Alright, who is with me?

[RunningMn9]

I remain hopeful (if delusional) that the "my guy is the greatest and your guy is stupid and evil" line of debate will slowly begin to dissolve (since one group or the other is no longer going to have a "my guy").

What I would hope to see replace it is a return to something I really used to enjoy here. Before the rise of Election-year politics, these parts seemed to me to be centered around two things.

On the one hand, there was the obvious discussion of current political and religious events. State of the Union speeches. School boards trying to get creationism into the biology textbooks. Judges trying to put gigantic stone monuments in the lobby of their courthouses. That sort of stuff.

On the other hand, we had various issue debates. You'll remember those as the debates where neither side mentions a candidate in the discussion. It's been a long time since those were the predominant kinds of discussions.

Sure, we talk about current events - but those degenerate into partisan fights more often than not these days.

So, if it has been a long time (i.e. some of you ARE with me), it seems to me that there are a number of new faces here since the electioneering started nearly a year ago. And I don't know rightly where some of you stand on various issues.

So I'm wondering whether or not we R&P'ers can begin to look forward, past this election (hoping against all hope that it is settled Tuesday night, one way or the other) and start lining up some serious 'issues" debates. Abortion. A full-blown stem cell research debate. Capital Punishment. Smoove_B's Gender.

Something. ANYTHING other that these two candidates.

Is anyone with me?

...hears crickets chirping...

[Exodor]

I'd love to see more issue-oriented debates, but I think you're engaging in a bit of revisionist history here.

I can't recall a time on GG when the debate was NOT centered on particular figures. For several years, much of the debate surrounded Bush and his polices. While the partisans seem to be out in force now that the election is near, I don't think we've ever experienced the sort of panacea that you describe.

We both know that once this election is settled (sometime in December, I expect), we can look forward to four years of one group of partisans sniping about the man in the White House while the other gropu defends his every move.


I can't wait!

[Austin]

QUINN SUCKS!!!!!


/runs.

[gellar]

I tried posting a discussion on religion in politics, but apparently no one wanted to participate. Maybe if I added a "BUSH SUCKS CAWK" line in there, I would've gotten more traffic.

gellar

[RunningMn9]

I can't recall a time on GG when the debate was NOT centered on particular figures. For several years, much of the debate surrounded Bush and his polices.

Well, those were in the current events threads. And are perfectly fine, assuming that some of the venom begins to recede. Certainly I don't expect, nor do I remember a time when discussing Bush was off-limits.

Nor do I forsee a time (or remember one) where no partisan bickering took place.

But I do remember a time when the balance of topics was tipped the other way - and there were a lot more substantive discussions on issues, rather than candidates. For the past year, virtually every issue oriented discussion has been done with voting in mind.

I just hope that that can ease into the background for at least a month or two.

[Little Raven]

Well, I don't know if I'd call it a panacea, but there certainly was a time when issues played a bigger role.

The 'your guy sucks' threads started appearing about a year ago, and have been accelerating ever since.

I wasn't around GG back in the 2000 elections, but I when I asked about it, someone posted a mushroom cloud, so I assume it was pretty bad back then too. The forums recovered that time, so I'm pretty confident the same will happen this time.

We're almost there. Let's just hope it actually end on November 3rd this time. Otherwise we're in for two more long, long months.

[geezer]

I'm with ya.

[Biyobi]

Once all the lawsuits filed by both parties have been settled I think the vitirol will diminish somewhat. I look forward to seeing some good debate here (or should I say "with these folks") again, though I seldom took part. Maybe we can even convince Ezra to stick his nose in around here again.

Edit: spelling is teh hard!!

[RunningMn9]

Maybe we can even convince Ezra to stick his nose in around here again.

I'll work on that - you work on calming down the natives.

[AttAdude]

im with ya man, issue debates are fun and generaly more informative.

By the way smoove is a hermaphadite so that issue is solved.

[Kelric]

Get rid of the constant Bush/Kerry talk and actually talk about the issues and I might start participating once again. It's been a long, long time.

So snap to it! My post count needs the help!

[YellowKing]

It'll be OK. It's a cyclical thing. Just like the "OHNOZ PC GAMING IS DEAD" mantra every time a new wave of consoles comes out, and the "LOL I was just kidding PC GAMING ROXXORZ" after those consoles become 3 years old.

That said, I don't see how you can separate politics from a Religion & Politics forum.

[Dirt]

Issues don't matter. It's all about the sound bites.

[Crabbs]

Issues don't matter. It's all about the sound bites.

That's a pretty good sound bite in itself

[Kraken]

So I'm wondering whether or not we R&P'ers can begin to look forward, past this election (hoping against all hope that it is settled Tuesday night, one way or the other) and start lining up some serious 'issues" debates. Abortion. A full-blown stem cell research debate. Capital Punishment. Smoove_B's Gender.

I am quite fed up with partisan politics, myself. Glad it's nearly over.

[Poleaxe]

I'm with you in spirit, but I can't help responding when I read bullshit (IMO of course) so no promises.

[Asharak]

I'm dead set against you.

Oh wait, this wasn't one of the actual debates? Dang. In that case, I'm on your side... but don't get used to it!

- Ash

[Massena]

Hey, I could be civil except for the fact that [team X] is lying through their asses and spouting the most vile retoric since the 1868 election! In fact, I don't see how any of the [team X] morons can show their faces in public after that crap their candidate ran on tv the other night. How can any SANE, RATIONAL person support that guy? And don't get me started on that guys record! I couldn't concieve of a more deceptive, manipulative, lowball campain. In fact, this is the worst I've ever seen!

Ahem.

I think I'll be able to refrain from anyomore of that. Gladly. It's like the saying goes though, I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine. You'd think a simple thing like keeping a discussion polite would be doable... Well, as a part time lurker, I'm optimistic.

[Tscott]

The 'your guy sucks' threads started appearing about a year ago, and have been accelerating ever since.

Ah yes, the good olds days. Remember when nobody had anything bad to say about Clinton? Same thing with Bush after he "won" the 2000 election in court, everyone just accepted it and moved on.

Sorry, I don't post in P&R too often so I shouldn't poke fun... but I may be more inclined lurk here and occasionally post here on certain subjects if things start taking the tone that RM9 is suggesting. There were many posts in the past I can recall when EBG and R&P were one that where informative of both (or several) views, civil and intelligent.

Actually, it hasn't even been the "Your guy sucks" thing that has bothered me here, but rather the pigeonholing that the "your guy sucks" is indicative of. By pigeonhole I mean, someone makes a post for or against one issue, and then someone replies with a rant against the whole party line- thereby derailing the subject at hand and assigning a whole doctrine of views to one poster who may or may not share them all as they were only offering an opinion of one certain subject. This isn't CNN's Crossfire, so "please stop, you're hurting America".