Let Me Introduce Myself

Which Video Provides a Better Introduction?

  • The Beta Male in "Beautiful Stranger"

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The Alpha Male in "Prometheus"

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Hmm, if you want her to blind you with science Mr Dolby, probably should change your tack, not tact. ;)

Actually, tact could work.

Speak softly and carry a .50 BMG, perhaps? She is a good girl as well as playful and affectionate. However, I'm suprised we lasted past December because we have very different outlooks. Ironically, she was a Sanders supporter who is now having a more favorable view of Trump (Free money) and I was a Trump supporter who is having a more favorable view of Sanders! (What's the difference between the both of them).
 
The way i saw it, it was something in the meaning of that nick, associated with sacrifice towards worthy ideal, you know, once a man goes for a big dreams/goals, suffering will be the part of the journey. The more of it, the bigger reward.

But obviously, very personal and individual perspective comes from each user/member.

I like your thinking behind why I chose that handle and there is a tiny bit of that behind my decision to use that name. The big reason I went with that handle was for anti-quoting purposes in other Social Media outlets, on the idea that the potential quoter should make the most effort in thinking for themselves. Someone who liked my idea may feel uncomfortable with using my handle and would probably would also be uncomfortable in copying what I wrote exactly. The act of rewording what I said could stimulate new ideas by the would be quoter, potentially creating a more robust idea or argument. Receiving a citation or credit for my ideas or analysis was and is not my highest priority.
 
When Millennials start voting in large numbers, what they want will be listened to by politicians. So far, many of them don't vote, so, so far, they are paid lip service by most politicians, but in reality, largely ignored; ignored more by republican than democrat politicians, but ignored nevertheless. Bernard Sander's hitched his campaign wagon to a bunch of non-registered non-voters; hence his failure. In the interim, between our two plutocracies, roughly the period between women's suffrage up to Citizens United, if you wanted to be successful in politics you'd find out who is actually going to vote, and then tell them what they wanted to hear. Nowadays you find out who has the money to support politics and tell them what they want to hear. Of course there will never be enough people with money to elect anyone, so the politician still has to find out who is going to vote and cow tow to them. In the meantime, the people with the money hire all the best marketers and video producers. Once you get to Washington it's those with the money that count.

Millennials don't fit into either of these schemes. Most likely, unless by miracle the Democrats can take the Senate, and then pull off a second miracle by legislating around Citizens or getting it reversed, the nation will move inexorably toward total plutocratic fascism. We'll still vote in federal elections, but there will also remain an Electoral College largely neutralizing the utopian dream of one person one vote in presidential elections.

The move toward a more powerful plutocracy, where monied interests gain greater and greater influence over policy, will return the nation to a "more perfect union" as envisioned by its founders. The nations approximately three-quarter-century experiment with partial democracy at the federal level will be seen by historians as an interesting interlude. We will return to our roots, as a plutocratic Republic with the best government money can buy. And who is to say that democracy or plutocracy is better, Winston Churchill not withstanding? All forms of government are defective, but in different ways. Plutocrats favor, well, a plutocracy, whereas the rest of us look favorably on a more democratic government. And good luck with that!

Although the Millennials tend to be met with derision by other generations, there are some individuals are very impressive respresentatives for the Millennials. The Corona Virus may end up being a much needed emotional and character "Slap on the bottom" as they face emotional and economic hardship beyond what some Millennials realized was possible. Older generations with their experience and hopefully, wisdom, would serve well in an advisory type role in politics, but leaving the ultimate decision making to the mentally agile and those who may feel the impact the longest.
 
How about the idea that people vote for Trump because he is not Biden and as a FU to the establishment and the media?


That happened in 2016.The people realized what a mistake that was


upload_2020-4-2_7-38-33.png
 
Speak softly and carry a .50 BMG, perhaps? She is a good girl as well as playful and affectionate. However, I'm suprised we lasted past December because we have very different outlooks. Ironically, she was a Sanders supporter who is now having a more favorable view of Trump (Free money) and I was a Trump supporter who is having a more favorable view of Sanders! (What's the difference between the both of them).

Just remember that free money is your own money. The corporations getting grants, they are getting free money.

And Trump is among many awful things a child rapist, nothing can erase that in the minds of fathers with daughters.
 
How about the idea that people vote for Trump because he is not Biden and as a FU to the establishment and the media?
I do know how to say this more diplomatically, but in this case that is not warranted. Think about what you have written. It is incredibly stupid and self-defeating.
 
I do know how to say this more diplomatically, but in this case that is not warranted. Think about what you have written. It is incredibly stupid and self-defeating.

Tongue in check, my friend, tongue in cheek. To be diplomatic, unbelievably diplomatic, neither Presidential candidate represents the hopes of the majority of people. To fervently support one of the Preseidential candidates over the other seems silly to me. This is why I'm going to focus on those issues that affect the interests of the majority.

Looking forward to lively discussions with you on those issues.
 
Tongue in check, my friend, tongue in cheek. To be diplomatic, unbelievably diplomatic, neither Presidential candidate represents the hopes of the majority of people. To fervently support one of the Preseidential candidates over the other seems silly to me. This is why I'm going to focus on those issues that affect the interests of the majority.

Looking forward to lively discussions with you on those issues.
It's not silly when the basis for decision is mental health.
 
If you are putting your future financial well being in the hands of anyone being elected President then you are fucked and get what you deserve in a way. HRC and Trump supporters both learned that...
 
It's not silly when the basis for decision is mental health.

You see one candidate having a mental health advantage over the other?

It is no longer April 1st.

One candidate in a career establishment politician who has made millions from an active war machine, apparently thinks the military of our rivals are like it was In the '50's, and has impulse control issues as shown by his recent interactions with voters. Can you think of any geopolitical issues that this candidate would bring if elected? As in a costly and dangerous war that could very well escalate beyond what we could deal with? Also, that candidate is not nearly as mentally agile the other candidate. The other candidate seems to think the universe revolves around him most of the time and can't help himself even when he should be sensing the world is looking for leadership from the US during a crisis, not cringe-worthy self aggrandizement. At least the other candidate has avoided escalating conflicts so far.

I'm done with comparing or talking about Presidential candidates that are far from viable from a leadership perspective. Time to move on and pursue viable subjects.
 
Back
Top