Which Candidate Best Represents You and do You Intend to Support?

[Yup!]

Who do I vote for if I find them equally crappy?

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo..._do_you_intend_to_support-20.html#post3186665

 

[buckstopshere]

Evidently, your stance if that a term of nothing happening except vetos of everything is acceptable, OK.

When was the last good piece of legislation?

 

[mrjarrell]

When was the last good piece of legislation?

I didn't hear any *****ing about the last session of congress where, due to gridlock, they only managed to pass 85 bills. That's a good thing, in my eyes. The less they do, the better off we are. If we had a president who could use the veto power like Johnson did, we'd be much better off, especially with the addition of congressional gridlock.

 

[Ted]

When was the last good piece of legislation?

Probably the legislation that repealed something, and left nothing in its place.

 

[buckstopshere]

I didn't hear any *****ing about the last session of congress where, due to gridlock, they only managed to pass 85 bills. That's a good thing, in my eyes. The less they do, the better off we are. If we had a president who could use the veto power like Johnson did, we'd be much better off, especially with the addition of congressional gridlock.

QFT!

 

[mydoghasfleas]

Who do I vote for if I find them equally crappy?

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo..._do_you_intend_to_support-20.html#post3186665

How about this instead.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo..._do_you_intend_to_support-15.html#post3181397

 

[Arthur Dent]

Well if you don't want him to win, then perhaps you should consider voting for someone who actually has a chance to dethrone him. It's a game of give and take. You can get a little of what you need for the next 4 years, but voting for your 2nd favorite candidate, or you can get none of what you need by voting for your favorite candidate.

It is because of people like you thinking exactly this sort of thing that this country is in the shape it's in. You are a symptom of the sickness in our political system that keeps electing such wastes of skin into positions of power. Republicans and democrats are the same, have been the same for some time. It doesn't matter who or what party is in office, just as long as they can keep profiting from being in power. Voting for someone just to try to keep or get someone out of power is exactly what both parties want. They count on you to keep them in power. There is a reason most of congress are millionaires and it isn't because they have been acting in the best interests of the people who elected them or actually doing the job they were elected to do, which is representing the people of their district.

These guys are too polite to say it like this. Which isn't a fault, but sometimes you just need to be rude.

 

[Yup!]

It is because of people like you thinking exactly this sort of thing that this country is in the shape it's in.

I literally quit reading right here. Quoted and deleted the rest.

 

[jamil]

It is because of people like you thinking exactly this sort of thing that this country is in the shape it's in. You are a symptom of the sickness in our political system that keeps electing such wastes of skin into positions of power. Republicans and democrats are the same, have been the same for some time. It doesn't matter who or what party is in office, just as long as they can keep profiting from being in power. Voting for someone just to try to keep or get someone out of power is exactly what both parties want. They count on you to keep them in power. There is a reason most of congress are millionaires and it isn't because they have been acting in the best interests of the people who elected them or actually doing the job they were elected to do, which is representing the people of their district.

These guys are too polite to say it like this. Which isn't a fault, but sometimes you just need to be rude.

Since rudeness is now a necessity, I'll say what I've said before more bluntly. Libertarian anarchists will never have enough voting power to gain any significant political power because, well, there just isn't enough tinfoil to go around.

 

[Arthur Dent]

I literally quit reading right here. Quoted and deleted the rest.

Thank you for reinforcing my point.

 

[firehawk1]

It is because of people like you thinking exactly this sort of thing that this country is in the shape it's in. You are a symptom of the sickness in our political system that keeps electing such wastes of skin into positions of power. Republicans and democrats are the same, have been the same for some time. It doesn't matter who or what party is in office, just as long as they can keep profiting from being in power. Voting for someone just to try to keep or get someone out of power is exactly what both parties want. They count on you to keep them in power. There is a reason most of congress are millionaires and it isn't because they have been acting in the best interests of the people who elected them or actually doing the job they were elected to do, which is representing the people of their district.

These guys are too polite to say it like this. Which isn't a fault, but sometimes you just need to be rude.

Ah another citizen of Black & White World.

 

[DragonGunner]

If you show me a candidate that isn't evil, I will vote for them.

Which is probably why so few people bother to vote.....what is it, about 60 percent of the population doesn't vote.....?

 

[Yup!]

Wamp wa waa wump wuh wump

.

 

[jbombelli]

Ah another citizen of Black & White World.

Because seeing everything in various shades of grey has been working so well up until now, right?

 

[jamil]

Because seeing everything in various shades of grey has been working so well up until now, right?

The world is not black and white. It is diverse. Most people can live with that. Those few who can't try to sort all the diverse thoughts and beliefs into black or white buckets. Perhaps that's why libertarian anarchists are considered out there on the fringe. It seems contradictory in a sense. Liberty doesn't really fit all that well in a black-and-white mindset. It's almost like the gaping intolerance of the "tolerance" movement. A living oxymoron.

 

[ATOMonkey]

The world is not black and white. It is diverse. Most people can live with that. Those few who can't try to sort all the diverse thoughts and beliefs into black or white buckets. Perhaps that's why libertarian anarchists are considered out there on the fringe. It seems contradictory in a sense. Liberty doesn't really fit all that well in a black-and-white mindset. It's almost like the gaping intolerance of the "tolerance" movement. A living oxymoron.

Yes, the world is black and white, or right and wrong if you will. Things are either right, or they are not.

If you compromise your principle of what is right and make it "gray", then you have made it something wrong.

A compromise on where to go to lunch is not wrong, because the principle of going to lunch, as being right, remains intact. Both parties agree that eating lunch is right and proper. One party wants burgers, the other wants chinese, and they compromise on mexican. There is nothing inherriently wrong in this compromise.

People have taken the meaning of comprimise, as it pertains to what is already established as being right, and applied it towards their principles, giving us a world of relative truth, rather than absolute truth.

That will be our undoing in the end, as what is "right" is nothing more than a man's opinion put to vote.

If a man can't stand upon his principles, how can he stand at all?

 

[jamil]

Yes, the world is black and white, or right and wrong if you will. Things are either right, or they are not.

If you compromise your principle of what is right and make it "gray", then you have made it something wrong.

A compromise on where to go to lunch is not wrong, because the principle of going to lunch, as being right, remains intact. Both parties agree that eating lunch is right and proper. One party wants burgers, the other wants chinese, and they compromise on mexican. There is nothing inherriently wrong in this compromise.

People have taken the meaning of comprimise, as it pertains to what is already established as being right, and applied it towards their principles, giving us a world of relative truth, rather than absolute truth.

That will be our undoing in the end, as what is "right" is nothing more than a man's opinion put to vote.

If a man can't stand upon his principles, how can he stand at all?

In some religions, eating bacon is wrong and evil. In which bucket would you toss that one in?

 

[Yup!]

Yes, the world is black and white, or right and wrong if you will. Things are either right, or they are not.

If you compromise your principle of what is right and make it "gray", then you have made it something wrong.

A compromise on where to go to lunch is not wrong, because the principle of going to lunch, as being right, remains intact. Both parties agree that eating lunch is right and proper. One party wants burgers, the other wants chinese, and they compromise on mexican. There is nothing inherriently wrong in this compromise.

People have taken the meaning of comprimise, as it pertains to what is already established as being right, and applied it towards their principles, giving us a world of relative truth, rather than absolute truth.

That will be our undoing in the end, as what is "right" is nothing more than a man's opinion put to vote.

If a man can't stand upon his principles, how can he stand at all?

Black: It's wrong to Kill someone.
grey: it ok in self defense

 

[ATOMonkey]

In some religions, eating bacon is wrong and evil. In which bucket would you toss that one in?

C.S. Lewis does a great job of tackling this issue. I encourage everyone to read Mere Christianity, even if they have no intention of becoming Christian, as he breaks down very complicated thoughts socratically, and does a fantastic job using metaphors to illustrate his points.

There are many places that have different cultural norms that are considered either right or wrong, depending on where you are both geographically and historically.

Most of these do not involve interaction with other people. If you think that eating bacon is wrong, then you should not eat bacon. You should not compromise your principle and only eat canadian bacon, and furthermore, no one should FORCE you to eat bacon. Similarly, it is of no consequence to you if someone else chooses to eat bacon.

However, there are basic truths that transcend all of humanity. Murder for instance. In every culture, it is considered wrong to murder your fellow man. It may be forgivable in certain instances, but in order to forgive something, it must have been wrong in the first place. Other things such as rape, can be forgiven, by forcing the rapist to marry his victim, but the idea of rape is still wrong.

The graying of what is clearly wrong has not lead to better society, but rather worse. It leads to oppression and immorality rather than an increase in morality and greater freedom.

You can not have gray without first having white. To say that gray can exist without the white ignores a simply basic fact that white and black must both exist in order for there to be gray. In order for something to be forgivable, or conditionally acceptable, it must first be wrong at its core.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Black: It's wrong to Kill someone.
grey: it ok in self defense

Yes, but that does not make the killing right, just because it is conditionally acceptable.

Taken further, murder is wrong, but can be forgiven with pennance (jail, money, etc. depending on your culture).

Is that gray? Of course, but the fact of the matter is that murder is still wrong. To say that murder is right doesn't get you closer to a truth, but rather, further from it.