Politics!

This forum is founded on discussions about T Campbell's work (alone and with artist partners).

Moderators: TCampbell, Gisele

Re: Politics!

Postby sun tzu » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:20 pm

Rowan Hawthorn wrote:Sun Tzu, actually, most of those people would never grasp your point, because they DO think that scenario would be okay. I'll take it even further: most of the people I talk to on the internet who loudly proclaim as how regulations are infringing on their rights, believe they should be able to treat anyone else any way they please, and would really like to see just enough law to protect their own asses should the people they like to kick when they're down decide to kick back. A return to the days of feudalism and the robber barons would suit these people just fine.

Do you have suggestions on what would get through to this sort of person? (I mean, I intended the final version to have a few more examples, but...)
User avatar
sun tzu
 
Posts: 2032
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 3:16 pm

Re: Politics!

Postby Rowan Hawthorn » Tue Oct 30, 2012 3:34 pm

Hmmm... well, a baseball bat comes to mind... :twisted:

...but no. I have yet to see anything make a dent in that mindset. I've wasted unbelievable amounts of time arguing it. As far as I can tell, the only thing that might get through is for them to be on the bottom rung of the arrangement in Real Life for a while.
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange..." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"
Rowan Hawthorn
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:17 am
Location: Lexington, Kentucky, US

Re: Politics!

Postby Valerie » Tue Oct 30, 2012 3:45 pm

sun tzu wrote:
Rowan Hawthorn wrote:Sun Tzu, actually, most of those people would never grasp your point, because they DO think that scenario would be okay. I'll take it even further: most of the people I talk to on the internet who loudly proclaim as how regulations are infringing on their rights, believe they should be able to treat anyone else any way they please, and would really like to see just enough law to protect their own asses should the people they like to kick when they're down decide to kick back. A return to the days of feudalism and the robber barons would suit these people just fine.

Do you have suggestions on what would get through to this sort of person? (I mean, I intended the final version to have a few more examples, but...)


It's a question of reasonably molding it to their situation, which can be very tough.

If you're talking to a man and saying that he'll suffer sexual harassment, as in your example, he might not get it. Men don't get sexually harassed. Women do. Everyone knows that, duh. This is obviously not true, but a lot of people think it is, and your example has to be believable.

This isn't the same issue, but it's the easiest way for me to break it down, so... Let's say you're trying to explain why women should be allowed to have abortions to an anti-abortion man. You have to figure out what angle gets him.

Does he care about the woman's ability to live her own life? Well, this should be easy. Point out that having children at an unexpected time could throw a wrench into the woman's plan.

Does he care about the child's right to be born into a decent home to a mother that's ready for him? Surely he doesn't approve of neglectful and abusive homes, which are more likely to occur when an unwanted child is born.

Does he care about finances? Children are expensive, especially when you aren't expecting them. That's easy to explain, especially if the guy has kids himself. Point out also that women still tend to make less than men and that having an unexpected child means that this woman won't be able to climb the ladder, and she'll be lucky to hold her place where she is. (This especially works well on people who think you should climb the ladder on your own with no help from anyone.)

Does he care about progress in general? This one takes slightly more work if the guy wants sources. but it's doable. Children born to women who don't expect/want them are likely to be raised in a poor home (since the mother-- who, by the way, probably makes less than her male counterparts-- wasn't financially prepared for a child and maybe had to drop out of school so that she could work two jobs just to keep food on the table). A poor home means a crappy school (because damned if you're getting into a private school, buddy) and almost no real chance at college. No real chance at college means one more guy flippin' burgers instead of curing cancer.

My dad, for example, is anti-abortion (unless it's rape or the pregnancy will seriously harm the mother in a physical way), but I threw the "finances" and "progress" arguments at him because he cares about those things, and he actually shut up for a minute. It's really just about finding out what the person does care about and then explaining why your stance supports those things.
Lia S wrote:Valerie is right.

As usual.


TCampbell wrote:Val has a harem, but it's chiefly structured online at the moment.
User avatar
Valerie
 
Posts: 4001
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:18 pm

Re: Politics!

Postby Pink Freud » Tue Oct 30, 2012 7:53 pm

Rowan Hawthorn wrote::?: My turn to ask if you're confused. The two guys in Tampa? Claiming to be from "Protect the Polls"? Supposedly offering a petition to allow gun owners to shoot "illegals" caught voting?


Yeah, the article I linked is about how Florida and a bunch of other states are trying to pass Voter ID laws that are really just veiled attempts at keeping black people from voting, because they tend ot vote democrat. I don't know how you connect that and some hoax about shooting hispanic people or whatever that article you linked is about.
User avatar
Pink Freud
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 4:13 am
Location: here

Re: Politics!

Postby thebitterfig » Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:03 pm

Pink Freud wrote:
Rowan Hawthorn wrote::?: My turn to ask if you're confused. The two guys in Tampa? Claiming to be from "Protect the Polls"? Supposedly offering a petition to allow gun owners to shoot "illegals" caught voting?


Yeah, the article I linked is about how Florida and a bunch of other states are trying to pass Voter ID laws that are really just veiled attempts at keeping black people from voting, because they tend ot vote democrat. I don't know how you connect that and some hoax about shooting hispanic people or whatever that article you linked is about.


One of the interesting things related to voter ID laws and other restrictions is how much they seem to have energized Democrats. It'll be interesting to see, if Obama wins, whether he got a boost from enthusiasm generated from a backfiring Republican plan to disenfranchise people.
The notes of this paradoxalist do not end here, however. He could not refrain from going on with them, but it seems to us that we may stop here. - Fyodor Dostoevsky, Notes from Underground (trans. C. Garnett)
User avatar
thebitterfig
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 4:25 pm
Location: Maine, where it's probably snowing.

Re: Politics!

Postby Valerie » Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:38 pm

thebitterfig wrote:One of the interesting things related to voter ID laws and other restrictions is how much they seem to have energized Democrats. It'll be interesting to see, if Obama wins, whether he got a boost from enthusiasm generated from a backfiring Republican plan to disenfranchise people.


If you can't win, cheat, right?

I know that, the way this year has been, I'm gonna be a straight-ticket Democrat this time around. I don't want to live by that principle, but oh my God I have so much hate for Republicans this year. I'm sure I can't be the only one, and I pray that I'm not the only who still has the ability to vote.

These laws, in addition to disenfranchising blacks, have been affecting newly-wed women who change their names (because the paperwork can be a jerk, from what I understand) and out-of-state college students (because they have an ID for their home state instead of their college state).

Oh hey, you know who tend to vote Democrat? Women and young people. Oh, but I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

If anyone needs me, I'll be sitting in the corner and glaring bitterly.
Lia S wrote:Valerie is right.

As usual.


TCampbell wrote:Val has a harem, but it's chiefly structured online at the moment.
User avatar
Valerie
 
Posts: 4001
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:18 pm

Re: Politics!

Postby thebitterfig » Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:57 pm

Valerie wrote:
thebitterfig wrote:One of the interesting things related to voter ID laws and other restrictions is how much they seem to have energized Democrats. It'll be interesting to see, if Obama wins, whether he got a boost from enthusiasm generated from a backfiring Republican plan to disenfranchise people.


If you can't win, cheat, right?


But if the cheating causes you to lose, what then? The sweet, sweet potential irony. I mean, there are pretty major GOTV drives centered around people with the mindset "I don't want them taking my vote away from me."

Valerie wrote:I know that, the way this year has been, I'm gonna be a straight-ticket Democrat this time around. I don't want to live by that principle, but oh my God I have so much hate for Republicans this year. I'm sure I can't be the only one, and I pray that I'm not the only who still has the ability to vote.

These laws, in addition to disenfranchising blacks, have been affecting newly-wed women who change their names (because the paperwork can be a jerk, from what I understand) and out-of-state college students (because they have an ID for their home state instead of their college state).

Oh hey, you know who tend to vote Democrat? Women and young people. Oh, but I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

If anyone needs me, I'll be sitting in the corner and glaring bitterly.


Or anyone who moves into a new place - it almost caught me... There's potentially a legal black hole, where you often have to live in a place for a while to gain official residency, plus most states require you to register to vote well in advance of the election (go go Maine Same-Day registration!*), oh, and it can often take a while to PROVE residency, since most things require a bill or a paystub with your address, but don't mention the rental lease... Anyhow, I moved into my apartment and registered in early September, which allowed enough time to for it to be official (it's something like 6 weeks before the election in Ohio). I voted a week ago. However, if I was a bit later, and I would have not been eligible where I live, nor where I'd moved out from. The moral of the story is don't move in the fall in Presidential years.

* So Maine's guvnah, the illustrious Paul LePage, lead the legislature to ban Maine's Same-Day registration law, which allows people to register to vote on election day. Among the pieces of evidence against it were 200ish college students who were registered in two places, with no actual indication that they'd voted in both places. Oh teh noes! Of course, there have been tens of thousands of people who've registered to vote on election day in Maine over the past decade, and the most anyone can come up with is 200 flaws. The difference in orders of magnitude is astonishing. Tens of thousands of otherwise legitimate voters versus a handful of 'maybe not even an issue's. Anyhow, we've got this thing in Maine called a People's Veto. It's been used to bad effect (SSM was struck down 53-47 in 2009 after passed by 2/3rds of each house of the Legislature), but we gathered enough signatures, put a hold on the Same-Day registration ban, and it went to vote. The people of Maine spoke, and we kept the our registration. Another potential twist of fate is that the election to decide if we could register on election day had the potential to be the last election where you could register on election day.
The notes of this paradoxalist do not end here, however. He could not refrain from going on with them, but it seems to us that we may stop here. - Fyodor Dostoevsky, Notes from Underground (trans. C. Garnett)
User avatar
thebitterfig
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 4:25 pm
Location: Maine, where it's probably snowing.

Re: Politics!

Postby Rowan Hawthorn » Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:27 am

Pink Freud wrote:
Rowan Hawthorn wrote::?: My turn to ask if you're confused. The two guys in Tampa? Claiming to be from "Protect the Polls"? Supposedly offering a petition to allow gun owners to shoot "illegals" caught voting?


Yeah, the article I linked is about how Florida and a bunch of other states are trying to pass Voter ID laws that are really just veiled attempts at keeping black people from voting, because they tend ot vote democrat. I don't know how you connect that and some hoax about shooting hispanic people or whatever that article you linked is about.


Because the article you linked mentioned the same two guys.
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange..." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"
Rowan Hawthorn
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:17 am
Location: Lexington, Kentucky, US

Re: Politics!

Postby thebitterfig » Wed Oct 31, 2012 6:07 pm

The notes of this paradoxalist do not end here, however. He could not refrain from going on with them, but it seems to us that we may stop here. - Fyodor Dostoevsky, Notes from Underground (trans. C. Garnett)
User avatar
thebitterfig
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 4:25 pm
Location: Maine, where it's probably snowing.

Re: Politics!

Postby CEOIII » Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:03 pm

4 years from now, after Obama's second term, if Biden doesn't run, I may write his name in.
I'm Charlie Owens, good night, and good luck.
User avatar
CEOIII
 
Posts: 943
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:49 am
Location: Franklin, PA

Re: Politics!

Postby Lia S » Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:25 am

I’ll just leave this here, it’s made of win.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfem ... ement.html
Artemisia: if we cannot sympathize or understand then all we claim to be as human beings is just marsh gas
Valerie: Lia knows how to turn that frown upside-down. :D
User avatar
Lia S
 
Posts: 1363
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:53 am

Re: Politics!

Postby Pink Freud » Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:40 am

thebitterfig wrote:Gotta love Joe Biden, right?

http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2012/10/ ... human.html


What I want to know is where the hell was THIS Biden in 2008? I was certain Obama was gonna take him hunting Cheney-style by the end of it.

I don't have any ideas about Republicans trolling or whatever, I'm pretty sure I know what it is. They already know they're going to lose. They knew it from the beginning, and grew more certain of it with every week leading up to the election, so they've decided to make whatever giant dramatic grandstanding gestures against Obama that they can, for any reason they can think of, to secure their house/senate/whatever seat in the backwater Kentucky trailer park communities that probably never even bothered to vote until 2008. The onw rule of the game you can always rely on in this world is "Money Talks, Bullshit Walks", and that applies to votes doubly so.
User avatar
Pink Freud
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 4:13 am
Location: here

Re: Politics!

Postby Valerie » Thu Nov 01, 2012 4:06 pm

Pink Freud wrote:backwater Kentucky trailer park communities


Hey!
Lia S wrote:Valerie is right.

As usual.


TCampbell wrote:Val has a harem, but it's chiefly structured online at the moment.
User avatar
Valerie
 
Posts: 4001
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:18 pm

Re: Politics!

Postby Mr. Brightside » Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:58 pm

...I wouldn't say it's in the bag for Obama. A lot of people have been trying to sell it as media spin, but there's only so big a conspiracy can get, and mainstream media polls are among the more favorable to him. The debates were not kind to Obama, and I'll be rather surprised if he wins the popular vote. I'm going to say Intrade has about the right line at 62/38.
(There has never been a signature.)
Mr. Brightside
 
Posts: 2026
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:44 am

Re: Politics!

Postby mindstalk » Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:35 pm

Mr. Brightside wrote:...I wouldn't say it's in the bag for Obama. A lot of people have been trying to sell it as media spin, but there's only so big a conspiracy can get, and mainstream media polls are among the more favorable to him. The debates were not kind to Obama, and I'll be rather surprised if he wins the popular vote. I'm going to say Intrade has about the right line at 62/38.


The first debate wasn't kind. But Obama's still favored in the state polls and the electoral college map, and weakly favored in national polls. (Nate SIlver says the two don't match up; the state polls don't point to losing the national vote. They also have more date and less historical bias, though it's not a sure thing.)
User avatar
mindstalk
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:02 am

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

cron