No, they don't. The populace you're talking about wanted to appeal Obamacare but they loved the ACA. They want tough criminal sanctions but want help on the opioid epidemic. They want help from the government but distrust others from getting that same help. They live in cognitive dissonance. Blue states elect the Dems who vote for those programs because blue state liberals believe in a society that tries to help people. On a fundamental level, a Democrat tends to be someone who is a 'great society' kind of person. Who isn't scared of some inefficiencies or waste. It's sort of the point. On the macro level, if I want subsidized healthcare on the federal level just to be redundant, of course I know aid is going to red states. A more philosophical approach would be that liberals take the Rawlsian way of thinking. So I hate to sound elitist, but I do have a better idea of what the poor family in Missouri needs than average person living that life. And I live in Illinois, which has a very large rural population. I often side with that populace in regards to how Chicago runs things. Do you feel me, NTL? Do you feel me?
Damn it King. They understand what their best interests are! Your interests for them, are not their own. They may appear stupid to you, but that doesn't matter because they are not you and you are not them. If red states constantly vote against their best interests and elect Republicans, then by the same argument blue states vote against their best interests in electing Democrats. Why are blue states always electing these Democrats who send all of the Federal budget to red states and pay huge taxes that never come back to their benefit because they get paid out in welfare benefits to folks in Mississippi? It's silly to make that argument. Don't be silly.
It's perceived. You're right. It's not a lazy argument - it's understanding that they don't actually understand what their best interests are. Everyone knows you need to eat. But it goes deeper than that. I lived around these people my entire life, NTL. Why is it so hard to accept it?
Nobody votes against their own perceived self interest. Stop making that lazy argument. It inhibits you from understanding anything. Just because you don't understand their self-interests, or prioritize interests in the same way doesn't mean that they are voting against their own self interest.
FWIW, I didn't ban you. I abstained from the vote. And I know you didn't blame me, no worries.
FWIW, I know that you did not ban me out of trying to censor me. You banned me because I knowingly broke the rules, and I did.
That MHS did make me smile a bit. But dammit the context is different! I maintain my innocence!
I truly believe that the establishment conservatives are either going to ignore it, weakly refute it, or stand solely on ideological grounds on the matter. NTL, I just get frustrated with it because it's doesn't even look to be appear debatable at this point: torture doesn't yield results. It's possible that the best argument for it is that in the most extreme circumstances it stands as a proverbial Hail Mary, but that's about it.
http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/...16#post2009916 Your input would be incredibly helpful, good sir.
You are a good person.
