Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

retrofade

Democrat Thunderdome - 2020 Democratic Candidate Thread

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

No it doesn't.  I am not strongly prejudiced against children because I don't think they should vote.  I am not strongly prejudiced against felon's because I don't think they should vote.  I am not strongly prejudiced against non-citizens because I don't think they should vote.   Woman, Felons, Children are all groups will to vote their interests against the interests of the whole of the country, I think that is bad and they shouldn't vote.

Stop with the Trumpian tactics hypocrite.

You believe that an entire adult segment of the population shouldn't be allowed to vote because their "vote has ruined individual rights" and because they're jealous of each other. That's the very definition of misogyny. 

Should minorities be allowed to vote? Well, I guess the question should actually be this. Should minority men be allowed to vote? You've just up and decided that an entire segment of the population shouldn't be allowed to vote because you don't like how they vote.

You. Are. A. Misogynist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even liberal white women agree it is hard for a female candidate to get a women's vote.  If you want more women in office don't let them vote.

https://www.thelily.com/even-though-most-white-women-voted-for-trump-hes-losing-their-approval/

And while Trump didn’t win white college-educated women, the fact that more than 44 percentvoted for him was something many liberal white women found problematic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, retrofade said:

You believe that an entire adult segment of the population shouldn't be allowed to vote because their "vote has ruined individual rights" and because they're jealous of each other. That's the very definition of misogyny. 

That's the very definition of fact.

I am not making the decision based on sex but on their demonstrated willingness to vote their own personal interests against the whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bluerules009 said:

That's the very definition of fact.

I am not making the decision based on sex but on their demonstrated willingness to vote their own personal interests against the whole.

So you're admitting to being an authoritarian. You've decided what the best interests of the "whole" are and as such, people who don't vote the way you want them to shouldn't be allowed to vote. 

I'm glad that we've finally gotten that out of the way. You're an authoritarian to the very core because you want to control who is and isn't allowed to vote so that it serves your own beliefs. In your philosophy, women do not experience personal freedoms in the form of voting, which is an authoritarian belief. 

You're a misogynistic hypocrite of the highest order. I'm just glad that you're finally admitting it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really good to see the hot button issue of women's suffrage getting discussed here, but sexism totally isn't a problem in this country. 

 

I'm curious to see if some right wing posters have the same vitriolic response to blue's stance, as they would have to a Liberal poster claiming that we should have stricter gun laws or government run healthcare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boise fan said:

The crystal ball is saying R's are where your mark will be for on the ballot.  A lot of R's.  Perhaps not for President, but I tend to believe most here who claim not to have voted for him actually did.  The specter of Hillary created by the propaganda was just too strong.

 

Does your crystal ball see that no one gives a shit what you, a Canadian, think about how one chooses to vote in a US election?

v0icAvfW.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to get a real Libertarian like @BSUTOP25 to weigh in on this one. 

Should women be allowed to vote? Or are Libertarians misogynists like @bluerules009 is? I mean, I know the answer, but it'd be nice for someone that actually follows libertarian principles to weigh in, as I know I don't count anymore other than adhering to the non-aggression principle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, sebasour said:

It's really good to see the hot button issue of women's suffrage getting discussed here, but sexism totally isn't a problem in this country. 

 

I'm curious to see if some right wing posters have the same vitriolic response to blue's stance, as they would have to a Liberal poster claiming that we should have stricter gun laws or government run healthcare. 

Serious question, why even respond to his position with a comment?  It’s not a position I’ve ever heard anybody else advocate here with the exception of Tools.  I mean it’s not a position I agree with and it’s not even worth responding to, just roll your eyes and move on. 

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, retrofade said:

I'd like to get a real Libertarian like @BSUTOP25 to weigh in on this one. 

Should women be allowed to vote? Or are Libertarians misogynists like @bluerules009 is? I mean, I know the answer, but it'd be nice for someone that actually follows libertarian principles to weigh in, as I know I don't count anymore other than adhering to the non-aggression principle. 

Of course women shouldn’t be “ALLOWED” to vote. By that definition, the decision would be determined by a male. According to libertarian philosophy, women are equal to men by natural law so they decide to vote or not according to their own will rather than that of some male authority. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Of course women shouldn’t be “ALLOWED” to vote. By that definition, the decision would be determined by a male. According to libertarian philosophy, women are equal to men by natural law so they decide to vote or not according to their own will rather than that of some male authority. 

That's a great distinction from what I said. I wasn't trying to imply that men should have a say in it... just that women have an equal right to be able to vote because they're equal to men. 

Now.... does believing that women shouldn't be allowed to vote an authoritarian principle? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Serious question, why even respond to his position with a comment?  It’s not a position I’ve ever heard anybody else advocate here with the exception of Tools.  I mean it’s not a position I agree with and it’s not even worth responding to, just roll your eyes and move on. 

 

I've seen 3 people advocate it (though in fairness 1 may have been joking, I'm not really sure).

 

I mostly do roll my eyes and ignore blues, but I'm just using him as an example to illustrate something that I find problematic. I often see people get up in arms over "PC culture" (which is just generally people trying to make the world a friendlier place), yet just shrug off blatantly hateful comments like "women can't be trusted to vote"  by one of this boards proudest posters.

 

There is a lot of racist and sexist views out there, and it's not just on the fringes (look at who is president). Yet when it's called out, it's just dismissed as Liberals playing the race or gender card. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, retrofade said:

That's a great distinction from what I said. I wasn't trying to imply that men should have a say in it... just that women have an equal right to be able to vote because they're equal to men. 

Now.... does believing that women shouldn't be allowed to vote an authoritarian principle? 

By principle yes, preventing women from their natural right to vote is authoritarian. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sebasour said:

 

I've seen 3 people advocate it (though in fairness 1 may have been joking, I'm not really sure).

 

I mostly do roll my eyes and ignore blues, but I'm just using him as an example to illustrate something that I find problematic. I often see people get up in arms over "PC culture" (which is just generally people trying to make the world a friendlier place), yet just shrug off blatantly hateful comments like "women can't be trusted to vote"  by one of this boards proudest posters.

 

There is a lot of racist and sexist views out there, and it's not just on the fringes (look at who is president). Yet when it's called out, it's just dismissed as Liberals playing the race or gender card. 

Who else has advocated for that position on the board?

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Who else has advocated for that position on the board?

WyomingCoog did it back in the day, and I've seen Joe do it as well, though with him, he might just be trying to be edgy. I'm not sure if he's serious. 

 

Out of curiosity, how far do you let people go on this board?  To be clear I'm not asking you to ban anyone, or trying to sound critical (I'm actually a big fan of how you run this board). This is legitimate curiosity. Saying women shouldn't be allowed to vote is pretty damn hateful. Would you allow posters to say the same about minorities? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sebasour said:

WyomingCoog did it back in the day, and I've seen Joe do it as well, though with him, he might just be trying to be edgy. I'm not sure if he's serious. 

 

Out of curiosity, how far do you let people go on this board?  To be clear I'm not asking you to ban anyone, or trying to sound critical (I'm actually a big fan of how you run this board). This is legitimate curiosity. Saying women shouldn't be allowed to vote is pretty damn hateful. Would you allow posters to say the same about minorities? 

 

WyoCoug was before I took over.  And if Joe said that I’m pretty sure it was in jest. 

As for how far I let things go, I tend to play it by ear.  With Tools I don’t think he’s trying to be hateful as much as I think he’s trying to justify is stupid opinion he holds.  If I banned everybody for having a stupid opinion I would just be here talking to myself (since I can’t ban myself).  I probably wouldn’t allow the same thing about minorities. I don’t know though as it hasn’t come up.  That’s a fair question though as it also depends how you take it.  I also didn’t read all of his posts so if there’s something deragorty in there about women I missed it.  Sometimes it’s best for a stupid opinion to be aired out in public so everybody can see how stupid it is and it can be mocked.   

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mugtang said:

WyoCoug was before I took over.  And if Joe said that I’m pretty sure it was in jest. 

As for how far I let things go, I tend to play it by ear.  With Tools I don’t think he’s trying to be hateful as much as I think he’s trying to justify is stupid opinion he holds.  If I banned everybody for having a stupid opinion I would just be here talking to myself (since I can’t ban myself).  I probably wouldn’t allow the same thing about minorities. I don’t know though as it hasn’t come up.  That’s a fair question though as it also depends how you take it.  I also didn’t read all of his posts so if there’s something deragorty in there about women I missed it.  Sometimes it’s best for a stupid opinion to be aired out in public so everybody can see how stupid it is and it can be mocked.   

 

That's fair.

 

I hope I didn't come off as critical, as much as I dislike his views, this place wouldn't be the same without Blues. I was just curious what your approach was 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sebasour said:

 

That's fair.

 

I hope I didn't come off as critical, as much as I dislike his views, this place wouldn't be the same without Blues. I was just curious what your approach was 

It’s all good :cheers:

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, retrofade said:

I'd like to get a real Libertarian like @BSUTOP25 to weigh in on this one. 

Should women be allowed to vote? Or are Libertarians misogynists like @bluerules009 is? I mean, I know the answer, but it'd be nice for someone that actually follows libertarian principles to weigh in, as I know I don't count anymore other than adhering to the non-aggression principle. 

Some libertarians would say no one should get a vote everyone should just do what they want.  Kind of the anarchy wing.

In my view they should get the vote from a libertarian point of view but I don't view libertarianism as a death pact and ttheir past votes have in my view canceled their right to vote because they are trying to cancel everyone elses rights.

It is pretty simple Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

I probably am sexist.

I am fine with them running for office but their vote has ruined individual rights in this country and turned us into a socialist disaster two things you cannot dispute.

Here is the other funny thing, if women couldn't vote more of them would be elected to office.  The hardest thing for a woman candidate to do is get over the jealousy other women have for each other.

Probably?

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...