So I know we're not supposed to talk politics - Presidential Election - Poll

Certainly many more outspoken ones.

 

 

haha.. again, I can make the same claim from my side of the looking glass.

 

 

One thing that keeps coming to mind when bickering with one buddy of mine who is a very outspoken, strong supporter of Trump.. and it may sound condescending but the gist of it is that "I'm glad I don't share the same thoughts/ideology as that guy"... I am fairly certain that when Trump said that "he loves the uneducated" he was specifically talking about this one guy.

 

 

If there ever was a case of voting against one's interests.. he was it.

 

 

 

Geert wilders got told to go fcuk himself

 

Would have to disagree with this. He and his party fell short, but you make it sound like they were completely rejected. They are the second-largest party in Dutch politics right now. He also has changed much of the debate in Dutch politics.

Would have to disagree with this. He and his party fell short, but you make it sound like they were completely rejected. They are the second-largest party in Dutch politics right now. He also has changed much of the debate in Dutch politics.

Let's be clear, second party with 13% of the votes, with 81% voter turnout, so the representation is pretty accurate, no 'silent majorities' waiting for the right leader to come along and solve all their problems. Hardly game changing or a political force seeing as no other party supports him or agrees with his world view. The dude's got nothing else to say except anti EU and anti immigrant slogans. When you say second largest it sounds like a big deal, and that he enjoys broad support, when in reality it's not the case. In the US the second largest is a big deal, you've only got 2 parties.

Pakisho, i'd like to have a crystal ball challenge with you if you're up for it. My prediction for James Comey addressing the Russian investigation on Monday is that he announces they have found no collusion between Donald J Trump and Russia and that they have not found he is compromised or has been compromised in anyway.

Gaze into your orb and tell me what you see and we'll check back

Little sneak peak of Monday

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/no-evidence-collu...-140536917.html

Pakisho, i'd like to have a crystal ball challenge with you if you're up for it. My prediction for James Comey addressing the Russian investigation on Monday is that he announces they have found no collusion between Donald J Trump and Russia and that they have not found he is compromised or has been compromised in anyway.

Gaze into your orb and tell me what you see and we'll check back

 

 

Hell no, no bet and this is the bullshit the trumpeteers are pulling.

 

There was no outright collusion with the incompetent bumbling idiots who keep denying meetings and calls that actually happened. Christ knows why, i mean, last i checked you dont lock the ambassador in the basements, you're SUPPOSED to talk to the guy. Why deny it?

 

What the russians DID do, is throw up enough gh shit re emails that it ruined hillarys remaining credibility.

Hell no, no bet and this is the bullshit the trumpeteers are pulling.

 

There was no outright collusion with the incompetent bumbling idiots who keep denying meetings and calls that actually happened. Christ knows why, i mean, last i checked you dont lock the ambassador in the basements, you're SUPPOSED to talk to the guy. Why deny it?

 

What the russians DID do, is throw up enough gh shit re emails that it ruined hillarys remaining credibility.

 

 

Hillary had ZERO credibility to begin with..

As opposed to the donald

Tapping out, I am done on this thread.

 

To my Republican friends, Trump breaks it, you own it. Unlike religion, you can't pick and chose what parts you want to believe in.

 

 

Tapping out, I am done on this thread.

 

To my Republican friends, Trump breaks it, you own it. Unlike religion, you can't pick and chose what parts you want to believe in.

Tapping out, I am done on this thread.

 

To my Republican friends, Trump breaks it, you own it. Unlike religion, you can't pick and chose what parts you want to believe in.

 

Yes, yes you can, that's politics. there are no perfect candidates. You said yourself you didn't believe in everything about Hillary, but you supported her. So why is this ok for you, but not for republicans??

 

 

...This is lost I think- and again, in my experience, on those from the right. They believe something so everything else must then be false...

Yet this would be EXACTLY what the right would say about their experience with the left. There is no obvious solution for the two groups that operate on such assumptions and/or have no respect for each other at such a basal level.

So i guess tge wiretap claim was bs

 

 

Who knew

Yet this would be EXACTLY what the right would say about their experience with the left. There is no obvious solution for the two groups that operate on such assumptions and/or have no respect for each other at such a basal level.

 

Truth.

 

But I would respond by saying that this is simply not true. At least in the very narrow version of the world I have seen= the right folk 'believe' something, the left folk 'know' something. What I mean by that is that a left person can look at something, anything objectively and develop an opinion based on the information given. This opinion can change with the discovery of new data. The folk on the right= and again, in my experience, seem to dismiss any and all opposing information regardless of its source/validity.

 

Obviously there are many flavors between the extremes and this is merely my experience with people.

 

Please don't think for one second that I don't show everyone the respect they're due.

So i guess tge wiretap claim was bs

 

 

Who knew

 

 

Shocker. And tomorrow it will be something else.

 

 

 

I'm f'ing terrified that I am traveling to S. Korea on business next month with the current state of the world.

Shocker. And tomorrow it will be something else.

 

 

 

I'm f'ing terrified that I am traveling to S. Korea on business next month with the current state of the world.

 

 

Just tell them you know Pakisho, youll be fine!

A big part of why Isis exisist could be in breeding. This Joe Rogan podcast was interesting

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.c...p/idUSKBN16R0SK

Truth.

 

But I would respond by saying that this is simply not true. At least in the very narrow version of the world I have seen= the right folk 'believe' something, the left folk 'know' something.

Nah, still have to disagree with you there, and it's left leaning people who think that way. Sure, there are people on the right who do as you say, but there are also people on the right with very well thought out reasons as to why they think the way they do -- highly intelligent people with no connection to "belief" who also look at every angle and very much "know" things. The left continuously and habitually discounts the right for this and is now in full head-scratching mode as why their candidate didn't get elected. Many chalk it up to their belief that the right is simply overpopulated with clouded thinkers who lack the same mental faculties and are incapable of forming the same opinions.

 

"...because of course anyone with a brain could see the correct answer, amiright?" says the average liberal thinker. Discounting their enemies is the left's biggest mistake today. And it's lighting off like a huge EAT AT JOES sign in American politics right now.

 

The belief that everyone on the other side of the argument is a moron, prohibits dialogue. Both sides are guilty and that's where the respect is lost. It's deeper than having a so-called "respectful" conversation, and you've just described that you will approach a conversation politely but have already written off the conservative as not being as mentally adept. I'd say a lot of conservatives do the same in refusing to speak with liberals since they deem liberals as intellectually inferior. If both sides of the conversation think they're trying to persuade an idiot, how well is that going to go? If we're comparing experiences, the left makes their belief very clear throughout our media and internet that they have the market on knowing stuff cornered. When, in reality, they know nothing more than anyone else. How is that realistic, or even intelligent, to think that way? Everyone has roughly the same gray matter sloshing around. No political movement has suddenly risen to a higher analytical plane. Not in 10,000 years of human history and certainly not in the last 500 days.

 

I went to a funeral once for a family member. I was wearing a military dress uniform. I was called out at the reception for being a "brain-washed baby killer" by some left-leaning extended family members (who I didn't know). It wasn't 1969, it was the year 2001. Am a I brain washed baby-killer? I'm pretty confident that I'm not, others were too, and the left didn't register any points on the intelligence scale with me that day. I was so surprised that my fellow humans would be so utterly fcuking stupid. I was so much more disappointed in their stupidity than their politics. The moral of the story is that poorly formed opinions are deeply rooted regardless of party affiliation and no one group of people has ever dominated the philosophical high ground like you're implying.

 

Take sexual identity issues for example, a fiery debate topic. The liberal thinker can quickly get on board with with idea that people are born with a sexual orientation over which they have no control. The Christian-right thinker can quickly get on board with the idea that environmental or other factors may shape sexual orientation. On a scientific basis, both sides will be able to find credible evidence that favors their perspective. Then it simply devolves into an argument over which science is more credible, which is nothing more than a dog-pile on a 50-yard line fumble. However, to this day, NOBODY knows for sure and there is no singular smoking gun explanation for any of it that closes the case once and for all. However, liberals will, to a head, swear that they KNOW their perspective to be true, when it really is just a level of belief (as you say). I'm not taking a position on this, but it's an example where liberals are convinced that their perspective is irrefutable WITHOUT any such case-closed declaration from science to prove it...no objectivity at all because objectivity doesn't serve their primary desire for people to be treated well (the next logical concern in debating sexual identity). People haven't changed in this respect in eons. Many will simply reference their science of choice and start hammering in that last nail anyway because they have a hard time realizing that they don't know enough, can't know enough, and that the real answer might be too difficult and complicated to work with right now.

 

What I mean by that is that a left person can look at something, anything objectively and develop an opinion based on the information given. This opinion can change with the discovery of new data. The folk on the right= and again, in my experience, seem to dismiss any and all opposing information regardless of its source/validity.

For this, I have never known this to be true as a principle. The left is the left and they are just as rigid and narrow minded as their counterparts on the right. There's no respect for "new data" as a political movement, ref. the above on sexual identity. Each perspective serves its own needs. No one, right or left has a monopoly on independent thought or objectivity. I went to college in a very left-leaning city and I discovered it to be one of the most harshly discriminatory and un-accepting places on Earth, with less tolerance than a rural Mississippi KKK meeting for anyone who was different. There are many people on the right with delusional tunnel-vision, however, there are at least as many people on the left with exactly the same problem.

 

If your experiences have been recent, I'd say we should all keep in mind that only in fairly recent times has the right become so closely associated with Christianity. Religion in any direction turns a lot of people off from the outset and I can see where this would make you compare belief with knowledge. Conservatism in American politics existed without religious crutches for the majority of its life, so you might take into consideration that many people in the right wing have no such upbringing or decision-making framework at all.

Just tell them you know Pakisho, youll be fine!

 

 

Allan stop gambling with people's lives you KNOW that only works for you

Whole post

 

 

Nah, still have to disagree with you there, and it's left leaning people who think that way. Sure, there are people on the right who do as you say, but there are also people on the right with very well thought out reasons as to why they think the way they do -- highly intelligent people with no connection to "belief" who also look at every angle and very much "know" things. The left continuously and habitually discounts the right for this and is now in full head-scratching mode as why their candidate didn't get elected. Many chalk it up to their belief that the right is simply overpopulated with clouded thinkers who lack the same mental faculties and are incapable of forming the same opinions.

 

"...because of course anyone with a brain could see the correct answer, amiright?" says the average liberal thinker. Discounting their enemies is the left's biggest mistake today. And it's lighting off like a huge EAT AT JOES sign in American politics right now.

 

The belief that everyone on the other side of the argument is a moron, prohibits dialogue. Both sides are guilty and that's where the respect is lost. It's deeper than having a so-called "respectful" conversation, and you've just described that you will approach a conversation politely but have already written off the conservative as not being as mentally adept. I'd say a lot of conservatives do the same in refusing to speak with liberals since they deem liberals as intellectually inferior. If both sides of the conversation think they're trying to persuade an idiot, how well is that going to go? If we're comparing experiences, the left makes their belief very clear throughout our media and internet that they have the market on knowing stuff cornered. When, in reality, they know nothing more than anyone else. How is that realistic, or even intelligent, to think that way? Everyone has roughly the same gray matter sloshing around. No political movement has suddenly risen to a higher analytical plane. Not in 10,000 years of human history and certainly not in the last 500 days.

 

I went to a funeral once for a family member. I was wearing a military dress uniform. I was called out at the reception for being a "brain-washed baby killer" by some left-leaning extended family members (who I didn't know). It wasn't 1969, it was the year 2001. Am a I brain washed baby-killer? I'm pretty confident that I'm not, others were too, and the left didn't register any points on the intelligence scale with me that day. I was so surprised that my fellow humans would be so utterly fcuking stupid. I was so much more disappointed in their stupidity than their politics. The moral of the story is that poorly formed opinions are deeply rooted regardless of party affiliation and no one group of people has ever dominated the philosophical high ground like you're implying.

 

Take sexual identity issues for example, a fiery debate topic. The liberal thinker can quickly get on board with with idea that people are born with a sexual orientation over which they have no control. The Christian-right thinker can quickly get on board with the idea that environmental or other factors may shape sexual orientation. On a scientific basis, both sides will be able to find credible evidence that favors their perspective. Then it simply devolves into an argument over which science is more credible, which is nothing more than a dog-pile on a 50-yard line fumble. However, to this day, NOBODY knows for sure and there is no singular smoking gun explanation for any of it that closes the case once and for all. However, liberals will, to a head, swear that they KNOW their perspective to be true, when it really is just a level of belief (as you say). I'm not taking a position on this, but it's an example where liberals are convinced that their perspective is irrefutable WITHOUT any such case-closed declaration from science to prove it...no objectivity at all because objectivity doesn't serve their primary desire for people to be treated well (the next logical concern in debating sexual identity). People haven't changed in this respect in eons. Many will simply reference their science of choice and start hammering in that last nail anyway because they have a hard time realizing that they don't know enough, can't know enough, and that the real answer might be too difficult and complicated to work with right now.

 

 

For this, I have never known this to be true as a principle. The left is the left and they are just as rigid and narrow minded as their counterparts on the right. There's no respect for "new data" as a political movement, ref. the above on sexual identity. Each perspective serves its own needs. No one, right or left has a monopoly on independent thought or objectivity. I went to college in a very left-leaning city and I discovered it to be one of the most harshly discriminatory and un-accepting places on Earth, with less tolerance than a rural Mississippi KKK meeting for anyone who was different. There are many people on the right with delusional tunnel-vision, however, there are at least as many people on the left with exactly the same problem.

 

If your experiences have been recent, I'd say we should all keep in mind that only in fairly recent times has the right become so closely associated with Christianity. Religion in any direction turns a lot of people off from the outset and I can see where this would make you compare belief with knowledge. Conservatism in American politics existed without religious crutches for the majority of its life, so you might take into consideration that many people in the right wing have no such upbringing or decision-making framework at all.

 

Very well said.

 

However, I think I used the disclaimer that it was "most rights" in my life. I am from Western NY, not Western NYC, but literally- just about as far west as one can go in NY. I don't know for sure- but I'd say we are more left than right over here too but some will say Upstate is more conservative. My point= the people whose path I cross that are of the right side (again, most, not all) are the very same people who cannot spell the very rebuttal they are trying to insult me with. Their thoughts contradict their very way of life. Like it or not, those are decent indicators of who you're dealing with. Let's not forget the history I have with some of these folks.

 

You also bring up some of the more sensitive issues such as gender identification and then which science holds the most water. I'm not quite sure those are the conversations that I get involved with, or that I am talking about. However, since you brought it up (haha) I would side more with the "what the hell do I care what you call yourself- regardless of science" crowd.

 

The conversations I am talking about are the ones where people hoot and holler about what an evil liar Hillary is but have nothing to say about what we have now and the laundry list of things he said he wouldn't or would do that he has changed his mind on. Or the fact that he is cutting very important programs to save a buck while we all pay for him to play golf (which he had a lot to say about Obama doing, by the way). Or the fact that he has shown in several instances to be oblivious to how the world actually works.. or/.. lol.. 39 week abortions- as if those are a real thing in USA.

 

I am more than aware of my surroundings here and that my view is likely not the popular one. I do appreciate the conversation though and I do respect the responses and point of views. Will you change my mind? Maybe! Not likely, but hey- I often say that if I can plant one small idea that makes a person take another look at their stance, then I have won. That goes both ways.

 

Just to make the point that people change, again in NY and the suburbs here, I was once more of the mindset of "why would I need a gun"? Why would anyone NEED a gun? Peaceful world, right? I grew up in Amherst which claims to be the safest town in America. Well- after about 3 months in our new home which has- gees, I don't even know how many 1st floor windows (18?) and laying in bed at night wondering "what if"... well, now I have a love for guns. It might not quite be the same as views on Gays or Muslims.. but still a view.

 

Cheers-

 

Truth.

 

But I would respond by saying that this is simply not true. At least in the very narrow version of the world I have seen= the right folk 'believe' something, the left folk 'know' something. What I mean by that is that a left person can look at something, anything objectively and develop an opinion based on the information given. This opinion can change with the discovery of new data. The folk on the right= and again, in my experience, seem to dismiss any and all opposing information regardless of its source/validity.

 

If the Left looked at things objectively, we wouldn't have had sixty years of reverence for communism and the Soviet Union. We wouldn't have the continued deference to communism and the Soviet Union's history given by much of the global Left (look at the outpouring of support when Castro died). They also would not adhere to their beliefs in gun control, late-term abortion, the levels of government regulation they support and the manner in which they do so, campaign-finance law, and so forth.

 

Much of the Left from what I have seen is not even aware of most conservative arguments. Also one only need look at the bastions of fascism that the universities have become.

Very well said.

 

However, I think I used the disclaimer that it was "most rights" in my life. I am from Western NY, not Western NYC, but literally- just about as far west as one can go in NY. I don't know for sure- but I'd say we are more left than right over here too but some will say Upstate is more conservative. My point= the people whose path I cross that are of the right side (again, most, not all) are the very same people who cannot spell the very rebuttal they are trying to insult me with. Their thoughts contradict their very way of life. Like it or not, those are decent indicators of who you're dealing with. Let's not forget the history I have with some of these folks.

 

You also bring up some of the more sensitive issues such as gender identification and then which science holds the most water. I'm not quite sure those are the conversations that I get involved with, or that I am talking about. However, since you brought it up (haha) I would side more with the "what the hell do I care what you call yourself- regardless of science" crowd.

 

The conversations I am talking about are the ones where people hoot and holler about what an evil liar Hillary is but have nothing to say about what we have now and the laundry list of things he said he wouldn't or would do that he has changed his mind on. Or the fact that he is cutting very important programs to save a buck while we all pay for him to play golf (which he had a lot to say about Obama doing, by the way). Or the fact that he has shown in several instances to be oblivious to how the world actually works.. or/.. lol.. 39 week abortions- as if those are a real thing in USA.

 

I am more than aware of my surroundings here and that my view is likely not the popular one. I do appreciate the conversation though and I do respect the responses and point of views. Will you change my mind? Maybe! Not likely, but hey- I often say that if I can plant one small idea that makes a person take another look at their stance, then I have won. That goes both ways.

 

Just to make the point that people change, again in NY and the suburbs here, I was once more of the mindset of "why would I need a gun"? Why would anyone NEED a gun? Peaceful world, right? I grew up in Amherst which claims to be the safest town in America. Well- after about 3 months in our new home which has- gees, I don't even know how many 1st floor windows (18?) and laying in bed at night wondering "what if"... well, now I have a love for guns. It might not quite be the same as views on Gays or Muslims.. but still a view.

 

Cheers-

 

Point is, both the Right and Left have their share of morons. Conservatism and political Rightism overall has a very rich intellectual basis and history.

 

...However, since you brought it up (haha) I would side more with the "what the hell do I care what you call yourself- regardless of science" crowd. The conversations I am talking about are the ones where people hoot and holler...

Not a worry, I wasn't debating LGBT topics either. I only used the example to show that liberals don't have "knowing" suitcased, and liberals are humans who will rely on information as long as it suits their needs just like everyone else. ...that liberalism is not some kind of intellectual utopia where purity and reason flourish and all that is biased is forsaken. It's also not atop a pyramid of growth either, where people pass through various levels of development to reach it as if it's the pinnacle of intellectual maturity.