29
   

Why I left the Democratic Party

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Aug, 2017 07:25 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Research and pretty impressive scientific rebuttal to your claim says otherwise, but I'm no longer invested in convincing those who argue.

Eat up.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Aug, 2017 07:30 pm
@Lash,
For people so certain of their facts they seem desperate to get non believers back in line. What's that all about.
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Aug, 2017 07:32 pm
@Lash,
What would you say your single best piece of scientific proof is? Just give me one study to delve deep in and I will.

There won't be a single mocking or snide remark made.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Aug, 2017 07:38 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Actually,

We are living in the future. People were predicting mass starvation in the 1970s based on the estimation that the Earth can't hold so many people. Now, humanity is, as a whole, healthier than ever. People are living longer and there are fewer people starving.

Science based agriculture is a good thing.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Aug, 2017 07:38 pm
@Lash,
Yeah...foodbabe.com Smile
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Aug, 2017 07:40 pm
@maxdancona,
Of course it is, but unless it comes from the State or some funky little Ag boutique in Brooklyn, Lash and Edgar want nothing to do with it.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Aug, 2017 07:40 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

For people so certain of their facts they seem desperate to get non believers back in line. What's that all about.


Look in a mirror Edgar. I am not sure you know what the word "fact" means.

The great thing about science is that the facts are transparent. Scientists not only tell you what they found, they tell you exactly how they found it. Sometimes science gets results that favor liberals, sometimes science gets results that favor conservatives. It doesn't matter, facts are facts.

You are the one who is denying facts. We can look at them from objective sources, the scientific community is pretty much in sync about GMOs.

If the Scientific community always support the liberal way of thinking... wouldn't that make you suspicious? It would me.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Aug, 2017 07:42 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

[If the Scientific community always support the liberal way of thinking... wouldn't that make you suspicious?



Edgar? No way!
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 04:33 am
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
The true believers take the corporate line down to the last gulp of Roundup and will defend it with their last breath.

I have a different take on the use of Roundup. I think it's a great herbicide for spot applications on unwanted vegetation because it doesn't build up in the food chain the way some of the older herbicides like 2,4D did. A patch of poison ivy, invasive buckthorn, or barberry can be very difficult to remove by physical means alone. Many conservation groups approve of using herbicides when no other options are available.

The problem with Roundup is its use in factory farming where it is broadcast up to six times a season on genetically modified food crops which have been engineered to resist its toxicity. It is this use which has led to glyphosate resistant weeds and the accumulation of glyphosate in food and in the human body.

Same with GMOs — not bad in and of themselves, their negative consequences only emerge when used in industrial-scale farming. With better regulation I would be more likely to support their use.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 05:10 am
I didn't leave the Democratic party over Monsanto. Both parties push that ****. I left both parties because both talk serving the people's interests, but in fact push the agendas of their donors.
maxdancona
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 06:37 am
@edgarblythe,
You have every right to leave the Democratic party... and to leave both parties. It means that you are giving up any political power, your vote no longer means anything and you have no ability to influence your government. But that is your right.

What is silly about this thread is your apparent believe that there are enough people who agree with you to form a third party.

The problem with ideological purity is that it is very exclusive. Someone might agree with you about GMOs but disagree with you about abortion, or guns, or the use of military force. Coalition building means compromise. This is why a party built on ideological purity never succeed.

You are making the decision to withdraw from real-life politics (fantasy utopian politics doesn't count). That is your decision.

But many people choose to remain engaged. They promote their issues, work to elect candidates with a real chance of winning, raise money, and work to change hearts and minds.

Bernie is an great example of this. I have great respect for him.
layman
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 11:33 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

What is silly about this thread is your apparent believe that there are enough people who agree with you to form a third party.

The problem with ideological purity is that it is very exclusive. This is why a party built on ideological purity never succeed.

You are making the decision to withdraw from real-life politics (fantasy utopian politics doesn't count). That is your decision.


Some influential Democrat recently suggested that they should (if they wanted to win elections, anyway), be willing to accept people who opposed abortion in the party. The Left wing immediately and ferociously objected. Those kind must be excluded from the party. They're deplorable "untouchables," it seems.

They aint real bright, is they?
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 01:25 pm
@layman,
layman, there are already plenty of people who are opposed to abortion in the Democratic Party.

The question is not whether or not anyone personally approves of the procedure but whether we want an intrusive government that dictates what choices are available to citizens facing such complex and intimate decisions. It's not the function of government to promote or to prohibit medical procedures or to criminalize women who, for whatever reason, are unable or unwilling to bring a pregnancy to term.

Those who are adamantly opposed to the procedure in each and every case are entitled to their beliefs. But a majority of the population feels that the decision should be legal in some instances.
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 01:33 pm
@hightor,
You aint tellin me nuthin I don't already know, Hi. Best tell the "progressives" all this ****, eh?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  4  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 01:33 pm
I see abortion as a personal issue. No one I personally know has ever had one, to my knowledge, but I would not think less of them if they did. When my youngest daughter went to planned parenthood for the help they provide a woman not getting an abortion, the asshole protesters were all in her face and they had no clue why she was there. The right to lifers are busy taking away the social safety net that would help poor and unwanted children, in effect making them be born, but not caring afterwards if they live or die.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 03:25 pm
The only way progressives have any chance of getting what they want is through the Democratic Party.
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 03:45 pm
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:

The only way progressives have any chance of getting what they want is through the Democratic Party.

The Communist Party is still around, aint it? Granted, it's never accomplished anything, but if ya wanna stick to your own kind, there's your party. No need to go looking for a new one.

Maybe they could even be talked into changing their name to the "Progressive Party," who knows? The "progressives" have already done that. Now all they need to do is to get the commies to accept their re-definition, see?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 03:46 pm
The Democratic Party, as it is constituted today, has lost most state governments, most federal power, the presidency and control in congress. They have talked doing constructive things for the people, but have in effect been offering carrots on sticks. THey offer a few tokens, such as Obamacare, which is just a partway measure, but do everything else for their wealthy sponsors. Much of the Great Recession crash was set in motion by your local friendly Bill Clinton.
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 03:48 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

The Democratic Party, as it is constituted today, has lost most state governments, most federal power, the presidency and control in congress. They have talked doing constructive things for the people, but have in effect been offering carrots on sticks. THey offer a few tokens, such as Obamacare, which is just a partway measure, but do everything else for their wealthy sponsors. Much of the Great Recession crash was set in motion by your local friendly Bill Clinton.

Very astute, Ed.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Aug, 2017 04:20 pm
@edgarblythe,
Ever heard the phrase "perfection is the enemy of the good?"
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 11/18/2024 at 11:33:21