2016 elections - because it's never too early

[Valmy]

Edit: "I hope Lettow has children?" You realize I have a son, right?

Nope. Congrats! Japan needs him.

The ironic thing about your post Lettow is that southerners are the only region of the country to identify themselves as 'Americans' ethnically in large numbers.

[Lettow77]

 I know it. It's especially prevalent in the intermountain South, which has always been more ambivalent about their duties to the sacred Southern nation.

I support Trump with every hope the nomination will be stolen from him- I'd like to see the GOP greatly discredited in the South, and the region isolated and disaffected from either party. Consistent neglect and misrule may cure the South of its misplaced affections.  If not, the country is set to become increasingly nonwhite and culturally fractured; Where successive administrations hostile to the South have failed, that nation's infamous racism and prejudice may serve to isolate it into the future.

[lustindarkness]

Wait what? Are you people saying Kasich, a presidential candidate in this election has common sense?! Say it ain't so!

[Malthus]

Wait what? Are you people saying Kasich, a presidential candidate in this election has common sense?! Say it ain't so!

Notice he's losing. 

It's like Adlai Stevenson (allegedly!) said to someone who told him "you have the vote of every thinking American":

"That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!"

[Eddie Teach]

Wait what? Are you people saying Kasich, a presidential candidate in this election has common sense?! Say it ain't so!

If it makes you feel any better, he did ask his local Blockbuster to take Fargo off the shelf because it was "too graphic".

[alfred russel]

Kasich: 'I'm a Traditional Marriage Guy,' But SCOTUS Ruled, 'Let's Move On,' 'What the
Kasich responded, "I think if you're a photographer, okay, and you are deep Christian and you object to going to a gay wedding, okay. So somebody comes in, and they say, 'Okay, we want you to be our photographer,' photographer says, you know, 'I'd really not be comfortable doing that.' If I were trying to arrange a gay wedding, I might go down the street to another photographer. Why do I need to raise all this cane about this? and frankly, if I'm selling cupcakes, why don't I just sell a cupcake? That's what I do in commerce. It gets to be a tricky thing about how much you involve somebody against some deeply held belief. But most of the time, I think we can accommodate one another, don't you?"

To break the Kasich love fest, he has responded with something of a straw man. The purported reason for the "religious liberty" laws is that the photographer is, under some interpretation of current law in at least some states, obligated to photograph the wedding. So basically he is asked about some controversial laws, is like, "nah, lets just have a world like x,y,z without such nonsense", but to get to such a world new laws would need to be in place.

[Berkut]

No, what he is saying is not at all a strawman.

He is saying there is no such need for any of these laws - in fact, if people just fucking acted like adults to each other, we could avoid all of this...and he is right.

He is saying that it is a dangerous area to get into - the state making laws demanding that people do or do not take some positive action, and that people on BOTH sides are being kind of children about it.

If you ask a photographer to photograph your wedding, and that would clearly require him to GO TO that wedding, and they don't want to...so what. Go find another photographer. Don't be a jackass about it.

And if you sell cupcakes, and you suspect the person buying them might be gay - so what. You are selling cupcakes. Don't be a jackass about it.

The only reason the state gets involved is because people are acting like children about these things, and the reality is that reasonable people acting reasonably can resolve all of these situations without the need for stupid new laws.

[alfred russel]

No, what he is saying is not at all a strawman.

He is saying there is no such need for any of these laws - in fact, if people just fucking acted like adults to each other, we could avoid all of this...and he is right.

He is saying that it is a dangerous area to get into - the state making laws demanding that people do or do not take some positive action, and that people on BOTH sides are being kind of children about it.

If you ask a photographer to photograph your wedding, and that would clearly require him to GO TO that wedding, and they don't want to...so what. Go find another photographer. Don't be a jackass about it.

And if you sell cupcakes, and you suspect the person buying them might be gay - so what. You are selling cupcakes. Don't be a jackass about it.

The only reason the state gets involved is because people are acting like children about these things, and the reality is that reasonable people acting reasonably can resolve all of these situations without the need for stupid new laws.

But the law (in places) apparently already says they need to go to the wedding. The law exists. It is a part of civil rights law which was passed for a good reason, but that is neither here nor there. If Kasich wants to get to his ideal state, he needs to repeal that law in whole or part, or alternatively pass a law with a positive exemption covering the case in question.

[Martinus]

Yeah, Kasich is not saying that only the "pro-religion" side is unreasonable - the "pro-progress" side can be unreasonable as well - and that works in a lot of things. People just love to have their little crusades to fight and they often essentially go out of their way to prove the point. It's same for the gays who go out of their way to have a Christian pizza place cater to their "renewal of vows", atheists who want a local school to take down a Christmas creche, or Christians who suddenly feel that whether a person going into a bathroom has a dick or not is the matter of primary national concern.

[Martinus]

No, what he is saying is not at all a strawman.

He is saying there is no such need for any of these laws - in fact, if people just fucking acted like adults to each other, we could avoid all of this...and he is right.

He is saying that it is a dangerous area to get into - the state making laws demanding that people do or do not take some positive action, and that people on BOTH sides are being kind of children about it.

If you ask a photographer to photograph your wedding, and that would clearly require him to GO TO that wedding, and they don't want to...so what. Go find another photographer. Don't be a jackass about it.

And if you sell cupcakes, and you suspect the person buying them might be gay - so what. You are selling cupcakes. Don't be a jackass about it.

The only reason the state gets involved is because people are acting like children about these things, and the reality is that reasonable people acting reasonably can resolve all of these situations without the need for stupid new laws.

But the law (in places) apparently already says they need to go to the wedding. The law exists. It is a part of civil rights law which was passed for a good reason, but that is neither here nor there. If Kasich wants to get to his ideal state, he needs to repeal that law in whole or part, or alternatively pass a law with a positive exemption covering the case in question.

Well, no disagreement there.

[Martinus]

Incidentally, there are now apparently calls for a Trump/Cruz ticket. While I find it unlikely (these two have too big egos), the faces of the GOP establishment would be hilarious to watch after that.

[DGuller]

Love those quotes from Kasich. Victimless moral disagreements should never be written in the law of the land, and that doesn't mean you are forced to disown your beliefs.

Indeed.

I think if Kasich came out with the nomination, I would actually break my vow to not vote for any Republican on principle this cycle.

And get another Scalia on the bench? 

[Razgovory]

Edit: "I hope Lettow has children?" You realize I have a son, right?

You should really post baby pictures.

[derspiess]

No, what he is saying is not at all a strawman.

He is saying there is no such need for any of these laws - in fact, if people just fucking acted like adults to each other, we could avoid all of this...and he is right.

He is saying that it is a dangerous area to get into - the state making laws demanding that people do or do not take some positive action, and that people on BOTH sides are being kind of children about it.

If you ask a photographer to photograph your wedding, and that would clearly require him to GO TO that wedding, and they don't want to...so what. Go find another photographer. Don't be a jackass about it.

And if you sell cupcakes, and you suspect the person buying them might be gay - so what. You are selling cupcakes. Don't be a jackass about it.

The only reason the state gets involved is because people are acting like children about these things, and the reality is that reasonable people acting reasonably can resolve all of these situations without the need for stupid new laws.

Wow, for once you're right on something

[Martinus]

See? Donald Trump brought us all together. It's magic.