Kerry, Bush and Armenians

[dusken]

So since we're all keen on this relativist talk, I shall reply in kind to all your comments from now on.

You seemed to miss the idea that it is all on a gradient and that any given candidate is not necessarily all good or all bad.

You said:

"It is not a false dichotomy because nobody is trying to force anyone into an extreme."

Then that statement makes no sense if you're talking about verbal intimidation.. because there *are* people who do that, and HyeJinx's post is doing exactly that.

Again, forcing does not imply anything physical. You can try to force somebody into an extreme with fallacious arguing as false dichotomy suggests, just as you have been doing with red herrings for example.

First trying to "expose" Bush's lies, then claiming Armenians who support him are hard-headed, then saying he's not telling me to vote for Kerry, then giving reasons to *vote* for Kerry..... the alternative.. ahh.. somehow, that post doesn't sound like it was meant to just expose Bush's lies about his "loyalty" to the Armenian cause (whatever the hell that means)...


I am criticising those who vote, yes, but that is because I don't believe in political systems. It has nothing to do with who you want to vote for. And I'm also criticising those who DO tell me whom I should be voting for, and that I *should* be voting... What part of that do you not understand?

I think you need to read my first response to you and what I was responding to for you to realize that you went off on a red herring to make yourself feel better. I quoted you suggesting that someone who choses the Kerry is somehow logically uninformed then responded by saying that it is the "lesser of two evils" which I went on to show is completely fine because what is ultimately good and ultimately bad cannot be quantified in terms of candidates and decisions can only be made by weight. This response to you, clearly has nothing to do with people convincing you. That is a different topic.

I still don't support anyone's justification for voting for Kerry if it has to do with how bad Bush is... like I said, we can go on about how it's all relative, but that's not the point. The point is, we're talking about voting for someone just because you don't want the other person to come into office. It needn't even be justified with how good or bad the candidate is. All one needs to do is just say that they don't want Bush to come into office. Period. The majority who voted for the Liberals here in Canada voted for them just to keep the Conservatives out of office. Does that mean they made a good choice? Of course not. The Liberals killed the budget, among other things. So was it a "good" choice? Depends on if you consider killing the budget a good thing, I suppose..

You should stop referring to relativity and ignoring the idea of a gradient. A gradient can be argued objectively. Voting for someone because you would prefer him over the other candidate is the point of voting. This is not registering with you.

Again, using your relativist argument, what's your definition of idiot? Also, why doesn't it make one an idiot? You're making a statement as if it's a fact, but are not justifying it.

This is all useless. You are trying to distract from the main ideas. The idea is that you feel the process I described is naive and I said it is not. Stating a fact? You are doing that more often than yoiu claim I am and are now drawing a relativity card because I tried to explain the involvement of a gradient in this scenario. You still have not shown any reasoning why someone chosing the better candidate is a naive decision making process.

Again, bringing in the Canadian example, EVERYONE who voted for the Liberals KNEW about the corrupt government the Liberals have had for the past couple of years.. Was it right to vote for them just to keep the socially conservatives away? They voted for the Liberals because the Liberals are socially progressive.. but does that mean that they are better overall? Voting for a presidential candidate should not be a matter of one issue taking priority over everything else. Because that is what creates all the economic AND social problems, and the clashes between "special interests".. If people thought better about who really is a good candidate and who isn't, things wouldn't be so bad.

I do not think I need to repeat myself.

I thought it was all relative. And yet another statement without supportive arguments from Mr. dusken..

What a dunce. This was your response to "Oh, and stating that someone is politically naive is not a statement of a fact. That was the dumbest thing you posted today." Your saying it is relative supports that it is an opinion, which it is. If I call you stupid, that is not a fact; it is my opinion. If you think that needs more "supportive arguments from Mr. Dusken" you are an mentally impaired.

[pixie]

hahahahahhahahahahahhaha

[Darorinag]

I think you need to read my first response to you and what I was responding to for you to realize that you went off on a red herring to make yourself feel better. I quoted you suggesting that someone who choses the Kerry is somehow logically uninformed then responded by saying that it is the "lesser of two evils" which I went on to show is completely fine because what is ultimately good and ultimately bad cannot be quantified in terms of candidates and decisions can only be made by weight. This response to you, clearly has nothing to do with people convincing you. That is a different topic.

Your replies do not seem to be related at all to what I'm talking about. It seems to me that you're the one who's been using the red herring fallacy in this thread, not I, with all that relativist talk about who's good and how good is defined.

You should stop referring to relativity and ignoring the idea of a gradient. A gradient can be argued objectively. Voting for someone because you would prefer him over the other candidate is the point of voting. This is not registering with you.

lol.. you have a way of twisting things and making it seem like *I'm* the one who's arguing about relativity... I beg to differ. If I vote for someone, it wouldn't be because I prefer their hair over the other candidate's hair, but because I think he/she would take decisions that would enhance my position/agenda or the position/agenda of my group, rather than taking decisions that would hurt me. I'm not talking about relativity here. I'm talking about comparative voting. You don't seem to understand the difference between the two arguments (one of which is yours, mind you).

This is all useless. You are trying to distract from the main ideas.

And you weren't? Remember, you're the one who introduced the concept of relativity in this thread, and you're the one who kept arguing about the "idiot" comment being illogical.

The idea is that you feel the process I described is naive and I said it is not. Stating a fact? You are doing that more often than yoiu claim I am and are now drawing a relativity card because I tried to explain the involvement of a gradient in this scenario.

Wow, and here again, you insist that I started with the relativist argument... Impressive.

You still have not shown any reasoning why someone chosing the better candidate is a naive decision making process.

How do you know he's the better candidate? Just because you know person X is bad doesn't mean person Y is necessarily better......... Logic 101. Hence it's naive.

Your saying it is relative supports that it is an opinion, which it is.

Umm, do you know what sarcasm means?

If I call you stupid, that is not a fact; it is my opinion.

It doesn't mean I'm not stupid though, does it? If I have enough proof that you're stupid, then you're stupid, and the comment is not out of line.

I recommend that you enrol yourself in Logic 101 ASAP.

[HyeJinx1984]

You are an absolute moron.

Wow, I didn't know you know me so well. Well,i t's always reassuring when I hear my own people call me a moron, idiot, xxxxxx, white boy, dumbass, or unprideful since that's basically all I heard from Armenians around me when growing up. Maybe I should stop being nice and trying to form any sort of relationships or brotherhoods with my own people since they seem to hate me so much? You are right, I am complete idiot for trying so hard.

But, out of curiosity, I'm an absolute moron for what exactly? For saying that anyone who votes for a person who we know FOR A FACT won't help Armenians is wrong? Yes, how moronic of me. Notice I never said "republicans are bad, democrats are good" or "vote kerry not bush," I simply said "Look at this guy, he's a total prick to the Armenian people, no Armenians should suport HIM" Wow, that really makes me a moron, I'm glad you opened my eyes apar jan, let us drink some chai over a relaxing game of tachdinard, eh?

[Anonymouse]

Wow, I didn't know you know me so well. Well,i t's always reassuring when I hear my own people call me a moron, idiot, xxxxxx, white boy, dumbass, or unprideful since that's basically all I heard from Armenians around me when growing up. Maybe I should stop being nice and trying to form any sort of relationships or brotherhoods with my own people since they seem to hate me so much? You are right, I am complete idiot for trying so hard.

But, out of curiosity, I'm an absolute moron for what exactly? For saying that anyone who votes for a person who we know FOR A FACT won't help Armenians is wrong? Yes, how moronic of me. Notice I never said "republicans are bad, democrats are good" or "vote kerry not bush," I simply said "Look at this guy, he's a total prick to the Armenian people, no Armenians should suport HIM" Wow, that really makes me a moron, I'm glad you opened my eyes apar jan, let us drink some chai over a relaxing game of tachdinard, eh?

I agree with you here, neither are good, and it is the most realistic answer you offered, and the truth. All else is wishful thinking.

[HyeJinx1984]

I agree with you here, neither are good, and it is the most realistic answer you offered, and the truth. All else is wishful thinking.

Please don't agree with me, I'm an absolute moron.

[xBaron Dants]

Please don't agree with me, I'm an absolute moron.

Oh quit whining, you absolute moron!

[HyeJinx1984]

Well, when you put it like thaaaaaaaaaat...

[xBaron Dants]

Well, when you put it like thaaaaaaaaaat...

In all honesty, I agree entirely with what you said, and I really felt bad reading about your past experiences with Armenians.

But I see no use in joining this argument because Surfer and I are pretty much at the opposite ends of the spectrum, and this is something on which we will never agree, or even arrive to a compromise.

[HyeJinx1984]

Yea.. I mean, this is the kind of thing we should talk about in a different thread cause it doesn't have much to do with this one, but thinking back on it I don't think anything positive has ever come from any Armenians I've known other than family members. No friendships, no business help, no spiritual connections. I got my ass kicked a lot by them in highschool and was sued by some for getting in a car accident that was admitedly my fault, but that they blew out of proportion to get more money. Yet I love my people and make myself seem like an idiot for having this moronic idea of brother hood and a globe spanning family. I think I'm just stupid and naive, I should go with my earlier sentiments of "xxxx my people"... I swear at one point I hated being Armenian so much because of how other Armenians treated me that not only did I wish I wasn't Armenian but I remember crying and angrily telling my mother I wished the turks had succeeded and killed every one of those Grant Highschool Armo xxxxs so I wouldn't have to deal with them anymore.

I'm so glad I'm not in highschool anymore and realize there's a bigger world out there... but then some very irritating Armenians show up now and again in the adult world. Best to ignore them or make fun of them.