Go Vote

[emkay64]

What? I like my spandex...it's so stretchy.. it keeps all my rolls snuggly. What's wrong with that?

 

[ImWithStupid]

What? I like my spandex...it's so stretchy.. it keeps all my rolls snuggly. What's wrong with that?

How about a fat guy in a speedo?

View attachment 3055

 

[emkay64]

Mmmmmm..he has some sweet moves. He's so fleshy....but I think he's too young for me.

 

[eddo]

I've lost weight since then.

and I wear my hat the right way now too...

 

[emkay64]

Oh Eddo..why do you tease me so?

 

[hugo]

Anyone with half a brain knows that the higher the turnout the higher the percentage of liberal voters. High turnouts are not good.

 

[timesjoke]

I do have to somewhat agree with Hugo and not with TJ.

Not everyone should vote.

Everyone should have the right to vote, but uninformed, ignorant people should stay home.

I remember you one time saying I was a bad person for saying only people who pay taxes should be allowed to vote. You claimed I was trying to advocate a "ruling class" and limiting who can vote was very bad.

So I agree with you and want everyone to vote and suddenly "YOU" are advocating a "ruling class" and wanting to limit who is allowed to vote? Flip flop much?

This is why the ignorant should be seen and not heard.

This isn't the same thing and I never said everyone should vote. I said everyone should have the right to vote, you only want property owners to have the right to vote. Big difference.

Dumbass.

Don't play the Bender two step Joe, you just said some people should not vote. You are now playing semantics, either everyone should vote or they should not, you say some people should not vote, the reason for your vote restriction was different than mine but the concept is exactly the same only this time it is you who is saying some people should not vote so I guess that makes it okay, lol

Not everyone should vote.

Your words, not mine Joe........................hypocrite.

Dumbass.

You want to take the "RIGHT" to vote from people. I said that uninformed, ignorant people shouldn't vote, not that they should lose the right to do so.

The fact that you can't or won't see the difference is why I lump you in the category of those who shouldn't vote.

If "some" people in your opinion should not be allowed to vote, it is the exact same thing no matter what semantics you try to play Joe. The only difference is what reasons we each use to justify limiting their ability to vote.

You say you would restrict the ability to vote based on what you see as "stupid" while I said voting should be limited to those who pay taxes (I never said anything about property by the way, just to keep you on track, not sure where you got that). So the "ruling class" according to IWS is those who IWS believes is smart while my idea of the "ruling class" are those who pay for Government to function. Same thing, different justifications.

Not everyone should vote.

Your words Joe, not mine, lol

I never said "some" people should not be allowed to vote. I said some people shouldn't vote. Kinda like fat people shouldn't wear spandex. Doesn't mean I think they shouldn't be allowed, they just shouldn't do it.

Nice lie, Dumbass.

Lie?

I used your actual words Joe. The only lie is from you when you change from day to day what your possitions are just so you can take a shot at me my flip-flop friend, lol.

Let me quote you again:

Not everyone should vote.

You said it Joe, now be man enough to admit it or ch!ckensh!t enough to simply run away from it, stop trying to lie your way out of it though because that is just pathetic.

 

[ImWithStupid]

I do have to somewhat agree with Hugo and not with TJ.

Not everyone should vote.

Everyone should have the right to vote, but uninformed, ignorant people should stay home.

I remember you one time saying I was a bad person for saying only people who pay taxes should be allowed to vote. You claimed I was trying to advocate a "ruling class" and limiting who can vote was very bad.

So I agree with you and want everyone to vote and suddenly "YOU" are advocating a "ruling class" and wanting to limit who is allowed to vote? Flip flop much?

This is why the ignorant should be seen and not heard.

This isn't the same thing and I never said everyone should vote. I said everyone should have the right to vote, you only want property owners to have the right to vote. Big difference.

Dumbass.

Don't play the Bender two step Joe, you just said some people should not vote. You are now playing semantics, either everyone should vote or they should not, you say some people should not vote, the reason for your vote restriction was different than mine but the concept is exactly the same only this time it is you who is saying some people should not vote so I guess that makes it okay, lol

Not everyone should vote.

Your words, not mine Joe........................hypocrite.

Dumbass.

You want to take the "RIGHT" to vote from people. I said that uninformed, ignorant people shouldn't vote, not that they should lose the right to do so.

The fact that you can't or won't see the difference is why I lump you in the category of those who shouldn't vote.

If "some" people in your opinion should not be allowed to vote, it is the exact same thing no matter what semantics you try to play Joe. The only difference is what reasons we each use to justify limiting their ability to vote.

You say you would restrict the ability to vote based on what you see as "stupid" while I said voting should be limited to those who pay taxes (I never said anything about property by the way, just to keep you on track, not sure where you got that). So the "ruling class" according to IWS is those who IWS believes is smart while my idea of the "ruling class" are those who pay for Government to function. Same thing, different justifications.

Not everyone should vote.

Your words Joe, not mine, lol

I never said "some" people should not be allowed to vote. I said some people shouldn't vote. Kinda like fat people shouldn't wear spandex. Doesn't mean I think they shouldn't be allowed, they just shouldn't do it.

Nice lie, Dumbass.

Lie?

I used your actual words Joe. The only lie is from you when you change from day to day what your possitions are just so you can take a shot at me my flip-flop friend, lol.

Let me quote you again:

Not everyone should vote.

You said it Joe, now be man enough to admit it or ch!ckensh!t enough to simply run away from it, stop trying to lie your way out of it though because that is just pathetic.

We all know you couldn't have done well on the writing section of the SAT but I see you obviously didn't do very well on the critical reading part either.

 

[eddo]

I understood IWS's meaning the first time.

it's really not that hard a concept to grasp.

 

[emkay64]

Your lying Eddo.

 

[eddo]

Your lying Eddo.

no, I'm sitting up..

</didn't understand 'cause TJ didn't explain it to me>

 

[timesjoke]

I do have to somewhat agree with Hugo and not with TJ.

Not everyone should vote.

Everyone should have the right to vote, but uninformed, ignorant people should stay home.

I remember you one time saying I was a bad person for saying only people who pay taxes should be allowed to vote. You claimed I was trying to advocate a "ruling class" and limiting who can vote was very bad.

So I agree with you and want everyone to vote and suddenly "YOU" are advocating a "ruling class" and wanting to limit who is allowed to vote? Flip flop much?

This is why the ignorant should be seen and not heard.

This isn't the same thing and I never said everyone should vote. I said everyone should have the right to vote, you only want property owners to have the right to vote. Big difference.

Dumbass.

Don't play the Bender two step Joe, you just said some people should not vote. You are now playing semantics, either everyone should vote or they should not, you say some people should not vote, the reason for your vote restriction was different than mine but the concept is exactly the same only this time it is you who is saying some people should not vote so I guess that makes it okay, lol

Not everyone should vote.

Your words, not mine Joe........................hypocrite.

Dumbass.

You want to take the "RIGHT" to vote from people. I said that uninformed, ignorant people shouldn't vote, not that they should lose the right to do so.

The fact that you can't or won't see the difference is why I lump you in the category of those who shouldn't vote.

If "some" people in your opinion should not be allowed to vote, it is the exact same thing no matter what semantics you try to play Joe. The only difference is what reasons we each use to justify limiting their ability to vote.

You say you would restrict the ability to vote based on what you see as "stupid" while I said voting should be limited to those who pay taxes (I never said anything about property by the way, just to keep you on track, not sure where you got that). So the "ruling class" according to IWS is those who IWS believes is smart while my idea of the "ruling class" are those who pay for Government to function. Same thing, different justifications.

Not everyone should vote.

Your words Joe, not mine, lol

I never said "some" people should not be allowed to vote. I said some people shouldn't vote. Kinda like fat people shouldn't wear spandex. Doesn't mean I think they shouldn't be allowed, they just shouldn't do it.

Nice lie, Dumbass.

Lie?

I used your actual words Joe. The only lie is from you when you change from day to day what your possitions are just so you can take a shot at me my flip-flop friend, lol.

Let me quote you again:

Not everyone should vote.

You said it Joe, now be man enough to admit it or ch!ckensh!t enough to simply run away from it, stop trying to lie your way out of it though because that is just pathetic.

We all know you couldn't have done well on the writing section of the SAT but I see you obviously didn't do very well on the critical reading part either.

Not everyone should vote.[/u

Not a lot there to understand or misunderstand Joe, you said it, now your trying to sidestep taking responsibility for your own words.

All I am doing is pointing out a fact that you said some people should not vote.

 

[eddo]

All I am doing is pointing out a fact that you said some people should not vote.

exactly.

and he isn't denying that TJ.

There is a BIG difference between 'some people should not vote' and 'some people should not be allowed to vote'

BIG difference.

Kinda like socialism.

Yes, we should all, by choice, help out those around us in need. It's a BIG difference when the Gov't starts demanding that we have to help others, and starts taking our money to do so.

 

[timesjoke]

All I am doing is pointing out a fact that you said some people should not vote.

exactly.

and he isn't denying that TJ.

There is a BIG difference between 'some people should not vote' and 'some people should not be allowed to vote'

BIG difference.

Kinda like socialism.

Yes, we should all, by choice, help out those around us in need. It's a BIG difference when the Gov't starts demanding that we have to help others, and starts taking our money to do so.

Semantics, his desire in his heart was the same, some people not voting, the execution of the desire was never the point, it is now just an excuse to try and get out of what he said.

Joe in his heart believes some people should not vote, and that was my point.

 

[wez]

TJ is a dipshit..

 

[jokersarewild]

All I am doing is pointing out a fact that you said some people should not vote.

exactly.

and he isn't denying that TJ.

There is a BIG difference between 'some people should not vote' and 'some people should not be allowed to vote'

BIG difference.

Kinda like socialism.

Yes, we should all, by choice, help out those around us in need. It's a BIG difference when the Gov't starts demanding that we have to help others, and starts taking our money to do so.

Semantics, his desire in his heart was the same, some people not voting, the execution of the desire was never the point, it is now just an excuse to try and get out of what he said.

Joe in his heart believes some people should not vote, and that was my point.

So you think the ignorant morons who know nothing about any of the issues, do no research, and vote for the guy with the best hair, should be out voting?

I think that's something along the lines of what IWS meant. It's kind of like driving a car with a .06 BAC. Is it legal? Technically, yes. Is it a bad idea? Probably.

If you don't know what's going on, have no interest in politics, and then vote, that's not a good thing. Do they have the right to? Yes. Should they? No.

 

[eddo]

TJ is a dipshit..

dammit, this sucks....

I agree with Wez.

 

[timesjoke]

So you think the ignorant morons who know nothing about any of the issues, do no research, and vote for the guy with the best hair, should be out voting?

Yes, even Democrats should go out and vote.

I think that's something along the lines of what IWS meant. It's kind of like driving a car with a .06 BAC. Is it legal? Technically, yes. Is it a bad idea? Probably.

If you don't know what's going on, have no interest in politics, and then vote, that's not a good thing. Do they have the right to? Yes. Should they? No.

That is exactly what I was saying as well when IWS jumped me.

My point was that people who don't pay taxes will never be concerned about the cost of the things they vote for. Take for example Government run healthcare. Most Americans pay little or no taxes so why not vote for people who will pass that when you know you will never have to pay for it?

The only real difference between what I said and what IWS said is who said it, as usual the double standard, but it is not like this is new, I just like pointing out the hypocrisy when it appears.

 

[hugo]

As a radical libertarian I believe cocaine should be legal. I do not believe people should use it.

I believe the American Communist Party has a right to exist. I do not believe people should join them.

I believe you should be allowed to pick your nose in front of your date on the first date. I do not believe you should do it.

It is a simple concept that only a total idiot could not understand.

 

[jokersarewild]

Semantics, his desire in his heart was the same, some people not voting, the execution of the desire was never the point, it is now just an excuse to try and get out of what he said.

Joe in his heart believes some people should not vote, and that was my point.

Actually, semantics are pretty relevant here. He said some people should not vote. And he's quite correct. I know a few people that shouldn't vote. And they don't. Because they know they shouldn't. It's not that they don't want to. They're doing the responsible thing and not voting when they know nothing about politics and don't give a sh t.

He never said that some people should not be able to vote. Just that some people shouldn't vote. Big difference.

And how do you know the desires of his heart? By reading the text he posted on the internet?