Vote Present

Dixie said:
<snip>

You say, "when conservatives had a shot" but conservatives haven't had a shot since Reagan. We've been electing REPUBLICANS! Mitt Romney was not a Conservative. When he attempted to carry the conservative message to the people, without comprehending and understanding core conservative principles and values and how they all relate to one another, the message simply failed. It is attacked by liberalism and stigmatized just as you articulated in your rant, as "out of touch" and insensitive or offensive. Arrogant and condescending. The 47% comment, how dare he? Fuck it was the truth, except it was more like 51-52% We're a nation of freeloaders who think government is supposed to pay for our shit, man. The people have spoken!

<snip>
Click to expand...

According to your definition, several "true conservatives" were given their shot and they couldn't even get to the primaries. Ex: Michele Bachmann, rick santorum, Herman Cain. And please don't blame their demise on the liberal media or dirty liberal politics. The bottom line is that their brand of conservatism didn't resonate with the majority of Americans.
 
Annie said:
I agree. This is a better version in some ways than mine a few days after the election to just go along with any votes, explaining they were not going to stand against the will of the people. Voting present is better. Demonstrates one isn't in favor of, but not blocking either. Get rid of the 'obstruction' label, and let the other side fully own the outcome.

There does need to be articulation of why conservatives think a particular decision is wrong and what is the likely outcome. Alternatives may be brought up, again with likely seen outcomes. Then let those that own and vote for a certain choice, deal with whatever happens. If their policies result in a better life for most Americans, they will have one party. If not, the alternative exists.

Whatever the outcome, the current Republican vision of trying to be Democrat lite isn't working. It's obvious that Obama is going to get his more taxes, more spending 'budget' plan through, with 'present' or with 'obstruction.' There comes a time of learning 'natural consequences.'
Click to expand...

Hilarious. One of the repub talking points always has been to excoriate Obama for his "present" votes. Now the shoe's on the other foot.
 
christiefan915 said:
According to your definition, several "true conservatives" were given their shot and they couldn't even get to the primaries. Ex: Michele Bachmann, rick santorum, Herman Cain. And please don't blame their demise on the liberal media or dirty liberal politics. The bottom line is that their brand of conservatism didn't resonate with the majority of Americans.
Click to expand...

Bingo.
 
Go for it. Being on record as not voting for a tax break for all Americans for the first $250,000 while working to protect the very richest of the rich
is a big vote getter.

They set this up and had their bluff called. The reich-wing is only good at propaganda...governing not so much.
 
Last edited:
It's amazing, isn't it? I suggest that we stand down and allow Democrats to do whatever they please, and I am bombarded by people who just can't stand not to hate and hurl insults. You'd think I had proposed erecting a statue of Hitler!

What Dixie doesn't realize in his moonshine-induced delirium is that what his beloved conservatives will be doing is voting "present" on a tax CUT for the middle class. Wait til they go home and tell their constituents they voted present instead.
Click to expand...

Obviously you don't comprehend the stark difference in voting "present" and voting "nay." Voting "present" is neither voting FOR or AGAINST. You say, "lead, follow, or get out of the way," well, we're getting out of the way, and letting you 'geniuses' call the shots! Whatever the hell you want to pass, go for it, we're not voting for it or against it. At the end of the day, how are you going to blame the results on us? We voted PRESENT!

You see, the days of manipulating reality are over. You can't use our votes against us if we simply vote "present" on everything. We've not taken a position of support or opposition, and you can't spin a "present" vote into "opposition" no matter how good you are.
 
Dixie said:
It's amazing, isn't it? I suggest that we stand down and allow Democrats to do whatever they please, and I am bombarded by people who just can't stand not to hate and hurl insults. You'd think I had proposed erecting a statue of Hitler!



Obviously you don't comprehend the stark difference in voting "present" and voting "nay." Voting "present" is neither voting FOR or AGAINST. You say, "lead, follow, or get out of the way," well, we're getting out of the way, and letting you 'geniuses' call the shots! Whatever the hell you want to pass, go for it, we're not voting for it or against it. At the end of the day, how are you going to blame the results on us? We voted PRESENT!

You see, the days of manipulating reality are over. You can't use our votes against us if we simply vote "present" on everything. We've not taken a position of support or opposition, and you can't spin a "present" vote into "opposition" no matter how good you are.
Click to expand...
Personally, I love your idea. I'm just seeing all the Fox loons talking about it now. Of course, we both know it isn't going to happen. But we can dream
 
Haiku said:
Go for it. Being on record as not voting for a tax break for all Americans for the first $250,000 while working to protect the very richest of the rich
is a big vote getter.

They set this up and had their bluff called. The reich-wing is only good at propaganda...governing not so much.
Click to expand...

Again, a "present" vote is neither a vote "for" or "against" anything. Conservatives aren't very smart if they vote "for" an increased tax on people earning over $250k, because that will be used against them come election time. Likewise, if they vote "against" the proposal, it will be spun into a "vote against a middle class tax cut" as you seem to want to do here. But a "present" vote is neither a vote "for" or "against" it is completely neutral. In other words, YOU did it, we didn't try to stop you and we didn't help you.
 
Dixie said:
Again, a "present" vote is neither a vote "for" or "against" anything. Conservatives aren't very smart if they vote "for" an increased tax on people earning over $250k, because that will be used against them come election time. Likewise, if they vote "against" the proposal, it will be spun into a "vote against a middle class tax cut" as you seem to want to do here. But a "present" vote is neither a vote "for" or "against" it is completely neutral. In other words, YOU did it, we didn't try to stop you and we didn't help you.
Click to expand...
Looks good on paper, but I think you still lose points for not obstructing.
 
Althea said:
Personally, I love your idea. I'm just seeing all the Fox loons talking about it now. Of course, we both know it isn't going to happen. But we can dream
Click to expand...

Well, apparently, you are all alone in your love of the idea, the rest of your butt buddies are here hurling insults and hate at me. Trying to spin "present" votes into opposition, as best they can. Sometimes, I honestly think, the ONLY thing that would truly satisfy the liberal left, is if every Republican went home and put a bullet through their head out of the sheer depression over being a Republican! Anything short of that, is not okay with liberals. We can't even vote "present" without some liberals screaming "obstruction!"
 
Dixie said:
Well, apparently, you are all alone in your love of the idea, the rest of your butt buddies are here hurling insults and hate at me. Trying to spin "present" votes into opposition, as best they can. Sometimes, I honestly think, the ONLY thing that would truly satisfy the liberal left, is if every Republican went home and put a bullet through their head out of the sheer depression over being a Republican! Anything short of that, is not okay with liberals. We can't even vote "present" without some liberals screaming "obstruction!"
Click to expand...
Seeing Cantor/McConnell's faces on t.v brings exactly that thought about bullets to mind. They disgust me. Ryan is as guilty, as is Boehner and everyone who attended the 'secret' meeting on inauguration night.

Boehner gets a modicum of credit for being able to negotiate, and compromise. He loses the same credit for not being able to control the teabag element of his party. Said element will be your demise.

Funny how impotent they look without Koch funding, isn't it?
 
hazlnut said:
STRAW MAN.

FAIL.

GOD CREATED BOTH.

I suggest voting yea unless you think you know better.
Click to expand...

I know I know better, I don't think it... Vote PRESENT! On EVERYTHING! No straw man, no rhetoric, no spin... just vote PRESENT and be done with it! I don't care if it's a liberal social issue or a liberal economic issue, or a liberal anti-military or anti-capitalist issue, just fucking vote PRESENT and let the chips fall where they may! Fuck you people, if you don't want bipartisan two-party government, and you want to act like every issue is the end of the world unless liberals get 100% of what they want and conservatives get nothing, then fine, so be it, we'll step aside and let you rule the fucking roost for a while, and you can pass anything you please into law, we won't stand in your way. If this is what America wants, it's what they need to have, full bore liberalism! The more, the better! Bring it on!

My guess is, in 4 years or maybe 8 years, the people will be so sick of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and Liberals in general, they will be ready to listen to common sense conservatism again. Right now, the republicans have been so stigmatized they can't even throw up their hands without being accused of assault and battery on the liberals.
 
Althea said:
You'd have to pose that question to your caucus. You and I both know it not only hurt your party, but our country. Didn't stop them....did it?
Click to expand...

No, I don't need to pose that question to anyone, I know the answer. It didn't do Republicans one bit of good. They allowed the left and the media to spin their obstruction into a major negative and got their butts kicked, plain and simple. Voting "present" is not obstructing anything. Trying to spin "present" votes into obstruction, will be a daunting task. Trying to lay blame for massive policy failures the Republicans voted "present" on, will not work. You will own every bit of this, because the Republicans will not have supported or opposed any of it. Then we will let the people decide if they want to continue living in a Liberal Dictatorship, or if they maybe would like to again have two-party bipartisan government.
 
Dixie said:
Nope. Please explain to me how voting "present" is obstruction?
Click to expand...

They're not doing the job they were elected by the people to do in that case. You can spin that they are because it's part of your strategy, but the fact is that they are elected to make decisions & represent their constituents as best as they are able.
 
Thing1 said:
They're not doing the job they were elected by the people to do in that case. You can spin that they are because it's part of your strategy, but the fact is that they are elected to make decisions & represent their constituents as best as they are able.
Click to expand...

That's the best way to help their constituents. They weren't elected to go along with liberals, that's for sure. They aren't getting re-elected by opposing liberals, and that's for sure as well. So the best way to represent their constituents is to not take a side, and vote "present" on everything. Now back when we had bipartisan government and a two-party system, they could go out there and tell their constituents they supported this or that, or they opposed this or that, but now we have the media in cahoots with the liberals, spinning their opposition into "obstruction" and making them the bad guys. There's no way to win when you're the bad guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top