The Democrat Primary Race Is Filling Up

[Tombs]

Group blame? No. Group blame is a social construct. Blame, to the extent that it's necessary, belongs to the individuals who did an act, knew better, or objectively should have known better.

I think you're starting to see my point, it's just a logical conclusion made up of many small parts, and is an inevitable outcome of all of these small parts being added together.

 

[BugI02]

.

 

[BugI02]

I voted for Trump. I will most likely vote for Trump again this time. Trump has done a number of things that have pissed me off. I'm not responsible for those things if I vote for him again. It's a trade off. That's just as applicable to democrat voters. One can be against some things and still vote for the person because of the totality of the platform. I think it's a dangerous and wrongheaded thought if we all impose our personal moral scruples on everyone else. I can disagree with Alpo on his choice. But that's his choice to make and he doesn't see the world like I do. I'm sure he doesn't see the world as you do either.

Hear, hear! Can you cc that post to the We're Better Than That® Club

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to jamil again.

Frack!

 

[jamil]

The supposed crimes were pressure to follow up on a corruption investigation that was abruptly ended by the Vice President and father of the person being investigated.

How does this compare to thousands of dead Americans, the economy collapsing, and the medical system being stretched to the point of snapping, all because people wanted to virtue signal their anti-racism message? Or potentially, to destroy the economy Trump built, to improve their chances in November?

I feel like you're being purposefully blind for the sake of playing the devil's advocate, but it doesn't help the situation or help give perspective. You kind of need more even scales to weigh here to make that kind of point actually mean something.



I think we're drilling down to a philosophical issue. And in my eyes, yes you can take credit for enabling Trump to achieve the things he has achieved. Just as any voter would enable their elected official to carry out the tasks they put them in office to carry out.

The buck stops with the people, in my opinion. A politician needs to create a platform that has popular support of the people to get into office. If the majority of people are deeply against the platform of that politician, then they won't win a seat in office.

This means the people, in large part, shape the platform of their political leaders, and in turn, should be considered responsible for where those platforms go.


The issue I think most will take with this isn't actually that people are responsible, but whether an individual is responsible or a collective is responsible. Considering we're largely a group of people who believe in individual responsibility and liberty, and deny the existence of a collective, I'm not sure how you'd square a collective responsibility as an exception.

That's your interpretation of the supposed crimes. That's not how democrats see it. Just like the way you see the other thing as thousands of dead Americans, the economy collapsing, medical system being stretched, all because people wanted to virtue signal their anti-racism. That's a very facile explanation of it, and not only that, not all democrats believe that. You also believe Trump built the economy. They don't believe that.

I'm not playing devil's advocate. I'm not being purposefully blind. Seeing more than just my side is the opposite of blindness. I think my scales are even. I think you have your thumbs on your side of the scale. The point I'm making is that the democrats you're talking about think you're just as evil as you think they are. You are imposing the logical conclusion of your idea of responsibility in your own worldview on them. They could use your very own argument against you in the same way. You have blood on your hands because you don't care about people across the border. They see that as immoral. But we're getting away from the specific topic, that you think a "blue-dog" traditional democrat is immoral for supporting Joe Biden. Well, that's just like your opinion man. He could say the same about you for supporting Trump. But you can't see that because you don't look past your own worldview, as if yours is the only way to see the world and derive a moral outlook from it.

On the other question, no, you don't get to take credit for what Trump does as president, at least not much. You're an individual. You "helped" only by participating in electing him. So you get only 1/1,557,286th credit for Indiana's 11 electoral votes that went to Donald Trump. And maybe you might have written some letters to congress critters to support Trump's agenda. That's it. you don't get group credit because there's no such thing.

I do think that people shape platforms, but people are highly hackable. The media you consume makes you support the causes you support more than you may think. The part that you contribute, the freewill thinking, maybe contributes 1%. That's how I see it.

 

[BugI02]

unintentional doppelpost

 

[jamil]

I think you're starting to see my point, it's just a logical conclusion made up of many small parts, and is an inevitable outcome of all of these small parts being added together.

I'm not saying anything I've never said before. It is the individual parts that make an outcome. But there's no group credit nor group blame for that.

 

[T.Lex]

One thing Trump has achieved - like the Dem national leadership - is a cadre of unquestioning, unyielding, unapologetic loyalists.

Probably an appropriate observation in a thread about the Dem primary.

 

[jamil]

Hear, hear! Can you cc that post to the We're Better Than That® Club

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to jamil again.

Frack!

Dopplepost notwithstanding, you seem to care a lot about this "we're better than that club". Sometimes I think you think it's that at play when it's really something else.

 

[BugI02]

No. I got really tired, quite a long time ago, of the people on this board who feel they occupy sufficiently high moral ground so as to judge the morals of others based on who they voted for. I thought that was the point you were making, that if I voted for Trump it doesn't mean I can be blamed for his moral failings nor in any way must share them

You could substitute the Club for Holier Than Thou and the membership lists would likely have significant overlap

 

[jamil]

One thing Trump has achieved - like the Dem national leadership - is a cadre of unquestioning, unyielding, unapologetic loyalists.

Probably an appropriate observation in a thread about the Dem primary.

Yeah, but is that so much out of the ordinary? They're no more unquestioning, unyielding, unapologetic loyalists, than their democrat counterparts.

 

[T.Lex]

Yeah, but is that so much out of the ordinary? They're no more unquestioning, unyielding, unapologetic loyalists, than their democrat counterparts.

That's what I said.

What's new is that I don't recall that kind of blood oath level fealty in the GOP. Kinda wished for it when there were actual Republicans at the top. Awkward that it happens now.

 

[jamil]

No. I got really tired, quite a long time ago, of the people on this board who feel they occupy sufficiently high moral ground so as to judge the morals of others based on who they voted for. I thought that was the point you were making, that if I voted for Trump it doesn't mean I can be blamed for his moral failings nor in any way must share them

You could substitute the Club for Holier Than Thou and the membership lists would likely have significant overlap

That's what I'm saying. You can't judge the morals of people because of who they vote for. But, I'd also say there's an objective morality where one can called immoral. Those people who voted for Marion Berry for DC council after he was arrested for drugs as Mayor, I think they're ****ing immoral.

 

[BugI02]

One thing Trump has achieved - like the Dem national leadership - is a cadre of unquestioning, unyielding, unapologetic loyalists.

Probably an appropriate observation in a thread about the Dem primary.

Yes; an overly simplistic, self aggrandizing fiction is certainly appropriate to the Dem primary thread

 

[jamil]

That's what I said.

What's new is that I don't recall that kind of blood oath level fealty in the GOP. Kinda wished for it when there were actual Republicans at the top. Awkward that it happens now.

Oh. I thought you meant the "cadre" were Trumpers.

 

[T.Lex]

Oh. I thought you meant the "cadre" were Trumpers.

Oh they are. The part about "like the Dem national leadership" is constituting a cadre like that. Trump has achieved the same kind of group the Dems have had.

Zealots.

 

[BugI02]

One thing Trump has achieved - like the Dem national leadership - is a cadre of unquestioning, unyielding, unapologetic loyalists.

Probably an appropriate observation in a thread about the Dem primary.

You left out unrepentant

 

[Tombs]

That's your interpretation of the supposed crimes. That's not how democrats see it. Just like the way you see the other thing as thousands of dead Americans, the economy collapsing, medical system being stretched, all because people wanted to virtue signal their anti-racism. That's a very facile explanation of it, and not only that, not all democrats believe that. You also believe Trump built the economy. They don't believe that.

I'm not playing devil's advocate. I'm not being purposefully blind. Seeing more than just my side is the opposite of blindness. I think my scales are even. I think you have your thumbs on your side of the scale. The point I'm making is that the democrats you're talking about think you're just as evil as you think they are. You are imposing the logical conclusion of your idea of responsibility in your own worldview on them. They could use your very own argument against you in the same way. You have blood on your hands because you don't care about people across the border. They see that as immoral. But we're getting away from the specific topic, that you think a "blue-dog" traditional democrat is immoral for supporting Joe Biden. Well, that's just like your opinion man. He could say the same about you for supporting Trump. But you can't see that because you don't look past your own worldview, as if yours is the only way to see the world and derive a moral outlook from it.

On the other question, no, you don't get to take credit for what Trump does as president, at least not much. You're an individual. You "helped" only by participating in electing him. So you get only 1/1,557,286th credit for Indiana's 11 electoral votes that went to Donald Trump. And maybe you might have written some letters to congress critters to support Trump's agenda. That's it. you don't get group credit because there's no such thing.

I do think that people shape platforms, but people are highly hackable. The media you consume makes you support the causes you support more than you may think. The part that you contribute, the freewill thinking, maybe contributes 1%. That's how I see it.

If they don't believe he built the economy, how can they believe he crashed the economy?

I wouldn't exactly call joe biden a blue-dog democrat either. Jim Webb was a blue-dog democrat, can't say I've seen many in modern times. Biden is out there trashing labor unions and praising big corporations. The major malfunction with Biden is that it isn't hyperbole to say he isn't mentally fit for doing much more than living out his days at home with family, and trying to comprehend people who believe someone in that state should be running the country is quite physically impossible to me. It just appears to be political games, and pure hatred/fear, not genuine support for the candidate and his ideals. I have yet to see a joe biden bumper sticker, or people openly discussing how great of a guy he is. This all appears very unusual and disingenuous to me, as if the only reason biden is even in the running is because of some fear that a candidate they actually support might not be as electable.

If you haven't already forgot, Trump didn't get the nomination because he was red. He got the nomination because he put across a message that resonated and motivated people to support his campaign. That's genuine support for a candidate and his platform, not just political games. I'd say Sanders also manages to draw genuine support, the problem is that his supporters don't vote, lol.

As far as having blood on my hands for people across the border, I have no qualms with that. I never once pledged allegiance to those nations or those people, American citizens come first.

 

[jamil]

If they don't believe he built the economy, how can they believe he crashed the economy?

I wouldn't exactly call joe biden a blue-dog democrat either. Jim Webb was a blue-dog democrat, can't say I've seen many in modern times. Biden is out there trashing labor unions and praising big corporations. The major malfunction with Biden is that it isn't hyperbole to say he isn't mentally fit for doing much more than living out his days at home with family, and trying to comprehend people who believe someone in that state should be running the country is quite physically impossible to me. It just appears to be political games, and pure hatred/fear, not genuine support for the candidate and his ideals.

If you haven't already forgot, Trump didn't get the nomination because he was red. He got the nomination because he put across a message that resonated and motivated people to support his campaign. That's genuine support for a candidate and his platform, not just political games. I'd say Sanders also manages to draw genuine support, the problem is that his supporters don't vote, lol.

As far as having blood on my hands for people across the border, I have no qualms with that. I never once pledged allegiance to those nations or those people, American citizens come first.

If you believe he built the economy, how can you not believe he crashed it? Of course that's not logical. People are what they are.

About 0biden, I wouldn't say people are immoral for voting for him. Foolish, maybe. But not immoral. I've been saying I don't think he has the mental faculties to be president. Whoever is his vice president will likely finish out his first term, unless they try to do some kind of Weekend at Bernie's kinda of trick.

It's the last statement that I've been trying to get across.

"As far as having blood on my hands for people across the border, I have no qualms with that. I never once pledged allegiance to those nations or those people, American citizens come first."

The progressives have no qualms with trying to help the illegal immigrants. Probably to some extent that's some virtue signaling. We could probably run some experiments to see just how committed they are to "undocumented citizens". But, they have a different world view that doesn't make them as "America first" as you. I don't think they would think of pledging allegiance as a thing to be sought. So again, if you say that makes them immoral, you're holding them to your moral standards. Those aren't objective standards.

 

[Tombs]

If you believe he built the economy, how can you not believe he crashed it? Of course that's not logical. People are what they are.

About 0biden, I wouldn't say people are immoral for voting for him. Foolish, maybe. But not immoral. I've been saying I don't think he has the mental faculties to be president. Whoever is his vice president will likely finish out his first term, unless they try to do some kind of Weekend at Bernie's kinda of trick.

It's the last statement that I've been trying to get across.

"As far as having blood on my hands for people across the border, I have no qualms with that. I never once pledged allegiance to those nations or those people, American citizens come first."

The progressives have no qualms with trying to help the illegal immigrants. Probably to some extent that's some virtue signaling. We could probably run some experiments to see just how committed they are to "undocumented citizens". But, they have a different world view that doesn't make them as "America first" as you. I don't think they would think of pledging allegiance as a thing to be sought. So again, if you say that makes them immoral, you're holding them to your moral standards. Those aren't objective standards.

I don't believe he built the economy, I believe he simply does what all presidents do, offer up a charter and message that either causes the markets to rally or recede. A president really can't do much more than that, but as has been shown, a single tweet can crash or rally the market. I've actually been kind of surprised the markets are holding as well as they are as I figured they'd hit a floor a lot lower than they've settled out at. Is Trump responsible for that? Yeah I really do think a president can control how the markets behave in a crisis like this, as long as there's still reason for the ship to stay afloat.

I wasn't directly calling alpo immoral for voting for biden. I was calling alpo immoral for his hypocrisy.

The truly immoral dems are the ones running cities like San Francisco, where homelessness and poverty is worse than a 3rd world nation, yet their leaders have the gall to look down their nose at middle America as if we're the bad guys. I'm pretty far right, yet I'd still be busting my bottom every day if I was in office in a place like that to resolve the problem by any means necessary, even if it required pursuing means that I'd normally be ideologically against. I don't understand how people can go to sleep at night knowing their city is in that bad of shape, when they have the power and authority to actually address the problem. Especially when they can espouse the tenants of socialism, while accepting millions in corporate money to essentially do nothing.

Call me crazy for thinking my moral compass is a lot closer to being calibrated than their's is.

I also don't buy that they care about immigrants in any capacity beyond a vote. In a hypothetical, if republicans held a super majority and legalized illegals, but denied them voting rights, I bet you'd stop seeing democrats in favor of open borders. Too many are sitting on billions of dollars, yet do not bother to house or feed those people, while telling us that we have to do it for them. I just don't see them making sacrifices in any significant capacity to prove they care beyond virtue signaling.

IMO, the entire immigration debate boils down to who can win the war to demographically change Texas, and by extension, control the electoral college.

 

[jamil]

"I wasn't directly calling alpo immoral for voting for biden. I was calling alpo immoral for his hypocrisy."

What hypocrisy?