The General Election

[Scratchtown]

But I never said it wasn't ok to label me. I just corrected it.

[Whistlebritches]

From the 538 blog:

 

Don’t Believe Everything You Read

We’re now a three and a half hours until we get our first look at exit poll data. That data is currently under quarantine. I remember a time, however, when that data could leak it out. Back in 2004, the very first wave of exit polls suggested by mid-afternoon that Democrat John Kerry was well on his way to defeating Republican President George W. Bush. Many people believed that the exits were right, and it even caused massive movement in the stock market. It turned out that the data was wrong. The exit polls overestimated Kerry’s support, and Bush went on to to win a small but comfortable victory.

That should serve as a lesson both at 5 p.m. and now. We won’t know who is going to win until the votes are actually counted. Don’t believe in reports you read online that supposedly give you a keen insight of who is going to win. No one knows.

[Count 'Bility]

c'mon T. Dont be so extreme. Cripes. The world aint ending.

 

You know what I'm listening to, for fun right now? for a good laugh? alex jones info wars. good stuff. Like comedy good stuff. Like glen beck on roids comical. yes. I will vote for trump. i have my reasons. I respect those who disagree. just leave me be. I'll leave you be. but if Hillary wins, we aint coming to an end. Life will go on, mostly completely unchanging, for the forseeable future. Even under Hillary-or Trump for that matter-some things would be better, some would be worse. Depends who you are and what your principles are. This is life. And of which i'm not even so sure is dependent on who's president.

[Scratchtown]

It's just amazing the double standard we have around here with the whole "judgement" thing.

 

I'm going to use the LGBT group as an example. People have their thoughts on what's right and what isn't. Most of the time the people that aren't for it are getting pounded for judging.

 

Then we have those same people judging republicans and the like for thinking the way they do. It's so a double standard it's not even funny.

 

Not saying I'm not guilty of judging others because I have and do still at time (when I shouldn't) but I don't go advocating against judging like some of the people on this board.

[Scratchtown]

c'mon T. Dont be so extreme. Cripes. The world aint ending.

 

You know what I'm listening to, for fun right now? for a good laugh? alex jones info wars. good stuff. Like comedy good stuff. Like glen beck on roids comical. yes. I will vote for trump. i have my reasons. I respect those who disagree. just leave me be. I'll leave you be. but if Hillary wins, we aint coming to an end. Life will go on, mostly completely unchanging, for the forseeable future. Even under Hillary-or Trump for that matter-some things would be better, some would be worse. Depends who you are and what your principles are. This is life. And of which i'm not even so sure is dependent on who's president.

Do you guys really think I was going to hide in a hole for 4 years? C'mon did I forget sarcasm emote?

[funhusker]

+1 Count (more if I could)

[zoogs]

I'll gladly defend any pounding on people who aren't "for" LGBTQ people, and any amount of "judging" of people of any party who feel that way.

 

They've chosen to take a stand on this opinion. Dissection, analysis, and criticism of opinions is fair game.

 

You know what I'll posit is an odd double standard, though: "We're too PC, *I* don't get offended" and "Please leave my opinions unchallenged."

[Count 'Bility]

I dont think double standardizing is nearly the problem as generalizing is.

[funhusker]

It's just amazing the double standard we have around here with the whole "judgement" thing.

 

I'm going to use the LGBT group as an example. People have their thoughts on what's right and what isn't. Most of the time the people that aren't for it are getting pounded for judging.

 

Then we have those same people judging republicans and the like for thinking the way they do. It's so a double standard it's not even funny.

 

Not saying I'm not guilty of judging others because I have and do still at time (when I shouldn't) but I don't go advocating against judging like some of the people on this board.

No one cares if you don't like gays or think it is evil. People care that laws are discriminatory against a group of people.

[knapplc]

It's just amazing the double standard we have around here with the whole "judgement" thing.

 

I'm going to use the LGBT group as an example. People have their thoughts on what's right and what isn't. Most of the time the people that aren't for it are getting pounded for judging.

 

Then we have those same people judging republicans and the like for thinking the way they do. It's so a double standard it's not even funny.

 

Not saying I'm not guilty of judging others because I have and do still at time (when I shouldn't) but I don't go advocating against judging like some of the people on this board.

 

So what do you want? You want to judge LGBT people for their life, but have nobody judge you for yours?

[Count 'Bility]

I dont agree with the lez/gay lifestyle. I am perfectly fine with one's right to live it though, and have the rights of a non-gay. It's your lifestyle. I DONT CARE. But what i dont like is the generalization, that, as a registered independent, i do have a lot of conservative views. economically and religiously. but dont use that to call me a bigot because other conservatives cant just let ppl be.

 

To me it's a lack of ability of our society to judge things on a case by case basis. We're lazy, so we use one instance to label a whole group. Sweeping generalizations run amuch. I could easily use that one comment by T, sarcastice or not, to label him as a right wing nut job, driving the jacked up truck, cow nuts hanging from the hitch, and the stars and bars in the back window. Thats where we're at.

[Landlord]

Double standards exist because they're two different situations and rightfully require different responses.

[Scratchtown]

Jeebus you guys...it was the example. Not the issue.

[knapplc]

Jeebus you guys...it was the example. Not the issue.

 

We get it. You're not talking over anyone's head.

 

The question remains - what do you want? A safe space where you can criticize, but never be criticized? That's what you seem to be asking for.

[zoogs]

"Safe space" was exactly the term I thought of, knapp.

 

I will defend the concept, also, to an extent. But a limited one. It is not about shielding opinions from challenge in every medium.

 

But what i dont like is the generalization, that, as a registered independent, i do have a lot of conservative views. economically and religiously. but dont use that to call me a bigot because other conservatives cant just let ppl be.

Two things to that, Count:

 

- I think there's often serious overzealotry in calling people names. Even in cases where there's a good argument for how fair it is, I'd rather focus on condemning the actions, not the person.

 

- Similarly, I think everybody wants to claim the "I'm not a bigot" (or sexist, or whatever) badge. But it's one thing to claim that. It's another to actually act consistently. And really, I think it's about accountability. It's great to claim certain beliefs -- and it's also important to be held accountable to them.

 

To use an example filtered through my own somewhat partisan lens, Paul Ryan has made a recent show of sympathy in rhetoric for the struggles of the poor, and so on, and how they're unfairly maligned. Great, Paul -- but until your platform changes dramatically (and I appreciate that it can't, for you to keep your job), I can only consider this fake compassion.

 

Similar criticisms could probably be made about how much the Democratic Party really fights for Black interests, for example. But I mean, unfortunately, look at the alternative right now.