NATION

PASSWORD

What Does Your Vote Mean to You?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31167
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Thu May 09, 2019 1:57 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t vote.

With that line of thinking why bother holding elections in some areas?

That's actually a good question, why should we bother in some areas?

Firstly It’s required by law.

Secondly if 75 percent or more want to vote for the democratic candidate for mayor of New Haven or Hartford, Connecticut both of which are holding mayoral elections this year what rationale do you have to deny it to them?
Last edited by San Lumen on Thu May 09, 2019 1:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 2:27 pm

San Lumen wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:That's actually a good question, why should we bother in some areas?

Firstly It’s required by law.

Secondly if 75 percent or more want to vote for the democratic candidate for mayor of New Haven or Hartford, Connecticut both of which are holding mayoral elections this year what rationale do you have to deny it to them?

Why waste their time and not just give them what they want?
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Esternial
P2TM RP Mentor
 
Posts: 51826
Founded: May 09, 2009
Democratic Socialists

Postby Esternial » Thu May 09, 2019 2:30 pm

Voting here is mandatory, so I always vote.

You're always free to submit a blank vote, but I always make a choice. Your individual vote might be a single drop of water in a bucket, but enough votes can fill it up just fine.

My vote is worth as much as anyone else's, but if you add them up they can make a difference.

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31167
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Thu May 09, 2019 2:49 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Firstly It’s required by law.

Secondly if 75 percent or more want to vote for the democratic candidate for mayor of New Haven or Hartford, Connecticut both of which are holding mayoral elections this year what rationale do you have to deny it to them?

Why waste their time and not just give them what they want?

Because we don’t simply anoint someone to elected office in a democracy and what if hypothetically a majority decided they didn’t want the democrat however unlikely? We could say the same about Philadelphia also holding a mayoral election this year

An election is still an election even if someone wins overwhelmingly. It wouldn’t be democratic to simply have the primary in Hartford or Philadelphia and no general election even if the primary tantamount to election
Last edited by San Lumen on Thu May 09, 2019 2:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 2:51 pm

San Lumen wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:Why waste their time and not just give them what they want?

Because we don’t simply anoint someone to elected office in a democracy and what if hypothetically a majority diced they didn’t want the democrat however unlikely?

An election is still an election even if someone wins overwhelmingly. It wouldn’t be democratic to simply have the primary in Hartford and no general election even if its tantamount to election

That's why you could have polling, most of the time you know who will win ahead of the time in a state.

It may still be an election, but it's pointless.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31167
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Thu May 09, 2019 2:52 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Because we don’t simply anoint someone to elected office in a democracy and what if hypothetically a majority diced they didn’t want the democrat however unlikely?

An election is still an election even if someone wins overwhelmingly. It wouldn’t be democratic to simply have the primary in Hartford and no general election even if its tantamount to election

That's why you could have polling, most of the time you know who will win ahead of the time in a state.

It may still be an election, but it's pointless.

No election is ever pointless. What your suggesting is whoever wins the primary for mayor in Philadelphia or Hartford simply win by default and there be no general election?

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 2:53 pm

San Lumen wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:That's why you could have polling, most of the time you know who will win ahead of the time in a state.

It may still be an election, but it's pointless.

No election is ever pointless. What your suggesting is whoever wins the primary for mayor in Philadelphia or Hartford simply win by default and there be no general election?

If the polling shows an overwhelming victory will happen then yeah, why not? The result will always be the same.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Mystic Warriors
Minister
 
Posts: 3180
Founded: May 10, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Mystic Warriors » Thu May 09, 2019 2:54 pm

A middle finger to the Republicans
Proud Trump Hater. Ban Fascism in all its forms. Disagreeing with a comment because you hate who said it is childish.

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31167
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Thu May 09, 2019 2:57 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:No election is ever pointless. What your suggesting is whoever wins the primary for mayor in Philadelphia or Hartford simply win by default and there be no general election?

If the polling shows an overwhelming victory will happen then yeah, why not? The result will always be the same.

Because it would be undemocratic. Should we just cancel the general election in Delaware for Governor next year since it’s unlikely the incumbent will lose?

Your disenfranchising whole areas of the state. In Philadelphia and Hartford’s case if 25 percent or so want to vote republican for mayor why shouldn’t they be able to. Your not presenting a very compelling case
Last edited by San Lumen on Thu May 09, 2019 2:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 2:58 pm

San Lumen wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:If the polling shows an overwhelming victory will happen then yeah, why not? The result will always be the same.

Because it would be undemocratic. Should we just cancel the general election in Delaware for Governor next year since it’s unlikely the incumbent will lose?

Your disenfranchising whole areas of the state. In Philadelphia and Hartford’s case if 25 percent or so want to vote republican for mayor why shouldn’t they be able to. Your not presenting a very compelling case

It wouldn't be undemocratic, the people are still getting who they want, you're just cutting out the extra, unnecessary steps.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31167
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Thu May 09, 2019 3:02 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Because it would be undemocratic. Should we just cancel the general election in Delaware for Governor next year since it’s unlikely the incumbent will lose?

Your disenfranchising whole areas of the state. In Philadelphia and Hartford’s case if 25 percent or so want to vote republican for mayor why shouldn’t they be able to. Your not presenting a very compelling case

It wouldn't be undemocratic, the people are still getting who they want, you're just cutting out the extra, unnecessary steps.

And those who vote the other way are unable to vote. Andrew Cuomo was all but assured of winning a third term last year. He won just 16 counties and got 60 percent of the vote. Our attorney general was likely to win too and got 62 percent.

Should we have not had the Governor and attorney general on the ballot and majority of counties have no one to vote for Governor or attorney general?

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 3:05 pm

San Lumen wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:It wouldn't be undemocratic, the people are still getting who they want, you're just cutting out the extra, unnecessary steps.

1) And those who vote the other way are unable to vote. Andrew Cuomo was all but assured of winning a third term last year. He won just 16 counties and got 60 percent of the vote. Our attorney general was likely to win too and got 62 percent.

2) Should we have not had the Governor and attorney general on the ballot and majority of counties have no one to vote for Governor or attorney general?

1) So? Their vote literally doesn't matter. In a winner-take-all election, only the votes for the winner matter. You may as well not even count the votes for the loser because it doesn't matter how many their are as long as they lost.
2) Sure.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31167
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Thu May 09, 2019 3:59 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:1) And those who vote the other way are unable to vote. Andrew Cuomo was all but assured of winning a third term last year. He won just 16 counties and got 60 percent of the vote. Our attorney general was likely to win too and got 62 percent.

2) Should we have not had the Governor and attorney general on the ballot and majority of counties have no one to vote for Governor or attorney general?

1) So? Their vote literally doesn't matter. In a winner-take-all election, only the votes for the winner matter. You may as well not even count the votes for the loser because it doesn't matter how many their are as long as they lost.
2) Sure.

I’ve heard my share of dumb arguments but this has to be one of the stupidest.
To clarify your saying we should hold elections based on polling and cancel the general if shows one side will win?

Upsets can happen and your idea amounts to mass disenfranchisement. Votes still count no matter the margin.

How would you count votes on election night?

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 4:00 pm

San Lumen wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:1) So? Their vote literally doesn't matter. In a winner-take-all election, only the votes for the winner matter. You may as well not even count the votes for the loser because it doesn't matter how many their are as long as they lost.
2) Sure.

I’ve heard my share of dumb arguments but this has to be one of the stupidest.
To clarify your saying we should hold elections based on polling and cancel the general if shows one side will win?

Upsets can happen and your idea amounts to mass disenfranchisement. Votes still count no matter the margin.

How would you count votes on election night?

If it shows one side will clearly win, say, if there is a margin of victory greater than 20%.

Explain how votes for the losing candidate matter if there's no proportional representation.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Conserative Morality
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 76675
Founded: Aug 24, 2007
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Conserative Morality » Thu May 09, 2019 4:02 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Because we don’t simply anoint someone to elected office in a democracy and what if hypothetically a majority diced they didn’t want the democrat however unlikely?

An election is still an election even if someone wins overwhelmingly. It wouldn’t be democratic to simply have the primary in Hartford and no general election even if its tantamount to election

That's why you could have polling, most of the time you know who will win ahead of the time in a state.

It may still be an election, but it's pointless.

I mean, an election is just a poll when you get down to it.
On the hate train. Choo choo, bitches. Bi-Polar. Proud Crypto-Fascist and Turbo Progressive. Dirty Étatist. Lowly Humanities Major. NSG's Best Liberal.
Caesar and Imperator of RWDT
Got a blog up again. || An NS Writing Discussion

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31167
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Thu May 09, 2019 4:12 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:I’ve heard my share of dumb arguments but this has to be one of the stupidest.
To clarify your saying we should hold elections based on polling and cancel the general if shows one side will win?

Upsets can happen and your idea amounts to mass disenfranchisement. Votes still count no matter the margin.

How would you count votes on election night?

If it shows one side will clearly win, say, if there is a margin of victory greater than 20%.

Explain how votes for the losing candidate matter if there's no proportional representation.

It’s still disenfranchisement no matter how you spin it.

They matter for the simple fact they were cast.

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 4:13 pm

San Lumen wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:If it shows one side will clearly win, say, if there is a margin of victory greater than 20%.

Explain how votes for the losing candidate matter if there's no proportional representation.

It’s still disenfranchisement no matter how you spin it.

They matter for the simple fact they were cast.

I disagree, they matter if they have any kind of impact on the practical. They don't.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Hakons
Senator
 
Posts: 4910
Founded: Jul 14, 2015
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Hakons » Thu May 09, 2019 4:13 pm

Pinch Me wrote:
Hakons wrote:
This is a good civic view to have on voting. American government is owned by the people. Some cynically say government is owned by special interests, but I think it is best to be optimistic and not give in to pessimism that only discourages people not to vote. Having a vote is tremendous power and the best development in governing systems ever devised.

Where I differ is I don't despise Trump, because I don't think we should despise people. This is a little difficult to maintain, especially for figures like Stalin or Hitler, but they are thankfully dead. One can despise ideas, however, and Trump's immigration policy has been pretty despicable. However, I'm Republican and support many of his other policies.

Religiously, voting is an obligation. To not vote is to not fulfill one's role and duty to the community. It's not a sin per say to not vote, but it's against Church social teaching.


A vote doesn't mean anything if it's based on ignorance. Person A tells Person B they won't vote. B tells A that they should vote. A goes and votes for the candidate B thinks is the worst.

You can't just say "everyone should vote" without specifying a candidate they should vote for and why.

The moral obligation is not to vote, but to vote for the right candidate!


A vote is a vote. I'm not the one to decide if it is ignorant or not. People make decisions in a rational manner, so people vote rationally. Just because someone doesn't vote how you want or doesn't use the same metrics you prefer doesn't make them ignorant voters. Anyone who votes is a rational voter, because voting rationally just means voting based on whatever reason you deem fit as an individual.

A Catholic should try to vote for the right candidate, but the Church obviously can't endorse a political party, especially in America's system, where both parties contradict Church teaching on major matters of faith. One is obligated to vote, and to vote with the teachings of the Church in mind, but Catholics are left with a bit of a conundrum when it comes to figuring who is actually the right candidate to vote for. I think views on abortion make it clear who a Catholic should vote for, but then again almost half of Catholics disagree with me.
“That word, ‘conservative,’ is understood by people in different ways. Suppose you say that when we did arithmetic, we learned that two plus two equals four. It’s still the same, so am I then ‘conservative’ for saying so?” - Cardinal Arinze

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31167
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Thu May 09, 2019 4:16 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:It’s still disenfranchisement no matter how you spin it.

They matter for the simple fact they were cast.

I disagree, they matter if they have any kind of impact on the practical. They don't.

So if your a republican in Hartford or Philadelphia for example you shouldn’t be able to vote at all and have no candidates?

How would you count votes on election night? The results in the Governor election in New York last year show were the incumbent is liked and not liked. That’s another example of how every vote matters
Last edited by San Lumen on Thu May 09, 2019 4:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 4:19 pm

San Lumen wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:I disagree, they matter if they have any kind of impact on the practical. They don't.

So if your a republican in Hartford or Philadelphia for example you shouldn’t be able to vote at all and have no candidates?

How would you count votes on election night? The results in the Governor election in New York last year show were the incumbent is liked and not liked. That’s another example of how every vote matters

Why does any of that matter? It has no practical ramification in a winner-take-all election. Zip, nada.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Conserative Morality
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 76675
Founded: Aug 24, 2007
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Conserative Morality » Thu May 09, 2019 4:21 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
San Lumen wrote:So if your a republican in Hartford or Philadelphia for example you shouldn’t be able to vote at all and have no candidates?

How would you count votes on election night? The results in the Governor election in New York last year show were the incumbent is liked and not liked. That’s another example of how every vote matters

Why does any of that matter? It has no practical ramification in a winner-take-all election. Zip, nada.

Culture and institutional norms matter. In a functioning democracy, politicians and policymakers adjust their behavior based on their margin of victory, rather than pulling up the proscription lists after winning at 50.1% of the vote.
On the hate train. Choo choo, bitches. Bi-Polar. Proud Crypto-Fascist and Turbo Progressive. Dirty Étatist. Lowly Humanities Major. NSG's Best Liberal.
Caesar and Imperator of RWDT
Got a blog up again. || An NS Writing Discussion

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20770
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Thu May 09, 2019 4:22 pm

Conserative Morality wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:Why does any of that matter? It has no practical ramification in a winner-take-all election. Zip, nada.

Culture and institutional norms matter. In a functioning democracy, politicians and policymakers adjust their behavior based on their margin of victory, rather than pulling up the proscription lists after winning at 50.1% of the vote.

Hence why I said elections should be decided this way only if polling shows a margin of victory greater than 20%.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
The Liberated Territories
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11502
Founded: Dec 03, 2013
Capitalizt

Postby The Liberated Territories » Thu May 09, 2019 4:23 pm

Nothing really. I'd sell it if I could.
"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
—Robert Heinlein

Proud Veniceboo. Byzantium btfo

User avatar
LiberNovusAmericae
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5790
Founded: Mar 10, 2018
Left-Leaning College State

Postby LiberNovusAmericae » Thu May 09, 2019 4:24 pm

Considering the fact that there seems to be only the "lesser of the two evils" nowadays, I don't think my vote means a whole lot to me. I get a selection of candidates, and I vote for the one I dislike the least.
Nova Cyberia wrote:Thank you. I appreciate your respect for my low opinion of you.
Call me Liber for short.
Not to be confused with Novus America. We are different people with very different political opinions.

User avatar
Hakons
Senator
 
Posts: 4910
Founded: Jul 14, 2015
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Hakons » Thu May 09, 2019 4:26 pm

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:Considering the fact that there seems to be only the "lesser of the two evils" nowadays, I don't think my vote means a whole lot to me. I get a selection of candidates, and I vote for the one I dislike the least.


The way the Founders intended ;)
“That word, ‘conservative,’ is understood by people in different ways. Suppose you say that when we did arithmetic, we learned that two plus two equals four. It’s still the same, so am I then ‘conservative’ for saying so?” - Cardinal Arinze

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arumdaum, Dazchan, Dooom35796821595, Samadhi, Serconas, Vassenor

Advertisement

Remove ads