Peebs vs. Abdullah

[John Dule]

Fergie's Islamophobia aside, Abdullah is completely unpalatable to ~95% of the American electorate for either his social views or his religious views. I would vote for Peebs and she would win pretty easily. I'm pretty sure this is only a close vote because most people on this site are unfamiliar with the depths of Abdullah's radicalism.

[Biden his time]

Most people on this site are unfamiliar with the depths of Abdullah's radicalism.

Ooh, please tell me more about my "radicalism".

I'm very interested and won't be afraid to admit I, too, am unfamiliar with these "depths" of myself you have managed to identify.

[John Dule]

Most people on this site are unfamiliar with the depths of Abdullah's radicalism.

Ooh, please tell me more about my "radicalism".

I'm very interested and won't be afraid to admit I, too, am unfamiliar with these "depths" of myself you have managed to identify.

Wait, do you actually consider yourself electable in the US? Lmao!

[Biden his time]

Most people on this site are unfamiliar with the depths of Abdullah's radicalism.

Ooh, please tell me more about my "radicalism".

I'm very interested and won't be afraid to admit I, too, am unfamiliar with these "depths" of myself you have managed to identify.

Wait, do you actually consider yourself electable in the US? Lmao!

No (at least not on the federal or state level), because I don't care about becoming a politician. I easily could be "electable" if I gave up my morals, picking and choosing what issues to talk about like every modern American politician does, and it would not be difficult to do.

You suffer from the same exact problem as me, being a weirdo Reddit-style Libertarian, and so does Peebs with her communism and obsession with gender. If you two talked about some of the issues you cared about, you could barely win 1% of the vote.

Also, I have an added bonus of not having mental illnesses, putting me easily ahead of a solid 25% or 30% of this forum, almost definitely including Peebs and possibly you, too.


Also it's funny how you dodged my question. Tell me what you really think about my "radicalism" (something shared by every single religious Muslim, according to you). Don't be afraid! You know so much about Islam and religion in general, having "never met a seriously religious person". You should talk about it a lot more!

Use paragraphs this time, not sentences. Go into what you think in detail.
And actually make attempts to refute my arguments instead of acting like what you say is self-evident and obvious.

[It’s so Joever]

Most people on this site are unfamiliar with the depths of Abdullah's radicalism.

Ooh, please tell me more about my "radicalism".

I'm very interested and won't be afraid to admit I, too, am unfamiliar with these "depths" of myself you have managed to identify.

Wait, do you actually consider yourself electable in the US? Lmao!

No (at least not on the federal or state level), because I don't care about becoming a politician. I easily could be "electable" if I gave up my morals, picking and choosing what issues to talk about like every modern American politician does, and it would not be difficult to do.

You suffer from the same exact problem as me, being a weirdo Reddit-style Libertarian, and so does Peebs with her communism and obsession with gender. If you two talked about some of the issues you cared about, you could barely win 1% of the vote.

Also, I have an added bonus of not having mental illnesses, putting me easily ahead of a solid 25% or 30% of this forum, almost definitely including Peebs and possibly you, too.


Also it's funny how you dodged my question. Tell me what you really think about my "radicalism" (something shared by every single religious Muslim, according to you). Don't be afraid! You know so much about Islam and religion in general, having "never met a seriously religious person". You should talk about it a lot more!

Use paragraphs this time, not sentences. Go into what you think in detail.
And actually make attempts to refute my arguments instead of acting like what you say is self-evident and obvious.

Hm…could you explain your reasoning for this sentence?

[Biden his time]

-SNIP-

Hm…could you explain your reasoning for this sentence?

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=490176

I've got nothing against someone who suffers with one of these conditions and it's not entirely that you can't win, it just gets a whole lot more difficult.

[John Dule]

No (at least not on the federal or state level), because I don't care about becoming a politician. I easily could be "electable" if I gave up my morals, picking and choosing what issues to talk about like every modern American politician does, and it would not be difficult to do.

You suffer from the same exact problem as me, being a weirdo Reddit-style Libertarian, and so does Peebs with her communism and obsession with gender. If you two talked about some of the issues you cared about, you could barely win 1% of the vote.

Also, I have an added bonus of not having mental illnesses, putting me easily ahead of a solid 25% or 30% of this forum, almost definitely including Peebs and possibly you, too.

I mean, by this logic pretty much anyone is "electable" so long as they have a pulse. The question in this thread is who would win based on the positions you've taken on the issues during your time on this site. If it was just a question of "Who is better at lying about their actual views to pander to the American people," that'd be a boring thread.

Peebs rarely brings up gender issues unless she's provoked first. As for mental illness, I've never been diagnosed with anything, so I can't speak to that.

Also it's funny how you dodged my question. Tell me what you really think about my "radicalism" (something shared by every single religious Muslim, according to you). Don't be afraid! You know so much about Islam and religion in general, having "never met a seriously religious person". You should talk about it a lot more!

Use paragraphs this time, not sentences. Go into what you think in detail.
And actually make attempts to refute my arguments instead of acting like what you say is self-evident and obvious.

I didn't think your question actually needed addressing because I assumed you weren't serious. You said in your argument with Ferguson that (1) Homosexuality and sodomy are immoral, and (2) Non-Muslims go to hell. The first point automatically puts you on thin ice with ~70% of the American electorate (the portion that supports gay marriage). The second automatically torpedoes your reputation with American Christians, who-- unsurprisingly-- make up a significant portion of that remaining 30%. So, Mr. Campaign Strategist... how do you propose to win back the ~95% of the country you've alienated?

This thread isn't about my personal views on your cult, it's about how far outside the American mainstream you are. My comment was limited to that issue and that issue alone.

[It’s so Joever]

-SNIP-

Hm…could you explain your reasoning for this sentence?

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=490176

I've got nothing against someone who suffers with one of these conditions and it's not entirely that you can't win, it just gets a whole lot more difficult.

I don’t think you fully understand these mental illnesses very well. ADHD definitely is not a major hurdle for a politician and honestly in some cases may not even be a bad thing.
Autism is a bit more complex, if it’s severe it absolutely would hinder a campaign but if it’s mild…it’s definitely not this giant barrier (although it still would be a downside)

[Biden his time]

I didn't think your question actually needed addressing because I assumed you weren't serious. You said in your argument with Ferguson that (1) Homosexuality and sodomy are immoral, and (2) Non-Muslims go to hell. The first point automatically puts you on thin ice with ~70% of the American electorate (the portion that supports gay marriage). The second automatically torpedoes your reputation with American Christians, who-- unsurprisingly-- make up a significant portion of that remaining 30%. So, Mr. Campaign Strategist... how do you propose to win back the ~95% of the country you've alienated?

Easy, don't talk about it?

Neither of these points are relevant to my campaign, especially not in the way Peebs' ardent pro-communist stance would be.

It's really hard to imagine a scenario where I actually would have to give a Q&A session about gay marriage or sodomy, especially as such things move farther back in time for the American electorate. It'd be like unlocking prohibition once again. I myself could truthfully and honestly reply that I don't care about banning gay marriage or sodomy laws, since they'd be useless and there are much more important issues affecting the American public.

The other thing is "Non-Muslims go to hell". This seems to be a sticking point among the online atheists of this forum who get really triggered when hearing this, but of course there's virtually zero chance that a candidate for office will get questioned on this topic unless they go out of their way to talk about it. I myself only did so on the "Religion & Philosophy" board of this forum. It's also relatively well-known what the Islamic viewpoints on heaven and hell are, this won't be some insane idea that someone who's gung-ho for voting for me suddenly hears and they turn away. If there's someone turned off by this point, they almost certainly wouldn't have been OK with voting for a Muslim anyway (also, you expect these guys to vote for a transgender?)

In any case, the former question is irrelevant whereas the latter question is likely to be extremely easy to avoid considering that there are many Muslims who have managed to make it into federal and statewide elected positions over the last few years such as Keith Ellison and Andre Carson. Neither of them have been cancelled regarding what they think about heaven or hell, and presumably they haven't been questioned much due to its irrelevance to their jobs (and if they have been questioned, there are almost definitely good answers that could be given that wouldn't arise hostility except among the John Dules of the world).

No doubt it'd be impossible to make it on the presidential level against an actual candidate (at least for now). Even a regular average American could crush me in a landslide. With an opponent like Peebs, though, with all the radical stances provided and all the attack ads which write themselves, it seems quite easy.

This thread isn't about my personal views on your cult, it's about how far outside the American mainstream you are. My comment was limited to that issue and that issue alone.

It doesn't really matter what this thread is about. We're allowed to go off-topic and go into tangents, and this is a topic at least tangentially related to the main thread topic.

So, once again, I want to hear your detailed thoughts on why you hate Islam and Muslims so much.

You really shouldn't be so afraid to tell me what you really think when you have so many friends around you on this forum. You will be showered with praise. Go for it. Do it on your Q&A page if you want.

[John Dule]

Easy, don't talk about it?

Neither of these points are relevant to my campaign, especially not in the way Peebs' ardent pro-communist stance would be.

It's really hard to imagine a scenario where I actually would have to give a Q&A session about gay marriage or sodomy, especially as such things move farther back in time for the American electorate. It'd be like unlocking prohibition once again. I myself could truthfully and honestly reply that I don't care about banning gay marriage or sodomy laws, since they'd be useless and there are much more important issues affecting the American public.

The other thing is "Non-Muslims go to hell". This seems to be a sticking point among the online atheists of this forum who get really triggered when hearing this, but of course there's virtually zero chance that a candidate for office will get questioned on this topic unless they go out of their way to talk about it. I myself only did so on the "Religion & Philosophy" board of this forum. It's also relatively well-known what the Islamic viewpoints on heaven and hell are, this won't be some insane idea that someone who's gung-ho for voting for me suddenly hears and they turn away. If there's someone turned off by this point, they almost certainly wouldn't have been OK with voting for a Muslim anyway (also, you expect these guys to vote for a transgender?)

Sorry, but you're not making any sense. You really think that as the first Muslim major-party nominee you wouldn't be asked about your faith? And you really think that even if you lied about your positions, they wouldn't come out via other people in your life exposing you? Come on, dude. Religion is brought up in American presidential campaigns very frequently. Need I remind you that Obama's pastor nearly torpedoed his primary campaign?

In any case, the former question is irrelevant whereas the latter question is likely to be extremely easy to avoid considering that there are many Muslims who have managed to make it into federal and statewide elected positions over the last few years such as Keith Ellison and Andre Carson. Neither of them have been cancelled regarding what they think about heaven or hell, and presumably they haven't been questioned much due to its irrelevance to their jobs (and if they have been questioned, there are almost definitely good answers that could be given that wouldn't arise hostility except among the John Dules of the world).

No doubt it'd be impossible to make it on the presidential level against an actual candidate (at least for now). Even a regular average American could crush me in a landslide. With an opponent like Peebs, though, with all the radical stances provided and all the attack ads which write themselves, it seems quite easy.

When have Keith Ellison or Andre Carson been subjected to the scrutiny of a nationwide political campaign? In any case, I'm sure a moderate Muslim could mount a solid campaign on the federal level (perhaps even as a Republican). But you're not a moderate Muslim.

More to the point, why do you care? I've never seen anyone devote this much effort to defending themselves in one of these silly matchup threads. I gave my thoughts on the matchup based solely on the rhetoric I've seen you employ on this site. "But I'd lie" isn't a legitimate retort to my analysis. What more needs to be said? I'm flattered that you care this much about my opinion, but it remains unchanged.

It doesn't really matter what this thread is about. We're allowed to go off-topic and go into tangents, and this is a topic at least tangentially related to the main thread topic.

So, once again, I want to hear your detailed thoughts on why you hate Islam and Muslims so much.

You really shouldn't be so afraid to tell me what you really think when you have so many friends around you on this forum. You will be showered with praise. Go for it. Do it on your Q&A page if you want.

I hate all religions indiscriminately. I just hate Islam more because its current manifestation is particularly antithetical to my values (free speech, secular legal codes, rights for women, etc). Not sure what's so hard to understand about this. If you have a more specific question about my views on religion, I think this discussion should be taken elsewhere.

[kwabbit]

TIL: Thinking gay marriage is morally wrong because of your religion=queer phobia.

Yes. If you think women are inferior because of your religion, you're sexist. There's no reason queer issues should be different.

Believing that marriage is supposed to be unitative bond between a man and a woman is not “queerphobia.” There’s a reason why this was the case for a long time, and it’s not because pretty much every society had a bone to pick with gay people.

Can you actually name any reason that makes sense in the modern world? Because marriage was a lot of things in the past which it isn't anymore. And yeah, most societies that did "traditional marriage" did have a bone to pick with gay people.

Most of the issues that traditional marriage were encouraged to treat have actually become more salient in recent years. Declining birth rates, more one parent households, more angry single men (which today means incels but in ancient history when men took many wives this was also an issue) are all growing societal problems. The traditional nuclear family is a solution to all of these. That’s not to say that same sex marriage doesn’t solve all of these issues since they have shown to be as beneficial as heterosexual marriages. In either case, many core tenants of traditional marriage have been validated in the past few decades and the issue was traditional marriage was simply the between one man and one woman part and not the other aspects.

[Badger]

Anyone hating on Abdullah's views is clearly Islamophobic.

Takes one to know one I guess?

[Badger]

-SNIP-

Hm…could you explain your reasoning for this sentence?

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=490176

I've got nothing against someone who suffers with one of these conditions and it's not entirely that you can't win, it just gets a whole lot more difficult.

Ugly look, dude. Very ugly indeed.

Though that just might be my ADHD "mental illness" sneaking (Shrug).

[Devout Centrist]

But it’s ready for a trans president?

3rd Trans President

[T'Chenka]

Peebs is a Democrat, Abdullah is a quasi- or semi-fundamentalist muslim.

How is this even close?

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

But it’s ready for a trans president?

3rd Trans President

Wait, who were the first two?

[T'Chenka]

3rd Trans President

Wait, who were the first two?

Taft and Bush 41

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Wait, who were the first two?

Taft and Bush 41

Not me trying to think of trans readings of what I know about them. My "median voter" half thought of the bathtub thing for Taft and my "autism" half thought of the fact that the original Quantum Leap aired during Bush's administration. I don't know about the bathtub, but I do know that Quantum Leap sees Sam Beckett experience gender euphoria in just about every episode.

EDIT: And now that I think of it, the episode where Sam had to perform Hamlet naked (which aired in January 1992, while Bush was still President) is a pretty solid allegory for gender dysphoria as well.

[Ferguson97]

TIL: Thinking gay marriage is morally wrong because of your religion=queer phobia.

Religious beliefs can be founded on bigotry.

[TheReckoning]

TIL: Thinking gay marriage is morally wrong because of your religion=queer phobia.

Religious beliefs can be founded on bigotry.

The religious views against same-sex marriage predate the concept of “gay people” by several thousand years. They have nothing to do with thinking anything bad about gay people.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

I didn't think your question actually needed addressing because I assumed you weren't serious. You said in your argument with Ferguson that (1) Homosexuality and sodomy are immoral, and (2) Non-Muslims go to hell. The first point automatically puts you on thin ice with ~70% of the American electorate (the portion that supports gay marriage). The second automatically torpedoes your reputation with American Christians, who-- unsurprisingly-- make up a significant portion of that remaining 30%. So, Mr. Campaign Strategist... how do you propose to win back the ~95% of the country you've alienated?

Easy, don't talk about it?

Neither of these points are relevant to my campaign, especially not in the way Peebs' ardent pro-communist stance would be.

It's really hard to imagine a scenario where I actually would have to give a Q&A session about gay marriage or sodomy, especially as such things move farther back in time for the American electorate. It'd be like unlocking prohibition once again. I myself could truthfully and honestly reply that I don't care about banning gay marriage or sodomy laws, since they'd be useless and there are much more important issues affecting the American public.

The other thing is "Non-Muslims go to hell". This seems to be a sticking point among the online atheists of this forum who get really triggered when hearing this, but of course there's virtually zero chance that a candidate for office will get questioned on this topic unless they go out of their way to talk about it. I myself only did so on the "Religion & Philosophy" board of this forum. It's also relatively well-known what the Islamic viewpoints on heaven and hell are, this won't be some insane idea that someone who's gung-ho for voting for me suddenly hears and they turn away. If there's someone turned off by this point, they almost certainly wouldn't have been OK with voting for a Muslim anyway (also, you expect these guys to vote for a transgender?)

In any case, the former question is irrelevant whereas the latter question is likely to be extremely easy to avoid considering that there are many Muslims who have managed to make it into federal and statewide elected positions over the last few years such as Keith Ellison and Andre Carson. Neither of them have been cancelled regarding what they think about heaven or hell, and presumably they haven't been questioned much due to its irrelevance to their jobs (and if they have been questioned, there are almost definitely good answers that could be given that wouldn't arise hostility except among the John Dules of the world).

No doubt it'd be impossible to make it on the presidential level against an actual candidate (at least for now). Even a regular average American could crush me in a landslide. With an opponent like Peebs, though, with all the radical stances provided and all the attack ads which write themselves, it seems quite easy.

This thread isn't about my personal views on your cult, it's about how far outside the American mainstream you are. My comment was limited to that issue and that issue alone.

It doesn't really matter what this thread is about. We're allowed to go off-topic and go into tangents, and this is a topic at least tangentially related to the main thread topic.

So, once again, I want to hear your detailed thoughts on why you hate Islam and Muslims so much.

You really shouldn't be so afraid to tell me what you really think when you have so many friends around you on this forum. You will be showered with praise. Go for it. Do it on your Q&A page if you want.

As a Christian who believes that Christianity is the only path to Salvation, I actually respect someone's faith a lot more if they believe that there is only one true religion.  If you believe that there are multiple paths, then you don't really believe that your religion is correct.  And, if you don't believe your religion is correct, why would you care to follow it?

It's like a former politician from Utah who was Jewish.  He said in a meeting with Mormon leaders that they didn't see eye to eye on religion and that he wouldn't want his daughters dating their sons, but that they shared some similar values.

[Ferguson97]

The religious views against same-sex marriage predate the concept of “gay people” by several thousand years. They have nothing to do with thinking anything bad about gay people.

This makes zero sense. How can opposition to homosexual marriage predate homosexuality?

[TheReckoning]

The religious views against same-sex marriage predate the concept of “gay people” by several thousand years. They have nothing to do with thinking anything bad about gay people.

This makes zero sense. How can opposition to homosexual marriage predate homosexuality?

Homosexuality =/ homosexual people. The former has been known for millennia, while the latter I think has only been a concept since the late 19th century.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Homosexuality =/ homosexual people.

Homosexuality is an ideology.

[Sumner 1868]

Not super familiar with Abdullah, but while lurking on/off I've seen him constantly insist Florida is a Utopia On Earth and that everyone secretly loves it.

Peebs without hesitation.