clear on exactly what you're asking. You ended your post with "Both sides may be talking, but neither side is listening..." and that point was also directly addressed by Moi.

See?
Listen up...

The Question was clear. It asked "Has any opinion, issue or statement voiced to any of you from the opposing point of view, ever had any impact whatsoever in swaying you to that opposing point of view? If so, what?".

If you read the post by Moi, you'll see that he said that the Democrats listen to their own constituents, and the Republicans listen to their constituents.
That misses the mark.

The issue is do you as a Democrats ever listen to and are impacted by a Republican point of view, or do you as a Republicans ever listen to and are impacted by a Democrat point of view. If neither side ever impacts the other, then they just spewing party rhetoric trash at each other, for no reason.

 

[jimnyc]

See?
Listen up...

The Question was clear.

As was Moi's post in reference to the point you attempted to make. Why don't you just respond with "that's not exactly what I was looking for" instead of sounding like a pompous ass with your "listen up" crap.

 

[Moi]

See?
Listen up...

The Question was clear. It asked "Has any opinion, issue or statement voiced to any of you from the opposing point of view, ever had any impact whatsoever in swaying you to that opposing point of view? If so, what?".

If you read the post by Moi, you'll see that he said that the Democrats listen to their own constituents, and the Republicans listen to their constituents.
That misses the mark.

The issue is do you as a Democrats ever listen to and are impacted by a Republican point of view, or do you as a Republicans ever listen to and are impacted by a Democrat point of view. If neither side ever impacts the other, then they just spewing party rhetoric trash at each other, for no reason.

Constituents are of both parties. Once a leader is elected, she/he is sworn to uphold the views of ALL their constituents not just those that are of the same political party as themselves. The examples I have already given are proof enough that republicans do listen to democrats and that democrats do listen to republicans.

And, by the way Mr. Quick Trigger-Finger, you asked 3 questions. I responded to your third: "If either party is never impacted by the other party, then why waste so much time discussing/debating anything?"

I certainly am under no constraints to answer every one of your questions.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Listen up...
You missed the point...

The question is, are you ever swayed by the opposing point of view?

If it is the TRUTH. For example, look in the "Kerrys 4 months! military service" thread. I acknowledged Kerry's Vietnam service as being more than 4 months when that was pointed out to me and I gave him credit for it. However I am still wondering about other important things with regard to his service and gave you some factual material.

In the "Dirty Campaigning" thread I asked you to prove my statements wrong if you could. Evidently you couldn't and you resorted to dancing around the issues and personal attack. However I am still


<<<<<<< LISTENING >>>>>>>>>


Although so far, in terms of PROOF and TRUTH on the issues, all I have heard from you is

<<<<< THE SOUNDS OF SILENCE >>>>>


other than your whininess

 

[popefumanchu]

See?
Listen up...

The Question was clear. It asked "Has any opinion, issue or statement voiced to any of you from the opposing point of view, ever had any impact whatsoever in swaying you to that opposing point of view? If so, what?".

If you read the post by Moi, you'll see that he said that the Democrats listen to their own constituents, and the Republicans listen to their constituents.
That misses the mark.

The issue is do you as a Democrats ever listen to and are impacted by a Republican point of view, or do you as a Republicans ever listen to and are impacted by a Democrat point of view. If neither side ever impacts the other, then they just spewing party rhetoric trash at each other, for no reason.

Let me speak as a recovering rabid socialist. In my foolish youth, I let idealism form my political beliefs. If I read or heard something that supported my view of the world, I incorporated that as added proof that I was right. That is inferential reasoning. When I argued with conservatives, who were people in a different click who I felt looked down upon by, I just thought they were brainwashed and didn't see the big picture. I didn't consider where they were coming from. That is arrogance.

Luckily, I did learn about debate. Unfortunately, I thought the lesson was that you could come up for proof for anything. Later, I learned some sources are more reliable than others. In debate, it was about winning, so you don't care about the source as long as it supports you want it to. In the battlefield of ideas, it is about being right, so it is very important to consider the validity of "proof".

Later, I had a good friend who was a Republican. He wasn't socially conservative, but he believed in small government, cutting social spending, and other "evil conservative" ideas. We would often get into arguments, which was good because I didn't have any other friends who enjoyed political discussions. We almost always disagreed. However, a few days later I would think about his arguments and find that they made a lot of sense. After a couple of years, I found that my views were becoming more conservative because it made more sense.

Through the years, I learned more about economics. The more I learned about economics, the more conservative fiscal policy made sense.

After 9/11, I learned that evil truly exists. Good and evil cannot exist in the same space. This changed my world view. I went from being unsure about George W. Bush to being a staunch supporter after witnessing how he handled the aftermath.

After I had a child, I found that my personal morality was lacking. I listened to people who I before thought were "holier than thou". They began to make sense. I realized we must improve ourselves to be the best possible example to our children.

So, yes, I was swayed by the "dark side". However I see it as growing and improving my mind. The more I learn, the more I can piece together to find The Big Truth. I have learned to rely on deductive reasoning removed from emotion. I am guided by what is, not what I want to be true or what I fear to be true.

I will not be swayed back, though. You see, I have already been over every argument that a liberal could possibly think of. I used to believe it. I now know it is a bunch of nonsense. It is harmful to me, my family, and my country. I will fight to the death do defend your right to believe and say it, but I will pray that you will begin to use the divine gift of reason someday.

 

[Annie]

Let me speak as a recovering rabid socialist. In my foolish youth, I let idealism form my political beliefs. If I read or heard something that supported my view of the world, I incorporated that as added proof that I was right. That is inferential reasoning. When I argued with conservatives, who were people in a different click who I felt looked down upon by, I just thought they were brainwashed and didn't see the big picture. I didn't consider where they were coming from. That is arrogance.

Luckily, I did learn about debate. Unfortunately, I thought the lesson was that you could come up for proof for anything. Later, I learned some sources are more reliable than others. In debate, it was about winning, so you don't care about the source as long as it supports you want it to. In the battlefield of ideas, it is about being right, so it is very important to consider the validity of "proof".

Later, I had a good friend who was a Republican. He wasn't socially conservative, but he believed in small government, cutting social spending, and other "evil conservative" ideas. We would often get into arguments, which was good because I didn't have any other friends who enjoyed political discussions. We almost always disagreed. However, a few days later I would think about his arguments and find that they made a lot of sense. After a couple of years, I found that my views were becoming more conservative because it made more sense.

Through the years, I learned more about economics. The more I learned about economics, the more conservative fiscal policy made sense.

After 9/11, I learned that evil truly exists. Good and evil cannot exist in the same space. This changed my world view. I went from being unsure about George W. Bush to being a staunch supporter after witnessing how he handled the aftermath.

After I had a child, I found that my personal morality was lacking. I listened to people who I before thought were "holier than thou". They began to make sense. I realized we must improve ourselves to be the best possible example to our children.

So, yes, I was swayed by the "dark side". However I see it as growing and improving my mind. The more I learn, the more I can piece together to find The Big Truth. I have learned to rely on deductive reasoning removed from emotion. I am guided by what is, not what I want to be true or what I fear to be true.

I will not be swayed back, though. You see, I have already been over every argument that a liberal could possibly think of. I used to believe it. I now know it is a bunch of nonsense. It is harmful to me, my family, and my country. I will fight to the death do defend your right to believe and say it, but I will pray that you will begin to use the divine gift of reason someday.

That was awesome!

 

[tpahl]

The issue is do you as a Democrats ever listen to and are impacted by a Republican point of view, or do you as a Republicans ever listen to and are impacted by a Democrat point of view. If neither side ever impacts the other, then they just spewing party rhetoric trash at each other, for no reason.

That would be true if there are only republicans and democrats in this country. However about 1/3 to 1/2 of the country is not either a republican or a democrat and does vary quite a bit from issue to issue.

Travis

 

[smirkinjesus]

That was awesome!

How ironic. I started out the opposite way. When I was young and foolish, I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh. I soon found myself hating Bill Clinton as if he were the very embodiment of evil.

Luckily, I was fortunate enough to attend College. I soon learned that the world is much more complex and nuanced then the likes of Limbaugh would lead you to believe. I learned, to my astonishment, that poor people aren’t always poor because they are lazy. I learned that Economics is actually a little more complicated then tax cuts. I even learned that free markets don’t always work! And what was the biggest shocker of all? I actually learned that not all government programs are bad! In fact, some government programs like the GI Bill helped to make this country the greatest nation in the history of the world. I learned that the Social Sciences have real data based on the Scientific Method that back up their theories, whereas Limbaugh has none to back up his rants.


Today, I call myself a Liberal, a moderate. I like the idea that I can approach an issue with an open mind, listen to all sides and come to my own position. While I tend to believe strongly in Free Markets, I also recognize that sometimes they don’t work. I know now that Republicans never actually reduce the size of Government, they always increase it. I know that many Liberals want to use government to impose equality, I don’t agree with that. I know that Conservatives like to use government to impose order, I certainly don’t agree with that.

Finally, I’ve learned that neither the “Right” nor the “Left” has the best method. The Political Pendulum will swing back and forth. We will go too far to the right, and there will be a backlash. Then we will swing too far to the left and there will be a backlash. If we ever get to the point where we keep going farther and farther to either side, Right or Left, that will be the end of our greatness.

 

[Hobbit]

When I hit college, I didn't know much about politics, but a decent amount about economics. When I finally got into politics, I was getting most of my information from very liberal sources (the most prominent) and got some fairly warped ideas. Once I started talking to my parents and listening to talk radio, I figured a lot of things out, and I think conservatism makes more sense, although I think both parties are wrong for increasing the size of the government every few years.

 

[LoneVoice]

As was Moi's post in reference to the point you attempted to make. Why don't you just respond with "that's not exactly what I was looking for" instead of sounding like a pompous ass with your "listen up" crap.

How hypocritical... Considering how pompous ass your response is...

If you truly believe that one shouldn't sound pompous ass, you might try following that philosophy yourself...

 

[Annie]

How hypocritical... Considering how pompous ass your response is...

If you truly believe that one shouldn't sound pompous ass, you might try following that philosophy yourself...

He and Moi answered you. Not a good idea to get in a flame with the owner of the board.

 

[LoneVoice]

If it is the TRUTH. For example, look in the "Kerrys 4 months! military service" thread. I acknowledged Kerry's Vietnam service as being more than 4 months when that was pointed out to me and I gave him credit for it. However I am still wondering about other important things with regard to his service and gave you some factual material.:

When you discussed the Kerry's military service career, your objective has been something on the line of, try to find something to discredit Kerry's military service so that you can make him look worse than Bush.

Now, I will acknowleged that when you were informed that Kerry's service was 16 months instead of 4, you accepted it. You even said you bumped up your respect for him.

Then, interestingly enough, you went right back to trying to discredit the now longer military service of Kerry in order to make Bush better. Your task is just a little bigger now...

In other words, your goal is to discredit Kerry's military service, and now your goal is still to do that. Meaning, that those facts did virtually nothing (at this point) to changing your original premise. I'm not even suggesting that it should've.... I'm just saying that it isn't relevant to this thread of what has swayed you to the opposing point of view.

In the "Dirty Campaigning" thread I asked you to prove my statements wrong if you could. Evidently you couldn't and you resorted to dancing around the issues and personal attack. However I am still

<<<<<<< LISTENING >>>>>>>>>

If you were LISTENING, then YOU'D TRY ANSWERING SOME OF THE QUESTIONS that were asked of you in that thread. The conversation in that thread is still open to discussion, but you haven't answered a single question, and you haven't asked a single question. Try answering questions in that thread, then you can say or ask anything you want.

Until then, you have nothing to be upset about...

 

[LoneVoice]

He and Moi answered you. Not a good idea to get in a flame with the owner of the board.

Don't you think he should try to lead by example then...

Actually, Moi didn't, and JimmyNYC never answered. Moi at least tried, but he's off in a slightly different direction saying that Dems listen to Dems and Repubs listen to Repubs...

Where he's close is that he's sorta implying that those are the other party's issues... It's too vague a reference to be sure.

 

[Annie]

Don't you think he should try to lead by example then...

Actually, Moi didn't, and JimmyNYC never answered. Moi at least tried, but he's off in a slightly different direction saying that Dems listen to Dems and Repubs listen to Repubs...

Where he's close is that he's sorta implying that those are the other party's issues... It's too vague a reference to be sure.

I'm not debating this, it was freely given advice.

 

[LoneVoice]

I'm not debating this, it was freely given advice.

Good idea... Let's let people speak for themselves...