Sanders or Biden? Where Do You Stand

[Poorhouse]

^

^Donald trump is barely running the government, he has been fought tooth and nail for the 4 years in office.

.

What? He had a Senate majority for his presidency and a House majority for half.

[2mAn]

^Maybe they are old and stale, but unfortunately they are all together too true, and his ideas much too dangerous. Illan Omar needs to be considered a treasoner and hung as well.

^Donald trump is barely running the government, he has been fought tooth and nail for the 4 years in office.

Still for a vote, I think Trump is the better bet because you will get to retain your opinion and voice. Sanders will try to remove that further, and Biden...well, he has no opinion or voice, he's just a puppet, he can't even remember who was responsible for his wifes death.

Lets leave the lynching talk alone and try to keep this as civilized as possible in a Political Off-Topic Subforum as possible...

[roguetoaster]

Lets leave the lynching talk alone and try to keep this as civilized as possible in a Political Off-Topic Subforum as possible...

Reported this post for being reasonable in P&R...

[2mAn]

Reported this post for being reasonable in P&R...

Someone reported a post in the this thread calling someone a racist and demanding a ban... clearly they didnt realize they were in the P&R

[roguetoaster]

Someone reported a post in the this thread calling someone a racist and demanding a ban... clearly they didnt realize they were in the P&R

Maybe, but I suspect we get more long term members banned from P&R posts than any other section,

[R3Z3N]

IMO the majority should be much more offended by Bernie and Illan Omar. When ideas run completely contrary to the foundation of America and the freedom it provides, are those involved not dangerous enough to take offense and remove at all costs when those ideas work to remove your freedoms? This is what America was built upon, the blood of those that believed in such freedoms. To be luke warm is to be part of the problem.

[phillipj]

IMO the majority should be much more offended by Bernie and Illan Omar. When ideas run completely contrary to the foundation of America and the freedom it provides, are those involved not dangerous enough to take offense and remove at all costs when those ideas work to remove your freedoms? This is what America was built upon, the blood of those that believed in such freedoms. To be luke warm is to be part of the problem.

So, exactly, what problem do you have with Ilan Omar? or Bernie? Please clearly state it.

I am so sick and tired of your kind of viewpoints.

[z31maniac]

So, exactly, what problem do you have with Ilan Omar? or Bernie? Please clearly state it.

I am so sick and tired of your kind of viewpoints.

I can give you one reason that most Americans would never vote for Bernie:

He publicly stated he believes convicted terrorists should keep their right to vote WHILE IN PRISON. What kind of dumbass, faux-progressive shit is that? This old guy thinks the Boston Bombers should be allowed to vote? Of that McVeigh should have when he was alive?


Omar has said some pretty ridiculous stuff, but the biggest reason MAGA folks don't like her is that she prays to a different god.

[R3Z3N]

MAGA ≠ Belief in God/god

But your close!

[z31maniac]

MAGA ≠ Belief in God/god

But your close!

Well then answer for yourself, sweetheart? Or is being asked a simple, direct question that hard for you?

[phillipj]

I can give you one reason that most Americans would never vote for Bernie:

He publicly stated he believes convicted terrorists should keep their right to vote WHILE IN PRISON. What kind of dumbass, faux-progressive shit is that? This old guy thinks the Boston Bombers should be allowed to vote? Of that McVeigh should have when he was alive?

Yes, Bernie has stuck to his guns saying "The right to vote is an inalienable and universal principle that applies to all American citizens 18 years and older. Period." He actually wrote a pretty good op-ed in the USA Today here defending his stance in his own words. In his home state of Vermont, and in Maine too, that's actually the law -- as it is in Canada. I personally don't think it is very controversial, but to a lot of people, I imagine allowing prisoners (or even ex-prisoners or parolees or probationers) to keep their right to vote is controversial. It's a very good debatable topic!

I appreciate that he'll take a stand and give a real answer, even for things like this, unlike pretty much any other politician that punts on it, evades the question completely, or puts their finger to the wind first and maybe "evolves" on it way later.

[phillipj]

Omar has said some pretty ridiculous stuff, but the biggest reason MAGA folks don't like her is that she prays to a different god.

I'd mostly agree; mainly, she's a dark-skinned woman wearing a Hijab.

I very much appreciate Omar's viewpoints; I see her as very patriotic, a strong minority voice in our very diverse nation. For some of these rightwing politicians to recoil in faux-horror over some of the undeniable truths she is so criticized for saying, I see it as total hypocrisy given their own history of words and actions. And the kind of hateful personal attacks against her by the President and some of these other hypocrite politicians are just plain dangerous. Their words empower closet skinheads and white nationalist xenophobes to blurt out things just like the R3Z3N above, ie. "We Should Hang her from a Tree", and think it's totally ok. Some of these people even move to act on them. It is definitely not ok.

[z31maniac]

Yes, Bernie has stuck to his guns saying "The right to vote is an inalienable and universal principle that applies to all American citizens 18 years and older. Period." He actually wrote a pretty good op-ed in the USA Today here defending his stance in his own words. In his home state of Vermont, and in Maine too, that's actually the law -- as it is in Canada. I personally don't think it is very controversial, but to a lot of people, I imagine allowing prisoners (or even ex-prisoners or parolees or probationers) to keep their right to vote is controversial. It's a very good debatable topic!

I appreciate that he'll take a stand and give a real answer, even for things like this, unlike pretty much any other politician that punts on it, evades the question completely, or puts their finger to the wind first and maybe "evolves" on it way later.

There is nothing to debate. If you plan, plot, and kill american citizens........you shouldn't be able to vote. Period. Full stop. If you sexually assault someone, you shouldn't be able to vote. Period. Full stop.


Not to mention in this particular example he says "Our Constitution says everybody can vote." Really? No it didn't, it said land owning, white males could vote. Multiple amendments later..........women have only been able to vote for 100 years. Seriously he thinks rapists and terrorists should be able to vote. I'm really note sure how anyone can defend that..............especially using the faulty logic that the Constitution says everyone can vote. The average Bernie supporter has to have the difference between debt and deficit explained to them.

I truly hope you don't think those people should be allowed to vote. Jesus Christ the man uses the Slippery Slope Fallacy when as long as the country has been around, it's only increased who can vote vs 1776.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY-1Shv_8-E

[roguetoaster]

There is nothing to debate. If you plan, plot, and kill american citizens........you shouldn't be able to vote. Period. Full stop. If you sexually assault someone, you shouldn't be able to vote. Period. Full stop.


Not to mention in this particular example he says "Our Constitution says everybody can vote." Really? No it didn't, it said land owning, white males could vote. Multiple amendments later..........women have only been able to vote for 100 years. Seriously he thinks rapists and terrorists should be able to vote. I'm really note sure how anyone can defend that..............especially using the faulty logic that the Constitution says everyone can vote. The average Bernie supporter has to have the difference between debt and deficit explained to them.

I truly hope you don't think those people should be allowed to vote. Jesus Christ the man uses the Slippery Slope Fallacy when as long as the country has been around, it's only increased who can vote vs 1776.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY-1Shv_8-E

The question always is, where do we draw the line when it comes to disenfranchisement? If we allow freedoms to be taken from the very least among us we slowly go down that slippery slope to not being able to vote because you have a parking ticket.

We really need carefully examine how we deal with criminals both large and small on an individual basis over an extended time period to assess their potential value to society.

Unfortunately, it seems easier to simply discard people and not bother to look at that large grey area that separates a drunk driver who kills a pedestrian from a person who deliberately plans to murder other(s) for whatever their reasons may be. It seems to me that in either case it is quite possible that each individual may be salvaged or may need to be permanently removed from participation in society.

[phillipj]

There is nothing to debate. If you plan, plot, and kill american citizens........you shouldn't be able to vote. Period. Full stop. If you sexually assault someone, you shouldn't be able to vote. Period. Full stop.

Not to mention in this particular example he says "Our Constitution says everybody can vote." Really? No it didn't, it said land owning, white males could vote. Multiple amendments later..........women have only been able to vote for 100 years. Seriously he thinks rapists and terrorists should be able to vote. I'm really note sure how anyone can defend that..............especially using the faulty logic that the Constitution says everyone can vote. The average Bernie supporter has to have the difference between debt and deficit explained to them.

I truly hope you don't think those people should be allowed to vote. Jesus Christ the man uses the Slippery Slope Fallacy when as long as the country has been around, it's only increased who can vote vs 1776.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY-1Shv_8-E

The question always is, where do we draw the line when it comes to disenfranchisement? If we allow freedoms to be taken from the very least among us we slowly go down that slippery slope to not being able to vote because you have a parking ticket.

We really need carefully examine how we deal with criminals both large and small on an individual basis over an extended time period to assess their potential value to society.

Unfortunately, it seems easier to simply discard people and not bother to look at that large grey area that separates a drunk driver who kills a pedestrian from a person who deliberately plans to murder other(s) for whatever their reasons may be. It seems to me that in either case it is quite possible that each individual may be salvaged or may need to be permanently removed from participation in society.

Z31, you seem to feel strongly about that, and that is why I think it is debatable. Because, like Roguetoaster, and in past conversations, I've seen Bernie ask, "where do we draw the line?"

If you are (still, somehow) in jail for weed, should you not be able to vote?

If, in Roguetoaster's example, it's some unfortunate vehicular manslaughter, should you not be able to vote?

If I go in for insider trading (ha! yeah right) but if I did, should I be disqualified from voting?

Bernie's talking about the constitution as a whole with it's amendments, and, to my knowledge anyway(!) there are no asterisks on whether you can vote if you are a citizen and over 18. I guess he's being pretty true to the Constitution. So, maybe, you are saying they should write into the Constitution that, let's say, if you are a Citizen, but are also are found guilty of Murder, or (?) whatever you deem too terrible, you lose that right?

As mentioned, I think this is very debatable!




I will also say, that so few people in prison actually vote, it's really not worth our time! Again, I like that he sticks to his guns and the Constitution on that one. It's also his own state law. And you are right, maybe Conservatives would pick that bone with him or me, but I'm sure there is a whole lot of more relevant and important stuff we'd agree on.