What this campaign season has taught me ...

[Juror#8]

I used to work in politics. Some remember in 2012 I had some rather prescient strategic observations about the state of the 2012 race. Specifically I mentioned that anyone who felt that Romney had a chance, based on internal polls that I was seeing, was nut-swinging from conservative media that was pushing a weird agenda of confirmatory bias that was eaten happily like **** pie by some of the more gullible on this thread who think that some conservative revolution was underway.

 

It was sad to see such inanity flow.

 

Anyway, I had a cool conversation over fish and chips and a couple schooners of Yuengling with someone who works for a political think tank in dc. In addition to some other super smart people that I have an occassion to talk with frequently, this is what I've learned this campaign season:

 

1. Donald Trump is banking on ethno-nationalism. He is won't admit it overtly, but he is and hoping that it galvanizes a semi-silent demographic that off-sets the growing political power of the minority voting bloc. These are people who sadly believe that most blacks and other minorities suck the tit of the welfare system and languish in perpetual poverty and are imparting that culture, by way of politics, into our American ethos.

 

Sadly many of those dolts are here and are under the mistaken belief that the country, intrinsically, loves the right and loathes the left.

 

Dolts.

 

2. This country is decidedly center right; however the right misses a golden opportunity to court demographics that naturally fit it's party platform by subscribing to ethno-nationalism and being conspicuously quiet on **** that it shouldn't be quiet on. I went to a trump rally and it fundamentally changed my perspective. I've never seen anything like that. I could not align my vote with *some* of the people there after seeing them and some of the things said by supporters. Some were good people and I enjoyed some good conversation with like-minded folks. And then there were the others who displayed and said things that were as odious and offensive as anything that you could imagine.

 

It was epiphany-inducing.

 

Anyway, the right could easily have 60% of the southern black vote and 25% of the black vote everywhere else if they took the L on this election cycle and marginalized Trump now. He is going to lose anyway The Asian vote is another that's nearly tailor-made for the taking in republican politics but their rhetoric is making that increasingly powerful vote unattainable in a generational way.

 

If Clinton gets 60% of the white female vote and Trump 65% of the white male vote, the minority vote will be dispositive. The gop is counting on a lack of enthusiasm from the minority contigent but the dems have some very interesting and persuasive tactics up their sleeve - ads tantamount to the 70s "Daisy" ad - that should drive turnout and scare up support. Also warren is the front-runner but look out for a name that doesn't appear much in national news, Tim Ryan.

 

3. Gop should have let Garland proceed to a vote. They played the math wrong. They would have ended up with a moderate-left justice who was a flip on potentially key issues. He would not defacto align himself with the left on the bench. If/when Hillary is in office, she will have substantial progressive pressure to put a super lefty on the bench. And mind you it will be right after she takes office so the optics around a gop push back will be bad and have no public support because of what will have been a one-year vacancy. And also new presidents have loads of goodwill.

 

Dumb, dumb, dumb. And the word is that gop lawmakers are starting to realize it.

 

Check-mate

 

4. I would have voted for Bush and he should have been the nominee. I would have voted for Kasich too. Read back to my posts from 2011. I mentioned, on this forum, being a supporter of Bush presidency back in 2012 and he wasn't running. I mentioned a Kasich presidency 5 years ago because of his resume and big things that he was doing in Ohio at the time only 2 years in as governor. I also mentioned Buddy Roemer who I still believe would be a great third party candidate. The gop is being hijacked by its basest, most feral instincts. And I believe that it's on the verge of 20+ years in the national minority. Because they can't replace their hatred with assimilation.

 

As of 2014, there were 20 million in this country under the age of 5. 51% were minority. Almost 20% mixed race marriages last year. Projected almost 60% of the population "minority" by 2060. Do the math. The gop is losing ground. Because it's alientating, or at least not welcoming, a growing swath of voters.

 

5. The anti-o, crazy fervor of the last 4 years has created a monster that is now untamable and ushered in an appetite for Trump. Instead of responsible political disagreement over the last 8 years, there has been a personalization and hatred - highlighted by issues-based dissatisfaction that admits itself through weird racial overtones. That will rub some here the wrong way because they will think that they're being called "racist." There are some here (micro), and nationally (macro) that are generally just in different ideological camps. There are some (minority) that are using ideological differences as a proxy for racial biases. In their head the "n" word flows indiscriminately as they work with minority's happily and without incident every day.

 

You know who you are. And it is a decided minority.

 

6. Some dolts here will think that Hillary doesn't stand a chance against Trump. And she may not. I see polls that give her an advantage over advantage. Either way, though, I challenge you to view multiple media sources because I'm convinced that Fox spins an agenda that tries to reshape polling data. Oc and others here fell for that **** on the last go round though I was saying "I'm looking at internal data points that shows Romney down 8 points in Ohio and worse in other swing states ..."

 

7. With the scotus thing and damn near this entire election cycle, to this point, the gop is playing checkers while the dems are playing chess.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Juror#8

[boyst]

6. The major issue of what you bring up was 100% flamed by Barrack Obama. He has divided this nation so strategically and thoroughly that it will be a long time to repair. He set a stage that makes everyone loathe any talk of division or inequality. we are now dead set on the supposed word of tolerance - the expectation that mentally ill people can identify themselves as trees, a non gendered person, etc. your misunderstanding, possibly, that this is not an agenda pushed by obama needs to be addressed.

 

even you are are now riding this high horse of birdbrain stupid saying you're morally superior. the thought that you are calling people out for their beliefs, and actually accusing others of racism... that just doesn't need to be here and you're better than that. if you stoop to that level you should be termed jerkoff#8. but we both know that won't be better than that, you're too good to be that low.

 

7.. its not bad to play checkers vs. chess. some times the best thing to do is not to play. look what happened when people attempted to play global thermo nuclear war. they found tic tac toe was better- so sometimes simple is better

 

 

 

 

 

hilary will win, no problem. we will endure 8 years of more division and it will tip the scales so radically conservative that will be amazaing, as center shifts left the right deemed radically conservative will support gay rights and such things.

[Juror#8]

6. The major issue of what you bring up was 100% flamed by Barrack Obama. He has divided this nation so strategically and thoroughly that it will be a long time to repair. He set a stage that makes everyone loathe any talk of division or inequality. we are now dead set on the supposed word of tolerance - the expectation that mentally ill people can identify themselves as trees, a non gendered person, etc. your misunderstanding, possibly, that this is not an agenda pushed by obama needs to be addressed.

 

even you are are now riding this high horse of birdbrain stupid saying you're morally superior. the thought that you are calling people out for their beliefs, and actually accusing others of racism... that just doesn't need to be here and you're better than that. if you stoop to that level you should be termed jerkoff#8. but we both know that won't be better than that, you're too good to be that low.

 

7.. its not bad to play checkers vs. chess. some times the best thing to do is not to play. look what happened when people attempted to play global thermo nuclear war. they found tic tac toe was better- so sometimes simple is better

 

 

 

 

 

hilary will win, no problem. we will endure 8 years of more division and it will tip the scales so radically conservative that will be amazaing, as center shifts left the right deemed radically conservative will support gay rights and such things.

 

I think that you may have read more into my post then what I was saying.

 

1. I don't have problem with Trump. I've decided not to vote for him. But read my posts about him, they've been for the most part complimentary. I think that he is alientating people and for the gop to have a chance moving forward, they will need to distance themselves from him. But I just think he is a showman with a stage and he is working his celebrity and support towards a cable news conglomerate that rivals Fox News at some point post-election.

 

2. This isn't about tolerance. I don't think that men should be able to use women's bathrooms because that's how they identify themselves. In fact, I find that loathsome and criminal. What it is about is establishing a voting segment and the gop is losing that or at least not growing it because of alienation, and the strange personal issue that people have with this administration that I believe, in some instances, has a racial motivation.

 

And people see it. I see it. Others I know see it. It seems like the only folks who don't want to see it is those who want to take offense to he slightest suggestion that there may be an element of racial bias and stereotype inherent in the ideological stance of some against this administration.

 

And this isn't black/white, dem/repub. I make politicians work for my vote. I've voted once dem, twice repub, and one write-in the last four national cycles so I'm not a sell out for any party. Others I know see that there is a strange personal dislike for this administration that existed since jump street. And those individuals, who have that personal dislike, carry the water for an obstructionist congress as if the congress has been duped out of solemn efforts at harmonious bi-partisan legislation by a bulling administration.

 

How dumb are people?

 

3. I think that this administration has definitely divided some but if you believe that it's by his doing singularly and that the gop has played ball and sat at the negotiation table patiently waiting to meet the president halfway towards political harmony, then you are lost. The repubs are as complicit as the administration for all the dysfunction in the country. They had an obstructionist agenda and they played it for 8 years. The administration dug their heels in and were as stubborn in their agenda.

 

And so here we are.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Juror#8

[FireChan]

That's a lot of words to get to the point of saying anyone who disagrees with the trajectory of this country and this administration has a "racial bias."

 

Cool beans.

[Juror#8]

That's a lot of words to get to the point of saying anyone who disagrees with the trajectory of this country and this administration has a "racial bias."

Cool beans.

That's not even close to what I said. Quite the opposite actually.

 

But maybe the words "decided minority" mean something different to you than they do to me and the rest of the universe.

 

beans Cool.

[FireChan]

That's not even close to what I said. Quite the opposite actually.

 

But maybe the words "decided minority" mean something different to you than they do to me and the rest of the universe.

 

beans Cool.

Does the "decided minority" of the Left who have "racial biases" against Caucasians (and/or Christians) matter in your world? Nah, probably not. Whitey deserves it after all.

[Juror#8]

Does the "decided minority" of the Left who have "racial biases" against Caucasians (and/or Christians) matter in your world? Nah, probably not. Whitey deserves it after all.

 

You've proven my point; thank you.

 

And I have no clue what you're talking about with "your world."

 

I am most certainly a Christian.

 

I'm most certainly not a lefty.

 

But maybe it helps you to categorize everyone neatly in boxes so you that feel justified in your feelings about the world.

[boyst]

I think that you may have read more into my post then what I was saying.

 

1. I don't have problem with Trump. I've decided not to vote for him. But read my posts about him, they've been for the most part complimentary. I think that he is alientating people and for the gop to have a chance moving forward, they will need to distance themselves from him. But I just think he is a showman with a stage and he is working his celebrity and support towards a cable news conglomerate that rivals Fox News at some point post-election.

 

2. This isn't about tolerance. I don't think that men should be able to use women's bathrooms because that's how they identify themselves. In fact, I find that loathsome and criminal. What it is about is establishing a voting segment and the gop is losing that or at least not growing it because of alienation, and the strange personal issue that people have with this administration that I believe, in some instances, has a racial motivation.

 

And people see it. I see it. Others I know see it. It seems like the only folks who don't want to see it is those who want to take offense to he slightest suggestion that there may be an element of racial bias and stereotype inherent in the ideological stance of some against this administration.

 

And this isn't black/white, dem/repub. I make politicians work for my vote. I've voted once dem, twice repub, and one write-in the last four national cycles so I'm not a sell out for any party. Others I know see that there is a strange personal dislike for this administration that existed since jump street. And those individuals, who have that personal dislike, carry the water for an obstructionist congress as if the congress has been duped out of solemn efforts at harmonious bi-partisan legislation by a bulling administration.

 

How dumb are people?

 

3. I think that this administration has definitely divided some but if you believe that it's by his doing singularly and that the gop has played ball and sat at the negotiation table patiently waiting to meet the president halfway towards political harmony, then you are lost. The repubs are as complicit as the administration for all the dysfunction in the country. They had an obstructionist agenda and they played it for 8 years. The administration dug their heels in and were as stubborn in their agenda.

 

And so here we are.

firechan already beat me to it, but the only real statements you are making about anything that are coming from either you or the supposed political think tank guru is that the GOP is racist and race is playing a big factor in this election.

 

you are using a lot of words to back yourself in to an argument that is decidedly flawed because it is not going to go forward with what this country is actually looking for, plus logically it's ridiculous. to believe that trumps supposed racism and baiting of racism is any different than the blatant racism exercised by Obama is unbelievable. obama has stoked the flames of racism, pandered to blacks, pandered to gays and done everything in his power to rub opponents nose in it. combined with the health care reform nonsense obama has completely and utterly destroyed constitutional values and things once held sacred by undermining the democratic process of the executive party. so much so that the very next president is going to reap a large reward of american stupidity believing that fancy word of obstructionism you mentioned. that those opposed to hillary or donald are obstructionists, not american, etc. you'll back in to bush, or birdbrain will and there is a huge difference; bush did not completely undermine the legislative process and used congress and their support. obama has never done this and you now want to describe the next president as someone who is going to be divisive, unruly, etc.

 

i cannot stand donald trump but gun to my head i would vote for him and if north carolina comes out to be a state where the vote is close enough to hillary i will not vote johnson or bababooey but vote trump to keep her out of office. trump would do less to screw this country up than hillary on the premise that simply trump would be stopped from screwing us up worse where hillary would get away with the standard bull **** clintons get away from.

 

the racism factor nonsense. i don't see it. i don't care to see it, as well. but i'd see it if it was there. i'm not a very smart man, jurror, but i know what racism is.

[FireChan]

You've proven my point; thank you.

 

And I have no clue what you're talking about with "your world."

 

I am most certainly a Christian.

 

I'm most certainly not a lefty.

 

But maybe it helps you to categorize everyone neatly in boxes so you that feel justified in your feelings about the world.

I don't care what you are. It doesn't matter.

 

All that matters is that you, knowingly or not, are perpetuating a narrative. A shame, really, because you seem like a smart guy.

 

The Right is the only ideology harboring a minority of racists. That is your narrative. You will continue to spout it, and anyone who disagrees is either racist, or thinks they are being called a racist. Talk about "boxes" amirite? There are folks with the "n word floating through their head," but no BLM folks who hate white people. Even if there are, who cares? They aren't real racists, right?

Edited June 19, 2016 by FireChan

[boyst]

Does the "decided minority" of the Left who have "racial biases" against Caucasians (and/or Christians) matter in your world? Nah, probably not. Whitey deserves it after all.

 

 

You've proven my point; thank you.

 

And I have no clue what you're talking about with "your world."

 

I am most certainly a Christian.

 

I'm most certainly not a lefty.

 

But maybe it helps you to categorize everyone neatly in boxes so you that feel justified in your feelings about the world.

ok i'll respond to your jurror because its clear you're at a birdbrain level.

 

my local cbs station has had a mini series friday nights called racism in america tlaking about the race problems in our area of nc. evidently there are race problems. who knew? it's poppycock. its hosted by a black newswoman and joined by several local figures in politics all supporting blacklivesmatter, etc. but not one person of status supported the idea that the idea of blacklivesmatter is ridiculus and a sham.

 

think of it this way. when trayvon martin was killed for attacking that hispanic fat dude, did hispanic politicians get behind him for doing it? did black politicians get behind trayvon? one asshat proclaiming it would be trayvon martin as his son?

 

how about when any thing happens, say chicago... you never see a politica figure expose himself to ridicule about the tremendous amount of violence there by minorities? not unless that one is the sacrificial lamb or rudy guiliani who is more or less the axe man for the republicans. in this racist world you talk about, blacklivesmatter, minorities get the strongest voices and anyone with a shoebox to stand beside gets national attention. there is an attack on the principles of this country due to the division emplored by leadership. you should see this in baltimore where your retard of a mayor let an entire portion of the city be destroyed to make a political point and gain attention.

 

if you odn't see it, you never will. it's a moot point.

[Juror#8]

firechan already beat me to it, but the only real statements you are making about anything that are coming from either you or the supposed political think tank guru is that the GOP is racist and race is playing a big factor in this election.

 

you are using a lot of words to back yourself in to an argument that is decidedly flawed because it is not going to go forward with what this country is actually looking for, plus logically it's ridiculous. to believe that trumps supposed racism and baiting of racism is any different than the blatant racism exercised by Obama is unbelievable. obama has stoked the flames of racism, pandered to blacks, pandered to gays and done everything in his power to rub opponents nose in it. combined with the health care reform nonsense obama has completely and utterly destroyed constitutional values and things once held sacred by undermining the democratic process of the executive party. so much so that the very next president is going to reap a large reward of american stupidity believing that fancy word of obstructionism you mentioned. that those opposed to hillary or donald are obstructionists, not american, etc. you'll back in to bush, or birdbrain will and there is a huge difference; bush did not completely undermine the legislative process and used congress and their support. obama has never done this and you now want to describe the next president as someone who is going to be divisive, unruly, etc.

 

i cannot stand donald trump but gun to my head i would vote for him and if north carolina comes out to be a state where the vote is close enough to hillary i will not vote johnson or bababooey but vote trump to keep her out of office. trump would do less to screw this country up than hillary on the premise that simply trump would be stopped from screwing us up worse where hillary would get away with the standard bull **** clintons get away from.

 

the racism factor nonsense. i don't see it. i don't care to see it, as well. but i'd see it if it was there. i'm not a very smart man, jurror, but i know what racism is.

ok i'll respond to your jurror because its clear you're at a birdbrain level.

 

my local cbs station has had a mini series friday nights called racism in america tlaking about the race problems in our area of nc. evidently there are race problems. who knew? it's poppycock. its hosted by a black newswoman and joined by several local figures in politics all supporting blacklivesmatter, etc. but not one person of status supported the idea that the idea of blacklivesmatter is ridiculus and a sham.

 

think of it this way. when trayvon martin was killed for attacking that hispanic fat dude, did hispanic politicians get behind him for doing it? did black politicians get behind trayvon? one asshat proclaiming it would be trayvon martin as his son?

 

how about when any thing happens, say chicago... you never see a politica figure expose himself to ridicule about the tremendous amount of violence there by minorities? not unless that one is the sacrificial lamb or rudy guiliani who is more or less the axe man for the republicans. in this racist world you talk about, blacklivesmatter, minorities get the strongest voices and anyone with a shoebox to stand beside gets national attention. there is an attack on the principles of this country due to the division emplored by leadership. you should see this in baltimore where your retard of a mayor let an entire portion of the city be destroyed to make a political point and gain attention.

 

if you odn't see it, you never will. it's a moot point.

Not sure what "fire chan" beat you to. I proved that he was wrong in his initial comment. Realizing that he was wrong, he responded with a straw man. I then called out his straw man. Now he will respond with a non-sequitur, an ad-hominem, another straw man or a hybrid red-herring, or he just won't respond under the auspices of "why am I wasting my time."

 

You are a smart man and I enjoy our exchanges. There is nothing about you that I suspect to be racist. In fact there was one exchange that I had with one member at one time that I'm convinced had racial overtones. I feel that way for a very specific reason and I told him that then. I've never mentioned that since. One time. I've had a lot of disagree,nets and heated political exchanges on this forum.

 

I'm not sure what in your post that I can respond to. You drew a lot of assumptions about me and my position. You also seem to be angry about something that I said. I very carefully chose my words and am very confident in the thoughts that I shared. I also find it interesting that in everything that I said, the idea that some may have racial bias (that I specificed and identified as a "decided minority," and even went as far as to distinguish them from those that I believe have a legitimate ideological disagreement with the administration) is all that stood out. And what was ignored were some salient and substantive points for debate.

[FireChan]

Not sure what "fire chan" beat you to. I proved that he was wrong in his initial comment. Realizing that he was wrong, he responded with a straw man. I then called out his straw man. Now he will respond with a non-sequitur, an ad-hominem, another straw man or a hybrid red-herring, or he just won't respond under the auspices of "why am I wasting my time."

 

You are a smart man and I enjoy our exchanges. There is nothing about you that I suspect to be racist. In fact there was one exchange that I had with one member at one time that I'm convinced had racial overtones. I feel that way for a very specific reason and I told him that then. I've never mentioned that since. One time. I've had a lot of disagree,nets and heated political exchanges on this forum.

 

I'm not sure what in your post that I can respond to. You drew a lot of assumptions about me and my position. You also seem to be angry about something that I said. I very carefully chose my words and am very confident in the thoughts that I shared. I also find it interesting that in everything that I said, the idea that some may have racial bias (that I specificed and identified as a "decided minority," and even went as far as to distinguish them from those that I believe have a legitimate ideological disagreement with the administration) is all that stood out. And what was ignored were some salient and substantive points for debate.

Not so much a strawman as a pivot. I firmly believe that your implied distinction of Right minority racists is an important talking point. It's one the media routinely abuses, and will never stop. Which invalidates your other points about the right gaining a large chunk of the black vote, ever, by "taking an L with Trump." The Right will never get the black vote. They are the party with racists in it. You said it yourself.

 

I was wrong initially though. You weren't calling all GOPers or right-wingers racist, just that they are the only group with racists claiming membership. Which is silly.

 

You'll have to forgive me about making it all about race, that is what initially jumped out at me. However, I wasn't going to sit there and allow you to perpetuate some stupid narrative.

Edited June 19, 2016 by FireChan

[Juror#8]

I don't care what you are. It doesn't matter.

 

All that matters is that you, knowingly or not, are perpetuating a narrative. A shame, really, because you seem like a smart guy.

 

The Right is the only ideology harboring a minority of racists. That is your narrative. You will continue to spout it, and anyone who disagrees is either racist, or thinks they are being called a racist. Talk about "boxes" amirite? There are folks with the "n word floating through their head," but no BLM folks who hate white people. Even if there are, who cares? They aren't real racists, right?

Nope, there are people who are equally at fault for thir racist demagoguery against the majority. Read my posts here. I've called out Sharptons, and blm, and even Michael Eric Dyson. Search "Juror 8" and "Al Sharpton." I feel that he is a racist blowhard perpetuating a left wing racist agenda. Period. I call a spade a spade, man. You are labeling me as "one of them" and unfortunately proving my point of alienation. I'm the guy saying that for every naacp, there should be a naawp that enjoys tax exempt status. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Right is right and fair I fair.

 

But that has nothing to do with this environment right now. I'm talking about the course of the gop and what can be done to avoid a one party majority. I vote republican and I know a lot of black folks, like me, who want to see some change in the gop so that it doesn't get overrun by a far leftist agenda. I like my guns and I like my traditional values.

 

And I shouldn't have to say all that for my points to be taken seriously.

 

I'm different too in that I don't hate the current administration and feel that they are doing what they feel is best for the country. May not be exactly my cup of tea, but I don't hate them for it. They were voted in, let them do their job, and don't obstruct for the sake of obstructing. But there needs to be compromise ... from the administration and from congress. There hasn't much of any, anywhere.

 

That's my frustration as a citizen.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Juror#8

[/dev/null]

hilary will win, no problem. we will endure 8 years of more division and it will tip the scales so radically conservative that will be amazaing, as center shifts left the right deemed radically conservative will support gay rights and such things.

Four years. Cracks are already forming in the facade of the last eight years. The media won't be as in the tank for Hiliary as they are for President Potemkin

 

Next four years are gonna be rough

[Juror#8]

ok i'll respond to your jurror because its clear you're at a birdbrain level.

 

my local cbs station has had a mini series friday nights called racism in america tlaking about the race problems in our area of nc. evidently there are race problems. who knew? it's poppycock. its hosted by a black newswoman and joined by several local figures in politics all supporting blacklivesmatter, etc. but not one person of status supported the idea that the idea of blacklivesmatter is ridiculus and a sham.

 

think of it this way. when trayvon martin was killed for attacking that hispanic fat dude, did hispanic politicians get behind him for doing it? did black politicians get behind trayvon? one asshat proclaiming it would be trayvon martin as his son?

 

how about when any thing happens, say chicago... you never see a politica figure expose himself to ridicule about the tremendous amount of violence there by minorities? not unless that one is the sacrificial lamb or rudy guiliani who is more or less the axe man for the republicans. in this racist world you talk about, blacklivesmatter, minorities get the strongest voices and anyone with a shoebox to stand beside gets national attention. there is an attack on the principles of this country due to the division emplored by leadership. you should see this in baltimore where your retard of a mayor let an entire portion of the city be destroyed to make a political point and gain attention.

 

if you odn't see it, you never will. it's a moot point.

I've been nothing but cordial towards you and, despite that, you continue with the ad hominems and your posts are unfocused and rambling at that.

 

We will agree to disagree but I don't see a lot of value in our continued conversation.

[FireChan]

Nope, there are people who are equally at fault for thir racist demagoguery against the majority. Read my posts here. I've called out Sharptons, and blm, and even Michael Eric Dyson. Search "Juror 8" and "Al Sharpton." I feel that he is a racist blowhard perpetuating a left wing racist agenda. Period. I call a spade a spade, man. You are labeling me as "one of them" and unfortunately proving my point of alienation. I'm the guy saying that for every naacp, there should be a naawp that enjoys tax exempt status. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Right is right and fair I fair.

 

But that has nothing to do with this environment right now. I'm talking about the course of the gop and what can be done to avoid a one party majority. I vote republican and I know a lot of black folks, like me, who want to see some change in the gop so that it doesn't get overrun by a far leftist agenda. I like my guns and I like my traditional values.

 

And I shouldn't have to say all that for my points to be taken seriously.

Let's try to get an actual back and forth going so we aren't one post behind of the other person. I'll assume you are responding to my latest.

[Juror#8]

Let's try to get an actual back and forth going so we aren't one post behind of the other person. I'll assume you are responding to my latest.

Yes, I was responding to your latest. And I edited my last post. I'll wait for your response.

[Beef Jerky]

I haven't really been into politics anymore since no matter who wins it is always the same old **** over and over. Which is why I am not voting b.c I do not know enough about these presidential candidates, nor do I care to learn since it won't matter in the grand scheme of things.

 

Dem gets in the Republicans will try to stop them from doing anything, Republican gets in the Democrats will try to stop them from doing anything.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Beef Jerky

[FireChan]

Nope, there are people who are equally at fault for thir racist demagoguery against the majority. Read my posts here. I've called out Sharptons, and blm, and even Michael Eric Dyson. Search "Juror 8" and "Al Sharpton." I feel that he is a racist blowhard perpetuating a left wing racist agenda. Period. I call a spade a spade, man. You are labeling me as "one of them" and unfortunately proving my point of alienation. I'm the guy saying that for every naacp, there should be a naawp that enjoys tax exempt status. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Right is right and fair I fair.

 

But that has nothing to do with this environment right now. I'm talking about the course of the gop and what can be done to avoid a one party majority. I vote republican and I know a lot of black folks, like me, who want to see some change in the gop so that it doesn't get overrun by a far leftist agenda. I like my guns and I like my traditional values.

 

And I shouldn't have to say all that for my points to be taken seriously.

 

I'm different too in that I don't hate the current administration and feel that they are doing what they feel is best for the country. May not be exactly my cup of tea, but I don't hate them for it. They were voted in, let them do their job, and don't obstruct for the sake of obstructing. But there needs to be compromise ... from the administration and from congress. There hasn't much of any, anywhere.

 

That's my frustration as a citizen.

Nope, there are people who are equally at fault for thir racist demagoguery against the majority. Read my posts here. I've called out Sharptons, and blm, and even Michael Eric Dyson. Search "Juror 8" and "Al Sharpton." I feel that he is a racist blowhard perpetuating a left wing racist agenda. Period. I call a spade a spade, man. You are labeling me as "one of them" and unfortunately proving my point of alienation. I'm the guy saying that for every naacp, there should be a naawp that enjoys tax exempt status. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Right is right and fair I fair.

 

Cool, I didn't know that. However, as much as your posting history indicates, it's not something I gathered from your OP. More on this later.

 

But that has nothing to do with this environment right now. I'm talking about the course of the gop and what can be done to avoid a one party majority. I vote republican and I know a lot of black folks, like me, who want to see some change in the gop so that it doesn't get overrun by a far leftist agenda. I like my guns and I like my traditional values.

 

And I shouldn't have to say all that for my points to be taken seriously.

 

No, you shouldn't. But you have to. Do you know why? Because of what the course of the GOP is affected by. The right has the far greater reputation of racism than the left, when in reality, they aren't too far off. By making a post that singles out the minority racists of only one party, you lend credence to that narrative unwittingly. It's about protecting yourself more than anything else.

 

I'm different too in that I don't hate the current administration and feel that they are doing what they feel is best for the country. May not be exactly my cup of tea, but I don't hate them for it. They were voted in, let them do their job, and don't obstruct for the sake of obstructing. But there needs to be compromise ... from the administration and from congress. There hasn't much of any, anywhere.

 

Really? I find myself flip-flopping between the chief problem of this administration unrivaled ignorance or malevolence every week. Forgive my cliche, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Even if the Obama administration believed the ACA was gonna work, the damage it's doing has completely invalidated their intentions, IMO. Maybe you can't hate him for trying to do what's right, but I can be mad as hell that he's !@#$ed it up more by trying.

 

On the point of obstructing. I would argue Obama has done more to instigate obstruction and a lack of compromise than anyone. Get in the backseat? Really? Any man who tries to impose their will like that is a ****ty politician, regardless of the fact that he feels he's doing what is best for the country. You simply cannot lead effectively in this country acting the way Obama has. And then there's the whole "if you won't agree with me, I'll violate the Constitution and overrule you," thing. Why the hell would you ever agree to compromise with a man like that?

 

Furthermore, there is a compromise fallacy. If Billy says the sky is red, and Cindy says the sky is blue, the correct answer is not the sky is purple. That's an unwieldy analogy but it'll have to do. There are certain things in this country that are simply uncompromising. Like the Second Amendment. It's right there in black and white, "shall not be infringed." But the "correct" thing to do is compromise on common sense gun control? Says who? (Edit: I'm not saying this is a position you hold or that we disagree on, only using it to highlight a point.) I'm not argue that any specific policy maker subscribes to any uncompromising positions (mostly because they are by and large snakes), but as a voter, what matters is the upholding of the Constitution, not compromising so we can have the illusion of getting things at the cost of our Rights being infringed upon.

 

As a final aside, you appear to be not voting for Trump because some folks at his rallies said some awful stuff. Can you elaborate?

Edited June 19, 2016 by FireChan

[unbillievable]

Yet another liberal who believes they have some sort of insight because they managed to guess who won the election.

 

Let me guess... elections have consequences? .... is it time to ride in the back of the bus?

Wasn't Obama getting elected supposed to magically cure racism?