LastPommerFan

Papa Frankie gets it.

Very fair question. I am going to need some time to go back. I'm not searching for gotcha quotes, and I want to be thoughtful about it, and fair. Give me a day or so.

I did read it. It was a partisan attack point. I moved on. Everytime we fall into that trap, and start attacking that straw man, some centrist undecided voter who spends so much time working two jobs and trying desperately to be there for their family reads it. It's off putting. It is obviously not going to help them. That pointed bickering and name calling is quickly judged as something of no value to them. It will not make their life better. You're reaction was absolutely justified. You were absolutely right. I'm just trying to push the idea that we can focus on making everyone understand how right we are, and how wrong they are, or, we can change the paradigm and actually start making all those right ideas into actual American policy. We just need to convince more folks. This is all coming across way too preachy. I really don't have a problem with the conversation in the venue as you described it. I just see this from our side all over the place, and quite frankly, I am tired of losing elections.

"The world is at war because it has lost peace," Pope Francis said. "There is a war of interest, there is a war for money, a war for natural resources, a war to dominate people," he continued. "Some might think it is war of religion. It is not. All religions want peace. Others want war."

This is exactly how a party that is so much better on so many issues can manage to lose so many elections. We need more people. We are not going to win them by constantly berating the other side. In order to be fair, I should be clear on my position. I think you are a good person. I think most people are genuinely good. We have very few psychopaths in our species. I think your politics, however, are incredibly stunting to our growth and the advancement of a more perfect union. At times, such as this election, with a nominee who represents an existential threat to most of what makes this nation's incredible pluralism work, political positions like the ones you have written are down right dangerous. I can learn from good people with wrong ideas. Progressives need to understand why wrong ideas win sometimes, and we also need to recognize that liberal philosophy came into being by discussing ideas and comparing them in discourse, attempting to philosophically inquire about the roots of the bad ideas, and seeking out solutions to them. (John Stewart Mill's "On the subjugation of Women" is and exceptional example of this.) 10s of millions of people are going to vote for Donald Trump to be the president of the United States. That fact alone, regardless of the outcome of the election, means that liberalism as a political philosophy has a lot of work to do. That result should be impossible in a modern liberal democracy.(Note all the lowercase l's) My motivation is very simple. Modern liberalism cannot fail. We cannot support the species without it. The alternative all involve too much pain for too many people.

K-9, Politics ought to be the art of inquiry into why opponents see the evidence differently than you, not shouting at them until they shut up. We would likely not ever change ATL's mind, but by understanding better where he is coming from, we might be able to move someone else. We can win this one with shouting, but I don't just want the presidency, I want supermajorities. We need a few more folks.

He said, "helped so and so do..." or "was a part of..." multiple times. Maybe a partisan lens? And that might not be a dem-GOP partisanship, maybe just an anti-Hilary partisanship.

You think socialism is the cause of their strongman politics for the last 300 years? I'm not sure Peter the Great read much of Marx. The Russian people ceded nothing to Stalin, they had no Liberty to cede.

Bernie's independence is a great help to him on the campaign trail. As soon as he enters the Capitol, he's as much a Democrat as Shumer.

Gary Johnson's scatterbrained foreign policy and Jill Stein's complete lack of one will almost ensure and American military encounter in the next decade. Secretary Clinton has made a couple of major errors on terms of war in the last 15 years, but she is far and away our best chance to avoid conflict of the 4 candidates, and if she loses it is guaranteed that a President Trump will lead us into major conflict almost immediately.

My wife was a registered republican until McCain selected Palin as his VP. She left the GOP that day, and hasn't been back. It wasn't just the dens that saw his shift.

Interesting, I'll let you know soon.

Custom made cutting board in Canandaigua colors for my wife for our 11th anniversary this weekend. There is now stain or dye in this wood. All natural colors with some mineral oil for shine and protection. Hand made by a childhood friend of ours who I reconnected with over Facebook.

Bloodline, by Flying Dog, is a blood orange ale. It's the best flavored beer I have ever consumed. I had it first at the brewery last October. Now they carry it at the Canandaigua Wegmans. It has a permanent position in my beer fridge. Btw- I now have a full sized fridge in my auxiliary kitchen dedicated exclusively to beer. This makes me happy.

Is there a democrat that could have been nominated that would face a different fate? Are these problems with Clinton, or with the GOP caucus in congress?

Can you describe the threat you see from secretary Clinton? As in, what is the most probable failure mode, in your opinion?

DWS wins her district 2-1. I was talking about a different democrat who won't have a job next January. Although, he probably just wants some time off to spend with his daughters.

Europe is due for a decent size economic correction. I'm starting to see it in my business, which primarily supports heavy industry. Prosperity cures a lot of these wounds. Most of the major forecasters have Europe at ~2% growth rate for the next 2-3 years, far outpacing their previous decade. I know a pretty good democrat who will be constitutionally unemployed in january...

I'm shocked at how little this is being brought up by my friends in the sanders wing of the party. I'd say that, in my networks, this leak has been brought up 5-1 by conservatives vs Bernie supporters. I'm amazed how well the Democratic Party is coming together.

The founders wrote the constitution structures largely to prevent the people from choosing to eliminate the institution of slavery. They absolutely wanted to eliminate choice.

The DNC are elected by members of the Democratic Party. To your latter point, agreed, it's constitutionally irrelevant how the parties select their endorsed candidate.

The electoral college was not initially selected by popular vote, and there is no constitutional requirement that they be selected by popular vote. They were selected by the legislatures for several elections. On affects the actual elections of public officials, the other affects internal party politics.

Naw, usually the cheeky punchlines are reserved for the sexual assault of women. I was shocked that mr. Maher extend his comedy to victimized males. none of it is funny.

Celebrities get special treatment as normal procedure?

That's what we know that supports your desired conclusion. We also know that he shot himself in the head, which would be exceptionally out of character for a radicalized muslim terrorist, and that his Iranian heritage does not make him a prime suspect for the current threat of Islamic Terrorism.