• 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!

Being pragmatic is not a strenth of the right wing.

J

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
The right wing is like a bunch of pitbull's. They never admit defeat and they don't like to compromise. If they did we would not be helt hostage by Tea Bagger nutjobs who only represent 18% of GOP population. If the right was pragmatic they would have given up on the war on drugs long ago because 78% of Americans say it is lost yet the defend the status quo on bad law and bad policy.

The same is true with the ACA. They have been defeated three times and they still don't give up. If they where pragmatic they would be working with the left on making it better instead of the my way or the highway attitude they seem to hold on to no matter how many times they get their head jhanded to them. It is too bad because being pragmatic is a part of doing a good job in the house,senate and the Whitehouse. If the GOP was pragmatic they would not be holding the nation hostage over a lost fight. They has their chance in 2012 and lost by over 5 milion votes. Get over it.
 

You may think you're being smart, but in other threads about this affair you're basically saying the same thing over and over again, so that makes you sort of a parrot.

I bet you can't rationally comment anything that is said here. Just like when I asked you to logically explain why state-issued ID given to everyone at the age of 14(or another age, before the voting age), paid for from the budget, cheap, plastic things that contain people's pictures, address and some other relevant info... why this disinherits voters or disenfranchizes minority voters. You couldn't explain why this was the case back then, you still can't now.
And just like this, you can't explain why you said what you said in your OP.
 
James D Hill said:
If they where pragmatic they would be working with the left on making it better instead of the my way or the highway attitude they seem to hold on to no matter how many times they get their head jhanded to them.
Click to expand...

You mean kind of like Democrats rammed Obamacare through, when 70% of the American public was against it?
 

First of all I was not talking about redneck voter ID laws my friend. The SCOUS is going to shoot those down anyway. We are talking about tea bagger morons who can,t accept the fact they have been defeated three times. In baseball that is a strike out my friend and if they had a pragmatic bone in their body they would realize it.
 
lizzie said:
You mean kind of like Democrats rammed Obamacare through, when 70% of the American public was against it?
Click to expand...

They won that fight fair and square and if it was so bad then why isn't Romney in the Whitehouse? They had their chance and lost. Get over it and be pragmatic.
 

Politics is not baseball. That's one.. any comparison between them is kind of flawed.

Secondly. voter ID laws aren't redneck at all. Most of Europe has voter ID laws and mandatory ID cards issued. so if you want to call of Europe redneck, then ok, your sentence would be correct. But if not... then that kinda sucks.
 

So, according to your toy train of thought the proponents of gay marriage weren't very pragmatic either. Really, HOJ is a much better sockpuppet than you have been. :mrgreen:
 
clownboy said:
So, according to your toy train of thought the proponents of gay marriage weren't very pragmatic either. Really, HOJ is a much better sockpuppet than you have been. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

If the right had agreed to civil unions gay marriage would not be what it is today. Civil unions would have been the pragmatic chioce for the right but they let the moralist run the show so they lost that fight too.
 
James D Hill said:
The same is true with the ACA. They have been defeated three times and they still don't give up. Get over it.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting perspective.

I'm curious, for years when the issue of Same Sex Marriage made it onto a ballot it was defeated.

32 times in all, across numerous states, before the first victory was achieved in 2012.

Do you feel the same about this?

Should same-sex couples have given up and "gotten over it" after the first 3, 5, 15, or 20 losses?

Or do you admire their perseverance and willingness to press the fight through until they began achieving some measure of victory?

I do.

The way I see it, the Tea Party members are doing nothing illegal.

They're using the system, or maybe working the system, the way the system was designed, specifically to prevent what's been called a "tyranny of the majority".

We don't live in a direct democracy for a reason.

Small states should, ostensibly, have the same voice, in some respects, as large states.

Small interest groups should have some means of asserting their rights against a tidal wave of popular/populist opinion to the contrary.
 

The facts are the facts my friend. The GOP has lost trhree times on this issue so they need to be pragmatic and work with the other side to make it better. That is what they call governing.
 
James D Hill said:
The facts are the facts my friend. The GOP has lost trhree times on this issue so they need to be pragmatic and work with the other side to make it better. That is what they call governing.
Click to expand...

When the other side is not willing to negotiate, how is governing possible?
 

The right has lost this fight. Gay marriage's sopporters have been growing every year and like legalized marijuana a majority now supports it. People will support the ACA just like they did with SS in the 40's.
 
James D Hill said:
The right has lost this fight. Gay marriage's sopporters have been growing every year and like legalized marijuana a majority now supports it. People will support the ACA just like they did with SS in the 40's.
Click to expand...

And yet 52% of young americans want to opt-out of Social Security. Isn't that kind of funny? I wonder if that exposes a flaw in the program?
 
James D Hill said:
The right has lost this fight. Gay marriage's sopporters have been growing every year and like legalized marijuana a majority now supports it. People will support the ACA just like they did with SS in the 40's.
Click to expand...

Not the point and you know it. You only call for pragmatism when it not your oxen being gored. Weak and hypocritical.
 

So, James, your latest buzzword is "pragmatic". Shall we take a look at that?


I'm sure you will probably disagree, but it seems to me that the liberals are the ones who are not being pragmatic, while the conservatives in our government are doing their best despite those un-pragmatic liberals.

I mean, who is it that spouts their lofty goals that are based on ideas and theories with no sound judgment as a basis? Who is it that wants to "fundamentally change the US" with no clear, logical way to do it? Liberals? Or conservatives?

James, I know you will keep trying to convince people that conservatives are bad, but please, try to use terms and concepts that don't make you look stupid, eh?
 
Last edited:
James D Hill said:
The right has lost this fight. Gay marriage's sopporters have been growing every year and like legalized marijuana a majority now supports it. People will support the ACA just like they did with SS in the 40's.
Click to expand...

Whether people do support it or will grow to support it is irrelevant.

The point here is that a minority has the right to be tenacious and to force their point of view to be considered.

As long as that minority is behaving legally and within the bounds of codified procedure you either respect that tenaciousness from a minority or you don't.

But you can't, while expecting to maintain any degree of intellectual honesty, support it when you support the policy and oppose it when you oppose the policy.
 

Obama is likely a true tea bagger.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
When the other side is not willing to negotiate, how is governing possible?
Click to expand...

I think a good thing is happening. It should be very, very difficult to pass legislation. It has been way, way too easy. When both sides agree, it is likely a good law. There aren't many good laws and the good ones were passed years ago.
 

First of all we are not debating the voter ID laws. The SCOTUS is going to throw all those redneck laws out anyway. I am commenting on how right wing idealism has blinded the party to the fact they have lost this debate thee times just like they have lost the culture wars and won't admit it. If the right wing was pragmatic they would be handing out birth control pills and condoms by the truck loads to prevent abortions but because of their Christian base they don't want to come across as promoting sex out of wedlock so they take on the hypocritical stance of being both against abortion and birth control. That is not pragmatic. Tell me where I am wrong.
 

Are you stuck on the voter ID laws or something? They are redneck and this is about the right not being pragmatic. What is your opinion?
 
clownboy said:
So, according to your toy train of thought the proponents of gay marriage weren't very pragmatic either. Really, HOJ is a much better sockpuppet than you have been. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Gay rights are very pragmatic and most of all very fair. Why hold back a group of people because you do not agree with how they have sex?
 

Same sex marriage is the right thing to do just like it was when Loving vs Vigrinia went thru ending ther ban against mixed marriage. At that time 64% of Americans supported the ban but the right thing was done and the same is true with gay marriage. Getting 30 million people health care is the right thing to do.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
When the other side is not willing to negotiate, how is governing possible?
Click to expand...

A liberal spewing GOP talking points again. The right had their chance to repeal the ACA 3 times and lost all three. I don't think they have a strong position to bargen. Do you?
 
Velvet Elvis said:
View attachment 67154515
Click to expand...

The pot calling the kettle black? I don't think that works here Elvis because we do not have rednecks on the left. We do have some nutjobs but we keep them under control while your side puts them in office like Louie Gohmert. He is as thick as a brick and even right wingers say it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…