Jump to content

NBC's Kick-Off Democratic Debates "closed"


y2keglide

Recommended Posts

I couldn't help but laugh when I saw it closed so soon.

Never fails,politics and religion are two too touchy subjects lmao.

They often go hand in hand and end up foot in mouth.....the the the that's all folks!

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

 

zxz.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, y2keglide said:

Never fails,politics and religion are two too touchy subjects lmao.

They often go hand in hand and end up foot in mouth.....

I agree, especially when I saw who started that thread and the moderator who ended it. 😎I miss discussions with both of those guys and hope they are doing well.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

I agree, especially when I saw who started that thread and the moderator who ended it. 😎I miss discussions with both of those guys and hope they are doing well.

are you suggesting Gilbert isn’t fair and balanced? peace Zen.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BigStewMan said:

are you suggesting Gilbert isn’t fair and balanced? peace Zen.

Ha! Gilbert is ONLY "fair and balanced," because he subscribes to the one *News* outlet that claims to be...Btw, good to see you posting Bigstew and wish we could still engage as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the friendly reminder post says: "topics covering sensitive issues such as race, religion, or politics have no place here and will be locked by moderators at their discretion."

so, it’s a matter of discretion to lock a topic that doesn’t belong here.

so, topics of race, religion, and politics can remain unlocked, even though they don’t belong here.

many will say that i don’t belong here; but, i haven’t been locked. is it because although i belong to a race and a religion; but i have no political party? like meatloaf sang, “two out of three ain’t bad."

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

Btw, good to see you posting Bigstew and wish we could still engage as well. 

thanks ... needed a year off.  I will say that i’m not looking forward to the election season; although i don’t know why -- people suddenly become moral about everything (except their opponent).  Wish they’d be moral for three years and nasty for one. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BigStewMan said:

 I will say that i’m not looking forward to the election season; although i don’t know why --

I'm not either except for the outcome. I don't think people knew what to expect electing a Reality TV show host and now they do. If things don't change  I will be surprised but still respect the results.

Quote

 

people suddenly become moral about everything (except their opponent).  Wish they’d be moral for three years and nasty for one. 

I don't think moral is the word you are looking for, but maybe civility? Folks can have similar morals without supporting the same candidate or party, but the 2016 Republican debates got uncivil and nasty and it carried over into the general election. That said, I follow the President's Twitter feed and it's not very....Presidential, to say the least. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

I'm not either except for the outcome. I don't think people knew what to expect electing a Reality TV show host and now they do. If things don't change  I will be surprised but still respect the results.

I don't think moral is the word you are looking for, but maybe civility? Folks can have similar morals without supporting the same candidate or party, but the 2016 Republican debates got uncivil and nasty and it carried over into the general election. That said, I follow the President's Twitter feed and it's not very....Presidential, to say the least. 

i know i didn’t specify; but, that statement was meant about the speaker’s character in general.  They’ll often do shady things and suddenly, when in campaign mode, they’re outraged at the shady stuff their opponent has done.  I lived most of my life in California.  After Brown’s first term as governor, during an interview in which he was asked if he ever lied to the voters.  His answer was, “of course i lied to them.”  Now, i’m speculating that when he ran the second time, he probably told the voters how horrible a person his opponent was. And the voters and media ... well, sometimes they seem to want the candidate from their opposing party to be pristine. it’s kinda like the “my dog doesn’t bark” argument. Your dog barks as much as the next guy, we all know that. Brown’s opponent used clips of that interview in which he admitted to lying to the voters -- he still got elected. democratically controlled state voted for democrat -- him lying to them before didn’t matter. But, the other guy ... he’d better be pristine or we’re ripping him to shreds. 

personally, i love it if we did away with all political parties. Same number of representatives, same number of senators -- just no party affiliation. Loyalty to the party is what screws so many things up.  political parties are power whores and only care about getting our vote period. 

before i end my rant, let me say two things that should be banned from political ads ... saying the opponent is “bad for (insert state or country)” and saying that “it’s for the children.”  Drives me nuts to hear those.

Good thing I have every episode of Monk and Hogan’s Heroes recorded, plus some Twilight Zone ... that should get me through this election season. 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

Folks can have similar morals without supporting the same candidate or party

interesting statement and one that would have been delved into further in another part of this forum if it still existed. 

I do agree with your statement; however, it does get interesting when a person claims to adhere to a moral principle and support a candidate that doesn’t live up to that standard. One must suspend standing on that moral principle or not support their party’s nominee.  The mental gymnastics of a person in this position is fun to watch. 

In discussions, you’ll often find out that their support for a particular candidate was not based on the moral principle they touted. Of course their explanation of why is the fun part. I personally know a man that would be hard pressed to say good things about Trump; but, voted for him solely because of the abortion issue and Hillary’s pledge to support abortion on demand. To him, that one issue, superseded all other issues. Probably a lot more like him out there. 

Me ... i could probably support a candidate; but, i just no longer can support a party.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BigStewMan said:

i know i didn’t specify; but, that statement was meant about the speaker’s character in general.  They’ll often do shady things and suddenly, when in campaign mode, they’re outraged at the shady stuff their opponent has done.  I lived most of my life in California.  After Brown’s first term as governor, during an interview in which he was asked if he ever lied to the voters.  His answer was, “of course i lied to them.”  Now, i’m speculating that when he ran the second time, he probably told the voters how horrible a person his opponent was. And the voters and media ... well, sometimes they seem to want the candidate from their opposing party to be pristine. it’s kinda like the “my dog doesn’t bark” argument. Your dog barks as much as the next guy, we all know that. Brown’s opponent used clips of that interview in which he admitted to lying to the voters -- he still got elected. democratically controlled state voted for democrat -- him lying to them before didn’t matter. But, the other guy ... he’d better be pristine or we’re ripping him to shreds. 

personally, i love it if we did away with all political parties. Same number of representatives, same number of senators -- just no party affiliation. Loyalty to the party is what screws so many things up.  political parties are power whores and only care about getting our vote period. 

before i end my rant, let me say two things that should be banned from political ads ... saying the opponent is “bad for (insert state or country)” and saying that “it’s for the children.”  Drives me nuts to hear those.

Good thing I have every episode of Monk and Hogan’s Heroes recorded, plus some Twilight Zone ... that should get me through this election season. 

 

Add one more to my way of thinking.  Good job, man.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • dtel locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...