Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Where the Deuce is the Median Voter

1235»

Posts

  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    Its simple Carrot, since you continue to ignore my question. If you make the argument that the D party is no longer going to pursue the gun control issue, as has been made and quoted above, and thus median voters currently voting R should feel safe voting D it has to be because they have changed their position. No one could honestly expect voters to change their voting habits on the promise of "we wont fuck you because we don't have the votes, so please give us the votes to do so."

    If your next reply does not answer the question i have asked twice already that you seem to refuse to answer consider this my bow out of the thread.

    If I was kidnapped, woke up in a lab, told they were going to replace my vocal cords with those of Tony Jay, and lock me in a sound booth until the day I die I would look those bastards right in the eye and say "Alright you sons of bitches lets do this. This one is for the children."
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    Why should I answer your question when you won't answer mine, and you have a pattern of refusing to back up your claims?

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited September 2011
    Detharin wrote:
    Its simple Carrot, since you continue to ignore my question. If you make the argument that the D party is no longer going to pursue the gun control issue, as has been made and quoted above, and thus median voters currently voting R should feel safe voting D it has to be because they have changed their position. No one could honestly expect voters to change their voting habits on the promise of "we wont fuck you because we don't have the votes, so please give us the votes to do so."

    If your next reply does not answer the question i have asked twice already that you seem to refuse to answer consider this my bow out of the thread.

    Except it's actually "we won't pursue the issue because it causes a huge political shitstorm we end up losing".

    Something that won't change no matter how many votes they get.

    Say what you want about the NRA, they won.

    shryke on
  • LawndartLawndart Registered User regular
    Detharin wrote:
    Its simple Carrot, since you continue to ignore my question. If you make the argument that the D party is no longer going to pursue the gun control issue, as has been made and quoted above, and thus median voters currently voting R should feel safe voting D it has to be because they have changed their position. No one could honestly expect voters to change their voting habits on the promise of "we wont fuck you because we don't have the votes, so please give us the votes to do so."

    You are confusing "median voters" with "single-issue voters".

  • JuliusJulius Registered User regular
    Detharin wrote:
    Its simple Carrot, since you continue to ignore my question. If you make the argument that the D party is no longer going to pursue the gun control issue,

    What is "the gun control issue" anyway? Is it the idea of scrapping the 2nd amendment or just any position that favours some kind of restriction or oversight on any kind of firearm (as long as it's held by a Democrat)?

    Look, the ability to own a firearm getting rid of is just as likely as the US banning any and all religions. In fact, it's probably less likely. Americans really, really love their guns.

    Guns will be there for a long time.

  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    Julius wrote:
    Detharin wrote:
    Its simple Carrot, since you continue to ignore my question. If you make the argument that the D party is no longer going to pursue the gun control issue,

    What is "the gun control issue" anyway? Is it the idea of scrapping the 2nd amendment or just any position that favours some kind of restriction or oversight on any kind of firearm (as long as it's held by a Democrat)?

    Look, the ability to own a firearm getting rid of is just as likely as the US banning any and all religions. In fact, it's probably less likely. Americans really, really love their guns.

    Guns will be there for a long time.

    I still want to know two things:

    - If any measure of any strength to limit or restrict gun usage or possession or type is considered a wholly-encapsulating attack on the second amendment, just what in the fuck is the logical argument against that?

    - Since when does the slippery slope work so strongly in the direction of ridiculousness instead of reason? Surely we should err on the side of logic in the instances where restriction and parsing of legislation would save a lot of lives, within reason. The right response to, say, restricting magazine potentials shouldn't ever be, "Next they'll be coming for our hunting rifles and family heirlooms."

  • JuliusJulius Registered User regular
    Julius wrote:
    Detharin wrote:
    Its simple Carrot, since you continue to ignore my question. If you make the argument that the D party is no longer going to pursue the gun control issue,

    What is "the gun control issue" anyway? Is it the idea of scrapping the 2nd amendment or just any position that favours some kind of restriction or oversight on any kind of firearm (as long as it's held by a Democrat)?

    Look, the ability to own a firearm getting rid of is just as likely as the US banning any and all religions. In fact, it's probably less likely. Americans really, really love their guns.

    Guns will be there for a long time.

    I still want to know two things:

    - If any measure of any strength to limit or restrict gun usage or possession or type is considered a wholly-encapsulating attack on the second amendment, just what in the fuck is the logical argument against that?

    I can't answer that as I am busy buying a bazooka for my 3-year old.

1235»
Sign In or Register to comment.