• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stupidity of the American Voter?

But not constitutional conservatism. Big government conservatism is an oxymoron. The phrase you are looking for is authoritarian statist. You want others to do your bidding.

Big government conservatism was the original conservatism before liberalism, but I will be fine with the statist remark.
 
Delusional with what? I haven't been the one advocating the deaths of any State leaders.
Of course you would never want a tyrant to be held accountable. I understand that. Your tyrant, up until now. has given you things. He has diminished you and you lack the ability, at least today, to realize it. In this regard you are exactly like all of the other authoritarian statists on this board who call themselves Independent, Progressive, Liberal, Communist, Socialist and even one or two who call themselves Conservatives.

But lawful behavior, governing with the consent of the governed, has never meant much to you has it Fiddy? You just want more stuff.
 
Of course you would never want a tyrant to be held accountable. I understand that. Your tyrant, up until now. has given you things. He has diminished you and you lack the ability, at least today, to realize it. In this regard you are exactly like all of the other authoritarian statists on this board who call themselves Independent, Progressive, Liberal, Communist, Socialist and even one or two who call themselves Conservatives.

But lawful behavior, governing with the consent of the governed, has never meant much to you has it Fiddy? You just want more stuff.

There's no tyrant here, mate. The next Republican will be accused of the same thing by a loony few, but life goes on. The status-quo is both good and must be preserved.
 
There's no tyrant here, mate. The next Republican will be accused of the same thing by a loony few, but life goes on. The status-quo is both good and must be preserved.
Right. As long as your hands keep getting filled by government minions you are happy. Mate.
 
Right. As long as your hands keep getting filled by government minions you are happy. Mate.

Noblesse oblige is a perfectly acceptable governing position and has been for centuries.
 
Noblesse oblige is a perfectly acceptable governing position and has been for centuries.
While that may be true under the doctrine of the divine right of kings taking from one citizen to give to another citizen has never been Constitutional. That is why providing only general welfare is allowed. Nearly everything this federal government does today is unconstitutional.

Only an Article V Convention of States to propose amendments has a chance to save the nation. If we wait much longer there will be little left to salvage. We have lost our borders. Next on the chopping block are our language and culture.

Do you realize that you are now competing with a rapidly expanding number if aliens for your take? Obama has placed them ahead of you in line.
 
He doesn't understand that because Republocrats told him they were for limited government,

and so therefore he believes they're actually for it.

It is interesting all the "small government" mantra that gets thrown around to this day despite the Republicans best efforts to increase government size and power. Democrats do it too, of course. Republocrats love their power.
 
Not all American voters are stupid. Many recognized the fraud of Obamacare and the lies in several other issues also. They were a little stupid at that time, for sure, but the really stupid ones are those who continue to defend him. There is no cure for that.

Nahhh, I have to disagree. They watched him for FOUR YEARS and still voted him back into office. That is more than a little stupid. By voting for him after FOUR YEARS they continued to defend him by voting him after watching him for FOUR YEARS. Did I mention that he was president for FOUR YEARS before they elected him again?
 
Who ever told you things were supposed to be fair?

No one, but being fair is one of those values that gets talked about a lot. You either value it or you don't.
 
If employers are winning why are so many corporations leaving the country? Why are businesses suffering? In fact any business person can tell you the answer but the theorists don't want to listen.

The current president has never been in any business in his life yet seems to know what business is all about and can even give millions of taxpayer dollars to start-up companies of which he also knows nothing. Or feels he can decide who banks lend their money to. It's people who have no knowledge of business who want more rules, regulations and, in doing so, drive out all business from their areas.
No, you have none.

They are leaving because they can get even cheaper labor, don't have to worry about healthcare and don't have to worry about having safe working conditions. Yes, they are winning.
 
It happens over and over. We have an incompetent and corrupt federal government. Voters give power to one group. When their incompetence and corruption are displayed, they give power to the other group. Voters really are stupid. They blindly follow the system setup by the two political parties and never fix anything. Government gets worse and worse, political parties get more powerful and voters do the same thing over and over.

I agree. Voters are lazy. They don't study the issues; they believe in what the pundits and the media tell them; and they let TV commercials help them decide on what to vote for.
 
No one, but being fair is one of those values that gets talked about a lot. You either value it or you don't.

There is a difference between "fairness" in outcome, and "fairness" in opportunity...You are not promised an equal outcome, only an equal opportunity...
 
LOL....you need look no further than the author of the OP to appreciate the incredible irony of this thead.
 
They are leaving because they can get even cheaper labor...

In some cases like with Apple that is probably true to an extent...Business in under NO obligation to pay more for labor than they have to...

don't have to worry about healthcare...

Yep, and now under Obama, and liberals like you, have ensured that Health insurance costs are prohibitive to business, so it will result in MORE outsourcing....Thanks for admitting that.

don't have to worry about having safe working conditions.

In some cases yes, in others no...Depends on where they relocate...After all the bottom line is to turn out the end product for as little as possible, and sell it for as much as is possible...But, much more goes into a decision to relocate other than safety standards, or talking points like what you present here...
 
LOL....you need look no further than the author of the OP to appreciate the incredible irony of this thead.

Gruber nailed it especially with people from California that vote Democratic and call themselves liberal.
 
I agree. Voters are lazy. They don't study the issues; they believe in what the pundits and the media tell them; and they let TV commercials help them decide on what to vote for.

Isn't that better than being guided by what the politicians say?
 
Isn't that better than being guided by what the politicians say?

I think it is as bad as following what a politician states. I think if voters were more educated, they'd hold their politicians more accountable. Fool me once same on you, fool me twice, same on me.
 
There is a difference between "fairness" in outcome, and "fairness" in opportunity...You are not promised an equal outcome, only an equal opportunity...

Yes, I'm familiar with that thinking. And it doesn't really apply here. No one said anything about equality with anyone in anyway. We're talking about fair wages and not opportunity. That's the trouble with spouting platitudes, you have to what they mean so you can use them appropriately. ;)
 
In some cases like with Apple that is probably true to an extent...Business in under NO obligation to pay more for labor than they have to...



Yep, and now under Obama, and liberals like you, have ensured that Health insurance costs are prohibitive to business, so it will result in MORE outsourcing....Thanks for admitting that.



In some cases yes, in others no...Depends on where they relocate...After all the bottom line is to turn out the end product for as little as possible, and sell it for as much as is possible...But, much more goes into a decision to relocate other than safety standards, or talking points like what you present here...

Actually costs are flat. For about 29% of us they've decreased according to the link I gave you earlier. But as the reform still keeps insurance linked to employment, ACA did not solve this problem. And no one says anyone is obligated to do anything, so yes, that third world worker making next to nothing, not getting health care, working in unsafe working conditions is real appealing, and you want America to look more like them? Really?

The point is that other issue lead to them leaving over taxes, and much of it is a matter of greed over what is best for all. They are free to that, and I have not said they aren't. But they are not to be praised or appeased for not having foresight. In the end, lower wages will hurt them more than help. Remember, someone has to buy the ****.
 
Yes, I'm familiar with that thinking. And it doesn't really apply here. No one said anything about equality with anyone in anyway. We're talking about fair wages and not opportunity. That's the trouble with spouting platitudes, you have to what they mean so you can use them appropriately. ;)

Aw, yes, a fair wage? Tell me what a fair wage is for me? Seems you know what a fair wage is for everyone else so tell me what a fair wage is for me and explain why?

Liberal logic seems to be that a liberal knows what a fair wage is as they use that term all the time, so define it
 
Aw, yes, a fair wage? Tell me what a fair wage is for me? Seems you know what a fair wage is for everyone else so tell me what a fair wage is for me and explain why?

Liberal logic seems to be that a liberal knows what a fair wage is as they use that term all the time, so define it

Its not that hard. Say we go back and pay what we paid in the past, accounting for inflation. Wouldn't that be fair?
 
Yes, I'm familiar with that thinking. And it doesn't really apply here. No one said anything about equality with anyone in anyway. We're talking about fair wages and not opportunity. That's the trouble with spouting platitudes, you have to what they mean so you can use them appropriately. ;)

Or debate with honest people...;)
 
Back
Top Bottom