Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 04 Dec '17 22:43
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    I have no obligation to vote for candidates who do not support my positions. If the Democratic Party wants my vote, they should nominate candidates I find acceptable not those who support neocon adventurism overseas and have insufficient fealty to domestic progressive ideals.

    As I said, Trump getting elected is probably the best thing that could have happened for the Democrats in 2016.
    You should not be interested in what's best for Democrats, but what's best for your society, and having it led by a senile racist almost certainly isn't that.
  2. 04 Dec '17 22:59 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @kazetnagorra to No1Marauder
    You should not be interested in what's best for Democrats, but what's best for your society,
    and having it led by a senile racist almost certainly isn't that.
    No1Marauder seems to presume that a catastrophic Trump presidency would bring about
    the permanent demise soon of the Republican Party. But I doubt that will happen.
    The Republican Party may be in decline for other reasons, such as demographics.
    One should not underestimate the lasting damage that a catastrophic Trump presidency could cause.
  3. Subscriber no1marauder
    Caustic/Disagreeable
    04 Dec '17 23:10
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    No1Marauder seems to presume that a catastrophic Trump presidency would bring about
    the permanent demise soon of the Republican Party. But I doubt that will happen.
    The Republican Party may be in decline for other reasons, such as demographics.
    One should not underestimate the lasting damage that a catastrophic Trump presidency could cause.
    No one claimed such a thing as a "permanent demise" of one of the two big money parties. However, a series of electoral beatings may very well force the Republicans to moderate their present policy positions which have veered sharply to the Right in recent decades and have included an increased reliance on racist, homophobic and other undesirable viewpoints.
  4. Subscriber no1marauder
    Caustic/Disagreeable
    04 Dec '17 23:15
    Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
    You should not be interested in what's best for Democrats, but what's best for your society, and having it led by a senile racist almost certainly isn't that.
    An ineffective Hillary Presidency would have led to an increased probability of long term Republican control of American politics, while that party has increasingly become racist and intolerant. The fact is a Trump Presidency in 2016 with a likelihood of Democratic reversal of their minority status in Congress in 2018 is far preferable to a Ted Cruz or similar fanatic becoming President in 2020 with solid Republican majorities in Congress (it is practically axiomatic that the sitting President's party loses seats in the midterm elections).
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    Caustic/Disagreeable
    04 Dec '17 23:18
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    No1Marauder keeps being extremely disingenuous about the context.

    "Merely pointing out the fact that Asian-Americans have lower turnout rates is hardly "attacking" anyone..."
    --No1Marauder

    No1Marauder disingenously ignores the context in which he has made these statements.
    My position is that Asian Americans continue to suffer from significant ra ...[text shortened]... ericans (most of whom were US citizens).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_American_studies
    The context was that you claimed that Asian-Americans were vastly underrepresented politically. In response, I pointed out that the percentage of Asian-Americans in Congress was only slightly below their percentage in the general population and that the fact that AA turnout was low was a contributing factor in this result. There is nothing "racist" about such a factual observation no matter how many times you parrot that virtually everyone who disagrees with you about anything is a "racist".
  6. 05 Dec '17 03:14 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    The context was that you claimed that Asian-Americans were vastly underrepresented politically. In response, I pointed out that the percentage of Asian-Americans in Congress was only slightly below their percentage in the general population and that the fact that AA turnout was low was a contributing factor in this result. There is nothing "racist" abou ...[text shortened]... ny times you parrot that virtually everyone who disagrees with you about anything is a "racist".
    In fact, No1Marauder earlier put words into my mouth by claiming that I had written that
    Asian Americans are politically 'powerless', whereas my claim was that they are significantly
    underrepresented politically in respect toward their numbers and economic or educational status.

    I ALREADY HAVE EXPLAINED AT LENGTH why No1Marauder was misleading, dishonest, or wrong.
    As usual, No1Marauder completely ignores my earlier explanation and continues ranting.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_American_studies

    If the racist No1Marauder ever dares to enroll in an introductory class in Asian American studies,
    he might have the opportunity to amaze the professor by showing off No1Marauder's
    self-evident far superior knowledge of Asian American history, cultures, and identities.