Why we still have Democrats

[Vort]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/15/business/jack-ma-996-china/index.html

It's easy to criticize the blindness, foolishness, and outright stupidity (or even evil) of the opposition party. This is all the rage (no pun intended) today, perhaps especially with the left end of the spectrum, but certainly not confined there. Sometimes it's worthwhile to ponder why the opposition mindset arose in the first place. In this case, Republicans and conservatives in general would do well to remember why things like labor unions even exist.

Edited April 16, 2019 by Vort

[Guest Mores]

I believe there will always be an opposition party.  And there SHOULD always be an opposition party.  This keeps people in line and helps us all realize there is a different point of view.

Today's Democrat party has shown themselves to be much more than simply "another point of view."  They're outright beating up, harassing, stealing, and destroying property of people who oppose their views.  And many people in power (polticians, judges, juries, and school officials of all levels) are perfectly ok with letting them do so.

Why is THIS so? 

I am closely acquainted with a boy (I believe he is 12, but I could be off by a year or so) who suffers from R.A.D.  He is of a fairly mild version.  On a scale of one to ten, he's about a three. 

• A 1 can get by in society with minimal coaching and proper parenting.
• A 2 has a rough go of it.  May or may not need professional help.
• A 3 really requires some professional help, but they can be worked with. 
• Somewhere around a 5 or 6 takes a LOT of work to have them be productive members of society.
• Around a 9 or 10 is a point where I, being a non-professional, do not believe they can be treated/cured.

I saw some kid who was the textbook example of a 10.  The discipline that the counselors required when he acted out was very simple.  He simply had to sit still in a prescribed condition for 30 seconds.  Every single time he got to 29, he gave up.  He couldn't explain why.  He knew the rules.  He was internally driven to break up before the 30 seconds was up.  Even when he could stare at the clock, knowing he had only one second to go almost compelled him to burst out at 29 seconds.  It was unbelievable.

What does this have to do with SJWs?

The exact same behavior I saw among this crowd of children suffering from RAD is so similar to those who I see screaming to disrupt conservative political gatherings.  Think about it.  Is there really any rationale behind what these people are doing?  Does it even make sense some of the things they say?

There are many liberals who will have a conversation.  That's great.  I applaud them.  Let's have the conversation.  Let's get the ideas out there and discuss them together.  But that's not what is going on in these extreme cases that we see go viral.  We all know that every group has an extreme person among them.  But the behavior found in organized campaigns to outright lie and deny the rights of free speech and free assembly to those who simply have a disagreement with them is not normal.  Supported by student unions, student government, university faculty, public school faculty, politicians, and so many more in power says that among liberals, it is not merely an extremist in the party.  It is the party.

It is NOT NORMAL.

Edited April 17, 2019 by Mores

[MarginOfError]

Also, Democrats are better dancers.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, MarginOfError said:

Also, Democrats are better dancers.

But republicans are better in the mosh pits. Am I correct Mr. @mirkwood?

[Guest Mores]

45 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

Also, Democrats are better dancers.

OK.

Dance off, bro.  Me and you!  Right here.

<<After I set my beer down, you can imagine Chris Farley dancing alongside Vanilla Ice>>  Oh, Yeah!  Baby!!!  That's what I'm talkin' about.

Edited April 16, 2019 by Mores

[NeuroTypical]

Great, now I'm traumatized.

 

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, MarginOfError said:

Also, Democrats are better dancers.

 

 

Edited April 16, 2019 by anatess2

[pwrfrk]

"Why We Still Have Democrats" = "Why We Still Have Hemorrhoids".  In the end, the   still has to go somewhere....

[MarginOfError]

5 hours ago, pwrfrk said:

"Why We Still Have Democrats" = "Why We Still Have Hemorrhoids".  In the end, the   still has to go somewhere....

That's overly harsh, and if allowed to stand, I request permission to make similar comments about Republicans and Libertarians with impunity.

[Just_A_Guy]

33 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

That's overly harsh, and if allowed to stand, I request permission to make similar comments about Republicans and Libertarians with impunity.

If that’s a rhetorical statement, I’ll leave you folks to it.  If it’s a concern about moderating . . . just a friendly reminder that all parties are welcome to make liberal (see what I did there?  Yuk, yuk, yuk) use of the “report” function if they want to flag something for our review.    

Edited April 17, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest Mores]

34 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

That's overly harsh, and if allowed to stand, I request permission to make similar comments about Republicans and Libertarians with impunity.

I'd agree that the isolated statement was indeed nothing more than an ad hominem against liberals.  I apologize for someone on my political aisle making such a statement on a forum like this.

At the very least, I try to give actual examples and evidence that would support my accusations and characterizations. But this kind of stuff by pfrwk is just an attack and nothing more.

[MarginOfError]

54 minutes ago, Mores said:

I'd agree that the isolated statement was indeed nothing more than an ad hominem against liberals.  I apologize for someone on my political aisle making such a statement on a forum like this.

Nice to know that at least one of you can be civil  

Edited April 17, 2019 by MarginOfError

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

That's overly harsh, and if allowed to stand, I request permission to make similar comments about Republicans and Libertarians with impunity.

You're permitted.

That said, there's some nugget to be got about that comment.  But it's not that Democrats have to go away, no.  The Democratic Party have to get their act straightened out.  If that means having to torch the old party and have a do-over, then do so.

[Vort]

2 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

That's overly harsh, and if allowed to stand, I request permission to make similar comments about Republicans and Libertarians with impunity.

Please note that was not my statement.

[anatess2]

6 minutes ago, Vort said:

Please note that was not my statement.

@pwrfrk ruined it for us.

[MarginOfError]

4 minutes ago, Vort said:

Please note that was not my statement.

Yes it was, in fact.  I have reliable sources--the best sources, really--and these people are very smart people that know lots of things.  And they told me that you have many accounts you use to post very mean things about people without it coming back to Vort.  

(ignore my foil hat)

[Vort]

4 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

Yes it was, in fact.  I have reliable sources--the best sources, really--and these people are very smart people that know lots of things.  And they told me that you have many accounts you use to post very mean things about people without it coming back to Vort.  

(ignore my foil hat)

My favorite sock puppet is MarginOfError, where I pretend to be a math-hating statistician.

[MarginOfError]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

My favorite sock puppet is MarginOfError, where I pretend to be a math-hating statistician.

Vort is scum!

(Figure out how to address that insult, mods!)

[Vort]

25 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

Vort is scum!

MarginOfError is an intelligent and thoughtful man who dislikes me rather intensely based on previous interactions in this forum in years past—and to be fair, not wholly without cause, as those who have witnessed my past interactions can attest. I often (not always) see things from a different perspective than MoE and am occasionally frustrated by what he writes, but I actually hold him and his wife in esteem for the thoughtfulness of their opinions. Even the ones that are wrong.

And MoE's comment above was obviously a joke. I don't mean to imply otherwise, and I don't take offense. Just getting real for a moment. (Only for a moment, though.)

Edited April 17, 2019 by Vort

[anatess2]

47 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

Vort is scum!

(Figure out how to address that insult, mods!)

 

40 minutes ago, Vort said:

MarginOfError is an intelligent and thoughtful man who dislikes me rather intensely based on previous interactions in this forum in years past—and to be fair, not wholly without cause, as those who have witnessed my past interactions can attest. I often (not always) see things from a different perspective than MoE and am occasionally frustrated by what he writes, but I actually hold him and his wife in esteem for the thoughtfulness of their opinions. Even the ones that are wrong.

And MoE's comment above was obviously a joke. I don't mean to imply otherwise, and I don't take offense. Just getting real for a moment. (Only for a moment, though.)

 

Oh get a room, you two! 

[Maureen]

1 hour ago, MarginOfError said:

Vort is scum!

(Figure out how to address that insult, mods!)

I'm going to guess that "scum" is an acronym related to mathematics.

M.

[pam]

2 hours ago, Maureen said:

I'm going to guess that "scum" is an acronym related to mathematics.

M.

Well I always hated mathematics enough to perhaps call it scum.    

[Guest Mores]

21 hours ago, Maureen said:

I'm going to guess that "scum" is an acronym related to mathematics.

Hmmm...

SChool Uf Mathematics? (doesn't work)

Science, Calculation, Units, and Mathematics? (Ok.  But "units" was kinda forced).

Scary, Creepy, Ugly, and Monstrous? (wait, nothing to do with math).

That's all I got.

[Guest MormonGator]

18 hours ago, pam said:

Well I always hated mathematics enough to perhaps call it scum.    

First thing you and I have ever agreed on! Yuk, I feel so dirty. 

 

😝

[mnn2501]

I believe one of the problems is that each side looks at the most extreme members of the other party (media influence?) and labels all members of the opposite party as being like that.

I believe there is a vast group of people that call themselves democrats and that call themselves republicans that could meet in the middle and agree on many topics, more people (I believe) than the number of people at the extremes. 

Perhaps someone should start a "Middle of the Road" political party.