State of the Union Address

It is not uncommon in discussing politics about giving credit or denying credit for anything positive. The Obama / Osama example is just another classic.

If the economy is good, incumbent politicians take credit for it and if it is bad they blame the predecessor, lawyers, corporations, high taxes, excessive government regulations, banks, or <insert your hot topic>.

In NC, the unemployment rate has dropped significantly and the new governor is taking credit for it yet his policies are really just being implemented. Of course, no credit will be given at the national level as helping. It is just a constant spin game by both sides.
 
Bunky said:
It is not uncommon in discussing politics about giving credit or denying credit for anything positive. The Obama / Osama example is just another classic.

If the economy is good, incumbent politicians take credit for it and if it is bad they blame the predecessor, lawyers, corporations, high taxes, excessive government regulations, banks, or <insert your hot topic>.

In NC, the unemployment rate has dropped significantly and the new governor is taking credit for it yet his policies are really just being implemented. Of course, no credit will be given at the national level as helping. It is just a constant spin game by both sides.
Click to expand...

So by that theory, I am blaming Ms Pelosi's "Super Majority" for everything that's wrong now. Including every xxxxx that voted for the health care act without reading it.

We have to pass it before ya find out what's in it.

NOBODY deserves a super majority, no matter what party.... Simple.

I guess everything else is Bush's fault.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tropicsteve said:
Too many sheeple, not enough Americans.
Click to expand...

From the above quote it appears that the "sheeple" voted for Obama and the "Americans" voted for Romney. I thought we were all Americans exercising our right to vote as free citizens of this country for the candidate of our choice. The ballot I filled out listed "Democrats and Republicans" (and various other parties) not "sheeples and Americans".

I would be just as upset had the Democrats called the Republicans "sheeple" after George W. Bush won a second term and I'm sure a lot of them did. It's the same attitude prevalent in Congress today and that's why nothing gets done.

Does the definition for "sheeple" change depending on who won the election?

Since I'm married to a Republican do we go back and forth as husband and wife on who's a "sheeple" and who's an "American"? Does one of our vehicles have a "sheeple" bumper sticker while the other one has an "American" bumper sticker? I guess I should be driving the "sheeple" vehicle while she gets to drive the "American" vehicle.

Everybody that votes is an American and should be proud that they did vote. I served my country for four years and consider myself, first and foremost, an American...not a Republican, not a Democrat and certainly not a "sheeple".
 
Perhaps the definition refers to people that blindly follow other people, as, sheep follow the other sheep without question ?

But what about the shepherd ? The one who cares for the sheep and knows them all individually, and the sheep know him and his voice, and follow him ?
Dan F
 
Stokdgs said:
Perhaps the definition refers to people that blindly follow other people, as, sheep follow the other sheep without question ?

But what about the shepherd ? The one who cares for the sheep and knows them all individually, and the sheep know him and his voice, and follow him ?
Dan F
Click to expand...

I believe we have a man familiar with John Chapter 10.

I believe you're right about the definition of "sheeple" but don't all political parties, Democrats, Republicans, and others have "sheeple" as well as independent thinkers? I was born a (fill in the blank), I'll always be a (fill in the blank) and I'll die a (fill in the blank). That, in my humble opinion, is a "sheeple" but even a "sheeple" in our country is an American.

In the case of politics Dan, I don't know of any biblical type shepherds but I'm glad you brought up the fact that Jesus was a shepherd to his flock of believers.
 
Last edited:
I think 40% of the voters will vote republican no matter what and the other 40% will vote democrat. You see this thinking when people say I am voting one way to prevent the other party from doing something. It is more voting against someone than voting for someone. This is how some real losers get elected and once elected able to stay there.

The constant drum beating political propaganda (anti-government, anti-rich, pro or anti-gun - all depending on what side you are on) is intended to be sure their 40% are motivated to vote and help sway the remaining 20% who can swing the election. What is being said does not have to be true and each side looks the other way when they are loose with the facts as they are in any debate.

When you look at the actual vote totals, the difference between winner and loser is not that great which is why people are after voter fraud/vote suppression and making it easier to vote. The electoral college can make it look like a landslide.
 
Bunky said:
I think 40% of the voters will vote republican no matter what and the other 40% will vote democrat. You see this thinking when people say I am voting one way to prevent the other party from doing something. It is more voting against someone than voting for someone. This is how some real losers get elected and once elected able to stay there.

The constant drum beating political propaganda (anti-government, anti-rich, pro or anti-gun - all depending on what side you are on) is intended to be sure their 40% are motivated to vote and help sway the remaining 20% who can swing the election. What is being said does not have to be true and each side looks the other way when they are loose with the facts as they are in any debate.

When you look at the actual vote totals, the difference between winner and loser is not that great which is why people are after voter fraud/vote suppression and making it easier to vote. The electoral college can make it look like a landslide.
Click to expand...


Do you really think it's 40%? That's really frightening.
But I do believe that you are correct about the shoring up base and etc.
 
In no election has the losing candidate got less than 40% of the vote. As of late the loser is still getting 45% of the vote.

1980
Reagan 43.9 Mil
Carter 36.5 Mil (45%)

1984
Reagan 54. Mil
Mondale 37.6 Mil (42%)

1988
Bush 49 Mil
Dukakis 37 Mil (43%)

1992
Clinton 47 Mil
Bush 39 Mil
Perot 19.7 Mil (spoiler)

1996
Clinton 47 Mil
Dole 40 Mil (41%)

2000
Bush 2 50.5 Mil
Gore 51 Mil (lost in electoral college)
Nader 2.9 Mil (spoiler)

2004
Bush 2 62 Mil
Kerry 59 Mil (45%)

2008
Obama 66.9 Mil
McCain 58.3 Mil (45%)

2012
Obama 62.6 Mil
Romney 59 Mil (49%)
 
I thought you were talking about that 40% would vote party line, just because they were from that party.
 
Ronkh said:
I thought you were talking about that 40% would vote party line, just because they were from that party.
Click to expand...

That is my basic assertion. It is interesting that neither party has failed to get at least 40% of the vote. Yes, I am sure there is some switching but fundamentally many are voting for a philosophy rather than substance. People are not really debating the issues but slinging mud.
 
Bunky said:
That is my basic assertion. It is interesting that neither party has failed to get at least 40% of the vote. Yes, I am sure there is some switching but fundamentally many are voting for a philosophy rather than substance. People are not really debating the issues but slinging mud.
Click to expand...

You are precisely correct, people are voting for a philosophy. I feel there is nothing wrong with that.
The philosophies of the two major parties couldn't be more distinct.
Individualism or Collectivism.
Take your pick.
There will always be candidates from either party who fall somewhere in between(see post 54) but the majority in power will lead the country toward its ideal.
 
Bunky said:
That is my basic assertion. It is interesting that neither party has failed to get at least 40% of the vote. Yes, I am sure there is some switching but fundamentally many are voting for a philosophy rather than substance. People are not really debating the issues but slinging mud.
Click to expand...

I personally wonder if their interpretation of the "philosophy" is correct or imagined.
 
Ronkh said:
I personally wonder if their interpretation of the "philosophy" is correct or imagined.
Click to expand...

I am sure exactly your point but people believe what they want to believe and you cannot change their mind with all the facts. There have been political myths that come to mind that gets spread that are proven false but they continue to be repeated and believed by more than one would like. There is brainwashing going on on both sides.
 
Bunky said:
I am sure exactly your point but people believe what they want to believe and you cannot change their mind with all the facts. There have been political myths that come to mind that gets spread that are proven false but they continue to be repeated and believed by more than one would like. There is brainwashing going on on both sides.
Click to expand...

Agreed

I can keep my Dr. (as long as I pay em myself)
 
Ronkh said:
I'm a pragmatist, so I expected no less.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately they all lie to us, regardless of party affiliation. Here are two examples and there are probably plenty more if you want to do the research.

Bush lied regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Clinton lied when he said he didn't have sex with that woman.
 
Paul Mitchell said:
Unfortunately they all lie to us, regardless of party affiliation. Here are two examples and there are probably plenty more if you want to do the research.

Bush lied regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Click to expand...

Call me STUPID but I still believe they had wmd in Iraq. IMHO we find it out in 50 years, or when Syria falls
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top