Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The Dems are Getting Desperate!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    The phrasing in large letters, in addition to the official-looking warnings on the envelope, is what makes it worse. The idea being that a subset of voters won't take the time to read the contents but make an inference from the writing on the outside of the envelope, discouraging voting. Vote shaming is about pushing people to get out and vote. That envelope is about the opposite.

    And then you have these guys:

    GOP To Iowans: Your Neighbors Will Know If You Don’t Vote Republicans



    If there's a line, it shall be crossed.
    Okay, now something like THIS clarifies what you guys meant earlier.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Sorry, this is no worse than the example in the OP. I don't like the use of the phrase in large letters, but if you take the time to read past it, then the mailers imply no such thing.
    The phrasing in large letters, in addition to the official-looking warnings on the envelope, is what makes it worse. The idea being that a subset of voters won't take the time to read the contents but make an inference from the writing on the outside of the envelope, discouraging voting. Vote shaming is about pushing people to get out and vote. That envelope is about the opposite.

    And then you have these guys:

    GOP To Iowans: Your Neighbors Will Know If You Don’t Vote Republicans



    If there's a line, it shall be crossed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jedidiah
    replied
    The thread title "The Dems are Getting Desperate! ' is accurate. Both major parties are getting desperate. How many robot phone calls to you get every day, how many emails warning of dire consequenses?. This example is one among many. Republicrats are desperate and more so as the election gets nearer.

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Er, that's your language, not mine. Your painting of seer (with whom I do not always agree) as wrong 100% of the time is a refusal to consider that he might be right on something.
    I didn't refuse to consider that possibility. It's just that literally every single time I've seen him label something as "fascist" or "communist," it isn't fascist or communist--and if it is, it's deeply subtle and I've yet to see him expound upon his assessment. So I find it fair to say that so far, he's been wrong 100% of the time in this regard.

    Don't like it much when your own tactic is used on you, do you?
    That doesn't make any sense. How is that MY tactic? Where have I accused my ideological opponents here of "refusing" to see my point of view? When I see that they disagree, I always clarify and explain my position. I don't ignore their arguments against mine and say "None are so blind as those who refuse to see."

    It is all too easy to see "we will be interested to hear why you didn't vote" as the Inquisition saying, "we will be interested to hear why you are not a heretic." They're being deliberately vague, and letting people's imaginations fill in the potential consequences, but it's an unmistakable strong-arm tactic intended to goad people into voting.
    Now I can see how some people might get that impression, but that still seems a bit too exaggerated to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    It's distasteful, at the very least. Of course, it's nothing compared to good ol' Mitch:

    McConnell Mailers Imply Ky. Voters Are Involved In 'Election Violation'

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]2497[/ATTACH]
    Sorry, this is no worse than the example in the OP. I don't like the use of the phrase in large letters, but if you take the time to read past it, then the mailers imply no such thing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Er, that's your language, not mine. Your painting of seer (with whom I do not always agree) as wrong 100% of the time is a refusal to consider that he might be right on something. I guarantee you that if conservatives were in power and pulling the same tricks the Obama administration is, liberals would be howling at least as loudly about fascism.

    Don't like it much when your own tactic is used on you, do you?

    It is all too easy to see "we will be interested to hear why you didn't vote" as the Inquisition saying, "we will be interested to hear why you are not a heretic." They're being deliberately vague, and letting people's imaginations fill in the potential consequences, but it's an unmistakable strong-arm tactic intended to goad people into voting.

    Yep. it is saying "Vote or else! We know who you are!"

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    And you believe that those are problems. So since you accused me of "refusing" to see those things, you're by logical extension accusing me of refusing to see a problem, rather than realizing that I simply don't understand what the problem is and explaining it to me.
    Er, that's your language, not mine. Your painting of seer (with whom I do not always agree) as wrong 100% of the time is a refusal to consider that he might be right on something. I guarantee you that if conservatives were in power and pulling the same tricks the Obama administration is, liberals would be howling at least as loudly about fascism.
    I mean, seriously--why would you assume that I refuse to see something? Do you normally do this with other people in other areas of life--conclude that if they disagree with you on something, they must be refusing to see your point of view rather than simply not comprehending what it is?
    Don't like it much when your own tactic is used on you, do you?
    And that's the part that I don't understand. What part of the letter is threatening? It simply says "Who you vote for is your secret. But whether or not you vote is public record. We will be reviewing voting records to determine whether you joined your neighbors who voted in 2014. If you do not vote this year, we will be interested to hear why not." I have always been open about the fact that I don't vote and would have no qualms explaining that to a committee. And I'd have no qualms with letting people know whether I did or didn't vote. I've never thought of that as shameful in any way.

    So please, help me understand where the rest of you are coming from--what part is threatening, and how so? What am I missing here?
    It is all too easy to see "we will be interested to hear why you didn't vote" as the Inquisition saying, "we will be interested to hear why you are not a heretic." They're being deliberately vague, and letting people's imaginations fill in the potential consequences, but it's an unmistakable strong-arm tactic intended to goad people into voting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Truthseeker
    replied
    Originally posted by phank View Post
    I've been voting in every election here, and in Texas before I got here, since 1968. I don't think I have voted for a single winning candidate (or in the case of President, for a single slate of electors to the electoral college who supported my candidate). Tuesday, I go down to the Baptist Church and vote for another slate of losers. It's become a tradition. Those who DO win every election have led Alabama into being one of the poorest, unhealthiest, most uneducated states in the nation. Polls say those people will win again, often so overwhelmingly they run unopposed, continuing this stellar leadership into the future.

    The same sorts of candidates and policies will, of course, win resounding victories in Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia... They will then compete to see whose state can win the battle to be the most backward benighted state in the union. Currently, Mississippi has a slight edge.
    The quality of the people matters much more than that of their government. Unless I vote with the people, and I don't want to, I won't get what I want.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    It's distasteful, at the very least. Of course, it's nothing compared to good ol' Mitch:

    McConnell Mailers Imply Ky. Voters Are Involved In 'Election Violation'

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]2497[/ATTACH]
    Yep. I hate misleading flyers and scare tactics and both sides do it. It is despicable.

    Leave a comment:


  • phank
    replied
    Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
    Oh, wow. Square_Peg does not vote. I don't either. Now, if someone is interested in why not, a reason is that voting is a waste of time and resources. What are the chances my vote would make a difference of the sort that I want? Snowballs have a better chance in Hell. More to the point, the fact that neither SP nor I vote may mean I'm a nutcase all right, just as Sparko more than once suggested.
    I've been voting in every election here, and in Texas before I got here, since 1968. I don't think I have voted for a single winning candidate (or in the case of President, for a single slate of electors to the electoral college who supported my candidate). Tuesday, I go down to the Baptist Church and vote for another slate of losers. It's become a tradition. Those who DO win every election have led Alabama into being one of the poorest, unhealthiest, most uneducated states in the nation. Polls say those people will win again, often so overwhelmingly they run unopposed, continuing this stellar leadership into the future.

    The same sorts of candidates and policies will, of course, win resounding victories in Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia... They will then compete to see whose state can win the battle to be the most backward benighted state in the union. Currently, Mississippi has a slight edge.

    Leave a comment:


  • Truthseeker
    replied
    Oh, wow. Square_Peg does not vote. I don't either. Now, if someone is interested in why not, a reason is that voting is a waste of time and resources. What are the chances my vote would make a difference of the sort that I want? Snowballs have a better chance in Hell. More to the point, the fact that neither SP nor I vote may mean I'm a nutcase all right, just as Sparko more than once suggested.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam
    replied
    It's distasteful, at the very least. Of course, it's nothing compared to good ol' Mitch:

    McConnell Mailers Imply Ky. Voters Are Involved In 'Election Violation'

    xfzelvbyirt1jnnpmzcb.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Looks like I hit a nerve. And you can't even regurgitate what I posted accurately. I am not accusing you of refusing to not see a problem. I am accusing you of refusing to see a) the organic connection between fascism (and communism as put into practice) and the nanny state seer often decries and b) refusing to see the threat implicit in the letter.
    And you believe that those are problems. So since you accused me of "refusing" to see those things, you're by logical extension accusing me of refusing to see a problem, rather than realizing that I simply don't understand what the problem is and explaining it to me.

    I mean, seriously--why would you assume that I refuse to see something? Do you normally do this with other people in other areas of life--conclude that if they disagree with you on something, they must be refusing to see your point of view rather than simply not comprehending what it is?

    The letter makes nebulous threats that people will be made to regret not voting.
    And that's the part that I don't understand. What part of the letter is threatening? It simply says "Who you vote for is your secret. But whether or not you vote is public record. We will be reviewing voting records to determine whether you joined your neighbors who voted in 2014. If you do not vote this year, we will be interested to hear why not." I have always been open about the fact that I don't vote and would have no qualms explaining that to a committee. And I'd have no qualms with letting people know whether I did or didn't vote. I've never thought of that as shameful in any way.

    So please, help me understand where the rest of you are coming from--what part is threatening, and how so? What am I missing here?
    Last edited by fm93; 10-31-2014, 05:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    There are none so annoying as those who say vague dog excrement and refuse to explain.
    You're having a bad day, SP..... might want to take a walk or something.

    If you think there's a problem, then explain it. Show me what's wrong with it. Don't snidely sit there and post vapid proverbs that you probably ripped off a fortune cookie. And don't accuse me of refusing to not see a problem.
    Wow

    Leave a comment:


  • phank
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    There are none so blind as those who will not see.
    You can say that again.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by seanD, Today, 12:30 AM
18 responses
125 views
0 likes
Last Post Gondwanaland  
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 08-12-2022, 12:39 PM
13 responses
120 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Starlight, 08-11-2022, 01:26 AM
109 responses
634 views
1 like
Last Post Stoic
by Stoic
 
Started by Bill the Cat, 08-09-2022, 12:30 PM
52 responses
331 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Started by Sparko, 08-09-2022, 10:43 AM
22 responses
160 views
1 like
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Working...
X