And booze. Shampoo for some, little bottles of Drambuie for others.
Real nice, coming from someone who can’t even vote. What are you? 12?
Have I tried to change their opinions? I don’t care what their opinions are. What is important is that they realize that their opinions are not based in reality. Dude, I’m not the ignoramus. I’m just some schlub posting on a message board engaging in a little “tough love,” hitting them with a 2x4 to get their attention so they realize they are chin deep in honey pit but can pull themselves up out of it. Later I will happily and without insult help them learn the truth and maybe someday they and I can have a beer and laugh at what morons they were back in Ought-Four. For now, though, they are not seeing it.
I thought conservatives were into this old-fashioned style of teaching and were against making people feel good about themselves by not telling them they are wrong. 
I am a draftsman. By the standards of the profession I’m friendly, gracious, outgoing, openminded, and deeply accepting and understanding. :eek: There’s a reason most of us aren’t allowed to talk to customers. “You want WHAT?!?!?! What sort of pointy-headed moron ARE you? Have you been talking to your salesman again? How dumb are you to not know he’s a lying idiot?” 
Exactly.
Dude, that’s not the way to persuade people to see things your way. We need to become evangelists and sell people on the virtues of freedom and responsibility.
Every other Dem on this board wants to club the Pubs with their beliefs (or an actual club) and make them agree that the Dems are right. But we ought to be concerned with winning elections, not with with bullying the Pubs into acknowledging we are right. That is the path of ego, and it has failed.
Instead of telling people that we are correct, let’s use persuasion and reason to get our views to the electorate so that they will tell us we are right.
Sorry to break it to you, but that’s never going to work. The sooner this reality is accepted, the better.
Bullshit, the Pubs just managed to do it. You can keep on whining about the big, bad, Pubs and keep alienating potential voters, but I’m going to hold on to the principles or freedom that our nation was founded on and win.
That and a quarter will get you a bag of chips.
Look Gobear, you’re a great guy and one of my favorite posters, so I don’t want to argue with you. I’m glad we’re on the same side.
gobear is on the side of the angels in this debate … as much as angels can get involved in politics, anyway.
If you want to persist in handwringing and crying “woe is me” and in general being a nattering nabob of negativism, go right ahead. You will then allow the Republicans to continue to marginalize you and your message, whatever it may be. You can run around and scream “The sky is falling” because Bush won, but in so doing you run the risk of the sky NOT falling. Then, in 2008, if the sky is still aloft, Republicans will continue to poke fun at the Liberal Left, and how they always overreact to everything, and aren’t they cute like that? And the rest of the country, who truly doesn’t have much of a dog in many of the political issues/fights, will think “Wow, they are being childish” and will continue to vote Republican.
OR … you can point out the benefits your party’s/candidate’s platform has for the electorate, much as gobear has done. You can show middle America that YOURS is the party/candidate/idea/platform that benefits the American people.
It’s your choice. I gotta tell you, though, based on this election’s results, I don’t think the first option works very well.
Spiro? I heard you were dead.
You know what’s embarassing? I agree totally with all of you. But it’s nice to be able to spout off here so I don’t IRL. I’ll be able now to slap on my patented phony smile and pretend to be a good loser instead of letting the defeat eat at me in public. I say stupid things here so I don’t say them to my boss.
Yesterday I gave some of the depressives here shit for being so sad when it is really just a sport, which I believe. Some think that means I don’t take politics seriously. Nope, it’s as serious as a heart attack and today I gave the Bush voters shit because I know they are wrong. Does that mean I don’t want my side to win next time? No way! Every fiber of my being wants to slap that smug smirk off our Chimp in Chief and that is best done by retaking the House and Senate. So does that mean I won’t blow it for my side by saying something stupid? Of course not! I have the personality of a Bears fan talking to Packers fans and am guaranteed to say something stupid. I’ll just try to say it here. But Sauron, “nattering nabobs of negativism?” I’m trying to digest my lunch. Don’t go quoting Agnew.
Back to the OP, yes, those people all took Civics just like they all took Geography. The unfortunate part is that they remember both about as well. They don’t remember how the Electoral College works? If it’s any comfort they don’t remember the primary exports of Bolivia, either. 
Has anyone here seen 1776? There’s a scene toward the end where Jefferson’s stubborn refusal to excise the anti-slavery clause in the Declaration of Independence causes the entire South to walk out of Congress, dooming the chances of independence from Britain. John Adams tries to rouse the Northern delegates to action, but they all leave in despair.
Alone on stage, Adams breaks out into a song, “Is Anybody There?”
That’s about how I feel right now–yes, the election sucked, but that’s no excuse to give up. Instead of bitching and moaning, let’s pick ourselves up and plan for victory in 2006. It can be done because we have the better arguments to present to the voters.
Um, cocaine and … cocaine? 
I think this map is more apropos
More accurate geographically, but it should say White Jesusland. The black church doesn’t belong in there.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a straight line…
gobear, I’m married to one of them One-D Adams. None of them were ever that positive/sunny/glurgy, except my SIL, whom I wish to slap. The real John Adams would’ve sued the librettist.
So take your guns and hunt some terrorists. I hear private security is a booming industry in Iraq.
Look, there is no terrorist “doorstep.” The fight can’t be waged at some point on “terrorist territory” - there is no such thing, because terrorists are not confined to any precise area on Earth. No, the terrorists come to us, like how yellow jackets will come to a cook-out.
One suggestion to keep the yellow jackets away is to leave a piece of meat far away from yourself so they can go there instead. This sounds a lot like what you’re advocating.
Sure, you can try to find terrorist strongholds and take them out - but these are hard to find, and terrorists fade into the populace very, very easy.
The net result, then, is we have our soldiers out there so that they can be attacked. Then they can respond and kill some terrorists. Problem is, it was probably a suicide bombing or an IED in the first place - no one there to kill.
Our military is not so expendable.
Do you realize any of this?
What are you referring to here, exactly? I don’t mean to be snarky, just wondering.
Well, obviously not voting based on ignorant ideas of the pocess is umm, ignorant. But that doesn’t mean choosing not to vote is always ignorant. Personally I vote if there is a party whose numbers I want to boost. If noone on the ballot is worthy I choose to boost the apathy/no-show list. I would act differently if there was a “none of the above” slot, but there isn’t. I do not think of walking down to the voting booth as my fare for commenting on the society I live in. If you want to ignore me because I didn’t vote in the most recent election, well screw you robot. 
Nor France nor AFAIK Germany argued that Irak didn’t have WMD. They argued that evidences were lacking and that inspections should be conducted.