Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
supervike

Romney pulls ahead in Polls.

362 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Merc14

Yeah, where are th pole bashers now?

So let me get this straight...you don't want a democracy?

Of course not, democracy is one of the worst forms of government possible. Tyranny of the majority. Think of two wolves and a sheep and they vote for who will be dinner. Do you think you live in a democracy in the US? You don't. Do some research before you lose your mind at what I said.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

Of course not, democracy is one of the worst forms of government possible. Tyranny of the majority. Think of two wolves and a sheep and they vote for who will be dinner. Do you think you live in a democracy in the US? You don't. Do some research before you lose your mind at what I said.

Dude, I know that. I do research...I know how our government works. BUT Repubs generally do not understand this. When North Carolina banned gay marriage, the supporters of the ban said "The majority voted against it, that is good enough for me." Like you said, that is tyranny of the majority...yet Repubs seem to be okay with the idea because it is the popular vote. They love democracy when it works for them, but not against them.

Let me get this straight though...

This is me losing my mind?

So let me get this straight...you don't want a democracy?

You have an odd definition of "losing your mind."

Edited by HuttonEtAl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

Dude, I know that. I do research...I know how our government works. BUT Repubs generally do not understand this. When North Carolina banned gay marriage, the supporters of the ban said "The majority voted against it, that is good enough for me." Like you said, that is tyranny of the majority...yet Repubs seem to be okay with the idea because it is the popular vote. They love democracy when it works for them, but not against them.

Let me get this straight though...

This is me losing my mind?

You have an odd definition of "losing your mind."

Thanks for telling me what repubs don't understand. :rolleyes: NC has their own set of laws, as determined by their legislature, as does each of the other 49 states (56 if you're Obama). If they choose to settle questions such as gay marriage via a popular vote then so be it. If as a resident of NC you don't like that procedure you can move to VA or try and change the state constitution. Personally I think state legislatures should settle that question but I don't live in NC so none of my business.

Edited by Merc14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

Do you have anything to say or are you just quoting me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

Do you have anything to say or are you just quoting me?

Trying to eat dinner and type, chill out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

Thanks for telling me what repubs don't understand. :rolleyes: NC has their own set of laws, as determined by their legislature, as does each of the other 49 states (56 if you're Obama). If they choose to settle questions such as gay marriage via a popular vote then so be it. If as a resident of NC you don't like that procedure you can move to VA or try and change the state constitution. Personally I think state legislatures should settle that question but I don't live in NC so none of my business.

So the state legislatures say "Okay democracy on this decision" and you are okay with that? Did you not just say that democracy is a horrible idea?

It is crap like this that I do not understand. You have the nerve to throw out "tyranny of the majority" and then justifiy it by saying "well that's how their laws work, if you don't like it, move."

Convincing argument dude...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

Trying to eat dinner and type, chill out.

Do I seem excited? If I chilled out any more than I already am I would be sleeping...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

So the state legislatures say "Okay democracy on this decision" and you are okay with that? Did you not just say that democracy is a horrible idea?

It is crap like this that I do not understand. You have the nerve to throw out "tyranny of the majority" and then justifiy it by saying "well that's how their laws work, if you don't like it, move."

Convincing argument dude...

Who said I was arguing with you? What are we arguing about? Also I believe I said in my post, "Personally I think state legislatures should settle that question but I don't live in NC so none of my business." The states have the right to govern themselves and that seems to anger you. Oh well, too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

Who said I was arguing with you? What are we arguing about? Also I believe I said in my post, "Personally I think state legislatures should settle that question but I don't live in NC so none of my business." The states have the right to govern themselves and that seems to anger you. Oh well, too bad.

When you object and express your own view, you are arguing...

What angers me is when states try to pass laws that go against the constitution and deprives people of rights. Refusing to legalize gay marriage does so. I guess the only thing that will convince you of this (but probably not) is when the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional. If we allowed states to govern themselves the Souther states would have slaves. If you say "oh well, too bad" to that, you are a bigot IMO.

Edited by HuttonEtAl
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

When you object and express your own view, you are arguing...

What angers me is when states try to pass laws that go against the constitution and deprives people of rights. Refusing to legalize gay marriage does so. I guess the only thing that will convince you of this (but probably not) is when the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional. If we allowed states to govern themselves the Souther states would have slaves. If you say "oh well, too bad" to that, you are a bigot IMO.

Where can I find the article on marriage in the constitution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoIverine

What tinfoil hat? I don't think the "liberals" even make a secret of the fact they know how to run your life better than you do. Don't make me google stuff for you!

LOL, just choked on Sprite.

There needs to be a quadruple like button, haha :tu:

Edited by WoIverine
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

Where can I find the article on marriage in the constitution?

"Recognized federal civil rights law in the United States is grounded in the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. By this standard, marriage has long been established as a civil right.

The operative constitutional text is section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868. The relevant passages read as follows:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The U.S. Supreme Court first applied this standard to marriage in Loving v. Virginia (1967), where it struck down a Virginia law banning interracial marriage. As Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the majority:

The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men ...

To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."

Or do you not respect the Supreme Court?
Edited by HuttonEtAl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

What tinfoil hat? I don't think the "liberals" even make a secret of the fact they know how to run your life better than you do. Don't make me google stuff for you!

Great stuff!! :nw:
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

"Recognized federal civil rights law in the United States is grounded in the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. By this standard, marriage has long been established as a civil right.

The operative constitutional text is section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868. The relevant passages read as follows:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The U.S. Supreme Court first applied this standard to marriage in Loving v. Virginia (1967), where it struck down a Virginia law banning interracial marriage. As Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the majority:

The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men ...

To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."

Or do you not respect the Supreme Court?

Thanks for the legalese and I can find a dozen that say something different. The point I was making is that marriage is not a constitutional right, period. States decree how they manage marriage within their borders. I understand that you don't like it and that is fine by me but if you want gay marriage to be a constitutional right then there has to be a constitutional convention. Most states (33 I think but don't quote me) have passed laws banning gay marriage.

I don't agree with the Supreme Court deciding these things. I find it abhorrent that 9 people wield that much power, Abortion is still an issue in this country because our legislature refused to deal with it. SCOTUS should NEVER have taken that case, they should have thrown it back at congress and said "Do your ****g job!" Gay marriiage is the same thing. "Do your ****g job!" congress and deal with a controversial issue.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

Thanks for the legalese and I can find a dozen that say something different. The point I was making is that marriage is not a constitutional right, period. States decree how they manage marriage within their borders. I understand that you don't like it and that is fine by me but if you want gay marriage to be a constitutional right then there has to be a constitutional convention. Most states (33 I think but don't quote me) have passed laws banning gay marriage.

I don't agree with the Supreme Court deciding these things. I find it abhorrent that 9 people wield that much power, Abortion is still an issue in this country because our legislature refused to deal with it. SCOTUS should NEVER have taken that case, they should have thrown it back at congress and said "Do your ****g job!" Gay marriiage is the same thing. "Do your ****g job!" congress and deal with a controversial issue.

THE SUPREME COURT MADE IT A CONSTITIONAL RIGHT!

The Supreme Court was given this power by the Constitution.

Federal law over rules state law.

Don't like that? Oh well, too bad...

Edited by HuttonEtAl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

THE SUPREME COURT MADE IT A CONSTITIONAL RIGHT!

The Supreme Court was given this power by the Constitution.

Federal law over rules sta

Don't like that? Oh well, too bad...

SCOTUS chose not to review prop 8 . Regardless, SCOTUS cannot change the constitution, that requires a constitutional convention and that ain't gonna happen over same-sex marriage. Trust me. Kinda done with you now as you are boring me. :sleepy: Decree yourself the winner of whatever you are arguing about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

SCOTUS chose not to review prop 8 . Regardless, SCOTUS cannot change the constitution, that requires a constitutional convention and that ain't gonna happen over same-sex marriage. Trust me. Kinda done with you now as you are boring me. :sleepy: Decree yourself the winner of whatever you are arguing about.

I will declare myself the winner. You do what most Repubs do, run and avoid the facts. The fact is you preach the Constitution when it supports you and make excuses when it does not. You lost...marriage is a constitutional right, determined by the Supreme Court, given its power by the Constitution. When a state votes against a human right it is NOT OKAY, and not Constitutional...even if you think the state has the right to do so, which supports tyranny of the majority, which you claim you are against. Face it; the Federal government has the power over the states and it does so because "states rights" was proven not to work under the Articles of Conferderation. The result of the failure of the Articles of Confederation was the Constitution, which put in place a stronger federal government.

Don't like it? Oh well, too bad...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

I will declare myself the winner. You do what most Repubs do, run and avoid the facts. The fact is you preach the Constitution when it supports you and make excuses when it does not. You lost...marriage is a constitutional right, determined by the Supreme Court, given its power by the Constitution. When a state votes against a human right it is NOT OKAY, and not Constitutional...even if you think the state has the right to do so, which supports tyranny of the majority, which you claim you are against. Face it; the Federal government has the power over the states and it does so because "states rights" was proven not to work under the Articles of Conferderation. The result of the failure of the Articles of Confederation was the Constitution, which put in place a stronger federal government.

Don't like it? Oh well, too bad...

Yikes. Old saying "When your enemy is destroying himself, don't get in the way." :yes: Keep going . LOL

Edited by Merc14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremiah65

We are a "Republic". The Rule of law. A law decided and created by a group of "democratically" elected representatives. It is impossible to create, choose and enforce laws under "the mob rules" mentality of a "pure" democracy. It must be done through groups of people we choose to send forth to represent "all" of our interests. That is the many, the few...and the one.

Here's a hot topic for you...right out of current events. Lets say we have a nationwide vote to legalize drugs. 51% vote yes and 49% vote no. Do you honestly think the 49% is going to just say "Ok...gee...we lost...I guess I can live with it". Absolutely not. That 49% were absolutely positive that "they" knew what was best. Civil wars begin this way.

We choose representatives who filter through the opinions of their constituency and vote on the House and Senate floors accordingly. (Well in theory, but nowadays, it doesn't always seem to go that way).

The "Ideal" of Republic goes back to Ancient Greece. It MUST be a Republic...

In "anything less than a Republic", the few and the one are silenced. They are swept to the side...(or kicked) and the mob gets their way. In a Republic, the rule of law is equally applied to the many, the few or the one.

I know our great experiment has had it's problems, but I am not ready to let it go just yet. Our Bill of Rights and The Constitution are the greatest "living" documents on earth (Biblical texts not included). The wisdom within the way they were conceived, worded and penned down still applies through the ages...an amazing accomplishment and a display of the genius our forefathers possessed.

Do some reading into Sigmund Freud and his impression of humanity and "the mob rules" mentality of pure democracy. He came to the conclusion that it was impossible for human beings to ever truly live in a pure democracy. he cited Nazi Germany's brain washed masses as an example of what happens when large groups of people start gathering together.

Edited by Jeremiah65
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

Yikes. Old saying "When your enemy is destroying himself, don't get in the way." :yes: Keep going . LOL

I guess I should not have got in your way...

You have nothing. Keeping it going my making smart ass remarks like that. You laugh, you know you have nothing. I have the Constitution on my side

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

We are a "Republic". The Rule of law. A law decided and created by a group of "democratically" elected representatives. It is impossible to create, choose and enforce laws under "the mob rules" mentality of a "pure" democracy. It must be done through groups of people we choose to send forth to represent "all" of our interests. That is the many, the few...and the one.

Here's a hot topic for you...right out of current events. Lets say we have a nationwide vote to legalize drugs. 51% vote yes and 49% vote no. Do you honestly think the 49% is going to just say "Ok...gee...we lost...I guess I can live with it". Absolutely not. That 49% were absolutely positive that "they" knew what was best. Civil wars begin this way.

We choose representatives who filter through the opinions of their constituency and vote on the House and Senate floors accordingly. (Well in theory, but nowadays, it doesn't always seem to go that way).

The "Ideal" of Republic goes back to Ancient Greece. It MUST be a Republic...

In "anything less than a Republic", the few and the one are silenced. They are swept to the side...(or kicked) and the mob gets their way. In a Republic, the rule of law is equally applied to the many, the few or the one.

I know our great experiment has had it's problems, but I am not ready to let it go just yet. Our Bill of Rights and The Constitution are the greatest "living" documents on earth (Biblical texts not included). The wisdom within the way they were conceived, worded and penned down still applies through the ages...an amazing accomplishment and a display of the genius our forefathers possessed.

Do some reading into Sigmund Freud and his impression of humanity and "the mob rules" mentality of pure democracy. He came to the conclusion that it was impossible for human beings to ever truly live in a pure democracy. he cited Nazi Germany's brain washed masses as an example of what happens when large groups of people start gathering together.

Yikes in a good way. Well said sir. :clap:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc

You guys just don't get it, the elections are not decided by popular vote, they are decided by 17% of the electorate in 5 swing states. Romney can win 60% of the votes, if he does not win those swing states he has lost.

According to the University of Colorado model...Romney wins big in swing states and wins the election and they haven't been wrong since they started in 1980.

According to their analysis, President Barack Obama will win 218 votes in the Electoral College, short of the 270 he needs. And though they chiefly focus on the Electoral College, the political scientists predict Romney will win 52.9 percent of the popular vote to Obama’s 47.1 percent, when considering only the two major political parties.

Edited by joc
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CommunitarianKevin

I guess I should not have got in your way...

You have nothing. Keeping it going my making smart ass remarks like that. You laugh, you know you have nothing. I have the Constitution on my side

We are a "Republic". The Rule of law. A law decided and created by a group of "democratically" elected representatives. It is impossible to create, choose and enforce laws under "the mob rules" mentality of a "pure" democracy. It must be done through groups of people we choose to send forth to represent "all" of our interests. That is the many, the few...and the one.

Here's a hot topic for you...right out of current events. Lets say we have a nationwide vote to legalize drugs. 51% vote yes and 49% vote no. Do you honestly think the 49% is going to just say "Ok...gee...we lost...I guess I can live with it". Absolutely not. That 49% were absolutely positive that "they" knew what was best. Civil wars begin this way.

We choose representatives who filter through the opinions of their constituency and vote on the House and Senate floors accordingly. (Well in theory, but nowadays, it doesn't always seem to go that way).

The "Ideal" of Republic goes back to Ancient Greece. It MUST be a Republic...

In "anything less than a Republic", the few and the one are silenced. They are swept to the side...(or kicked) and the mob gets their way. In a Republic, the rule of law is equally applied to the many, the few or the one.

I know our great experiment has had it's problems, but I am not ready to let it go just yet. Our Bill of Rights and The Constitution are the greatest "living" documents on earth (Biblical texts not included). The wisdom within the way they were conceived, worded and penned down still applies through the ages...an amazing accomplishment and a display of the genius our forefathers possessed.

Do some reading into Sigmund Freud and his impression of humanity and "the mob rules" mentality of pure democracy. He came to the conclusion that it was impossible for human beings to ever truly live in a pure democracy. he cited Nazi Germany's brain washed masses as an example of what happens when large groups of people start gathering together.

I agree.

The Bill of Rights is clearly our most important document. It is what seperates us from the rest of the world.

Do not be to quick to grasp Plato's idea of a republic though...What he had in mind was closer to a theocracy...

Freud also claims that religious beliefs is a mental disorder, neurosis, specifically...

I do agree with Freud's conclusion on that issue, but evaluate the source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremiah65

Ok...we got off topic. and I added to the off-topic ride...so I'll reel it back in.

Do any of you Obama or Romney supporters actually think the Vice president debate tomorrow will effect the polls?

I don't think they will but then I don't directly have a horse in this race so it's a big whatever to me. My guy isn't even invited on the same stage. Just curious if anyone thinks what Biden or Ryan has to say means anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

Ok...we got off topic. and I added to the off-topic ride...so I'll reel it back in.

Do any of you Obama or Romney supporters actually think the Vice president debate tomorrow will effect the polls?

I don't think they will but then I don't directly have a horse in this race so it's a big whatever to me. My guy isn't even invited on the same stage. Just curious if anyone thinks what Biden or Ryan has to say means anything.

I think Biden doing well would get huge traction from the MSM. They need a winner to get back on the Obama bandwagon. Will it move the polls? I think it would in the swing states a tiny bit. Ryan failing horribly would have the same MSM effect and move the polls minutely in the swing states. Ryan crushing Biden like Romney crushed Obama would solidify the popular opinion that the Obama campaign is coming off the rails and make it harder for Obama to get a bounce in the next debate.

As pure theater, given Biden's multiple gaffes over the last few months and his isolation ward treatment the last few weeks and Ryan's reputation as a policy wonk and purported ability to cut old Joe to pieces and make him look like an idiot, I think the audience breaks the 70M number. Big winner will be the networks!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.