BC Election 2024

[rustled]

Quote where I've said that, please. TIA. Seems most likely this is a deflection from having used stereotypes to support an "anti-Conservative" stance. We're likely to see more of this sort of deflection when posters are held to account for partisan stereotyping heading into the BC election.

I'm not deflecting. Yup...anti-party-that-includes-religious-fundamentalists-that-naturally-gravitate-to-such-parties all the way to breakfast. Duck, stereotype, bigot...don't care. That's a party I won't vote for. No deflection necessary.

Clearly, then, there was no post in which I'd said what you've claimed I'd said - that claim was simply another stereotype used as a poor substitute for thoughtful comment.

Which underscores once again the lack of reason and logic in these anti-Conservative posts - a lack of reason and logic we're likely to see become even more pronounced in these anti-Conservative posts as the BC election draws nearer.

[LovemyBolt]

Clearly, then, there was no post in which I'd said what you've claimed I'd said - that claim was simply another stereotype used as a poor substitute for thoughtful comment.

Which underscores once again the lack of reason and logic in these anti-Conservative posts - a lack of reason and logic we're likely to see become even more pronounced in these anti-Conservative posts as the BC election draws nearer.

"what a few members of a group"
viewtopic.php?p=3312853#p3312853

"of the anti-Conservative "because religion" mindset"
viewtopic.php?p=3313623#p3313623

[rustled]

Clearly, then, there was no post in which I'd said what you've claimed I'd said - that claim was simply another stereotype used as a poor substitute for thoughtful comment.

Which underscores once again the lack of reason and logic in these anti-Conservative posts - a lack of reason and logic we're likely to see become even more pronounced in these anti-Conservative posts as the BC election draws nearer.

"what a few members of a group"
viewtopic.php?p=3312853#p3312853

"of the anti-Conservative "because religion" mindset"
viewtopic.php?p=3313623#p3313623

^^Neither post actually says anything remotely close to what was claimed:

It's the same illogic from so many here including yourself saying that my posts somehow represent the entire left of the political spectrum.

In reality I've not said what was claimed - and doubling down on the claim can't change this reality.

However, this doubling down on nonsensical and unsupportable claims is just the sort of silliness we are likely to see more of as those taking fervently anti-Conservative positions attempt to justify the use of stereotyping and bigotry in anti-Conservative posts as the BC election approaches.

[LovemyBolt]

"what a few members of a group"
viewtopic.php?p=3312853#p3312853

"of the anti-Conservative "because religion" mindset"
viewtopic.php?p=3313623#p3313623

^^Neither post actually says anything remotely close to what was claimed:

It's the same illogic from so many here including yourself saying that my posts somehow represent the entire left of the political spectrum.

In reality I've not said what was claimed - and doubling down on the claim can't change this reality.

However, this doubling down on nonsensical and unsupportable claims is just the sort of silliness we are likely to see more of as those taking fervently anti-Conservative positions attempt to justify the use of stereotyping and bigotry in anti-Conservative posts as the BC election approaches.

I had every expectation of your weaseling out. The first one is saying that I'm speaking on behalf of some member of a group. The second one is speaking in the plural of lumping me in as speaking for them. And you finish with lumping me in as though I speak for them all. I do not. You and others here keep hurling that insult at me.
Your illogic is exposed. Your lack of self-awareness is exposed. You are the one being non-sensical. The definition of silly.

[rustled]

I had every expectation of your weaseling out. The first one is saying that I'm speaking on behalf of some member of a group. The second one is speaking in the plural of lumping me in as speaking for them. And you finish with lumping me in as though I speak for them all. I do not. You and others here keep hurling that insult at me.

How ironic to accuse anyone of "weaseling out" when unable to prove an incorrect claim. The "group" in the first one is the "social conservative christian nationalist evangelicals", and no, there is no suggestion whatsoever you are speaking on behalf of some member of that group. The second very clearly isn't saying that your posts "somehow represent the entire left of the political spectrum". To suggest anyone would "represent the entire left of the political spectrum" or could "speak for them all" would be utterly illogical and lack reason, particularly since sensible people on the left are unlikely to use "Christian extremist" stereotypes and bigotry to maintain an "I'll never ever vote for the Conservatives!" mindset in preparation for casting a ballot in the upcoming BC election.

IMO, it would be insulting to "the entire left of the political spectrum" to suggest all left-leaning voters rely on stereotypes and fears about "what Christian extremists might convince the Conservatives to do" when casting their vote.

[Glacier]

Being opposed to SOGI or transing your kids is not necessarily a religious position. Yes, I'm sure there are religious arguments to be had, but instead of saying, "let's not have religious arguments against SOGI, let's only have secular arguments," you try to create a Boogie man so that no one can have any arguments against it.

You just cast aside secular arguments as if they are religious. Such a dirty slimy little trick to not have real debates about important topics.

The most prominent speakers against the transiting of kids are jk rowling (I don't know if she's religious, but she's not appealing to religion so totally irrelevant) and James Lindsay who is an avowed atheist.

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/sta ... YdmfQ&s=19

[Gone_Fishin]

Being opposed to SOGI or transing your kids is not necessarily a religious position. Yes, I'm sure there are religious arguments to be had, but instead of saying, "let's not have religious arguments against SOGI, let's only have secular arguments," you try to create a Boogie man so that no one can have any arguments against it.

You just cast aside secular arguments as if they are religious. Such a dirty slimy little trick to not have real debates about important topics.

The most prominent speakers against the transiting of kids are jk rowling (I don't know if she's religious, but she's not appealing to religion so totally irrelevant) and James Lindsay who is an avowed atheist.

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/sta ... YdmfQ&s=19

These lovely dolts from the NDP really hate people who choose to practice their religions.

That could be why the anti-Semites have so easily infected the CUPE owned NDP.

[LovemyBolt]

These lovely dolts from the NDP really hate people who choose to practice their religions.

That could be why the anti-Semites have so easily infected the CUPE owned NDP.

While I am NOT from the NDP, you might or might not be referring to me (as I have dared to express my opinions here) but I have NO hate for any religious followers. Have at it. It has no effect on me. EXCEPT when the group of followers go about imposing their tenets upon everyone else via government of any level. Then I have a problem. NOT hate. A problem.

[liisgo]

Being opposed to SOGI or transing your kids is not necessarily a religious position. Yes, I'm sure there are religious arguments to be had, but instead of saying, "let's not have religious arguments against SOGI, let's only have secular arguments," you try to create a Boogie man so that no one can have any arguments against it.

You just cast aside secular arguments as if they are religious. Such a dirty slimy little trick to not have real debates about important topics.

The most prominent speakers against the transiting of kids are jk rowling (I don't know if she's religious, but she's not appealing to religion so totally irrelevant) and James Lindsay who is an avowed atheist.

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/sta ... YdmfQ&s=19

These lovely dolts from the NDP really hate people who choose to practice their religions.

That could be why the anti-Semites have so easily infected the CUPE owned NDP.

We all need to keep in mind the manipulation of the lefts minds and how they work today thanks to these crazy woke lefty governments. Remember they have told their people that the opposition is usually, threats to democracy, extremists, terrorists, racists, woman haters, science deniers, misogynistic, nazi supporters, and somehow rich, etc, etc.
So in all fairness, they are loyal to their political parties ways.
Now, back to bc politic's and the election. Eby was never elected by the public, they are clearly failing in many of the most important aspects of doing good for the people of this province.
And, that other guy that switched his parties name as to try to disassociate itself from the massive failing that party currently is having, well he is a sworn liberalist and we all know their parties inability to accomplish anything.

[Veovis]

Now, back to bc politic's and the election. Eby was never elected by the public, they are clearly failing in many of the most important aspects of doing good for the people of this province.
And, that other guy that switched his parties name as to try to disassociate itself from the massive failing that party currently is having, well he is a sworn liberalist and we all know their parties inability to accomplish anything.

Eby was not elected, nor did people see his as a good choice, and there were enough issues in the process. Didn't they just simply boot the person who ran against him?

Eby has spent us into an 8 billion dollar deficit (I expect reality to be 10-15)

Nothing gets built, schools are worse than ever and the best ideas they have right now is sky genie money will fix it all. I do not find an individual like Eby as a leader, comes across more weaselly.

However, I did hear a Kevin Falcon add on the way to work today and that was the most monotone boring commercial I've ever heard. How does he plan to get people excited to vote for him when he sounds bored to be in the commercial.

[Glacier]

While I am NOT from the NDP, you might or might not be referring to me (as I have dared to express my opinions here) but I have NO hate for any religious followers. Have at it. It has no effect on me. EXCEPT when the group of followers go about imposing their tenets upon everyone else via government of any level. Then I have a problem. NOT hate. A problem.

You do realize that the purpose of the government is to impose laws on everyone against their will, right? If you don't like a specific policy in the BC Conservative platform, then by all means fight against it and actually post it here. People might disagree with you, but they will respect your position. At least I will.

But when you just invent out of thin air some boogieman that doesn't even exist, I have no respect for that. Sure, there are bad people who vote conservative just as there are bad people who vote NDP or any other party, but that's totally irrelavent until it becomes party policy.

I don't care if all the child rapists come out in support of the rival to Adolf Hitler or Putin or whomever, I'm not going to hold it against the politician and vote for Putin instead, well, unless the politician decided to legalize child molestation or grooming if elected.

[LovemyBolt]

You do realize that the purpose of the government is to impose laws on everyone against their will, right? If you don't like a specific policy in the BC Conservative platform, then by all means fight against it and actually post it here. People might disagree with you, but they will respect your position. At least I will.

But when you just invent out of thin air some boogieman that doesn't even exist, I have no respect for that. Sure, there are bad people who vote conservative just as there are bad people who vote NDP or any other party, but that's totally irrelavent until it becomes party policy.

I don't care if all the child rapists come out in support of the rival to Adolf Hitler or Putin or whomever, I'm not going to hold it against the politician and vote for Putin instead, well, unless the politician decided to legalize child molestation or grooming if elected.

Oh I glanced over several dog whistles in the conservative web site so I already have my notions confirmed of where they are coming from.
But why would I fight it? That's what they're putting forth. Selling, if you will. I don't buy it. I will vote elsewise.
It's that THOSE followers believe in it. I didn't invent it. Then they would prefer to impose the tenets of that belief on everyone. Others are quite right that some of their wishes will go unfulfilled. Good. But they're still there. I don't wish to be associated with them. They won't get my vote.

[The Green Barbarian]

Oh I glanced over several dog whistles

and here we go again with this stupid trope - anything the NDP does including running off Jewish cabinet ministers is "perfectly ok" but then anything any other party says or does is immediately a "dog whistle". This is just more proof of why the NDP just plain sucks, and why their supporters are such awful people.

[Glacier]

Oh I glanced over several dog whistles in the conservative web site so I already have my notions confirmed of where they are coming from.
But why would I fight it? That's what they're putting forth. Selling, if you will. I don't buy it. I will vote elsewise.
It's that THOSE followers believe in it. I didn't invent it. Then they would prefer to impose the tenets of that belief on everyone. Others are quite right that some of their wishes will go unfulfilled. Good. But they're still there. I don't wish to be associated with them. They won't get my vote.

And it's totally fair for you to vote for whomever you want.

Dog-whistles don't exist though... unless YOU are racist enough to pick up the signal... and you somehow picked up the signal. Interesting....

[LovemyBolt]

And it's totally fair for you to vote for whomever you want.

Dog-whistles don't exist though... unless YOU are racist enough to pick up the signal... and you somehow picked up the signal. Interesting....

Thank you. Seems others here don't agree with how I come to decide who I will or will not vote for.

Dog whistles aren't about racism. They're signalling words and terms and phrases that are euphemisms for what they actually mean to communicate.