Dems vs. Repubs

[B-Man]

There is this quaint small town in rural Northern Virginia with deep roots from before the Civil War. The median home price is $800 K. The majority of the political signs adorning the yards are 2 to 1 Obama over Mitt.

 

So much for the criminal aspect eh

 

A close friend of my family from North Carolina, a devout Republican is voting for Obama.

 

Not very notable.

 

Northern Virginia has always trended democrat (quaint or otherwise....lol)

 

and, like everyone here, I can name several 2008 Obama svoters who has changed their minds and will vote for Romney,

 

but keep your head in the sand.

 

 

 

 

.

[VABills]

I guess it was 47% not 41%.

[GG]

October 11, 2009.

 

Browns defeat Bills 6-3.

 

The joke was on all of us.

[meazza]

October 11, 2009.

 

Browns defeat Bills 6-3.

 

The joke was on all of us.

 

Which one is Romney and which one is Obama?

[GG]

Losman vs Edwards vs Derek Anderson?

[/dev/null]

50% of the country has below average intelligence. They vote Republican at a 90% rate.

Coming from you that's awesome dude!

 

People in glass houses...

[OCinBuffalo]

The premise of this thread is idiotic. Sorry, but it is.

 

If 15% of the US pop is black...that doesn't mean all 15% will vote. Nor does it mean that all of them will vote for the same reasons, or for all of the same party's candidates. Ticket splitting is common. So, there no way in hell 41% are voting for Obama in lock step, and certainly not 41% voting for Obama, Senator D, Congressman D etc. Paul Ryan = the personification of why this premise is idiotic, since his district voted 64% for Obama.

 

The reality is that the 5-10% of CONSISTENT, and therefore, LIKELY, INDEPENDENT VOTERS are the ones who determine elections in this country. The rare times when this isn't the case...is elections like 2008, where there were 8% more of total voters were Democrats. The simple reason for that: energized Democrats turned out way more than normal, and Republicans weren't too excited by McCain.

 

If you want to complain....complain to the people who actually control the election. Democrats and Republicans, the lifelong kind, have nothing to do with it since they usually cancel each other out. Complain to the independents.

 

If Romney wins...it will be the 5-10% of total voters, the independents, who make it so, because this is a 0, or +1 to +3 election at the most. Polls say it's more likely to be +2 Republican. And, who the f knows if the independents are hardworking, rich, poor, black, gay or whatever? You have to blame them if you think they support the %1.....and they will probably ignore you.

Agreed. The diversity that I saw at the DNC was sickening. Seriously, the slave owners would have been disgusted by that group.

 

A 2 party system is a joke. It's just bloods vs. crips. And there are a lot of good Republicans but it still seems like a party for mainly white rich people and people who hate change.

You should never be sickened by diversity, or lack of it. You should however be sickened by incompetence and/or poor leadership, because lack of those two things, when diversity is present, almost always cause diversity to be blamed, rather than their absence.

 

I will explain:

The research is clear, and I've see this right in front of me: diversity creates a superior problem solving environment...when it works. It only works if solid leadership is present. Also, the group's competence is critical. But, we also see it work poorly/have no effect in government, where incompetence and bad leadership is the norm. Um, GSA? There can be little doubt that the GSA is diverse....but how is it performing?

 

If diversity was absolute and causal in its effect, we'd see the same outcome for these groups every time, regardless of the other factors. We do not. However, we do see that when we take away leadership/competence...diversity matters little.

 

Thus, diversity alone is never a solution to anything. (Neither is being "green", "safe", "sexual identity tolerant", "charitable", etc., more often than not these are constructs of the marketing group, and produce marketing, not management, outcomes)

 

Just the opposite. Better solutions are typically made available by diversity. But diversity alone solves nothing without leadership and the competence to make use of it's value. Diversity is a raw material...not a tool.

 

 

And:

 

As a professional agent of change, I can tell you with absolute certainty: change is exactly like diversity.

 

Without the right leadership, competence, and attitude to both identify and make the right change....change for change's sake is worthless.

 

There's nothing wrong with hating something that is worthless. I mean...you hate Dick Jauron's defensive scheme, right? Do you want us to change to that? What? That would be change....so it's good, right?

Edited September 20, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[fjl2nd]

The food stamp claim ins unsubstantiated. You should remove it from the OP.

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

Not very notable.

 

Northern Virginia has always trended democrat (quaint or otherwise....lol)

 

and, like everyone here, I can name several 2008 Obama svoters who has changed their minds and will vote for Romney,

 

but keep your head in the sand.

 

NOVA is quaint and Democratic? Do you live there? Do you drive through there in the fall come election time? Republicans rule the country (rural areas). Well they did in the past.

 

People change their mind all the time and Politicians change parties all the time. Your point?

[whateverdude]

Repubs= sophic Dems= sophism

[birdog1960]

We're all equal. We all hopefully work hard. The problem is that the government doesn't and politicians don't see it that way. They set up programs to target these groups for the sole purpose of keeping large voting blocks. They also coerce these groups to become like minded in their thinking rather than being individuals.

yes, because minorities and the poor have done so well in the last decade under the rule of either party the discrepancy between the rich and everyone else is widening faster than ever...and much of it is due to government policies, both dem and repub.

[OCinBuffalo]

yes, because minorities and the poor have done so well in the last decade under the rule of either party the discrepancy between the rich and everyone else is widening faster than ever...and much of it is due to government policies, both dem and repub.

If that is the case....than why would you expect the situation to change...as a result of activity by either party? Why the hell would you support ANY MORE government activity? Isn't time for the "help" to end? What's that about "first do no harm?" What if we applied that to government social programs? (Not military, as obviously the point...is to do harm) Why the F shouldn't we?

 

-----------------

 

Also...if it is government policy....and that policy ABSOLUTELY has been to geometrically increase spending on social engineering(as forests of paper and petabytes worth of data confirms), and the social sciences that almost always conclude that we need more spending on both, form 1965 until today.....

 

how on God's green earth can you support MORE of the same government policy that has produced these results?

 

You are fond of calling yourself moral.

 

Well, let's see how moral. Purposely continuing the policy that the Federal government has been running, since FDR, never mind LBJ...which most certainly is: big government for BIG GOVERNMENT, and not for the poor, sick, elderly or anybody else....spending all of my generation's money...and putting us in massive debt....just so you can keep your nostalgic notions...

 

is perhaps the single most immoral act there is on this planet. Having anal sex with a dead guy is a close 2nd.

 

Now, are you going to support this blatant immorality, or are you gonna finally admit that the 1960s was basically BS, and that the baby boomer mentality that has grown out of that era is crap, and has done more harm to the country than anything else in history?

Edited September 25, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[Gary M]

If that is the case....than why would you expect the situation to change...as a result of activity by either party? Why the hell would you support ANY MORE government activity? Isn't time for the "help" to end? What's that about "first do no harm?" What if we applied that to government social programs? (Not military, as obviously the point...is to do harm) Why the F shouldn't we?

 

-----------------

 

Also...if it is government policy....and that policy ABSOLUTELY has been to geometrically increase spending on social engineering(as forests of paper and petabytes worth of data confirms), and the social sciences that almost always conclude that we need more spending on both, form 1965 until today.....

 

how on God's green earth can you support MORE of the same government policy that has produced these results.

 

You are fond of calling yourself moral.

 

Well, let's see how moral. Purposely continuing the policy that the Federal government has been running, since FDR, never mind LBJ...which most certainly is: big government for BIG GOVERNMENT, and not for the poor, sick, elderly or anybody else....spending all of my generation's money...and putting us in massive debt....just so you can keep your nostalgic notions...

 

is perhaps the single most immoral act there is on this planet. Having anal sex with a dead guy is a close 2nd.

 

Now, are you going to support this blatant immorality, or are you gonna finally admit that the 1960s was basically BS, and that the baby boomer mentality that has grown out of that era is crap, and has done more harm to the country than anything else in history?

 

+1

[Juror#8]

If that is the case....than why would you expect the situation to change...as a result of activity by either party? Why the hell would you support ANY MORE government activity? Isn't time for the "help" to end? What's that about "first do no harm?" What if we applied that to government social programs? (Not military, as obviously the point...is to do harm) Why the F shouldn't we?

 

-----------------

 

Also...if it is government policy....and that policy ABSOLUTELY has been to geometrically increase spending on social engineering(as forests of paper and petabytes worth of data confirms), and the social sciences that almost always conclude that we need more spending on both, form 1965 until today.....

 

how on God's green earth can you support MORE of the same government policy that has produced these results?

 

You are fond of calling yourself moral.

 

Well, let's see how moral. Purposely continuing the policy that the Federal government has been running, since FDR, never mind LBJ...which most certainly is: big government for BIG GOVERNMENT, and not for the poor, sick, elderly or anybody else....spending all of my generation's money...and putting us in massive debt....just so you can keep your nostalgic notions...

 

is perhaps the single most immoral act there is on this planet. Having anal sex with a dead guy is a close 2nd.

 

Now, are you going to support this blatant immorality, or are you gonna finally admit that the 1960s was basically BS, and that the baby boomer mentality that has grown out of that era is crap, and has done more harm to the country than anything else in history?

 

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

Oh OC, I would indulge this...you know I want to, but you and I have danced this particular selection before...for about 10 minutes and 10 pages.

 

We should, however, find that thread and reminisce. Regardless, I'll just renew my extensive objections to your line of reasoning from that particular debate to save you the trouble.

[GG]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

Oh OC, I would indulge this...you know I want to, but you and I have danced this particular selection before...for about 10 minutes and 10 pages.

 

We should, however, find that thread and reminisce. Regardless, I'll just renew my extensive objections to your line of reasoning from that particular debate to save you the trouble.

 

He does have a point. We're at the tipping stage in our demographics where feeding the Leviathan will crowd out the private sector growth, yet nobody inside DC seems to care.

[Juror#8]

He does have a point. We're at the tipping stage in our demographics where feeding the Leviathan will crowd out the private sector growth, yet nobody inside DC seems to care.

 

I agree with you and your point. I also feel that we need some sort of reformation or the system will become the menace that it was designed to defeat.

 

Something about OC's hyperbole though...

 

And then, if I recall correctly, he was of the opinion that the most compassionate thing that we can do for a starving mother/family, is to let them starve so as to engender within them a modicum of self-respect and self-reliance.

 

I suggested then, and still feel now, that that approach would incubate the ingredients for an underground anarchical society - comprised of individuals who feel that the laws, policies, and structure that's ostensibly designed to protect them, ignores them and leaves them to perish. When that feeling permeates, it's gonna spell trouble.

 

Cliff's Notes: When you tell Steve, who has some mild mental disorders and is a 2 strike felon, that the local food bank is closing because OC didn't approve the state grant subsidies, and that his rental assistance application was denied because the budget was cut by 50%, or that WIC will no longer be providing Formulyte for his youngins, and that he'll have to make due on his 20 hour a week gig at Subway, do you think that Steve is just going to get Darwined?

 

Steve needs to eat. He is not just going to expire. Steve doesn't fully understand it because he has a sub-30 IQ, and if you ask him about it he'll look at you quizzically, but he is abiding by the same "state of nature" don't-get-pimped-by-natural-selection, response that our neanderlithic ancestors made famous. And at some point a combination of hunger and the urgings of his sympathetic nervous system is going to convince him that since his hunger has reached a critical level, and since he is having difficulty distinguishing colors or having complete feeling in his lower extremities, he should take your food by any means necessary.

 

If we don't provide any public services, some will find jobs and make due. Others won't. And we're talking about raw numbers in the millions who rely on these services. We can't even provide jobs for the actual job seekers. What about the Steve's of the world and those who haven't had consistent employment in 18 months and are therefore off the unemployment records?

 

It will be bedlam.

 

To me it's not a democrat or republican thing - it's a domestic security matter.

Edited September 25, 2012 by Juror#8

[OCinBuffalo]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

Oh OC, I would indulge this...you know I want to, but you and I have danced this particular selection before...for about 10 minutes and 10 pages.

 

We should, however, find that thread and reminisce. Regardless, I'll just renew my extensive objections to your line of reasoning from that particular debate to save you the trouble.

Why would I want to revisit 20, not 10, pages of you not answering questions, obfuscating when confronted with fact, relying on logic constructs...in place of logic itself, and when finally, and absolutely being pinned down....hoping that we forgot what you said 19 pages ago/changing the subject...and trying to pretend that words don't mean things?

 

Still waiting on how in the hell we should rely on the political instincts/analyses....of the the people in the Obama campaign/political office....given their performance over the last 4 years...from you. Or...have people actually started to like Obamacare....now...3 years later....as projected by these same clowns?

 

Same line of reasoning can be applied here: why the hell should we keep listening to FAIL? Or...if you had a magic wand, and could automatically wave money from one group to another....what historical, economic data can you point to, what results...in the history of the world...that guarantees that 20 years later that money wouldn't end up right back where it started?

 

There's not a single piece of historical data that supports that it wouldn't. Even in the most leftist economies = USSR...money still ends up with those that have the most ability. Good ability/bad ability whatever. Ability is ability, IQ is IQ, and balls is balls.

He does have a point. We're at the tipping stage in our demographics where feeding the Leviathan will crowd out the private sector growth, yet nobody inside DC seems to care.

This is because Juror #8 doesn't seem to get the simple concept:

 

There can be no mission...without a margin.

 

It's a cause and effect relationship....and no matter how many books are written by Marx or his wanna-bes, people are killed by Communists, or Che T-shirts are sold...when all talking finally ceases on this....this relationship will continue to be a truism.

 

This is like gravity...it has been a fact long before humans even existed. It will continue to be true, and there's nothing anyone can do to change it.

[3rdnlng]

 

 

I agree with you and your point. I also feel that we need some sort of reformation or the system will become the menace that it was designed to defeat.

 

Something about OC's hyperbole though...

 

And then, if I recall correctly, he was of the opinion that the most compassionate thing that we can do for a starving mother/family, is to let them starve so as to engender within them a modicum of self-respect and self-reliance.

 

I suggested then, and still feel now, that that approach would incubate the ingredients for an underground anarchical society - comprised of individuals who feel that the laws, policies, and structure that's ostensibly designed to protect them, ignores them and leaves them to perish. When that feeling permeates, it's gonna spell trouble.

 

Cliff's Notes: When you tell Steve, who has some mild mental disorders and is a 2 strike felon that the local food bank is closing because OC didn't approve the state grant subsidies, and that his rental assistance application was denied because the budget was cut by 50% and that he'll have to make due on his 20 hour a week gig at Subway, do you think that Steve is just going to get Darwined.

 

Steve needs to eat. He is not just going to expire. Steve doesn't fully understand it because he has a sub-30 IQ, and if you ask him about it he'll look at you quizzically, but he is abiding by the same "state of nature" don't-get-pimped-by-natural-selection, response that our neanderlithic ancestors made famous. And at some point a combination of hunger and the urgings of his sympathetic nervous system is going to convince him that since his hunger has reached a critical level, and since he is having difficulty distinguishing colors or having complete feeling in his lower extremities, he should take your food by any means necessary.

 

If we don't provide any public services, some will find jobs and make due. Others won't. And we're talking about raw numbers in the millions who rely on these services.

 

It will be bedlam.

 

To me it's not a democrat or republican thing - it's a domestic security matter.

 

Uh, you accused OC of the one using hyperbole? Sub-30 IQ? He is the food.

[Juror#8]

Why would I want to revisit 20, not 10, pages of you not answering questions, obfuscating when confronted with fact, relying on logic constructs...in place of logic itself, and when finally, and absolutely being pinned down....hoping that we forgot what you said 19 pages ago/changing the subject...and trying to pretend that words don't mean things?

 

Still waiting on how in the hell we should rely on the political instincts/analyses....of the the people in the Obama campaign/political office....given their performance over the last 4 years...from you. Or...have people actually started to like Obamacare....now...3 years later....as projected by these same clowns?

 

Same line of reasoning can be applied here: why the hell should we keep listening to FAIL? Or...if you had a magic wand, and could automatically wave money from one group to another....what historical, economic data can you point to, what results...in the history of the world...that guarantees that 20 years later that money wouldn't end up right back where it started?

 

There's not a single piece of historical data that supports that it wouldn't. Even in the most leftist economies = USSR...money still ends up with those that have the most ability. Good ability/bad ability whatever. Ability is ability, IQ is IQ, and balls is balls.

 

This is because Juror #8 doesn't seem to get the simple concept:

 

There can be no mission...without a margin.

 

It's a cause and effect relationship....and no matter how many books are written by Marx or his wanna-bes, people are killed by Communists, or Che T-shirts are sold...when all talking finally ceases on this....this relationship will continue to be a truism.

 

This is like gravity...it has been a fact long before humans even existed. It will continue to be true, and there's nothing anyone can do to change it.

 

 

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

 

Why don't you post that link kind sir and we can see who was obfuscating, ignoring, and generally evading facts while making their own facts up as a surrogate.

 

I consistently point-by-point-by-point addressed your questions and you, consistently, ignored those and re-manufactured arguments and positions as you went along to fit your schizophrenic concept of domestic poverty culture.

 

You couldn't answer a few basic points that, while theoretical, comported with a reality and a basic truism of human nature. Instead you cracked open a philosophical text and plagarized ideas and notions that were misapplied and that you couldn't possibly understand even if you would have made it beyond the 10th grade.

 

Oh OC, you're so silly. And in truth, I enjoy arguing with you because I'm always victorious in our little flare ups. Then you recede back to your dungeon of pessismism and misery, only to re-surface later to take another beating.

 

I like you because you're an admitted and unabashed masochist. And while the lifestyle is disturbing, I think that it's laudable that you advertise it and you don't hide from your enjoyment of having pain inflicted upon you.

 

Oh yea...I never said that we should rely on their instincts. In some context, I brought up their POV and you (in your classic fashion of bastardizing arguments that you then argue against) felt that I should answer for the veracity of it. You decide if the info is impactful to you. If it's not, than move on. Otherwise, argue the merits of the point and don't ask me why should it matter to you. That's for you to decide.

 

BTW, why should I trust that it's raining outside when a weatherman, some how, some way, some where, has been wrong before? Can you answer that for me so I can know which way is up?

 

Idiot.

 

Uh, you accused OC of the one using hyperbole? Sub-30 IQ? He is the food.

 

I don't "use" hyperbole, I've mastered it.

 

OC is my 44th pupil.

Edited September 25, 2012 by Juror#8

[3rdnlng]

 

 

 

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

 

Why don't you post that link kind sir and we can see who was obfuscating, ignoring, and generally evading facts while making their own facts up as a surrogate.

 

I consistently point-by-point-by-point addressed your questions and you, consistently, ignored those and re-manufactured arguments and positions as you went along to fit your schizophrenic concept of domestic poverty culture.

 

You couldn't answer a few basic points that, while theoretical, comported with a reality and a basic trusim of human nature. Instead you cracked open a philosophical text and plagarized ideas and notions that were misapplied and that you couldn't possibly understand even if you would have made it passed the 10th grade.

 

Oh OC, you're so silly. And in truth, I enjoy arguing with you because you I'm always victorious in our little flare ups. Then you recede back to your dungeon of pessismism and misery, only to re-surface later to take another beating.

 

I like you because you're an admitted and unabashed masochist. And while the lifestyle is disturbing, I think that it's laudable that you advertise it and you don't hide from your enjoyment of having pain inflicted upon you.

 

 

 

I don't "use" hyperbole, I've mastered it.

 

OC is my 44th pupil.

 

Be proud of the students you've spawned.