Canada, who's goin' with me?!

Archived discussion from Toril-2.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sat Nov 06, 2004 1:26 pm

Corth wrote:Thats kind of the reason why the hollywood liberals are liberals. They have dozens of millions and can't see why it matters if the government takes an extra 20% or so. The conventional wisdom that republicans are rich and democrats are poor is bunk. The Republican base is the middle class. Democrat base are minorities (taken for granted, year after year), the very young (naive), the very old (dependent on handouts), and the very rich (out of touch).

Corth


I've been thinking about things overnight, and I remembered a conclusion I came to a couple weeks ago while arguing with an extremist libertarian.

The real problem with your argument is that much of it is based in logical fallacy. Hasty Generalization to be specific.

Yo you ALL minorities are Democrats, all the young are naieve, and all the elderly depend on handouts while the very rich are out of touch and support Democrats too...

You think anyone poor is lazy, and discount specific examples as trumped up sob stories.

Those are all generalizations and your entire argument, if not belief system, is based on them!

1) Minorities: I believe latinos tend to be very conservative.
2) Nievete comes with inattention and not paying attention, not with youth. Remember, to someone out there YOU are young.
3) Some elderly depend on handouts, but they have paid for them their entire lives!
4) Many of the very wealthy are Republicans... the Bush family for example. So if then wealthy are out of touch...
5) Many poor work harder than you can imagine, but perhaps have simply made a bad decision or aren't as smart as you.



Do you think people should suffer? Try to answer this without making qualifications.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Sat Nov 06, 2004 5:09 pm

Regarding Reagan he is on the list as one of the greatest presidents and most liked among Americans.

About the wealthy thing, I think that Kerry was/appeared more out of touch than Bush and thats one of the things that hurt him when it came down to it.
Dlur
Sojourner
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Minnesota
Contact:

Postby Dlur » Sat Nov 06, 2004 5:45 pm

rylan wrote:Regarding Reagan he is on the list as one of the greatest presidents and most liked among Americans.

About the wealthy thing, I think that Kerry was/appeared more out of touch than Bush and thats one of the things that hurt him when it came down to it.


Very true on the first point Rylan.

And I'll steadfastly agree with you on the 2nd point as well. Kerry was rich before he married the Ketchup Queen and now he's even richer. He has 4 or 5 homes and lives the lifestyle of a rich man. I realize that Bush and his family are also vastly rich, but you don't hear about Bush having 4 vacation homes scattered about the US. All you hear about is his "Ranch" in Crawford other than his regular digs at the White House and Camp David, which are a byproduct of any presidancy. When I think of a ranch, I think of hard-working and down-to-earth and I think that at least 51% of the rest of the US thinks along the same lines.

While Kerry is out windsurfing off the coast from his Nantucket vacation home, or downhill skiing just outside of his mountain ski "shack" Bush is at his Crawford ranch roping steers, hiking, mending fences. Which one of these scenerios seems more in touch with the working american?

And while Kerry's activities are probably more genuine to his nature, GWB at least is crafty enough to give the american working class the ideal of him that they're going to most easily connect with, and that is yet another reason why GWB won and Kerry lost.
Ghimok|Dlur|Emeslan|Ili|Zinse|Teniv
*~~~~~~~~~~*
"Censorship is telling a man he can't eat a steak just because a baby can't chew it." - Mark Twain
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:57 pm

Dlur wrote:
rylan wrote:Regarding Reagan he is on the list as one of the greatest presidents and most liked among Americans.

About the wealthy thing, I think that Kerry was/appeared more out of touch than Bush and thats one of the things that hurt him when it came down to it.


Very true on the first point Rylan.

And I'll steadfastly agree with you on the 2nd point as well. Kerry was rich before he married the Ketchup Queen and now he's even richer. He has 4 or 5 homes and lives the lifestyle of a rich man. I realize that Bush and his family are also vastly rich, but you don't hear about Bush having 4 vacation homes scattered about the US. All you hear about is his "Ranch" in Crawford other than his regular digs at the White House and Camp David, which are a byproduct of any presidancy. When I think of a ranch, I think of hard-working and down-to-earth and I think that at least 51% of the rest of the US thinks along the same lines.

While Kerry is out windsurfing off the coast from his Nantucket vacation home, or downhill skiing just outside of his mountain ski "shack" Bush is at his Crawford ranch roping steers, hiking, mending fences. Which one of these scenerios seems more in touch with the working american?

And while Kerry's activities are probably more genuine to his nature, GWB at least is crafty enough to give the american working class the ideal of him that they're going to most easily connect with, and that is yet another reason why GWB won and Kerry lost.


Popularity doesn't mean that a person or group is best...just remember that. Last time I checked, Good Charlette where concidered a good band and where very popular. The backstreet boys where very very popular a few years ago. Where they the best bands ever? I hardly think so. Where they the most talented? Not by a long shot. Look at all the indy bands that have more talent in their pinky fingernail than each of those bands have combined? In highschools the popular kids are usually among the groups of lower intelligence. How many nerds are popular? Again, popularity means nothing.

As far as Bush being more connected to the American people. Marketing ploy. I'm sure he is not very close to hard working. He's had everything handed to him! His education was paid for by his parents, not him. He even got a C average there...and I highly doubt he earned all of that concidering what America's seen of him. Don't you think a hard worker would have gotten A's or B's? You know, like the people that go to school because they HAVE to to get good jobs...he knew he'd have a job regardless so he didn't work. Look at all his failed businesses. Do you think he worked hard at those, or was he out partying and driving drunk? By Corth and Imis' theories, if he was a hard worker all his dreams would come true and those businesses would have thrived!! There's no way in hell somebody who worked so hard could fail so many times. So, either they are wrong, or Bush is a lazy and unintelligent person.

So, because he has a ranch and not a vacation home, he is hard working? I highly doubt that. I lived in a ranch house in Illinios for 6 years. My parents weren't ranchers :P Also, if you would put a second of thought into it...not one man can keep up a true ranch. He has to have workers there, but you never saw them did you? If it was a true ranch, that mandated hard work, he would have to be there instead of the white house, but no...he goes on vacation to his ranch house. You ever hear of rich people going on cattle drives or living for a few weeks on a ranch to see what it's like? It's a hobby at best. So, lets say he "works hard" a few weeks out of the year on his ranch. That's a hobby guys, not a job. If he had to do it day after day, year after year, it would be a different story. Nice try though.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am

Kifle wrote:Popularity doesn't mean that a person or group is best...just remember that. Last time I checked, Good Charlette where concidered a good band and where very popular. The backstreet boys where very very popular a few years ago. Where they the best bands ever? I hardly think so. Where they the most talented? Not by a long shot. Look at all the indy bands that have more talent in their pinky fingernail than each of those bands have combined? In highschools the popular kids are usually among the groups of lower intelligence. How many nerds are popular? Again, popularity means nothing.


Well if you're going down that road I'll bring up Bill Clinton. He was wildly popular, but not widely considered a great president. Reagan was. Bill Clinton is no Ronald Reagan.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:43 am

rylan wrote:Regarding Reagan he is on the list as one of the greatest presidents and most liked among Americans.

About the wealthy thing, I think that Kerry was/appeared more out of touch than Bush and thats one of the things that hurt him when it came down to it.


Reagan was <i>shot</i> several times wasn't he?

Must be Bush is more well liked since no one has even tried yet.

Kerry may have _appeared_ more out of touch, but that is largely because he couldn't explain his views in short sentences. He actually knew more about what was going on that Bush did.

Well if you're going down that road I'll bring up Bill Clinton. He was wildly popular, but not widely considered a great president. Reagan was. Bill Clinton is no Ronald Reagan.


Actually many people think Clinton was a good President. Just not Republicans.

Also, many Democrats do NOT think Reagan was a great President.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Imis9
Sojourner
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:26 am
Location: DC Area

Postby Imis9 » Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:50 am

Thanks for proving my earlier point Sarvis with that last post (in regards to Reagan).

"All this wheeling and dealing around, why, it isn't for money, it's for fun. Money's just the way we keep score."
-- Henry Tyroon
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:56 am

What point is that?

That people never admit the guy in the other party is a good President?

Because really all that proves is that Americans are too dumb to care about the _person_ rather than the letter in front of their names.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Imis9
Sojourner
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:26 am
Location: DC Area

Postby Imis9 » Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:58 am

In regards to Reagan's shooting and also to my statement about the futility of actually arguing something you bring up since it tends to be senseless.

"Principal: Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
-- Billy Madison
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:02 am

Imis9 wrote:In regards to Reagan's shooting and also to my statement about the futility of actually arguing something you bring up since it tends to be senseless.

"Principal: Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
-- Billy Madison


Imis9, you're not even worth insulting at this point. Please go away and let the adults speak now.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Imis9
Sojourner
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:26 am
Location: DC Area

Postby Imis9 » Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:05 am

This coming from someone who says that Reagan was less popular because he was shot? You've shown me alright, and maybe someday you'll actually believe it.

"If you can't convince them, confuse them."
-- Harry S. Truman
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:32 am

Imis9 wrote:This coming from someone who says that Reagan was less popular because he was shot? You've shown me alright, and maybe someday you'll actually believe it.

"If you can't convince them, confuse them."
-- Harry S. Truman



You don't get shot at if everyone likes you. It's that simple.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:39 am

Shot:
Lincoln, Kennedy, Regan

Not Shot:
Nixon, Tyler, Johnson

And Adversely,

Shot:
Wallace, McKinley

Not Shot:
Schwartzenagger, Washington, Marion Barry

I'm very sorry for the ignorance and the name calling in this thread, but here is the arguement that popularity isn't a factor in getting shot.

Sarvis, stay on point.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:48 am

teflor the ranger wrote:Shot:
Lincoln, Kennedy, Regan

Not Shot:
Nixon, Tyler, Johnson

And Adversely,

Shot:
Wallace, McKinley

Not Shot:
Schwartzenagger, Washington, Marion Barry

I'm very sorry for the ignorance and the name calling in this thread, but here is the arguement that popularity isn't a factor in getting shot.

Sarvis, stay on point.


Lincoln was hugely unpopular with half the country, and Nixon was popular until they found out what he was doing wasn't he? But then he was impeached and did not need shooting.


But I'll concede, since you posted evidence rather than just insulting me like Imis...

This IS in point though, since I was just responding to something Rylan said. Maybe he needs to be told to stay on point?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:07 am

I just picked a post that I though was worth responding to, hence the off topic... but not like this entire thread really has a solid topic :P

Oh and by the way... the line "You don't get shot at if everyone likes you. It's that simple." really made me laugh. Have you ever heard the following:

"You can please all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can't please all the people all the time". Abraham Lincoln said that. Being shot is a pretty poor argument for not being liked. A well known public is always going to have someone who doesn't like them. Additionally, people get shot for random stupid reasons by others who don't even know them.

Teflor, thanks for the post.
Vahok
Sojourner
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 6:01 am
Location: guelph,ontario,canada

Postby Vahok » Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:26 am

Wow! I leave this BBS for 2 days and come back to this?!? More Bush and more Kerry garbage.

Y'all should watch "Douche and Turd" episode of South Park. It might explain somethings to some people...

P.S. Sarvis...I'm not real sure on which candidate you'd have prefered to win. Could you maybe put up about 100 posts so I can figure it out?
Meatshield
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:42 am

Vahok wrote:Wow! I leave this BBS for 2 days and come back to this?!? More Bush and more Kerry garbage.

Y'all should watch "Douche and Turd" episode of South Park. It might explain somethings to some people...

P.S. Sarvis...I'm not real sure on which candidate you'd have prefered to win. Could you maybe put up about 100 posts so I can figure it out?


Hehe... saw that episode. Like two days before the election too...

They made it so obvious which was which too.. which is funny.

And I could post my favored candidate more if you wanted! ;)
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:44 am

rylan wrote:Additionally, people get shot for random stupid reasons by others who don't even know them.


Well yes, if you want to consider innocent bystanders.
Last edited by teflor the ranger on Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:33 am, edited 2 times in total.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Nov 07, 2004 5:50 am

teflor the ranger wrote:Well yes, if you want to consider innocent bystanders.


Huh?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:22 am

Sarvis wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:Well yes, if you want to consider innocent bystanders.


Huh?


you act as if teflor ever makes sense...just let it go, sarvis. If you think too long on it, you'll have an anurism or something.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Salen
Sojourner
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Salen » Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:39 pm

They may be bystanders, but they ain't innocent.
emote Rescuepractice

Return to “General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests