(November 18, 2016 at 6:08 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I didn't realize it was also politically incorrect to point out that Muslim is a religion not a race, but not surprised I guess. I won't do it anymore.

It's not that it's non-PC, it's that it's fatuous.

This is exactly why I used the word "bigot" upthread, and said as much ... but perhaps you missed that post?

Oh look, the PC card.  Another Usual Objection™.

(November 18, 2016 at 8:48 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(November 18, 2016 at 6:08 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I didn't realize it was also politically incorrect to point out that Muslim is a religion not a race, but not surprised I guess. I won't do it anymore.

It's not that it's non-PC, it's that it's fatuous.

This is exactly why I used the word "bigot" upthread, and said as much ... but perhaps you missed that post?

She is right Muslim is a religion, not a race. But seems to keep missing the point You can stop being a Muslim, Ayaan Hirsi Ali did. You can stop being a Hindu and you can stop being a Jew. It is as simple as not buying the stories of society or your parents. You can leave India with darker skin migrate to America, have a kid an raise them Christian. South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley has parents from India yet as far as I know she is Christian. 

I'd agree with her but again my point still would be "so what" no, Muslim is not a race, but religion does cause racism.

(November 18, 2016 at 8:48 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(November 18, 2016 at 6:08 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I didn't realize it was also politically incorrect to point out that Muslim is a religion not a race, but not surprised I guess. I won't do it anymore.

It's not that it's non-PC, it's that it's fatuous.

This is exactly why I used the word "bigot" upthread, and said as much ... but perhaps you missed that post?

Do you agree with the Nazi worldview?

And your point is?

Your religious fixation gets you nowhere at full speed. It doesn't cover Mexicans for starters. But that aside. The X, Y, Z is not a race argument is classic weasel. Used by all the bigots still having preserved a sufficient amount of shame to not wanting to be called racist.

That's all there is to say about that argument. It's got nothing to do with religion, alien as that concept may seem to you. It's got everything to do with "us vs them".

(November 18, 2016 at 6:28 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Racial apathy is the new racial antipathy.  It's been the Gentleman's Racism for a few decades now.   It's the driving force behind:
"I'm not a racist" -I just vote for racists alot.
"I wanted the economic promise stuff" - I don't care enough about the other stuff for me to withhold my support.
and the fun new wrinkle;
"The other guy was worse than racism" -How bad is racism anyway, isn't it, like, over since Obama?

SOOOOOOOOOOOO fucking true.

For a moment during the primaries I thought when Ryan and Romney and Ted condemned Trump I hoped beyond all hope they meant it, but nope, now that they have the win they are all sucking Trump's dick. Now they are all butt buddies in an orgy of "Never mind all the bigoted shit Trump said"

(November 18, 2016 at 9:45 pm)abaris Wrote: And your point is?

Your religious fixation gets you nowhere at full speed. It doesn't cover Mexicans for starters. But that aside. The X, Y, Z is not a race argument is classic weasel. Used by all the bigots still having preserved a sufficient amount of shame to not wanting to be called racist.

That's all there is to say about that argument. It's got nothing to do with religion, alien as that concept may seem to you. It's got everything to do with "us vs them".

Abris you keep ignoring context. 

In context of the individual not always. In the concept of religion as human construct it most certainly does. "Us vs them" comes out of religion and that causes the racism. It does not have to be every individual no, but religion does have just enough and that DOES lead to racism.

(November 18, 2016 at 11:34 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:

Opoponax Wrote:I don't blame you completely, just in part. And you can deny it all you want, just like Nader supporters still live in denial over aiding George W. Bush in getting elected in 2000. But it's okay, there are hundreds of thousands of dead people to remind them. 

There was an obvious choice to be made here and you helped Trump get elected. Suck it up and accept that you threw your vote away on someone who had absolutely zero chance to win jackshit. Hell, jackshit is infinitely more than any Johnson or Stein won, or had a chance to win. 

Most people don't always like either candidate, but they understand that often there is a lesser of two evils, and so they vote for the lesser and hope for the best. Neither Stein, nor Johnson ever stood a chance of appointing a SCOTUS justice, but Hillary did. Talk all your "corporate shill" bullshit until the cows come home, but now Trump is putting at least one, probably two, maybe even three justices on the Supreme Court. 

But hey, at least you voted your conscience.

What did blaming Naderites accomplish? Half the Dems stayed home and 13% voted for Bush...every single 3rd party candidate got more votes than Nader lost by. The man couldn't carry his own home state.

I get that blaming 3rd party candidates is easy...it's also really lazy.

No it isn't. Third party votes are convinced they made a more moral choice than anyone else. It's absurd, but generally, that's the belief. And to argue with them about it is a fucking hassle because of their self-righteousness. 

And I hold the people who stayed home far more responsible than anyone else. Make no mistake about that. 

As for Nader, it should have served as a reminder for decades as to what can happen when a candidate with absolutely no chance of winning siphons votes off from candidates that do stand a chance of winning. 

So now we have two Presidential elections in the last 16 years  where third party voters played a significant role in helping someone get elected (who obviously wasn't the candidate they voted for). 

1. George W. Bush
2. Donald "I'm Not Going to Settle That Lawsuit Okay Here's $25,000,000 To Settle That Lawsuit" Fuckface Trump. 

And I'll say it again: 109,000 votes over 3 states. That was the difference. Check it out:


http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/jill-stein...nal-votes/

Wisconsin
Overall Trump margin of victory: 27,257 votes
Jill Stein vote total: 30,980
Gary Johnson vote total: 106,442

---

Michigan
Overall Trump margin of victory: 13,107 votes
Jill Stein vote total: 51,427
Gary Johnson vote total: 172,726

---

Pennsylvania
Overall Trump margin of victory: 71,794
Jill Stein vote total: 48,657
Gary Johnson vote total: 142,334 (with 99.93% in)

---

Florida
Overall Trump margin of victory: 119,489
Jill Stein vote total: 64,060
Gary Johnson vote total: 206,189

---

Them's the facts. Third party voters played a very real, very significant role in putting Trump in the White House.

(November 18, 2016 at 9:44 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote:

(November 18, 2016 at 8:48 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: It's not that it's non-PC, it's that it's fatuous.

This is exactly why I used the word "bigot" upthread, and said as much ... but perhaps you missed that post?

Do you agree with the Nazi worldview?

What do you think? You've read enough of my posts by now to form your own judgement ... one should hope.

Did you notice that Gary Johnson was getting three times the votes as Jill Stein? You think a bunch of liberals went and voted for a Libertarian? No, the fact of the matter is that there were equal if not more Republicans refusing to vote for their candidate as there were liberals voting third party. Hell, some Republicans actually voted for Hillary.

The third parties didn't syphon anything. They were merely the dumping grounds for the frustrated voters.

There was an unprecedented number of Republicans denouncing Trump and refusing to vote for him, and she still couldn't beat that racist demagogue. There is no one to blame except the DNC and Hillary