Originally Posted by Fdemetrio


Yea there are still individual thoughts, and that's a good thing. But the fact that i'm able to know who leans which way, has alot to do with what they say about issues.


Careful not to go too"broad" with this statement, because it falls apart if you are wanting to generalize and say, "I can know what party you belong to based on how you feel about issues" because that's a tautology, because how one feels about issues is exactly what defines one's party affiliation.

Few people actually study political science to figure out their "leanings" but simply discover them by looking at the consensus of how they feel on different issues. If I believe climate change is an important issue and think there should be no wall and that pot should be legalized, I am probably gonna vote that way, and it's how we vote that is the ultimate test as to our leanings. We can say anything, but when we vote, that's really what defines our affiliation.

But you are safe to say that how we feel about climate change should not be party defined, but science defined--THAT seems like a solid statement, and I agree with that. If only everyone agreed on the legitimacy of certain findings and illegitimacy of other findings, there would be no divisiveness.. wink

Originally Posted by Fdemetrio
My estimation is if we went to Universal Healthcare it would mark the first real major change in our country.

I dont know how it would work, or if it will work, there are doubts, but we need to do something.


Amen, brother.

Last edited by Michael Zaneski; 09/24/19 11:08 PM.
Fate doesn't hang on a wrong or right choice
Fortune depends on the tone of your voice

-The Divine Comedy (Neil Hannon)
from the song "Songs of Love"
from the album "Casanova" (1996)