Democrats threatening Democrats into going to the polls

a reply to: grandmakdw

Well best way to show them who is in charge is to vote the other way.

Switch your party. If only on paper and vote for a third party vote. OR vote republican.

Its not like thats the sort of people you want in charge of anything public.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Did you read the quote?

If you did, how can you possibly get that Obama was talking about "christian conservatives"????

He stated that he was talking about people who had lost their jobs in PA and the midwest and had been lied to for years about good jobs coming back.

Right now "how about we bring our focus back ..." yes, your typical response when you've come the end of the line and had the facts prove your claims completely illegitimate, you want to muddy the water with more intentional misrepresentation:

(See, I don't think it's your 'reading comprehension' I think you INTEND to misread ... stubbornly and repeatedly).

Let me summarize the thread for you:

1. Wingers came in with this article about the "get out the vote" letter sent out to registered Democrats by their local party repsentatives, and implied that the letter was somehow a totally new example of strong-arm mafioso tactics when anyone could see it was just the garden-variety "do you want your neighbors to know" method. Oh the horror!

2. Then when a note from the GOP with virtually the exact same language was linked, the response was "oh, that's not the same" "this word is different from that word which means exactly the same thing" ... that kind of horse-puck.

3. Now you are trying to make some silly argument that the Democrats were mimicking the Republicans and ThinkProgress doesn't want us to be anything like Republicans in any way ... so would you say that means we have to stop doing fund-raisers or putting candidates up for election as well, because, "hey, the Republicans do that so we shouldn't?"

Pfffft.

You live in a tiny tiny world my friend.

a reply to: xuenchen

But the Kochs, they don't expect anything for their money?

Just two small-town boys who made it big, wanting to give back?

/sigh

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: xuenchen

But the Kochs, they don't expect anything for their money?

Just two small-town boys who made it big, wanting to give back?

/sigh

Oh I almost forgot about those guys.

a reply to: xuenchen

Let's face it. We all give our money to groups that either think like we do, or that we think we can affect to think like we do.

We have 10s they have 10,000,000s

If money is speech then Mr. Soros can support whomever he wants, right? Isn't that what Citizens United brought to us?

Hasn't that been the argument?

Or is that only for real Americans, you know, the Republicans ...

/wereallyneedaneyerollemoticon

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

They are not going to waste the postage and cost of printing and manpower on the GOP list.

Um.
Yes, they are. They are doing just that.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

So do you guys really want me to think that any article they post is going to be unbiased just because they tag on a little statement about both liberals and conservatives?

You mean, like --
kinda like, what you expect for others to think about Fox News? That it's unbiased?

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: grandmakdw

Can't say as I'm surprised, really.

I expect more heated rhetoric closer to election day myself.

I take a day off of ATS and I see more heated political rhetoric on ATS than a cage match between Rush Limbaugh and Bill Mahr.

lolz

a reply to: Kali74

Not one 'leftist' (which you default everyone in this thread that disagrees with you, as)

ummm ok how about people who agree with the people over at ThinkProgress that the GOP is intimidating voters? There does that make you feel better? Or how about the people who used the article at ThinkProgress to deflect the article from the OP?
This isn't about who disagrees with me.
But it should be evident who disagrees with me on the basis of their point on the political spectrum.
Most of the people who have been arguing with me are all the same people who always argue against conservatives and for Progressive viewpoints, err ummm I mean viewpoints held by the Democ....errr ummm viewpoints espoused by people who believe in "social justice" and redistribution of wealth, or any number of other ummmm politically correct agendas.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Look, we can agree that this was a GOP hit piece. No argument there.

That's not what matters. Their intent is irrelevant. What matters is if what they say is true or not. Did the GOP do what is claimed?

YES. Can we agree on that?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

So do you guys really want me to think that any article they post is going to be unbiased just because they tag on a little statement about both liberals and conservatives?

You mean, like --
kinda like, what you expect for others to think about Fox News? That it's unbiased?

When did I ever demand any one think anything of Fox news? Anyway, not everyone at Fox is all that conservative. Really would you view Shep Smith, or Juan Williams, or Geraldo Rivera conservative? And Bob Beckel is as Democrat as it gets. I'm sure every now and then CNN interviews conservatives too.
I've been posting David Horowitz's stuff on this thread. The reason I use Horowitz is that once upon a time he was a very radical leftist, who now exposes the activities of the Left. He could technically really be considered a Neocon, under the definition of that which is what a socialist coined the term as a slur to denote one who has left the radical camp and joined the right. I have however seen people here use it almost as a synonym for the Republican Party. True conservatives were never left to begin with.

Here is what Merriam Webster defines it as

a former liberal espousing political conservatism

www.merriam-webster.com...

But who better to expose the radical left agendas than a former radical?

originally posted by: sheepslayer247
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Look, we can agree that this was a GOP hit piece. No argument there.

That's not what matters. Their intent is irrelevant. What matters is if what they say is true or not. Did the GOP do what is claimed?

YES. Can we agree on that?

Did you notice that the thread was about what the Democrats did? Then someone posted this other article as if to say, well gee the GOP does this too.
Yah sure we can agree that the GOP used social media as a mechanism to get people to vote. Even the folks at ThinkProgress called it a "get out the vote" effort.
I don't agree with everything the GOP does. I sure didn't agree with going to war in Afghanistan or Iraq. That doesn't mean I agree with Democrats stance on the war on terrorism either, or at least their strategy anyway.
However, I was very proud of the Republican Congress for standing up to that monstrosity of a bill The Affordable Care Act. I just wish they carried through instead of letting it slip past.

Their intent is irrelevant

I happen to believe that intent is never irrelevant. But that's just me.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

They are not going to waste the postage and cost of printing and manpower on the GOP list.

Um.
Yes, they are. They are doing just that.

oops no I was talking about Democrats. I can see how you might have mistaken this though.

Absolutely astounding. The same words used to do the same thing, but it's different when one side does it.

... and this would be argued, page, after page, after page.

... and people on the left are called "radicals."

... and this discussion did not start as a discussion merely of what "Democrats did."

This discussion and the OP was intended to suggest, once again, that anything Democratic is evil, totalitarian, communist.

... and when we responded with "well, if what the Democrats did was evil, and the Republicans did the same thing, isn't that evil too?"

... and the answers were "no" it's different, because we know that Republicans are good people, and Democrats are bad people.

....

There was a time I didn't understand how a civil war could have ever started in this country ...

... and now, I do. Do you know why?

Republicans are bad people.

I can answer it right now.
I don't vote because
1. All politicians running are horrific people and don't do anything but make things worse. Why should I support that? By me voting, it's saying, whether my 'guy' wins or loses, that I support the crap they spew and later on do or don't do.
2. I refuse to have my vote associated with any jerks who win.
3. I have all rights to complain because I didn't vote so I had no influence IN said jerks winning.
4. I love playing games. I don't love playing games that result in every single time a jerk/jerks win and ruin things for everyone in some way or the other. That aint playing fair.
5. I'll vote once they all start listening to and working for the people again instead of their own personal agendas.
6. It's already known ahead of time who will win. At least that's the story told after someone's fave didn't win.
7. I won't vote because the small things that do go in the people's favor are just enough to molly coddle for a short while while worse things are being passed.
8. Government itself. I won't/can't support anything that doesn't hold my or my fellow struggling Countryfolk to high priority.

a reply to: sheepslayer247

How can you say that when I just highlighted that their piece said BOTH liberals and conservatives use that tactic?

Maybe it has something to do with reading comprehension

:-)

(I see you have that covered - I have premature reading comprehension)

I see a replacement for the words "racist" "bigot" it is reading comprehension,
all are overused on ATS and have lost their sting

They just demonstrate a lack of intelligence on the part of the users who can not make a cogent argument and so resort to the same old tired cliche's.

By the way, thanks everyone for participating. I'm enjoying the repartee, just as I want to chime in, someone else makes the point I was thinking!

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

I'm the one that posted the ThinkProgress article. I stated with the post that the GOP doing it wasn't threatening or intimidating either. My thinking in posting it wasn't to deflect from the Democrats but to show it wasn't unique to the Democrats and then watch the mental contortions ensue and I wasn't disappointed, which on the surface is entertaining but ultimately, really sad and depressing.

The TP article states that both Parties engage in vote shaming and then clarifies that the particular ad is just that, shaming and that they can't actually be privy to, let alone publish how individuals voted only whether or not they did.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: grandmakdw

Well best way to show them who is in charge is to vote the other way.

Switch your party. If only on paper and vote for a third party vote. OR vote republican.

Its not like thats the sort of people you want in charge of anything public.

That is what my quite elderly mother said she would do if she got a letter like that, vote exactly the opposite of what the person who sent the letter wanted her to vote. She said she'd be that angry.

a reply to: [post=18610439]

~ from OP link:


Such attempts to shame people to vote — what politicos call “social pressure” or peer pressure —
has become more common place and was used by the Obama campaign in 2012, sources said...

more of the illegal precedents set by this thug administration that still goes unchallenged by the other elected law-makers who are either in-bed with the WH occupier or are in need of being replaced in office themselves

I am voting Libertatian across the board, if there are no candidates other than Dems or Repubs
then I will 'write in' a cartoon character as I have done in several past elections

originally posted by: St Udio
a reply to: [post=18610439]

~ from OP link:


Such attempts to shame people to vote — what politicos call “social pressure” or peer pressure —
has become more common place and was used by the Obama campaign in 2012, sources said...

 

more of the illegal precedents set by this thug administration that still goes unchallenged by the other elected law-makers who are either in-bed with the WH occupier or are in need of being replaced in office themselves

I am voting Libertatian across the board, if there are no candidates other than Dems or Repubs
then I will 'write in' a cartoon character as I have done in several past elections

Well, then you'd better go after the Republican Candidate for Midlothian VA School Board 'cause you know, this horror has got to be rooted out.

One of the five candidates vying to become Midlothian’s next School Board representative once led an effort to disseminate Virginians’ voting information to their neighbors, in what has become commonly known as a “voter shaming” campaign.

Chesterfield businesswoman Debra Girvin served from 2008 until 2011 as executive director of the Know Campaign, a nonprofit that sought to motivate people to vote by letting them know that their participation in state and national elections, or lack thereof, could be subject to public scrutiny.

The timing of the revelation is less than ideal for both Girvin and the Chesterfield Republican Committee, which endorsed her last week as its choice to serve out the remainder of Patty Carpenter’s term on the county School Board.

Debra Girvin ... Public Enemy #2 (After Barack Obama, of course) ... DAA DAA DAAAAN!


Can we get a break around here? This post is nothing but another in the continuing series of "Obama Did It! Thanks Obama!" BS that have just gotten absolutely ludicrous.

The facts of the matter (like say, there's nothing illegal about trying to get people to vote) are irrelevant to these kinds of posts. Any chance to slam the President and get in the buzz words "Kenyan, communist, occupier, criminal" ... you guys are starting to look like fools with this kind of thing.

And actually, if you remember, Mr. Boehner is trying to use the People's money to sue the President ... except that attorney firm after attorney firm have dropped this groundless BS lawsuit (what is it, three firms now) ... BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING THERE.

PS: Oh and Udio, you might want to drop a note to ThirdEye ... he was wondering who was voting for Mickey Mouse, and now we know.