On Tuesday, November 6, 2018 at 11:31:42 AM UTC-6, Markem wrote:
I'm not sure Jefferson used very good wording in this case. I know he is k
nown for writing some good things back in his day. But not this. At the t
ime he was around, the USA had just fought a fairly bloody and deadly "revo
lution" with England for its independence. Hundreds of thousands of people
died on both sides in that revolution. To compare voting to hundreds of t
housands of dead people is foolish. I'm pretty sure if someone had stuck a
flintlock pistol into his mouth and said "you vote and I blow your head of
f". He would have said "I'll skip voting".
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 14:45:46 -0800 (PST), " email@example.com"
I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and
as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.
Unsuccesful rebellions indeed generally establish the incroachments on
the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of
this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their
punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is a
medecine necessary for the sound health of government.
Thomas Jefferson, Letters of Thomas Jefferson
It's pointless, the choice is to keep the current scoundrel or replace
it with a different scoundrel. If there was an option "shoot all
candidates for this office" I suspect that we would have much better
We should have "none of the above" as a choice. If "none of
the above" gets a plurality of the votes, the candidates on
the ballot are disqualified and we have another election with
a new slate of candidates.
Been saying this for years. All I ever hear is 'write someone in'. I
don't believe that sends the same message. So I write in 'none of the
above'. I want to vote, not take a multiple choice test.
If you don't like any of the above scoundrels, then maybe it's time to
change the method. Because 'it's the way it's always been done'
doesn't mean it's the most effective way anymore.
As in any first past the post system, the incumbents have everything to
gain from preventing change in a zero-sum game: all they need to do is
create artificial splits in the opposition, or find a polarising issue,
and they win. Strategies such as NOTA, or proportional voting, change the
rules so that platforms need some degree of substance, not just emotion-
based blather. The sum of the game is fluid, and not nearly so easy to
At least Trump is delivering on his promises. And he would not look half
bad if the biased media would quit taking his comments out of context.
Fortunately the mature population that votes saw through the media.
Unfortunately, the "mature population that votes" must exceed the morons
that vote, plus the dead, illegals, non-voters and non-existent etc,etc.
The trick the anti-American Dims face is to not let their moron voters
plus fake votes, exceed the number of registered voters. This is why
they pay people each time they register to vote. They really don't care
if they vote or not, they will vote for them. Mail in ballots are also
a major source of Dimwit voter fraud.
If Democrats don't want foreigners involved in our elections,
A perfect example, Trump and the media, specifically the CNN reporter
that was totally off topic during the news conference concerning the
election. He was rude and disrespectful to every one in the room
especially other reporters that wanted to ask questions.
An as expected Trump is portrayed as the bad guy. More spin.
On Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 11:54:13 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
I'm not defending Acosta's *behavior* in any manner, but reporters from all
sides - friend and foe - were asking questions unrelated to the election.
His tax-returns, the Russian probe, immigration, etc.
Yes, the opening remarks were about the election, but the questions ranged
far and wide from many other reporters, not just those trying to trip
Trump up. Trump had no issue with answering non-election related questions,
nor should he have.
Acosta was absolutely being an a-hole, but it wasn't because of the subject
matter of his questions, it was his method.
I don't recall any one being as bull headed as Acosta. Off topic is OK
but he made an ass of himself and refused to give up the mic on several
attempts so that others could speak. And he kept digging like he had a
hearing problem or a short attention span. He was looking for a fight
and he got his ass in a jam.
I'm not sure he had a method. If he did it certainly was not working.
Trump is a negotiator and the PIA press is so inept they think that
Trump is being mean, so those "like" Acosta walk into the press room
with a chip on their shoulders.
The media's motto.
"Never let the facts get in the way of a sensational "story".
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.