Who is, who runs, who controls the New Democrat Party?

[4est_4est_Gump]

i'm just glad you didn't tell us you were spitting on it again.

and that's my time. and yours, hopefully. i mean if it hasn't happened yet maybe you should give it a rest for a bit. chafing your shaft is no fun for anybody.

I have a beautiful blonde wife.

I do not need to employ your crass and crude methods to get my morning release.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

This is why I study economics:

...

This is not necessarily a character flaw—as libertarian economist Bryan Caplan shows at length in his book The Myth of the Rational Voter, excerpted here in Reason in "The 4 Boneheaded Biases of Stupid Voters," especially when it comes to economics, most voters don't know much, know a lot that ain't so, and have zero incentive to learn. And if they are just living their own lives, none of that matters. It's only when they are given the power to select the people who make the policies that get imposed on all of us that it matters.

Voters are, in Caplan's term, not just rationally ignorant, a term that has leaked out to pretty widespread public awareness, roughly meaning that the benefits of becoming learned on economics and policy far outweigh the benefits to most normal working Americans.

They are actually rationally irrational, intentionally just plain bonkers in areas where being bonkers has emotional benefits and low to no real costs. For philosopher Michael Huemer expanding on the meaning and dangers of rational irrationality, go here.

...

Brian Doherty

http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/21/donald-trump-wtf-democracy-can-be-rough

...

As Brennan wrote, generically, about silly voters, they are "often ignorant or misinformed about the relevant facts or, worse, are simply irrational. Though they intend to promote the public good, they all too often lack sufficient evidence to justify the policies they advocate. When they do vote, I argue, they pollute democracy with their votes and make it more likely that we will have to suffer from bad governance."

...

We get a lot of that here...

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I have a beautiful blonde wife.

#BlondeWivesMatter

SEE I CAN TASTELESSLY SNARK TOO!!!

(((Fremdschämen)))

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

More nonsense from the Progressive wing...

IrezumiKiss
This message is hidden because IrezumiKiss is on your ignore list.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

waaah waaah waaah

Never could take your own shit thrown back at you.

Go make yourself a lemonade, crack open an Ayn Rand book and have a smile, Francis.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Libertarian observation of the short-attention span voter:

http://spectator.org/articles/63845/lessons-las-vegas

 

[Adre]

Sounds like the smart guy wants to establish a few guidelines concerning who gets to vote going forward. I'm just going to assume he is one of the chosen rational voters, because...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Sounds like someone wants to put their own special-olympics spin on things to prove that they are truly representative of the "rational voter."

SSSSSSSshhhhh... be vewy vewy qwiet. Ahm huntin' wascaws...

 

[Adre]

Sounds like someone wants to put their own special-olympics spin on things to prove that they are truly representative of the "rational voter."

SSSSSSSshhhhh... be vewy vewy qwiet. Ahm huntin' wascaws...

Oh look, the tubby injun posting personal info. Should I go whine to kitty mama like you do, chubs? Turns out you're the biggest elitist of all, eh?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

At least now we have a third example of my earlier observations.

Too predictable.

They don't even want to do what DWS didn't want to do, to patiently explain to me how the Democrat Party is in no way, shape or manner, a party evolved into Socialist thought and direction. So when you cannot posit an argument, you engage in "tactics."

 

[Adre]

At least now we have a third example of my earlier observations.

Too predictable.

They don't even want to do what DWS didn't want to do, to patiently explain to me how the Democrat Party is in no way, shape or manner, a party evolved into Socialist thought and direction. So when you cannot posit an argument, you engage in "tactics."

Says the guy whose 'tactic' is to post personal information while accusing all others of ad hominem. Phony hypocrite.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I didn't post it.


You did. It must be getting to you. You never realized you look like Elmer Fudd...


Sometimes people ignore the evidence right in their face.


You support Socialism and fight its "enemies."


But that's okay. As we can clearly see,


You have a lot of "friends."

 

[Adre]

I didn't post it.


You did. It must be getting to you. You never realized you look like Elmer Fudd...


Sometimes people ignore the evidence right in their face.


You support Socialism and fight its "enemies."


But that's okay. As we can clearly see,


You have a lot of "friends."

In the interest of fair play, how about a pic of the tubby injun and his 'beautiful' blonde wife?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

In the interest of fair play, how about a pic of the tubby injun and his 'beautiful' blonde wife?

Do you really think that I am as stupid as you?



I have posted some of my pics. There was one of a beautiful clean knockout of my opponent by jump-spin crescent kick and one from the paper of me right after winning a weapons competition.

Is that the sort of thing you really want to see? Because I still have an athlete's body, walk and agelessness that causes disbelief when people find out what my age is.

But, this is another progressive-liberal-socialist Alinsky type of attack; personalize the discussion. Ignore the topic, make it all about the person to bring up an inconvenient truth. Never defend, only attack.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

In the interest of fair play, how about a pic of the tubby injun and his 'beautiful' blonde wife?

He could've just said "I have a wife," but making sure that we all know she's especially blonde means something significant.

"I have the most prized possession of them all! Aren't you jealous? Ha ha ha!"

*skips and frolics in the grassy meadow with arms akimbo*

 

[miles]

I have a beautiful blonde wife.

I do not need to employ your crass and crude methods to get my morning release.

What's up with all the LyingRacistPigDownSouth wannabees?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

What's up with all the LyingRacistPigDownSouth wannabees?

I do not know. I am going to assume Izzy was actually the fourth proof...



I decided to stir the shit a bit and the cream-of-turn rose quickly to the top.

 

[Adre]

Sounds like the smart guy wants to establish a few guidelines concerning who gets to vote going forward. I'm just going to assume he is one of the chosen rational voters, because...

Okay, back to the subject. In your rational world who gets to vote? (You are the one who posted the diatribe after all.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

At least now we have a third example of my earlier observations.

Too predictable.

They don't even want to do what DWS didn't want to do, to patiently explain to me how the Democrat Party is in no way, shape or manner, a party evolved into Socialist thought and direction. So when you cannot posit an argument, you engage in "tactics."

You're asking someone to prove a negative?

 

[miles]

^^^^^

I decided to stir the shit a bit and the cream-of-turn rose quickly to the top.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

That's not the subject.


I'm not saying a single thing about who should and should not vote; I posted something about voters.

Then, you took a half-truth and tried to twist it into a personal attack and now you demand that I defend your fantasy of what you decided you wanted for me to be saying, because then I resemble your stereotype of who and what everyone who is not on your team is.

Like your fellow Socialists, you are amazingly consistent. You need to get over yourself and open up your mind and justify your positions and who you support instead of merely engaging in your supposed and fanciful notion that by simple ridicule and junior high debate techniques that you can destroy people who are actually trying to think through issues instead of simply emoting what they introspectively feel to be a priori truth.

But I am having a lot of fun. It's like shooting fis..., skip that, turds in a barrel.

 

[Ishmael]

That's not the subject.


I'm not saying a single thing about who should and should not vote; I posted something about voters.

Then, you took a half-truth and tried to twist it into a personal attack and now you demand that I defend your fantasy of what you decided you wanted for me to be saying, because then I resemble your stereotype of who and what everyone who is not on your team is.

Like your fellow Socialists, you are amazingly consistent. You need to get over yourself and open up your mind and justify your positions and who you support instead of merely engaging in your supposed and fanciful notion that by simple ridicule and junior high debate techniques that you can destroy people who are actually trying to think through issues instead of simply emoting what they introspectively feel to be a priori truth.

But I am having a lot of fun. It's like shooting fis..., skip that, turds in a barrel.

He's a fucking moron, always has been. Why waste your time bantering with defective minds?

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You're asking someone to prove a negative?

^^^^^

Too fucking funny.

#4 (or 5, depending on what nonsense Izzy posted).

I ask someone to actually address the issue and not me and that's proving a negative?

On what fucking planet? I think they are flabbergasted and have no rational thoughts on whether or not the SOcialists have managed to insert themselves into their team using a long-term plan to take over and control government. You don't even hear a single childish

*Nuh-huh!*

It's as if they are willing to concede the premise and get straight to, "the alternative is worse!"

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

He's a fucking moron, always has been. Why waste your time bantering with defective minds?

Ishmael

*chuckle*

Because it proves my point (and beyond a shadow of a doubt!).

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

We clearly see what philosophy controls the minds of the Democrat Party.