squistion
Footballguy
The purpose of this thread is inflammatory, not to have a serious discussion and should be locked by the mods. :IBTL:
Last edited by a moderator:
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Time to Totally Get Rid of the Democratic Party (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Opie
- Start date
The Commish
Footballguy
This has become a completely dishonest and debunked talking point when we exclude the GOP from the equation...that ship has sailed. Both parties have no issue spending way more than we take in. The argument now is purely over what they will spend it on.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Just because you're triggered doesn't mean it was inflammatory. Just stay out of it if you don't like it. If you're capable of walking away from one thread.
Manster
Footballguy
Right....I'm not denying that. I don't like either approach. But I REALLY don't like the Dems pandering to the "have nots.".
Maybe we've reached a point in our country where complete government control is the only option. I will never be for that approach though. And I will not raise my kids to believe they need the feds to give them a bunch of free #### and that it's rich people holding them down.
John Blutarsky
Footballguy
Just because you're triggered doesn't mean it was inflammatory. Just stay out of it if you don't like it. If you're capable of walking away from one thread.
The Commish
Footballguy
Well, ultimately, this is where we're at. We are being forced to decide between "giving our money to the rich people" or "giving our money to poor people". The only way around this is not voting.
Manster
Footballguy
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Possum
Footballguy
I don't think it's true that progressives and radical leftists are consciously racist or homophobic, but I definitely think there's an element of truth to the control aspect. There is no better way in modern American society to smear or destroy someone's credibility or whip up the public into a frenzy than allegations of racism. It's become almost more of a stigma than actual murder, and it doesn't require anything close to the same level of proof.
and don't get me wrong, I guarantee right wingers would do the same thing if they could, but so far there's not an equivalent boogeyman they can use that carries the same impact of immediate universal scorn. It's been interesting to watch the Democrats completely co-opt the Republicans' "moral majority" strategy over the last 15 years by positioning themselves as the sole crusaders for secular truth and justice. With the widespread de-emphasization and abandonment of Christian beliefs and values in this country during that same timeframe (which is a good thing, mostly), it seems to me that woke social purification has become a new religion for much of the population, and I see a lot of parallels in their insistently dismissive emotional response to reasonable, intelligent debate and dogged unquestioning fervor for eliminating other viewpoints.
I believe that the vast majority of human beings are inherently, subconsciously tribal and instinctually desire some connection with a spiritual power greater than ourselves. Religion satisfies both of those impulses, and in the absence of traditional religion for most modern Americans, especially younger ones, we're seeing the rise of the church of political correctness. 90s right wing prayer warriors being superceded by modern left wing social justice warriors - meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
it's also interesting (from a clinical perspective - otherwise it's terrifying) to watch Orwell's concepts of Big Brother and thoughtcrime slowly become reality, but not as part of the totalitarian government he envisioned. Today Big Brother is just any random person around you with a phone and a Twitter account, and they are definitely always watching.
KiddLattimer
Footballguy
One that eulogized Strom Thurmond and was heavily involved in the crime bill/patriot act to boot.
We definitely need strong third parties to spring up. To me the ideal scenario would be four parties with a left leaning progressive party and a strong libertarian or conservative party on the right, but I won't hold my breath on seeing that in my lifetime. It would be nice to have that happen without having to destroy Dems/GOP but I'm sure both will work together tirelessly to prevent it from happening.
Manster
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
Possum
Footballguy
I kind of agree with you, but this simplifies the debate a little bit too much. IMO it's more like "give your money to the rich because leftist wackos are ruining the country and must be eliminated" vs "give your money to the poor because the entire American system is inherently, completely racist and anyone who thinks differently must be eliminated".
the "politics as team sports slash religion" thing we have today where everyone picks a side to ride or die with no matter what is what's killing us. Compromise and cooperation are integral components of human advancement, but we're getting to the point of polarization where those things are completely ignored in favor of demonization and conflict with other points of view.
and this thread is about Democrats but this crap isn't solely their fault by any means - hell, it's Trump's blueprint for how he got elected. It does seem to me that the left are more shrill and unreasonably combative at the moment, but the whole thing is just a symptom of the failing of the two party system in the face of an increasingly more connected and outspoken electorate. There's a real lack of competent leadership and worthwhile representative options on both sides of the aisle.
Grace Under Pressure
Footballguy
Apologies for only quoting part of the post, but this is the problem in a nutshell.
Politics isn't Alabama/Auburn. But with many entering into political discussion for the first time over the last decade or so and the advent of social media, this is exactly what it has become. "My side all the way!" "The other side is always wrong and must be defeated!" "Time to get rid of the other party!". That's not thoughtful at all.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
After being corrected for it endlessly in these threads, it's hard to see usage of "Democrat Party" as being anything other than a taunt at this point.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
What Gator Bait mean 125 years ago and what people mean by the chant today are 2 different things. That doesn't matter though we need to change anything with a history of racism. Now is the time to make significant change not selective change
Football Jones
Footballguy
Bible study. Haha.
You know what it is. I've mentioned it before. In case you really did miss it, it's a local political group (it's not hard guessing what affiliation). I suspect there are quite a few political groups around the country. This is one of them. We meet to talk about issues, etc.
I found it when I became more politically aware. Since it's an election year, there's quite a buzz (obviously). We're also in one of the most unprecedented times in history. It started growing a bit. Some black people are joining. We have a PS major who's been taking a particular interest in helping black folks. We have some people who have various interests doing various things.
It's called MURICA.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stealthycat
Footballguy
far left, left, right and far right but ...
what if there was a political party that encompassed a little bit of left, right and mostly center where so many people fall ?
such a party would dominate ......... but the DNC and GOP would fight such a party very very hard
Stealthycat
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
Yes, it has pointed out multiple times and specifically to this OP. So to use it in the thread title seems an obvious taunt.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Joe Mammy
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Demonstrably false! You described the make up of the democratic party since the '80s until at least a decade ago and maybe today. Not much domination going on.
bigbottom
Footballguy
My question wasn’t intended as a joke. I have and know many people who participate in Bible Study, so that wasn’t intended as a slight. I’m definitely aware of political affiliation groups, but haven’t heard of one that has teachings as part of the agenda with a teacher providing handouts. So it sort of sounded more like a Bible Study or book club where there is a defined agenda topic for the discussion/lesson plan with a facilitator (teacher) for the discussion.
Last edited by a moderator:
bigbottom
Footballguy
Most democracies start out that way, but over time they evolve into two party systems similar to what we now have. Historically speaking you can look at Poland's recent history to see how these things involved. Here in America it was never designed to be a 2 party system, but it only took about 20 years to get there.
Once in a while the two candidates are SO bad that you might end up with a 3rd party with a chance.. but the odds are so heavily stacked against them that it's almost impossible for a true 3rd party to win.
Football Jones
Footballguy
Fair enough.
Personally, I think maybe you're trying to read stuff into it (like teachings). He's just a guy (like me) who wants to help.
He kinda took over the role when more black people started coming. I've brought some black people in which is why I've been paying attention to that part of it.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Fwiw this is what happened in France with Macron.
Note, this leaves the nationalists as a rump party, so be careful what you wish for.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not only do we not have a choice of a different party.. with the Democrats you really don't even have a choice on candidates anymore. Both Hillary and Biden were chosen for you. Say what you will about Trump and the Republicans - the party machine sure didn't want Trump. The people chose him. (And frankly that still baffles me, but hey at least that's actual Democracy. And more than you'll get from the Democratic part)
bigbottom
Footballguy
You were the one who referred to “teachings” and “teacher”. Also the “handouts”. That’s what led me to ask the question. If it’s just a guy who participates in the discussion and offers his perspective, that is much more in line with what I’ve seen before.
Football Jones
Footballguy
I'd say "teaching" & "handouts" are pretty dang accurate in this particular instance. And I'm not sure I've ever mentioned religion since I've been here.
I think you're trying to make connections that aren't there. Anyway, hopefully, that straightens it out for you.
bigbottom
Footballguy
bigbottom
Footballguy
I’m not trying to make any connections. You’re way off base. I was asking for information about these meetings. And whether it’s structured with a lesson plan and a facilitator (teacher). Much like how book clubs and Bible studies are structured. Those were just examples. I’m not trying to connect you to Bible study or religion, I’m simply curious about the format of your meetings. There is no need to be defensive.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Football Jones
Footballguy
I find it kinda odd you would question something like I was explaining, but then again, I've never belonged to a political group.
That said, I find this group pretty typical of what I thought a political group would be.
Anyway, rest assured I'm not taken aback by it. I just found it odd.
No biggie.
The Martin Luther King thing is sort of interesting. He was almost certainly registered as a Republican. But being a republican 50 or 100 years ago has little resemblance to being republican today. People have been arguing this for the last 30 years, and much like the confederate flag the whole history and meaning has been completely lost. And BTW, everything has Bias now, even the sites that check the Bias. FInd me 4 sites that say he was a democrat and i can find you 4 sites that say he was a republican. At the end of the day it doesn't matter.
https://time.com/5764282/martin-luther-king-jr-politics/
The really scary thing is that there really isn't THAT much difference between the parties. Both of them edge towards more and more control and less and less individual rights. The Right will take your money and give it to Corporations. The Left will take your money and give it to special interest groups, foreign governments, or themselves. Neither will tax the rich becuase rich people are rich for a reason. Rich people, for the most part, don't pay taxes. Neither party is going to change that. It's the middle class that always bears this burden.
https://time.com/5764282/martin-luther-king-jr-politics/
The really scary thing is that there really isn't THAT much difference between the parties. Both of them edge towards more and more control and less and less individual rights. The Right will take your money and give it to Corporations. The Left will take your money and give it to special interest groups, foreign governments, or themselves. Neither will tax the rich becuase rich people are rich for a reason. Rich people, for the most part, don't pay taxes. Neither party is going to change that. It's the middle class that always bears this burden.
You don't think the party did everything in it's power to make sure these two were chosen? You can argue Biden. Maybe. But Hillary?
bigbottom
Footballguy
Let’s try this again, and without any reference to religion. This is asked with the utmost earnestness, I’m not trying to trick you or cast aspersions:
Your meetings sound very interesting in that there are teachings and handouts. Do your meetings have structured agendas with preset topics for discussion, say certain historical topics that are germane to the issues of today, where there is a person who provides handouts with educational materials and historical facts? Are the meetings sort of like teacher-led discussions, or is it more of an organic discussion group?
Your meetings sound very interesting in that there are teachings and handouts. Do your meetings have structured agendas with preset topics for discussion, say certain historical topics that are germane to the issues of today, where there is a person who provides handouts with educational materials and historical facts? Are the meetings sort of like teacher-led discussions, or is it more of an organic discussion group?
Ilov80s
Footballguy
This is the key to whole argument. He would be a Democrat today and what party he sided with 60 years ago is irrelevant. Looking at the current Trump dominated GOP of today, it’s very disingenuous to hail the accomplishment of Lincoln-era Republicans or Roosevelt era-Republicans as some reflection of the current party. It would be like Yale touting itself as a college football powerhouse to recruits this summer because they won 27 National Titles between 1872 and 1927.
HellToupee
Footballguy
Remember now, the big boss gave you are talking to about your posting behavior yesterday. Don’t get yourself all worked up here
Ilov80s
Footballguy
I agree the party pushed for them but the voters also voted. It’s not a surprise that Trump and Sanders faced a lot of resistance from the respective parties given that Trump wasn’t really a Republican and Bernie wasn’t really a Democrat.
While i highly doubt that MLK would be a Trump fan, he was an independent thinker at the time and he'd be an independent thinker today. If one makes an argument that the Democratic party hasn't done much good for his people who's to say he wouldn't vote GOP? He'd definately be closer to the Democrats though then the current republicans.
Don't confuse conservatives with Trump tho.. just becuase he's the lesser of two evils doesn't mean that people have to like him. Are you that in love with Biden? We still don't even know who any of his supporting cast will be. And it's highly unlikely to be beneficial at all to the black community.
Exactly. But with the way the democratic party is setup (And especially so in 2016) the democratic machine really can choose whomever they want. The Super Delegates exist to ensure this. And even this year plenty of safeguards were put in.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Anyone that combines knowledge with honesty. But then those kind of people aren't making the dishonest and/or ignorant argument that the Democratic party hasn't "done much good". Unless that failure to do much good is a result of losing elections or being too timid to push too fast.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
I’m not going to speculate about what a person who hasn’t been alive for decades would think with any great nuance. I just look at his contemporaries who lived, his family members and his congregation, that the most likely scenario is MLK is a Democrat.
As for connecting Trump to conservatives, I do if they vote for him or carry his water. He’s the actual leader and thought leader of the GOP. He’s not just some party vet that got the nomination because he’s safe or a recognized name. He came in with the goal of revolutionizing the Party and he has. The GOP has been re-shaped in his image. So I am connecting the dots between Trump and people who vote for him. Many principled conservatives have already ditched the party. I was a right leaning voter until the last 5-10 years or so. Trump was the absolute nail in the coffin for me. That party isn’t the conservative party I used to see eye to eye on quite a bit.
Similar threads
