1 - 10 Next
In response to:

An 'LBJ law' for Kentucky?

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Sep 08, 2014 12:41 PM
You missed the point of the article. Go read it again.
In response to:

Demand Primary Neutrality Now

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Sep 07, 2014 7:09 PM
The only one denying the truth is you. You evidently live in a different world than the rest of us. Vote (or not) as you choose. It is your right. But you are a sad example of a conservative. Why should anyone want to vote for a party that cannot deal with reality?
In response to:

Demand Primary Neutrality Now

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Sep 06, 2014 8:59 PM
No matter how much you wish it to be, it is not a lie. It is reality. It is true that by not voting or voting for a third party you could be aiding the Republican. The logic does work both ways. Nonetheless you could be helping the Democrat by not voting. This remains true.
In response to:

Demand Primary Neutrality Now

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Sep 06, 2014 8:38 PM
Its no lie. Its just basic math. If the votes received by the Democrat (assuming he/she gets more) less the votes received by the Republican is less than the votes received by third party candidate and/or the number of people that did not vote, then they helped the Democrat. I know its hard for some conservatives to accept this because its so much easier to bury your head in the sand, but this is reality, so get used to it.
In response to:

Demand Primary Neutrality Now

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Sep 06, 2014 3:12 PM
Yes!
In response to:

Demand Primary Neutrality Now

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Sep 06, 2014 3:12 PM
Let's assume that is true. Then you still should vote for the Republican. Control of the Senate is based on which party has the most seats. Surely Ted Cruz and co. would have an easier time of it if the Republicans are in control.
In response to:

A 'Right' to Recline?

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Sep 04, 2014 12:28 PM
"It is ridiculously rude to not let someone use an option that allows a minuscule modicum of comfort" So why does this not apply equally to the person wanting to prevent the seat from reclining? The argument goes both ways.
In response to:

The Problem With The Right Part 2

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Aug 18, 2014 8:32 AM
We don't have throw away the social issues, but we can back-burner them and adopt a position of not making the situation any worse with regards to those issues. We can be pro-life yet run on fixing the economy first.
In response to:

The Problem With The Right Part 2

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Aug 17, 2014 1:57 PM
So you consider yourself a Democrat?
In response to:

The Problem With The Right Part 2

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Aug 17, 2014 11:12 AM
Like it or not, its the world we live in, You can have the best ideas, but if you are not in a position to enable them, then they aren't going to do anything. You have to win elections to bring on change. Derek is saying you need to have priorities. You can be pro-life and support traditional marriage, but running on those issues isn't necessarily going to win you more votes. He summed it up well: "You can have the best ideas in the world, but if you keep them to yourself it doesn’t matter. If you do not win elections, nothing else matters. And the way to win elections is to think, act and speak strategically."
1 - 10 Next