TX-SEN: True to Form

[Calthrina950]

I am 20 (as you would know if you looked at my profile), and I'm very well aware of the kind of language and behavior engaged in by peers my age. That doesn't mean that I have to condone it. You would also know, from my prior comments on this board, that I have long held this position on such issues. I don't condone Hogg's profanity any more than I condone that of Trump himself.

I'm sorry; but this post is the best example of... Lib-Dem-ery (don't quite know if that term translates very well) that I have ever read.  The worst sort of snowflakery that only the finest Liberal Democrats manage to portray; a lot of virtue signalling to show that they are *respectable* while tone policing the survivors of a school shooting.

There's also the fundamental fact that there is a clear difference between an elected politician like Trump being a vulgar person and an activist using vulgar words to stress a point; and to compare the two indicates a lack of understanding of the way that the world works.  Hogg is someone who survived a school shooting; saw many of his friends shot and murdered and who was incredibly lucky to survive.  He's also seen the government do exactly nothing to prevent situations like that from happening again.    I'd say that he has a lot to be angry about and sometimes you have to let that anger out: internalising feelings like that is a good way of causing yourself harm.  Meanwhile Trump is a vulgar person: his utterances indicate his character flaws and weren't about demonstrates righteous anger.  However to someone like you who seems to have no firm principles bar being 'centrist' (which is a term that means very little; since the centre has a habit of drifting around in the breeze like a bin bag at a little used railway station) you seem to perceive the two as being the same; apparently unable to see the difference between someone who uses vulgar words to demonstrate the intensity of their views and someone who's just a vulgar person.

There's also the fact that there's a clear difference between an elected politician and a political activist.  Trump is meant to represent America on the international stage and to act as the leader of the country and clearly his vulgarity makes him very inappropriate for that job.  Its the same for all political figures; I get irrationally annoyed when you see politicians (mainly from the left although probably from all over) who use rude words as a way of looking cool and down with it - not to demonstrate intensity of feeling or many of the other reasons why a person swears but merely as another form of political messaging.  Hogg is a political activist; he's the face of a movement sure but hardly the key leadership figure that Trump his: and he's quite clearly an authentic person and his language demonstrates that really.  There's also the fact that there is something incredibly, incredibly dumb about comparing an old man who's elected to the highest office in the land and a young person who's been forced into the political world because of a very sad, sad thing that happened to him.

On a more on-topic subject: the incompetence of the way that Cruz is campaigning is rather astounding to me: and while I think that he's the favourite (and it'd take like every poll showing Beto ten points in front for me not to think that) it is possible that the Democrats pick this one up which I never thought would happen.  Does require a significant amount of work still though - and part of me wonders whether that might be what kills the Republicans in places like this: complacency can be what loses unexpectedly close elections.

I responded in detail to you on another thread, relating to your post concerning me. And you come in here with accusations of snowflakery! I hold everyone who is a part of the public forum to the same standard, regardless of their status or their situation. Yes, I understand that Hogg is the survivor of a mass shooting, and yes, I know that he is passionate about politics. But he is not the best spokesperson for his movement, and I don't have to condone everything that he, or any of his associates say. Nor do I condone the responses of the people who have denigrated him and the other survivors and have propagated conspiracy theories to the effect. And I am fully aware of the controversial language used by Trump himself; such language is a disgrace, and should be condemned by all people with some decency.

[Zaybay]

I am 20 (as you would know if you looked at my profile), and I'm very well aware of the kind of language and behavior engaged in by peers my age. That doesn't mean that I have to condone it. You would also know, from my prior comments on this board, that I have long held this position on such issues. I don't condone Hogg's profanity any more than I condone that of Trump himself.

I'm sorry; but this post is the best example of... Lib-Dem-ery (don't quite know if that term translates very well) that I have ever read.  The worst sort of snowflakery that only the finest Liberal Democrats manage to portray; a lot of virtue signalling to show that they are *respectable* while tone policing the survivors of a school shooting.

There's also the fundamental fact that there is a clear difference between an elected politician like Trump being a vulgar person and an activist using vulgar words to stress a point; and to compare the two indicates a lack of understanding of the way that the world works.  Hogg is someone who survived a school shooting; saw many of his friends shot and murdered and who was incredibly lucky to survive.  He's also seen the government do exactly nothing to prevent situations like that from happening again.    I'd say that he has a lot to be angry about and sometimes you have to let that anger out: internalising feelings like that is a good way of causing yourself harm.  Meanwhile Trump is a vulgar person: his utterances indicate his character flaws and weren't about demonstrates righteous anger.  However to someone like you who seems to have no firm principles bar being 'centrist' (which is a term that means very little; since the centre has a habit of drifting around in the breeze like a bin bag at a little used railway station) you seem to perceive the two as being the same; apparently unable to see the difference between someone who uses vulgar words to demonstrate the intensity of their views and someone who's just a vulgar person.

There's also the fact that there's a clear difference between an elected politician and a political activist.  Trump is meant to represent America on the international stage and to act as the leader of the country and clearly his vulgarity makes him very inappropriate for that job.  Its the same for all political figures; I get irrationally annoyed when you see politicians (mainly from the left although probably from all over) who use rude words as a way of looking cool and down with it - not to demonstrate intensity of feeling or many of the other reasons why a person swears but merely as another form of political messaging.  Hogg is a political activist; he's the face of a movement sure but hardly the key leadership figure that Trump his: and he's quite clearly an authentic person and his language demonstrates that really.  There's also the fact that there is something incredibly, incredibly dumb about comparing an old man who's elected to the highest office in the land and a young person who's been forced into the political world because of a very sad, sad thing that happened to him.

On a more on-topic subject: the incompetence of the way that Cruz is campaigning is rather astounding to me: and while I think that he's the favourite (and it'd take like every poll showing Beto ten points in front for me not to think that) it is possible that the Democrats pick this one up which I never thought would happen.  Does require a significant amount of work still though - and part of me wonders whether that might be what kills the Republicans in places like this: complacency can be what loses unexpectedly close elections.

wow. Im just.....wow. That was excellently put.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Good lord....Lying Ted is losing it:

Ted Cruz Says 'That's Great' to Supporter Who Suggests Sending Beto O'Rourke 'Back to Ireland'

The whole GOP has lost it...if they even had "it" in the first place, that is.

[Torrain]

Good lord....Lying Ted is losing it:

Ted Cruz Says 'That's Great' to Supporter Who Suggests Sending Beto O'Rourke 'Back to Ireland'

O Canada,
Our home and native land....

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Good lord....Lying Ted is losing it:

Ted Cruz Says 'That's Great' to Supporter Who Suggests Sending Beto O'Rourke 'Back to Ireland'

The whole GOP has lost it...if they even had "it" in the first place, that is.

I used to like and respect Cruz as a person even just a few weeks, ago. Recently though, he is acting reprehensible even beyond the political issues now, and I am incredibly disappointed with that.

[Continential]

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2018/09/04/heavily-spliced-ted-cruz-video-falsely-depicts-beto-orourke-saying-grateful-flag-burning
Cruz is doing a Liz Dole

[ON Progressive]

Good lord....Lying Ted is losing it:

Ted Cruz Says 'That's Great' to Supporter Who Suggests Sending Beto O'Rourke 'Back to Ireland'

O Canada,
Our home and native land....

Oh dear God no. We want absolutely nothing to do with Ted Cruz.

[Saint Milei]

I think it's pretty silly to say cruz is a bad politician. Do you like his positions? That's up to you. But he's definitely a good politician.

-Beat an establishment candidate
-Is probably the most hated senator in congress, even within his own party, and appeared to build a coalition between the establishment and the conservative base. Donald was just donald

[new_patomic]

I think it's pretty silly to say cruz is a bad politician. Do you like his positions? That's up to you. But he's definitely a good politician.

-Beat an establishment candidate
-Is probably the most hated senator in congress, even within his own party, and appeared to build a coalition between the establishment and the conservative base. Donald was just donald

I think you need more than one primary election to be declared a good politician. Not that it's a negative mark or anything on his record, but we have other elections and now (part of) this campaign to look at. And isn't him being hated a black mark, if anything? I sort of doubt that if he were less hated he'd have done worse in 2016, for instance.

[Florida Man for Crime]

I think you need more than one primary election to be declared a good politician. Not that it's a negative mark or anything on his record, but we have other elections and now (part of) this campaign to look at.

Cruz came in 2nd in the 2016 Republican Presidential primary.

You do not come in 2nd (in a race with 10-20 candidates) in a major party Presidential primary without having some skill and feel for the pulse of the voters as a politician.

[Saint Milei]

I think it's pretty silly to say cruz is a bad politician. Do you like his positions? That's up to you. But he's definitely a good politician.

-Beat an establishment candidate
-Is probably the most hated senator in congress, even within his own party, and appeared to build a coalition between the establishment and the conservative base. Donald was just donald

I think you need more than one primary election to be declared a good politician. Not that it's a negative mark or anything on his record, but we have other elections and now (part of) this campaign to look at. And isn't him being hated a black mark, if anything? I sort of doubt that if he were less hated he'd have done worse in 2016, for instance.

Being that hated and being the establishment choice is a very tactical move. Cruz is a student of the game. Dude studied Obama's groundwork game and would have been the nominee if trump was not there

[KingSweden]

I think it's pretty silly to say cruz is a bad politician. Do you like his positions? That's up to you. But he's definitely a good politician.

-Beat an establishment candidate
-Is probably the most hated senator in congress, even within his own party, and appeared to build a coalition between the establishment and the conservative base. Donald was just donald

I think you need more than one primary election to be declared a good politician. Not that it's a negative mark or anything on his record, but we have other elections and now (part of) this campaign to look at. And isn't him being hated a black mark, if anything? I sort of doubt that if he were less hated he'd have done worse in 2016, for instance.

Being that hated and being the establishment choice is a very tactical move. Cruz is a student of the game. Dude studied Obama's groundwork game and would have been the nominee if trump was not there

Didn’t he make his team read Axelrod’s book about the ‘08 campaign when he took on Dewhurst?

[junior chįmp]

The realignment is real

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Antonio the Sixth]

How come Houston Latinos are so Republican? Those numbers look pretty anemic.

[Florida Man for Crime]

The realignment is real

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some more information from the Telemundo description (only in Spanish it seems).

https://www.telemundohouston.com/noticias/local/Encuesta-de-Telemundo-y-Mason-Dixon-Beto-y-Lupe-favoritos-entre-hispanos-de-Texas-492513471.html

It is apparently a Mason-Dixon poll. They polled 625 Hispanic registered voters from 5 different regions (Dallas Fort Worth, Houston, San Antonio, Brownsville-McAllen, and El Paso).

So it is not actually a proper statewide poll, even of Hispanics, just of these 5 regions.

O'Rourke is apparently ahead by 48 in the El Paso region and 39 in the Brownsville-McAllen region (as compared to 5 in the Houston region). But the article doesn't list the actual crosstabs for those regions, and doesn't say anything about DFW or San Antonio.

Looks all in all like mostly a junk poll.

[junior chįmp]

GOP going full racist against Beto

https://www.twitter.com/jerryochoa/status/1037451693078790150

[new_patomic]

"Patsy"

[GeorgiaModerate]

GOP going full racist against Beto

https://www.twitter.com/jerryochoa/status/1037451693078790150

This can't be legal, can it?  I hope?

[Zaybay]

GOP going full racist against Beto

https://www.twitter.com/jerryochoa/status/1037451693078790150

This can't be legal, can it?  I hope?

Im pretty sure Cruz has broken multiple campaign laws so far, why not break some more?

[IceSpear]

TX Republicans have been diving head first into the gutter over the past few weeks, which is quite different from the last year and a half where they've barely acknowledged O'Rourke's presence, or only did so to occasionally mock him. Looks like they're getting pretty nervous.

[junior chįmp]

Yeah i was gonna say....anyone expect this lawless administration and criminal Republican party to enforce any FEC laws is outta their mind

Were essentially governed by the mob

[ON Progressive]

Yeah i was gonna say....anyone expect this lawless administration and criminal Republican party to enforce any FEC laws is outta their mind

Were essentially governed by the mob

Especially since they're about to confirm a SCOTUS judge who thinks literally all campaign finance regulation is unconstitutional.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

GOP going full racist against Beto

https://www.twitter.com/jerryochoa/status/1037451693078790150

This can't be legal, can it?  I hope?

Im pretty sure Cruz has broken multiple campaign laws so far, why not break some more?

I'm 100% sure this is defamation. Beto should sue if it gains anymore traction.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

I am 20 (as you would know if you looked at my profile), and I'm very well aware of the kind of language and behavior engaged in by peers my age. That doesn't mean that I have to condone it. You would also know, from my prior comments on this board, that I have long held this position on such issues. I don't condone Hogg's profanity any more than I condone that of Trump himself.

I'm sorry; but this post is the best example of... Lib-Dem-ery (don't quite know if that term translates very well) that I have ever read.  The worst sort of snowflakery that only the finest Liberal Democrats manage to portray; a lot of virtue signalling to show that they are *respectable* while tone policing the survivors of a school shooting.

There's also the fundamental fact that there is a clear difference between an elected politician like Trump being a vulgar person and an activist using vulgar words to stress a point; and to compare the two indicates a lack of understanding of the way that the world works.  Hogg is someone who survived a school shooting; saw many of his friends shot and murdered and who was incredibly lucky to survive.  He's also seen the government do exactly nothing to prevent situations like that from happening again.    I'd say that he has a lot to be angry about and sometimes you have to let that anger out: internalising feelings like that is a good way of causing yourself harm.  Meanwhile Trump is a vulgar person: his utterances indicate his character flaws and weren't about demonstrates righteous anger.  However to someone like you who seems to have no firm principles bar being 'centrist' (which is a term that means very little; since the centre has a habit of drifting around in the breeze like a bin bag at a little used railway station) you seem to perceive the two as being the same; apparently unable to see the difference between someone who uses vulgar words to demonstrate the intensity of their views and someone who's just a vulgar person.

There's also the fact that there's a clear difference between an elected politician and a political activist.  Trump is meant to represent America on the international stage and to act as the leader of the country and clearly his vulgarity makes him very inappropriate for that job.  Its the same for all political figures; I get irrationally annoyed when you see politicians (mainly from the left although probably from all over) who use rude words as a way of looking cool and down with it - not to demonstrate intensity of feeling or many of the other reasons why a person swears but merely as another form of political messaging.  Hogg is a political activist; he's the face of a movement sure but hardly the key leadership figure that Trump his: and he's quite clearly an authentic person and his language demonstrates that really.  There's also the fact that there is something incredibly, incredibly dumb about comparing an old man who's elected to the highest office in the land and a young person who's been forced into the political world because of a very sad, sad thing that happened to him.

On a more on-topic subject: the incompetence of the way that Cruz is campaigning is rather astounding to me: and while I think that he's the favourite (and it'd take like every poll showing Beto ten points in front for me not to think that) it is possible that the Democrats pick this one up which I never thought would happen.  Does require a significant amount of work still though - and part of me wonders whether that might be what kills the Republicans in places like this: complacency can be what loses unexpectedly close elections.

This is a phenomenal post, and articulates really well why a lot of people absolutely hate centrism. Far too often, the image of centrism is a boring small c-conservative who rejects any radical change, insists on the answer all being in the middle, and who is more concerned with language policing and "civility" than actually doing sh**t to help.

I think that there is an idealology that could be described as centrist while having actual energy and enthusiasm instead of suburbanite rent-seeking, but the word seems tainted for many by people like Calthrina950.

[Progressive Pessimist]

GOP going full racist against Beto

https://www.twitter.com/jerryochoa/status/1037451693078790150

This is despicable!