Rick Santorum-Pure Democracies are no way to run a country

[BigPapaKain]

(11-10-2023, 08:43 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Look, I am on record countless times expressing my dismay over the anti-democratic, authoritarian wannabes that make up the MAGA movement. It is something I critique the GOP for on a constant basis. However, what Santorum said was not outrageous. It wasn't inaccurate and it doesn't require rebuke from anyone. Honestly, when I see people that are left-of-center calling for such things it just tells me that they are either ignorant of our system of governance and the history of democracy or they are letting their biases get the better of them in an irrational criticism of someone they ideologically oppose. Usually there is a bit of both mixed in.

Because optics aren't important in politics.

Even if what he said wasn't wrong, it sounds wrong. I get that the US isn't a pure democracy - but saying shit like that just gets the rabids on any particular side fired up which is detrimental to the health of the country.

Also, he's saying it after a round of general elections which are as close to a pure democracy we have in this country on the state level. It's sour grapes and a bad sound bite for conservatives.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-10-2023, 08:43 PM)pally Wrote: You know, after reflection, you are right.  I obviously am so blinded by my own opinions that I had no idea what I wrote.  I am really grateful that you took the time and effort to mansplain it to me otherwise I would still be lost writing actual words that mean what they said not what someone else thinks they say.

Thank you so much for your valuable input.

Sarcasm is the ignorant man's weapon.  

[*pally*]

(11-10-2023, 09:06 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Sarcasm is the ignorant man's weapon.  

Well I guess that fits since you’ve told me I’m too stupid to know what I’ve said.

[GMDino]

I wonder if these guys speak for republicans or conservatives?



Almost like ole Frothy has his finger on the pulse and was right.

[*Nately120*]

Shouldn't that say god given rights with which we were conceived? Stating that we receive our god given rights once we are born sort of undercuts this whole thing.

[GMDino]

(11-11-2023, 11:18 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Shouldn't that say god given rights with which we were conceived?  Stating that we receive our god given rights once we are born sort of undercuts this whole thing.

If you want smart and consistent the OH republicans is not the place to start.

[BigPapaKain]

(11-11-2023, 10:46 AM)GMDino Wrote: I wonder if these guys speak for republicans or conservatives?



Almost like ole Frothy has his finger on the pulse and was right.

It's great that when Roe got overturned, they said they'd leave it up to the states to decide.

Now that a bunch of states are like 'yeah, we want safe and legal abortions', the entire Conservative response has boiled down to 'no not like that'.

[GMDino]

(11-11-2023, 12:25 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: It's great that when Roe got overturned, they said they'd leave it up to the states to decide.

Now that a bunch of states are like 'yeah, we want safe and legal abortions', the entire Conservative response has boiled down to 'no not like that'.

Clearly they wanted the state LEGISLATURES to decide.  And since 98% of seats are usually safe they knew they could ban it completely.  Unfortunately for them sometimes the voters wake up and show up and get what they want instead.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-11-2023, 12:55 AM)pally Wrote: Well I guess that fits since you’ve told me I’m too stupid to know what I’ve said.

What you said and what you intended to say can be two different things.  If you are stating that your statement inadvertantly touts Santorum as a representative of conservatives then fine and let's move on.

[Dill]

(11-10-2023, 03:26 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Suuuurrrreee she's not.  I mean she only said the following.

Conservatives, as a group.  So she absolutely did use Santorum as representative of not only the GOP but conservatives in general.  You can't stop lying even when the proof is in the very thread you're posting in.

Once again you've created a tempest in a teapot, calling people who dispute your take "liars." 

Santorum is well known on Newsmax and occasionally on Fox; he is definitely,  "a voice" of conservatism. 
That's why he has that public forum.

"its not fair the majority of voters have the right to vote directly on things that conservatives don't like"

That's Pally paraphrasing Santorum as voicing a view he thought conservatives ought to agree with. 
That's not Pally presenting Santorum as "THE voice of the GOP" or conservatives in general or whatever collection of right wing
voters you are trying to separate from the general anti-democratic tenor now common on your end of the political spectrum. 

I.e., simply noting that he ADDRESSES conservatives in general doesn't REPRESENT him as their general representative. 

Santorum is saying the sort of thing we hear from MANY in the GOP who are not "the voice of the GOP"; that's why it's worth discussing.

If I post this video of Greg Gutfeld saying "elections don't work" and "We need war to bring peace," That doesn't mean I am calling
him THE voice of the GOP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAv8Z8P05S4

[Dill]

(11-08-2023, 08:19 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Ok, so, he's not relevant, sure. But also...he isn't wrong. There is a reason we utilize a representative democracy. There is a reason why there are checks and balances.

I firmly believe in the need for some ballot referendums. All state constitutional amendments should face ballot referendums. Beyond that, though, ballot referendums result in some really stupid shit. I mean, the entire reason Colorado was so quick to legalize and tax marijuana was because they made it so that income tax increases had to be done by ballot so they were going broke because the people were never going to vote for an increase on their taxes.

You know, I initially agreed with the bolded. In general and in the abstract, Santorum is not wrong. People can't vote every year on everything.

But the more I think about his examples, the more I think he is complaining about too much democracy, about the inability of a minority to
enforce its views on the majority under the present system. 

And it's disturbing because so many GOPers who also "don't represent" the GOP" say similar things and have been able to push convert their worries into legislation. I'm thinking here, for example, of the "independent state legislature theory" which keeps popping up in different states behind innovative legal measures to "protect" against elections that go "the wrong way." 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-11-2023, 03:57 PM)Dill Wrote: Once again you've created a tempest in a teapot, calling people who dispute your take "liars." 

Santorum is well known on Newsmax and occasionally on Fox; he is definitely,  "a voice" of conservatism. 
That's why he has that public forum.

"its not fair the majority of voters have the right to vote directly on things that conservatives don't like"

That's Pally paraphrasing Santorum as voicing a view he thought conservatives ought to agree with. 
That's not Pally presenting Santorum as "THE voice of the GOP" or conservatives in general or whatever collection of right wing
voters you are trying to separate from the general anti-democratic tenor now common on your end of the political spectrum. 

I.e., simply noting that he ADDRESSES conservatives in general doesn't REPRESENT him as their general representative. 

Santorum is saying the sort of thing we hear from MANY in the GOP who are not "the voice of the GOP"; that's why it's worth discussing.

If I post this video of Greg Gutfeld saying "elections don't work" and "We need war to bring peace," That doesn't mean I am calling
him THE voice of the GOP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAv8Z8P05S4

If the sentiment is so rife on the right then I'm sure you'll find many more examples other than a comedy show host on Fox.  Like I said, tying yourself in knots.

[Dill]

(11-11-2023, 04:14 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: If the sentiment is so rife on the right then I'm sure you'll find many more examples other than a comedy show host on Fox.  Like I said, tying yourself in knots.

LOL We are discussing such examples on multiple threads as I write.

Have been for years. 

50+ million people want to re-elect an autocratic ex-president who tried to remain in power illegally.

That's how "rife" the sentiment is on the Right. 

And that ex-president, who is not a comedy show host, now says he is very comfortable with the idea of using the DOJ to go after 
political opponents--because Dems did.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/09/trump-interview-univision/

How many states have now passed legislative shifting authority to certify elections from independent bodies to the state legislature itself?

Normally we say its the people who try to ignore or downplay evidence who are "tying themselves in knots," not those "with many more examples." 

[Dill]

(11-11-2023, 12:25 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: It's great that when Roe got overturned, they said they'd leave it up to the states to decide.

Now that a bunch of states are like 'yeah, we want safe and legal abortions', the entire Conservative response has boiled down to 'no not like that'.

But BigP--Ohio doesn't represent all conservatives. 

[Dill]

(11-11-2023, 12:55 AM)pally Wrote: Sarcasm is the ignorant man's weapon.   

Well I guess that fits since you’ve told me I’m too stupid to know what I’ve said.

You'll want to save that quote, Pally.

I guarantee it's going to come in handy on future threads. 

[*pally*]

(11-11-2023, 02:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: What you said and what you intended to say can be two different things.  If you are stating that your statement inadvertantly touts Santorum as a representative of conservatives then fine and let's move on.

Or you can shelve your arrogance and accept the fact that you read something into my statement that wasn't there

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-11-2023, 04:44 PM)Dill Wrote: You'll want to save that quote, Pally.

I guarantee it's going to come in handy on future threads. 

You could even put it in your sig!

(11-11-2023, 06:03 PM)pally Wrote: Or you can shelve your arrogance and accept the fact that you read something into my statement that wasn't there

This is why you fail.  You can't even acknowledge the possibility that you made a statement far broader than you intended.  It is childishly simple to interpret your last sentence in OP as using Santorum's sentiment as emblematic of conservatives as a whole.  If this was not your intention it would be equally simple to acknowledge that was the case.  That you choose not to do so lends a large amount of credence to my assertion.  Partisan hackery is not a good look, especially when you refuse to even acknowledge its existence.

[*pally*]

(11-11-2023, 07:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You could even put it in your sig!


This is why you fail.  You can't even acknowledge the possibility that you made a statement far broader than you intended.  It is childishly simple to interpret your last sentence in OP as using Santorum's sentiment as emblematic of conservatives as a whole.  If this was not your intention it would be equally simple to acknowledge that was the case.  That you choose not to do so lends a large amount of credence to my assertion.  Partisan hackery is not a good look, especially when you refuse to even acknowledge its existence.

How dare someone not concede to your erroneous beliefs?  Trying to bully me into submission isn't going to work.  I know what I said.  You are the only one who seemed to not understand it.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-11-2023, 09:21 PM)pally Wrote: How dare someone not concede to your erroneous beliefs?  Trying to bully me into submission isn't going to work.  I know what I said.  You are the only one who seemed to not understand it.  

Everyone understood it and no one is trying to bully you, so spare me the victim mentality.  

[*pally*]

(11-11-2023, 09:51 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Everyone understood it and no one is trying to bully you, so spare me the victim mentality.  

Nothing says bully more than trying to dictate how someone else feels on top of already trying to put words into their mouth.

BTW, I also never said I was a victim. Trying to bully, as you are, and succeeding at it, which you are not, are two different things.