Quoted from Soap Hands Issues trump party. People vote along party lines because they perceive that the party generally reflects their positions on issues. If this was not the case, as in the space alien example, people would be able to convince themselves to vote for another party.

Your examples regarding McCain and Clinton don't have anything to do with issues, they're about personality.  Regarding the Obama example...do you really think that would be enough to cause Democrat voters to vote for McCain?  I really don't.

Voting party lines because you believe a party represents your stance on the issues is NOT the same thing as voting for a candidate based on the issues.  The latter implies that voters are active and informed, which I really don't think is the case.

Hey,

Quoted from escapist Your examples regarding McCain and Clinton don't have anything to do with issues, they're about personality.

The Clinton thing was a joke. You have point with the McCain example, I should have picked a better one(what I was getting at was that this behavior reflected on his positions, but point taken)

So fine, if McCain wanted to raise taxes, grant amnesty, and give free abortions to everyone, and cut military spending then most republicans wouldn't vote for him.

Quoted from escapist Regarding the Obama example...do you really think that would be enough to cause Democrat voters to vote for McCain?  I really don't.

No, I don't think they'd vote for McCain but for a lot they wouldn't vote for Obama. I don't know, maybe if his platform was to make Bush president for life they'd vote McCain.

Quoted from escapist Voting party lines because you believe a party represents your stance on the issues is NOT the same thing as voting for a candidate based on the issues. The latter implies that voters are active and informed, which I really don't think is the case.

Yeah, I guess implicit in my argument is that voters are aware of the issues to begin with. You may have a point but I don't know.

That said, I have a pretty firm conviction that if there were a conflict in an individual voter between party and issues, issues(meaning important issues) would almost always win out.  

sheepwalker

Quoted from Soap Hands Hey, You don’t seem to be taking this seriously anymore so I guess I’ll follow your lead. I’ll just correct some of your thinking and then wash myself clean of this.

Damnit, seems like I gave you an out with my charming nonchalance. Oh well, better now than in 20 pages.

Quoted Text You said they thought bush was evil not a bad choice. If they thought Bush, Kerry, and Nader were all evil then they are disconnected from reality or are moral idiots.

First of all I have no idea what a "moral idiot" is? I did a search and found the word only used on messageboards for MMORPGs and amateur political blogs. That must be one of 'em new awkwardly made-up words on the internet. Like "troll" or "co-dependent". Crazy kids...

Secondly you're using your own definition of what can and cannot be evil (in which Bush cannot be evil) and that's fine but I don't see the relevance to our discussion?

Quoted Text Yes, objective evil is different then a general consensus of what is evil. If one uses “evil” to describe something that is beyond the general consensus of what the word evil means(i.e. Bush and Kerry are as evil as Hitler) then the word loses it’s meaning.

What is objective evil then? I'm looking for some parameters here?

What is the general consensus on the word "evil"? You mean the lexical definition?

1 a : morally reprehensible  : SINFUL, WICKED  *an evil impulse*  b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct  *a person of evil reputation*
2 a archaic   : INFERIOR  b : causing discomfort or repulsion  : OFFENSIVE  *an evil odor*  c : DISAGREEABLE  *woke late and in an evil temper*
3 a : causing harm  : PERNICIOUS  *the evil institution of slavery*  b : marked by misfortune  : UNLUCKY

As you can see the lexical definition refers back to other synonyms or near-synonyms, not the thing itself. Meaning is infintely, or circularly, deferred.

Quoted Text It’s like if I started calling cats hotdogs. The crazy lady down the street snapped and ate all her hotdogs.

How is it like that? We have a common concensus on what a hot-dog is and what a cat is?

Quoted Text While I can’t say they are objectively wrong that Obama is evil I can say that they are completely unreasonable and a moron.

But...this thread isn't about what you feel about other people's definition of evil. It's cool you think they are morons, but what does that have to do with anything?

Quoted Text And btw, who’s says it’s not for me to decide what’s evil for other people? Maybe I have the perception that I should be allowed to do that. I might be in my right mind to perceive that I should get to decide that. Even if some people in the mainstream think I’m a little extreme.

Dude. Missed the point by THAT much.

This is turning into one of them:

DUDE 1: "I have the right say what I think, you can't censor me!

DUDE 2: "Don't tell me what I can't do, I have the right to say I don't like that you're saying what you're saying! Don't censor me!"

DUDE 1: "It's pretty ironic how we're both completely missing the point of the debate right now, isn't it?"

DUDE 2: "Indubitably."

Quoted Text [quote]No, I still think it’s stupid. But at least in their case it makes a little sense. As the only case I can think of would be anarchists and it would be silly for anarchists to participate in government.

So the bottomline for you is basically that people who want to vote blank should write an essay on their reasons which would then be screened by you, before they got permission. If it turned out they were moral idiots, then tough luck, mofo. That's righteous, yo.

Quoted Text No you haven’t. I’m referring to other strategies of action being superior to voting blank, mostly because you still retain influence and they are more effective. But I’ll respond to your metaphors. Again. But this time in all caps form. [quote]IF BY VOTING BLANK YOU MEAN LEAVE THE COUNTRY THEN YES, THIS IS TRUE.

SO NOW THE PLAYING FIELD REPRESENTS NOT THE ELECTION PROCESS BUT THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. FUNNY, I DIDN'T THINK METAPHORS COULD CHANGE CHARACTER IN MID AIR? CONVENIENT, MONSIEUR.

Quoted Text NO, IT’S LIKE VOTING TO PAINT YOU ROOM BLUE EVEN THOUGH YOU WANTED TO PAINT IT GREEN BECAUSE BLUE WAS YOUR FIFTH CHOICE SO YOU’LL GO WITH THAT BECAUSE IT’S IN THE REALM OF POSSIBLY HAPPENING. AND ANYWAYS YOU SURE AS HELL DON’T WANT TO VOTE WITH THE ASSHOLE THAT WANTS TO PAINT IT RED ‘CAUSE YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LIVE IN THAT FUCKING ROOM. Wow, that was actually pretty satisfying. Much better then typing in stupid regular sized letters.

WAIT. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SOCCER ANALOGY? STAY THE COURSE, SIR! DON'T LEAVE ONE METAPHOR BEFORE WE'RE DONE WITH IT, EVEN IF THINGS GET DIFFICULT.

ALSO YOUR NEW ANALOGY IS DUMB.

P.S. WHY ARE WE SHOUTING!?!?

Quoted Text You don’t think there is a general consensus of what is good and evil? If you don’t use such things how do you talk to anybody about anything?

OF COURSE I DON'T-

Oh sorry. Force of habit. Of course I don't think there's a general consensus on good and evil, beyond the vagueness of a lexical definition which I already supplied. If you feel there is please, by all means, present it.

As for how I manage to talk with anyone about anything without believing in a general consensus on good and evil, well, I do just fine. In fact, here's a funny observation, I don't see how the two are connected at all?

Wait, that wasn't funny. That was just astute.

Quoted Text Although I think your comment is cute, next time please respond to the point.

It's called the Socratic method. It means before we can discuss something we need to define our terms. You throw out flimsy and vague concepts that may mean one thing to one person and another to someone else, so before we can discuss them I need to know what you talking about.

Quoted Text Touche.

Wait a minute. That's French!

Traitor.

Quoted Text Dim lights. Queue soaring score. Close up on sheepwalker. He clenchs his fist and brings it to his heart. Sheepwalker: I expected more from you, Death Monkey. *barely audible*  I expected more from you… Fade out.

But I'm on the internets...? I thought we went through this?

Quoted Text It does however suggest that if you can’t think of an example then anybody that’s been doing it before has done it for no good reason. It also suggests that since this almost never occurs apple hungry goat hat. There’s some nonsense for you to gladly argue with.

I can't tell it apart from eveything else?

I'm in the zone!

Quoted Text ???? This quote agrees with my viewpoint. I said you needed to prove the more extreme example of Stalin/Hitler before you can extend it to the milder example of douche and turd.

No, it agrees with me. Milly is my homeboy.

When asked if you would vote for Stalin and Hitler if these were your choices, did you not concede you would vote for neither? Because you felt both of these choices would effectively ruin your country. So if you feel that any given two candidates will ruin your country, then the same applies. Hell, if you feel the candidates are just pernicious the same applies, by the Mill principle I just stated.

Quoted Text You do have to persuade me of this case before you can extend it to other cases though. Other wise you’re just wasting your breath— or type energy???

Ok, you took the "nonsense" joke too far. I hope you're happy.

Quoted Text You think it’s easier to argue that you shouldn’t vote for either a douche or a turd rather then arguing that you shouldn’t vote for either Hitler or Stalin???? If a douche and a turd had a retarded evil baby and you took that to the 10th power, and then a yak pissed on it, then you would have Hitler. Maybe.

First of all, shame on you for quoting me out of context. Second of all, if it's true for the extreme example then it's true for the less extreme one too. Thus the notion of stronger/weaker example is null.

Quoted Text If you believe that then you are a moral idiot.

And you, sir, are a first class Solthefryer! I think my made-up magical creature trumps yours. Mine has firebreath and plays bass.

Quoted Text I disagree that there is a logically significant distinction between "better and worse" and "less worse and worse" as "less worse" relative to "worse" is equivalent to "better".

Semantic. Semantic distinction.

Quoted Text But anyway, if you want to argue the Hitler/Stalin thing again whatever, but please don't try to just score points by nitpicking my language(even though you're totally wrong, +1 point for me). I already said if you want to replace all my "betters" with "less worses" that's fine by me.

Oh it's not nitpicking. This goes to the rhetoric that frames your argument. You make a false distinction between the one choice and the other by using the diametrically opposed terms "better" and "worse" whenin reality any distinction between them might be absurd.

Quoted Text But since you asked the cyanide pizza(They say it tastes like walnuts).

Fool. With plutonium the gamma rays would give you unimaginable powers!!!

Quoted Text It’s cause you didn’t quote the parts where I quoted myself. (That’s the important part because that’s where I answer your question)

I hope that's a phrase you're never gonna use again.

Quoted Text How is this relevant? To answer your question I need you to define: “parties”, “artificial”, “enveloping”, and “do”. But my tentative answer is yes.

My tentative reply is: awesome?

Quoted Text If those are answers to the questions: “Has this been worth sheepwalker’s time?”, “Am I awesome?”, and “Type ‘I’m watching House.’ if you admit defeat.” then yes, I agree with you. *turns head* "Hey guys, go get the Mission Accomplished banner"* sheepwalker

No, those weren't the questions I was answering at all!

Everyone lies...

His thread seems to be getting a bit volatile.  Can we just all agree that Hilary is the devil incarnate and move on?


Phil

Quoted from Soap Hands So fine, if McCain wanted to raise taxes, grant amnesty, and give free abortions to everyone, and cut military spending then most republicans wouldn't vote for him.

If this was the case, then McCain wouldn't really be a Republican, now would he?  Even if he still considered himself one, the party certainly wouldn't support him as their candidate.  Look what happened to Lieberman when he wandered too far from shore.  Same thing holds true for your Obama example.

And as for voting the issues, who do you vote for if you're anti-abortion, pro-gay marriage, anti-gun control, pro-big government, anti-immigration, pro-flat tax, pro-oil drilling, pro-nationalized healthcare, and anti-big military?  Which of the two candidates is for you?  The problem with issues is that they're a package deal.  So unless you only have a few that really matter to you, you're really just voting for a party.

Quoted from dogglebe His thread seems to be getting a bit volatile.  Can we just all agree that Hilary is the devil incarnate and move on?

If by "volatile" you mean "hilarious", then I agree.  And if by "Hilary" you mean "Dick Cheney", then I agree again.

Hey,

Quoted from dogglebe His thread seems to be getting a bit volatile.  Can we just all agree that Hilary is the devil incarnate and move on?

No, don't let the squabble between Death Monkey and I stop discussion. Let the discourse rage on.

There's no hurt feeling on this side and I'm sure he feels the same way. Just a small disagreement between two simplyscripters.

And besides, I agree with escapists, it's starting to get really entertaining. I almost wish it would happen more often.

Quoted from escapist If this was the case, then McCain wouldn't really be a Republican, now would he?  Even if he still considered himself one, the party certainly wouldn't support him as their candidate.  Look what happened to Lieberman when he wandered too far from shore.  Same thing holds true for your Obama example.

Point taken, but that's not what I'm really arguing. I'm just saying that when voting for someone, issues will trump party(although as you pointed out this presupposes that the person is aware of the issues, and of course there are other considerations).

Quoted from escapist And as for voting the issues, who do you vote for if you're anti-abortion, pro-gay marriage, anti-gun control, pro-big government, anti-immigration, pro-flat tax, pro-oil drilling, pro-nationalized healthcare, and anti-big military?  Which of the two candidates is for you?  The problem with issues is that they're a package deal.  So unless you only have a few that really matter to you, you're really just voting for a party.

I don't know how true that is for how many people but point taken. I guess I concede that "issues trump party" is a pretty qualified statement.

Quoted from Death Monkey Wait a minute. That's French! Traitor.

  

Credit where credit is do.

Yes, you're right. That choice of diction was a gross error of judgment.

I am shamed.


one more thing.

Quoted from Death Monkey When asked if you would vote for Stalin and Hitler if these were your choices, did you not concede you would vote for neither? Because you felt both of these choices would effectively ruin your country. So if you feel that any given two candidates will ruin your country, then the same applies.

  

I concede that I would not vote for either of them, BUT NOT THAT I WOULD VOTE BLANK. I said that I would run another candidate and VOTE FOR THAT CANDIDATE so I can still retain my agency rather then voting blank which does next to nothing.

As I said, twice I think, you hadn't won me over on that point(that voting blank is the best course of action whether it be Hitler/Stalin, turd/douche, or Bush/Kerry because they are all apparently morally equivalent, or if they aren't you can't say that they aren't because there is no general understanding of the term evil, which is what you are advocating).

I encourage everybody that cares to read through what Death Monkey and I wrote because there were some good points on both sides and it's a semi-important issue. Or if you don't care, read the last couple posts because there are some alright funnies.  

Happy Memorial Day,

sheepwalker  

  

Yet another thread ruined by my witty banter and rugged good looks, it seems. Well one out of two then, you be the judge.

Anyway, I'm not really sure how much of what I said I actually believe, and when I was just being facetious. Honestly, it's like that episode of the Simpsons where Homer goes to Lollapalooza to be shot with a cannonball and there are these two grunge kids in the crowd:

GRUNGE KID#1
Oh look it's that Cannonball guy. He's cool.

GRUNGE KID#2
Dude, are you being sarcastic?

Grunge kid#1 bows his head down.

GRUNGE KID#1
I don't even know anymore...


Anyway, long story short: I'd probably vote for Obama because I'd trust him with the task of working for the people more than Hilary. McCain I trust as well but disagree with on many issues. So yeah, Hilary ain't kosher.

I'm watching House.

Happy Memorial Day!

P.S. Isn't "13" a bit young to be a doctor?

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films No US President is going to be able to dictate to the Saudis to increase Oil Production and reduce oil prices. The Saudis have over 3 Trillion pounds invested in the US economy and can do what they like. They are the home of Islamism and are the ultimate root of Islamic terrorism but the US still had to go there with a begging bowl to ask for concessions.

The minute the world becomes non-dependent on oil is the minute the Middle East gets turned into a big pile of glow-in-the-dark radioactive sand. Thanks for services rendered -- KABOOM!

I pay my taxes - why can't I have a nuke? A nuke and an AH-64A Apache gunship, man that would be so cool.

RED LEADER (O.S.)
There are women and children down there!

ROB THE WRITER (O.S.)
Stay on target.

RED LEADER (O.S.)
All they want is food!

ROB THE WRITER (O.S.)
Stay on target.

What? 'The fuck you mean I'm rambling?

Quoted from Soap Hands Hey, Didn't I read on the age thread that you were like two years older then me? lol How many more elections have you "actually paid attention" to?

No. I am much older than you. And that's great that you are so excited about being able to vote. And by the way McCain is not the best man for the job. It's Obama. I'm a Republican saying this too by the way. We need a young, fresh outlook on things in the White House. Obama will bring that. All McCain will do is cause more problems and probably die in office. I heard he used to be BFF's with God.

Quoted from Pants No. I am much older than you. And that's great that you are so excited about being able to vote. And by the way McCain is not the best man for the job. It's Obama. I'm a Republican saying this too by the way. We need a young, fresh outlook on things in the White House. Obama will bring that. All McCain will do is cause more problems and probably die in office. I heard he used to be BFF's with God.

Baffling studies show that support for gerocracy is often proportional with a person's age.

I say postpone the franchise till you hit 50. Everyone knows the threshold for 20x20 political insight doesn't kick in untill you've had two successful mid-life crises and lived to see at least one attempt one an encumbent president's life.

Hint: If you refer to the internet as a series or tubes, or think iTunes is something heridetary, you may vote. If you have MySpace you may not.

Quoted from dogglebe His thread seems to be getting a bit volatile.  Can we just all agree that Hilary is the devil incarnate and move on? Phil

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey,

Quoted from pants No. I am much older than you.

My apologies, Sir. I've confused you with someone else.

Quoted from pants And by the way McCain is not the best man for the job. It's Obama. I'm a Republican saying this too by the way.

Really? I must say, I find those last two statements hard to reconcile.

As a republican how can you possible think Obama will do the best job? You mentioned age(in this case age is irrelevant to me) and freshness(inexperience) but how, as a republican(I assume you are at least conservative leaning) get over Obama's positions on issues?(escapist proven right?)

Are you one of those republicans that feels betrayed by the party or something? Or one of those that believe McCain isn't a "true" republican?

Quoted from pants I heard he used to be BFF's with God.

???

Quoted from Death Monkey Hint: If you refer to the internet as a series or tubes, or think iTunes is something heridetary, you may vote. If you have MySpace you may not.

I agree to an extent. I think 18 is too early an age to be allowed to vote. Nearly all 18 year olds I know are morons.

But I also think there should be a basic civics test that should be passed before people are allowed to vote. But I guess that wouldn't fly. Too reminiscent of literacy tests(which also sound reasonable to me.....).

sheepwalker

Quoted from Pants All McCain will do is cause more problems and probably die in office. I heard he used to be BFF's with God.

I just read this. Major LOL-lerskaters!

Quoted from Death Monkey Hint: If you refer to the internet as a series or tubes, or think iTunes is something heridetary, you may vote. If you have MySpace you may not.

While I don't agree with it unconditionally, I gave this statement some thought and I think it's probably more true than it is false. For most of my generation, politics and political activism is nothing but trendiness and a lot of college students I've come in contact with don't seem to know what they really believe even if they swear they do.