forum Debate. Debate. Debate.

Started March 14, 2019 by Deleted user

tune

Edit topic

Oh, and you should have said "it's", not "its". Talk about unimpressive.

That is the single most braindead analogy I've ever had the displeasure of reading.

I like how all of the tones to these messages are getting progressively angrier.

I don't ✌️

I mean I could always try asking people to take a moment to breath but I don't think that will work.

Oh hon, I was trying to tell you that you shouldn't find it funny, not that I think we should 'calm down' or whatever because honestly most of us are just annoyed with you.

I can name one good thing that Trump has done, and way too many fucked up things. I'd like to hear your actual reasons, Iamus.

God forbid that the people who would be directly harmed by Trump's policies react in a way that isn't super friendly and wholesome to someone trying to argue for his views.

This. We have every right to be angry.

If you think this is me getting mad, then you've clearly never seen me get mad.

Indeed. The state of the world is truly sad,

Dominus vobiscum.

I agree, your view of the world is sad.

Indeed. The state of the world is truly sad,

Dominus vobiscum.

I agree, your view of the world is sad.

Heheh

Indeed. The state of the world is truly sad,

Dominus vobiscum.

I agree, your view of the world is sad.

That was solid ngl

Indeed. The state of the world is truly sad,

Dominus vobiscum.

I agree, your view of the world is sad.

👍

God forbid that the people who would be directly harmed by Trump's policies react in a way that isn't super friendly and wholesome to someone trying to argue for his views.

This. We have every right to be angry.

Which is part of why the "lol you're so triggered, you're getting upset in debates!!" mentality is so harmful. It puts the detached view of someone with no stakes in the argument above the usually more emotionally charged view of someone who's directly impacted.

God forbid that the people who would be directly harmed by Trump's policies react in a way that isn't super friendly and wholesome to someone trying to argue for his views.

This. We have every right to be angry.

Which is part of why the "lol you're so triggered, you're getting upset in debates!!" mentality is so harmful. It puts the detached view of someone with no stakes in the argument above the usually more emotionally charged view of someone who's directly impacted.

Exactly. I saw a conservative tiktok that said "empathy has no place in politics" and I just-??? Proves your point well.

God forbid that the people who would be directly harmed by Trump's policies react in a way that isn't super friendly and wholesome to someone trying to argue for his views.

This. We have every right to be angry.

Which is part of why the "lol you're so triggered, you're getting upset in debates!!" mentality is so harmful. It puts the detached view of someone with no stakes in the argument above the usually more emotionally charged view of someone who's directly impacted.

Exactly. I saw a conservative tiktok that said "empathy has no place in politics" and I just-??? Proves your point well.

"Empathy has no place in politics, however trans people are bad because I think they're icky. Facts over feelings, unless the feelings are mine, in which case they win every time."

Think of the drama if a lefty said religion has no place in politics.

Politics and laws should never be have religion involved. Ever.

Think of the drama if a lefty said religion has no place in politics.

As a religious, fairly left, person, this is correct, but also I think someone did say this and the tik tok conservatives got angy but that might be dumb brain fucking with me

The only exception I can think of is if like a religious teaching was against the law, or whether or not the government should recognize a group as a formal religion with tax exemptions. Then the politics would be centered around religion, but they should apply it objective from the religion.

That's religious politics though, right?

That's religious politics though, right?

Yeah, but I don't mean to say law and religious ideas should mix, I just wanted to clarify.

It was a while back I think someone said that the system of this country was really bad or something like that. I would argue contrary,
The System it's self isn't bad, it's not perfect by any means but it's not as bad as it looks currently. The problem isn't the system its the people in the system.
I may not understand the inner workings of the government as well as some but from what I do know and what we're covering in my gov class it seems to me like the system was designed fairly well, but it's also fairly loose and up to interpretation meaning the individuals in the system are the ones that determine what it looks like.
At this point we don't have good choices when it comes to placing people into the government that's the sad fact, things are to corrupt, you can't win an election with out bucket loads of cash to back you up. Information fed to Voters is so narrow that they don't understand what they are voting for, and most don't care enough to learn more.
The President we elect wont be able to enact much change, the seats we should be more concerned about are those in Congress. Congress seats aren't determined by an electoral college, the people have a lot of power when it comes to electing people for the House and Senate but I never see any one talking about that. You want to change the government, start with the House of Representatives we vote them in every two years, or more importantly the Senate those people are in office for 6 years and yet no one seems to understand how important that is.
I understand the hype that's behind the Presidential election, it's something the entire country can debate over.
You want real change to happen, that starts in Congress, the President can only do so much against Congress.
Congress is the one that handles taxes, Congress decides when we go to war, Congress makes the laws, Congress can override the President.
So Yes, the Presidential elections are important, but how much do you know about your Senators, how much to you know about your Representatives. Article 1 of the constitution is about Congress not the President, It's the longest section of the Constitution, the founding fathers put Congress first before the President.
The way I see it the Presidential election is blown so heavily out of proportion that we forget that We the people have control over an entire branch of government, a very very powerful branch of government. In the end We aren't the ones choosing the President, that's the Electoral colleges job, and they don't even have to vote the way they say they will, 7 people did that last year. We are the ones choosing Congresspeople, that's where change happens.

I don't know much about Biden's goals. The debate didn't shine a lot of light on those and I tend to avoid the news seeing as its all a bunch of fucking fear mongering left and right nowadays. But I don't think the man has the mental capacity to be FOR anything. He can barely but together a competent sentence.

I didn't have the patience to sit through the entire debate. I needed to sleep and it was going nowhere.

I am so sick of people saying that they didn't get anything out of the debate when they didn't even watch the whole thing.
You can't say what happened if you didn't even watch it

Also as much as I don't like Biden, I think he handled a lot of the debate with a lot of grace. The way he took Trump's below-the-belt jab at his son's drug addiction to address the people and talk about how serious drug addiction is was very admirable and just made Trump look like an asshole with an over-inflated ego.

I agree with Moxie. Speaking like you know something about a topic when you only looked at a few parts of it really doesn't do anyone much good.