The long nightmare has just begun: Inauguration of a fraud.

[Town Heretic]

Some will say that by framing the only two possible choices as evils, one absolves oneself from any responsibility to choose the best candidate.

I'd say the responsibility is to conscience and principle and that if casting your vote violates either then the vote is irresponsible and contrary to meaningful democratic exercise. So to someone in that position framing is only another way of recognizing. I didn't find either candidate worthy of the office and the public trust.

One time I stayed out of a presidential vote based on that approach and my moment of clarity since then has brought me to a different conclusion.

I refuse to believe your clarity led you to believe I should be compelled to violate my conscience to satisfy yours. And to qualify my own position, if anyone doesn't agree with me in conclusion I would expect them to follow their own, wherever it led. My arguments against the two proffered were always my own and I noted them along the way.

From then on, with only two available candidates, I vote my conscience based on who I think is in the best interests of the country. I won't abstain again or make a third party vote, because if I did, I wouldn't have much ground to stand on when criticizing the results of the election.

The first part of this goes back to my answer above. As for the rest...I respectfully disagree. The litmus for civil protest of any form isn't going along with a process you feel has been compromised. Sometimes our part in objection will take the form of active civil protest. For me, abstaining wasn't enough. I encouraged others to protest the last election by refusing to cooperate with a choice between candidates I felt were demonstrably unworthy of the office. And in doing that I exercised my freedom to speak and participate in the process. I absolutely retain my right as a citizen to continue that objection on any particular point with this president as I would have with Clinton and for one simple reason: it's my birthright--as is civil protest in all its forms, as is the duty to exercise my best judgment as an inheritor of the compact we both value.

 

[Town Heretic]

I don't think she's "fair game," in the same way I would see a politician.

I don't know what that means. She's a public figure. If she supports something objectionable she's subject to the same treatment any public figure advancing it should be.

You'll have to make an argument as to why she would be. She has a role to fulfill, but she's not the politician who ran for office.

I gave you my rationale in my last. She's accepted a role, profited by it, continues to profit by it and was an active supporter. She should be subject to the same lampooning anyone in that role would be subject to, including some of the yahoos around here, though her participation and support had an arguably greater impact. Beyond that, if she uses her role to advance particulars that are objectionable, supra.

And I'm not making any assumptions about her motivations for marrying Trump, and I'm a bit bemused that you didn't grant Trump equal time in the assumption game

Always glad to bemuse you but I don't know what you mean. Equal time in what sense, impacting in what way? He's already under scrutiny and I've noted his habit of "next young blond up" in the past. You want the list?

Melania's had some missteps, like the plagiarism in her convention speech - but I don't know how much she was involved in that, since I don't recall if she claimed to have written the speech herself.

If it comes out of your mouth in a public venue it's your responsibility for good or ill.

That's key. I don't know a lot about her, but I sensed an unhappiness in her in some of the inauguration photos I saw, and maybe that will settle out and she'll make her own place, or maybe it won't and she'll struggle to make the transition. I've read repeatedly that Michelle pretty much couldn't wait to get back to private life, but she had a duty to fulfill and she did it with grace and a warmth that was genuine, even though she was subject to a nasty, vicious running commentary by the alt right wing.

Michelle married someone with particular ambitions and aims. She apparently shared much of that and found a constructive role for herself within the context. Maybe Melania will manage to do that. I suspect she married a guy she felt compelled by and whose ambitions and aims suited her. This is what follows...and I'd never support "nasty, vicious running commentary" by anyone, so that's not a part of what I'm speaking to or for.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

If it were left up to the Democrat Libs they'd dismantle this country brick by brick. I'm glad to be on the RIGHT side. The winning side.

 

[Town Heretic]

If it were left up to the Democrat Libs they'd dismantle this country brick by brick.

To borrow from...me...that's a stupid thing to say or believe. I don't believe you're stupid, but when you write something like that you waste the difference.

I'm glad to be on the RIGHT side. The winning side

Winning or losing has nothing to do with principle, unless that's your principle.

 

[Crucible]

Liberals got the upper hand on the 'culture war', and what they decided to do with that advantage is make anyone who disagrees with them miserable.

So, those people instead waited for the election and voted for Trump, and now the Left are being seen as the 'deplorables' they ought to have been seen as over the past seven years in the first place.

Because that is what they've been- absolutely deplorable. You'll notice that since the election, they aren't even making the sorry excuses they kept trying to get by with over the years- now they are just wide open with their absurdity.

The Left cost itself the election, and aren't even adult enough to consult one another and acknowledge it

 

[ok doser]

One time I stayed out of a presidential vote based on that approach

all of us, when we were children, had the desire to take our ball and go home when things weren't going our way

most of us put that aside when we grew up

...with only two available candidates, I vote my conscience based on who I think is in the best interests of the country.

and that's the grown-up thing to do - to recognize that often in life, our choices aren't between good and evil, but between poor and poorer

I won't abstain again or make a third party vote, because if I did, I wouldn't have much ground to stand on when criticizing the results of the election.

those who make a third party vote more than once or twice are just proving einstein's definition:

 

[ok doser]

If it were left up to the Democrat Libs they'd dismantle this country brick by brick.

whereas some of them would do it deliberately, most would do it unwittingly, in the hopes that they were constructing a more "just", "inclusive" and "sustainable" society


in that desire, they are foolish children, who deserve our pity and guidance


of course, many of them are certifiably insane :idunno:

 

[ok doser]

on the wife of a president he doesn't like:

.... She should be subject to the same lampooning anyone in that role would be subject to....

on the wife of a president he voted for:

....I'd never support "nasty, vicious running commentary"....

not to belabour the obvious, but one man's "lampooning" is another man's "nasty, vicious running commentary"

 

[Crucible]

If you think a third party might get enough votes to be funded on the next go around, then voting for them is a solid move- one is simply planting a seed in return for temporarily settling for a fruit they don't want.
Otherwise, you are wasting your vote, and your perceived morality is ultimately self-serving and vain.

As far as liberals are concerned, they reached a point a long time ago where reality doesn't matter to them- you can try to open their eyes, but they will just find a way to repeat the same narrative.

For example, blacks kill whites twice as much as whites kill blacks- they are doubly adversarial to white people than white people to them.
So why would any white person support 'BLM' unless it is for the sole purpose of being a misery to conservatives? That's all the Left is about now with every one of their agendas

 

[serpentdove]

on the wife of a president he doesn't like:


on the wife of a president he voted for:


not to belabour the obvious, but one man's "lampooning" is another man's "nasty, vicious running commentary"

For all her faults at least Michelle Obama was a wife. Trump's :greedy: wife lives down the street in a hut (Rom. 7:2, 3). His concubine

will live in the White House.

"God will have to judge America or He's going to have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah." ~ Billy Graham

See:

Divorce & Re marriage: A Position Paper by John Piper

America Will Not Repent

 

[ok doser]

surely you don't think trump is a Christian :idunno:

 

[kmoney]

Steve Bannon registered to vote in two states
The Guardian on MSN.com · 4 hours ago
As President Trump calls for a voter fraud investigation, it turns out his White House chief strategist is registered to vote in two states.


:doh:

 

[Angel4Truth]

Steve Bannon registered to vote in two states
The Guardian on MSN.com · 4 hours ago
As President Trump calls for a voter fraud investigation, it turns out his White House chief strategist is registered to vote in two states.


:doh:

Which often happens when one moves. Happened to me, not my fault the previous state where i lived, didnt fix it for some time.

From your own article:

It is not in itself illegal to be registered to vote in two states. It would be illegal to cast ballots in two different states. Many states have their own laws about who qualifies to register to vote in their elections, typically based on whether a person actually lives in a residence there.

and :

Bannon has not cast a ballot in Florida, according to state records.

Wow the left is so desperate!

 

[kmoney]

Which often happens when one moves. Happened to me, not my fault the previous state where i lived, didnt fix it for some time.

From your own article:



and :



Wow the left is so desperate!

I'm sure there are valid reasons and I didn't think Bannon had actually voted twice. I posted it because of the irony in Trump tweeting about an investigation and then a close adviser has multiple registrations.

 

[Angel4Truth]

I'm sure there are valid reasons and I didn't think Bannon had actually voted twice. I posted it because of the irony in Trump tweeting about an investigation and then a close adviser has multiple registrations.

Nothing ironic about it, it happens all the time when people move. To even write about something like that (mslsd) is pure desperation, since the meaning (those attempting to game the system) is apparent.

The left is starting to look psychotic, instead of just desperate.

 

[dodge]

Surely you joke ? Otraitor was a traitor to the American people. I guess if you do not mind a muslime queer that hates America as a president he was ok.

 

[fool]

Steve Bannon registered to vote in two states
The Guardian on MSN.com · 4 hours ago
As President Trump calls for a voter fraud investigation, it turns out his White House chief strategist is registered to vote in two states.


:doh:

That's only a problem if he votes in two states. If you move I don't know of an "un register" form you fill out.
It's the states fault for not talking to each other and how would they? All the polls know is name and address.

 

[fool]

I'm sure there are valid reasons and I didn't think Bannon had actually voted twice. I posted it because of the irony in Trump tweeting about an investigation and then a close adviser has multiple registrations.

It illustrates the problem beautifully.
If you can do it accidentally then imagine what people could do on purpose.

 

[Town Heretic]

I'm sure there are valid reasons and I didn't think Bannon had actually voted twice. I posted it because of the irony in Trump tweeting about an investigation and then a close adviser has multiple registrations.

The funny thing about the voter fraud Trump alleged (in an attempt to dismiss the nearly three million voter difference in favor of Clinton) is his own lawyers argued against him in seeking to stop voter recounts in 3 states that decided the election by razor thin margins. lain:

 

[ok doser]

It illustrates the problem beautifully.
If you can do it accidentally then imagine what people could do on purpose.

you're not such a fool after all :thumb: