Jump to content

Impact of walker warnock


Ranger
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Democratic Party would have a real majority. Manchin would no longer be the deciding vote.

 

From Politico:

 

A Warnock victory would give Democrats a firmer hand on nearly everything in the Senate, from committees to the floor, while improving the party’s defense ahead of a tough map in 2024.

 

Cheers,

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/1/2022 at 11:02 PM, Sweeper13 said:

^^^^^What he said. that's why Walker will win. Bye Bye Warnock. He can go back to his side hustle of kicking peeps out of apartments. He should run for mayor in Chicago, be perfect for him.

 

Odds are Walker will lose next week and he will move back to Texas.

He already "lost" in the general election by coming in second.

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t recall Manchin or Sinema(?) obstructing judicial nominees but maybe they did, I don’t follow that. Collins and possibly a couple others could go along for most picks making that moot. 
 

The bigger impact of a Warnock victory is VP Harris might not need to be in town for certain budget votes that only require a straight up majority.
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2022 at 12:20 PM, Sweeper13 said:

 

 

Is this the same as Hillary wining the popular vote? I'm confused, they are having an election Dec 6th in Georgia right? 😉


Indeed, they are having a runoff election on Dec 6th. In the general election, none of the three candidates received 50% plus 1, a Georgia law, hence the runoff with the top two candidates. One will get more than 50% of the votes and be declared the winner. 
 

The results for the general election:

Warnock 49.4

Walker 48.5

Libertarian 2.1

 

I expect Warnock will be the winner next week by 2-3 points , but you never know!

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

 

 

Edited by soundguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2022 at 1:15 PM, Illinois Sucks said:

You expect the Ls to vote with the Ds and some of the Rs (that voted for an R previously) to vote for a D?   That doesn't seem likely. 

 

 

I expect some Ls and some Rs will vote for Warnock, and some will stay home, abandoning Walker. I also expect Ds that failed to vote last month will vote Warnock. If Warnock gets half of the Libertarian votes, and everything else stays the same, he wins.

 

Walker is not a good candidate and would make a better werewolf than Senator.

 

... but ya never know until it's over.

 

Cheers,

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2022 at 12:15 PM, Illinois Sucks said:

You expect the Ls to vote with the Ds and some of the Rs (that voted for an R previously) to vote for a D?   That doesn't seem likely.  

 

 

 

I definitely see it as likely as the L party has been taken over by Marxists.     On so many issues, it is indistinguishable from the D's, such as MJ legalization, gay marriage, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2022 at 2:47 PM, BobPistol said:

 

I definitely see it as likely as the L party has been taken over by Marxists.     On so many issues, it is indistinguishable from the D's, such as MJ legalization, gay marriage, etc. 

 

I thought the point of Libertarianism was to allow everything… 

 

Cheers,

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's why Libertarianism fails...

Libertarianism wants an amoral lifestyle but you cannot have an amoral lifestyle without it eventually degrading into an immoral lifestyle. Unfortunately choices made by individuals tend to affect societal norms over time corrupting and degrading the society as a whole. The behaviors a society accepts as normal, the more the amorals and immorals look to see what they can get away with next. This is human nature. Everyone pays for each individuals choices. The more people make moral choices based on a rigid moral standard, the better society becomes. The more people make amoral choices based on a flexible, change with the times standard, the worse society becomes. For society to survive, it must be moral. If people won't be moral by choice they must be compelled to be moral. All magic comes with a price.

 

I've said it here before and was mocked by leftists and 'moderates' for saying so but Warnock/Walker won't make a bit of difference until we as a society get our heads out of our butts and realize that everything we see is a spiritual battle, not a political one. We need to get right with God. I do, and yes you do too :P  You don't have to believe in God to need to be right with Him. Ultimately you will believe. (Every knee shall bow...) Hopefully before it's too late to make any changes.

 

You can't have unrestricted access to and use of dangerous drugs without the resulting societal damage that drug (and alcohol) addiction causes. From the destruction of families, careers, lifestyle, personal development, health, ultimately leading to the need for societal support such as health care, addiction recovery services, welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing, etc., everyone pays, not just the person who is making their 'free' choice.

 

You can't have unrestricted right to engage in sexual activity of your choosing (fornication, adultery) without the resulting destruction of families, persons, unwanted/unexpected pregnancies, neglected and abused children, pornography, sex-trade, sex-slavery, pedophilia, etc.

 

You can't have the unrestricted right to abortion without degrading the value of human life as well as denying the protection of the right-to-life for those not yet born. There are other potential cascading negative issues as well.

Abortion > right to die (see Canada, Europe) > right to assistance in dying (see Canada, Europe) > imposed euthanasia (for the betterment of the individual and/or society [See some Scandinavian countries]) > genocide (not to mention harvesting human organs and other atrocities that deprive people of their freedoms, [see the Uyghur treatment in China]) Abortion is the camel's nose under the tent for all the others.

 

You can't have the unrestricted right to LGBTQ without stepping on the rights of the faith community. Look for churches and preachers being sued for calling sin sin, preaching about sexual immorality as sin, or even just reading the Bible out loud where people can hear, etc. You'll soon see churches and religious based institutions sued for loss of their non-profit/tax-exempt status simply for preaching the bible now that this 'respect for marriage' act has passed. Just like bakers and florists being sued for declining to create products for same-sex marriages leftists, marxists, and others bent on the destruction of western civilization will do all they can to sue any faith-based organization, or any business run by persons of faith out of existence. It's already begun. See also the large number of crisis pregnancy centers and faith based organizations that have been vandalized, burnt, or otherwise attacked by LGBTQ activists and feminist activists angry about the Dobbs decision.

 

You can't have the unrestricted right to keep and bear arms without imposing all kinds of restrictions on those 'who should not be allowed'. Shouldn't felons who've served their time for example have their right to keep and bear arms restored upon release? If that's too soon how about a reasonable probation period to assure they've changed their wicked ways? What if the felony was of a non-violent type? Almost anything is a felony nowadays.

 

If people would govern themselves morally (as John Adams opined) it could possibly work but not as long as human nature is what it is. We cannot be 'free' as libertarians define it. With great power (freedom) comes great responsibility. That responsibility is to make correct moral decisions personally and societally so that the maximum number of members can enjoy the maximum amount of freedom. That means that everyone should just what they SHOULD do over what they WANT to do.

 

'Crazy right-wing extremists and the Christian community' have been warning of today's events for years and people mocked them calling them nuts and saying 'oh, that will never happen here', 'you're just a bunch of moralist extremists'. Well, here we are. I need new conspiracy theories, all my old ones have come true.

 

 

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. ~John Adams

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2022 at 12:13 PM, rmart said:

Everyone pays for each individuals choices. The more people make moral choices based on a rigid moral standard, the better society becomes.

 

Whose morality should these choices be based upon?

 

Rigid moral standards do not work and will never work. Full blown Libertarian-ism could be a fine standard, as long as you don't take too much offense to the differing morality of others.

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's always the question that gets in the way, isn't it? Especially for those who cannot abide the idea of submitting to any god but one of their own design.

 

As for the differing morality of others, it's already been established why that can't work.

 

Ultimately we all answer to God, so perhaps His would be best.

The ten commandments would be a good standard. There's only ten after all.

And, ultimately if you follow the two that Christ set forth you'll automatically do all ten.

 

Unfortunately the best we can do as humans is strive for those 10. We'll never achieve them (hence Christ's sacrifice and God's grace) but we can certainly try. Each on their own and encouraging (not compelling) our fellow man to do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2022 at 1:42 PM, rmart said:

That's always the question that gets in the way, isn't it? Especially for those who cannot abide the idea of submitting to any god but one of their own design.

 


Aren’t all gods of one’s own design?

 

It seems that “the one god” is somewhat different in most Christian sects, and has changed from its beginnings long before Christianity. Possibly, God is open to interpretation for each believer. This would preclude any strict moral code based on Christianity as a whole. How could any one group tell any other group they are wrong?
 

Cheers,

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God is God. Men have attempted to diminish God by creating substitutes and alternatives or eliminate God by just denying His existence since the beginning of creation but there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus (I Tim 2:5). And as Jesus himself said, 'I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no man comes to the Father but through me' (John 14:6).

Christian sects all believe in one God, the Creator of heaven and earth. The way they practice, their rituals and forms of worship may differ somewhat, but the God they worship is the same. As far as telling another group they are wrong, always refer back to the written word of God. That way if you disagree you're not arguing with each other, you're arguing with God. He'll straighten things out.

 

Believe it or don't. Ultimately God will not be mocked and all will end up acknowledging Him either voluntarily before-hand or once they can no longer deny it afterwards. Even Satan believes God is...

 

Don't judge God by his followers, they'll always let Him and you down. Otherwise there'd be no need for Jesus' sacrifice. All have sinned and fall short of His glory (or his intents). At best we're sinners that can't meet the standards he sets (we did once), at worst we become tyrants and monsters attempting to use Him for our purposes (not His). God created us for His purposes, not for ours. It's ours to acknowledge and surrender to Him, not demand explanations, justifications, or try to fit Him into our plans or designs.

 

God created us and loves us. So much that he sent his own son to die on the cross for our sins so that any (and all) who believe can have life in His name.

 

Look at it this way. We are hurtling down a highway towards a bridge that's out. That bridge crossed a great chasm between us and Him but man's sin destroyed that bridge. We destroyed that bridge, not Him. He is offering us a way to avoid going over the edge and plummeting into the depths below. He warns us repeatedly with 'Bridge Out' signs, cones, barrels, barricades, flashing lights and arrow boards, public service announcements, etc. It's up to us to hit the brakes and follow the detour signs (Jesus) to avoid what's unavoidable otherwise. God doesn't have to punish us, that's unavoidable. It's going to happen. Unless you take the way out He offers.

 

All he asks is that you believe, love Him, and surrender. You don't have to fulfill any other obligations. It's hard to accept because we love being in control. But, look where that's gotten us.

Is there any other 'god' that offers a way out? No. Every other 'god' places requirements on us that are impossible to meet but no achievable means of escape. I think I'll believe in a God that loves me and offers a way of rescue. Because, I can't do it on my own.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2022 at 5:15 PM, mikew said:

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.

Well, yeah... there is always that. Keep in mind that the inquisition and other atrocities done in God's name were done by people that were not following the teachings of Christ and were doing what they were doing for their own power and not for the glory of God. No excuses for their behavior but that does not negate each individual's responsibility towards God.

When I referred to a rigid moral standard I was not implying rigid enforcement of that standard as the Catholics did during the middle ages, the Puritans did during the early years of this nation, the Nazis did to the Jews, the taliban and other Islamist factions are doing today, or the leftists/marxists will be doing in the not too distant future to Christians and anyone else who does not bow down to their humanist ideology. None of them were enforcing a religious code except as they were using religion for their own (not God's) purposes. Their punishments will be epic to behold.

 

I was referring to a standard that remains unchanging regardless of the times and the fickle mores of human nature.

 

Murder is always wrong, no matter how deserving or inconvenient the murderee is.

Stealing is always wrong, no matter how much you think you need the item or how undeserving the person being stolen from is.

Treating people in an unloving manner is always wrong, no matter how much you disagree with them.

 

For example...

 

Most sins identified in the bible were not established to ruin people's fun or freedom, or to establish an unobtainable standard that no one can meet but they were identified as activities and even just motivations that cause harm to others individually or collectively and ultimately cause people to turn from God resulting in a cycle of destruction causing catastrophic harm to both the individual and to the society. The closer we move towards God (and away from ourselves and our own selfish desires) the less likely we are to engage in harmful and destructive activities towards ourselves and others.

 

Religion is always a personal thing and should never be something that is compelled. If people make the right personal choices and do that which is right, it will never need to be. If we don't, a religious standard, be it theocratic (higher supernatural power) or humanist (secularist big government) will be.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2022 at 10:11 AM, soundguy said:

 

I thought the point of Libertarianism was to allow everything… 

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

Marxism doesn't allow everything, so that's why it is the case that the L party was assimilated by the Borg. 

 

That's like the Borg.   They assimilate anything that is not them.    All different stuff is to be assimilated and incorporated into the Collective. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2022 at 4:15 PM, mikew said:

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.

 

Versus the Marxist inquisition. 


You better make sure your social media has the correct opinion.

Better get that 24th jab, no matter how dangerous it is.  

How is your social credit score?

Is your vax passport updated?

Did you vote for a Marxist today?   How about tomorrow?

Did you make the correct campaign contributions to Marxist candidates?

 

Different religion.   Same results.    You're canceled if you do not comply. 

 

"Religion is the opiate of the masses"
And Marxism is the opiate of the elites. 

Edited by BobPistol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2022 at 6:15 PM, rmart said:

 

When I referred to a rigid moral standard I was not implying rigid enforcement of that standard as the Catholics did during the middle ages, the Puritans did during the early years of this nation, the Nazis did to the Jews, the taliban and other Islamist factions are doing today, or the leftists/marxists will be doing in the not too distant future to Christians and anyone else who does not bow down to their humanist ideology.

 

 

The Spanish Inquisition was done against the rules of the Catholic Church.   Torquemada wasn't enforcing a rigid moral standard, he was enforcing his own totalitarian sociopathy.    (When the Pope found out about this mess, he sent two legates to excommunicate him - and Torquemada promptly had them executed by the state for heresy.)

 

Puritans were not enforcing a rigid moral standard.     This was their version of cancel culture.    It was a form of totalitarian sociopathy.

 

Nazis did not enforce a rigid moral standard.    They were just enforcing evil and totalitarian sociopathy.

 

Taliban is not enforcing a rigid moral standard.   They're enforcing their totalitarian sociopathy.  

 

There's a big pattern in all of these.    And it has nothing to do with rigid moral standards - rather - it was going against them. 

 

When sociopaths get into positions of power, evil usually results.    And we're seeing this in our current governments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...