Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_itumfzm wrote

[deleted]

25

That_Checks t1_itv7ame wrote

Okay, first of all, we have disabled Americans serving as inspiration for other diasbled Americans and that sure as hell should be on the very bottom of why anyone would endorse a candidate. A stroke is much more than a lost limb though. So you can do the ra-ra for JF, but would you 1) ride as a passenger in a car with him as the driver or 2) trust him to fill out medical/legal/financial paperwork that would affect you for the rest of your life? That's the problem with what we saw last night. Nobody knows what comes next. Lastly, I hate that this happened and Mehmet Oz is now the more qualified candidate somehow.

2

[deleted] t1_itvnv15 wrote

[deleted]

2

That_Checks t1_itvvgg4 wrote

It's obvious that you are equating people you don't like/agree with on the same plane as someone having a stroke and being proven to have cognitive disabilities. And then you just went on an emotional diatribe. Your original position was that being mentally handicapped would be an inspiration for the mentally handicapped. I'm glad that is not the reality of how we vote.

0

[deleted] t1_itw0pi5 wrote

[deleted]

1

That_Checks t1_itw5qp0 wrote

You don't vote for people because they have a disability. You don't vote because of gender. You don't vote because of race. You vote because they line up with your views. If your views favor a race or gender...what do they call that?

3

[deleted] t1_itw9oqf wrote

[deleted]

1

That_Checks t1_itwc9qr wrote

I loathe Oz. I've even joked about wanting my politicians do all be like Fetterman so they are less effective. Because, the less they all do, the better the country is for it.

You glossing over the mental handicaps that are apparent with a stroke while getting mad at people for pointing it out is what is known as turning a blind eye. It's unfortunate that this happened to JF. He was the better candidate for a multitude of reasons to me...up until that stroke.

2

[deleted] t1_itwfrxx wrote

[deleted]

0

That_Guy704 t1_ity45yf wrote

So you admit it’s not about the stroke and about blocking the Republicans from getting the senate. Glad that finally came out.

2

JacoDaDon t1_itxq1vi wrote

The only people I see actually feeling bad for JF are his ideological opposites. Meanwhile his “supporters” have no problem throwing him to the wolves when he clearly had no business on stage.

1

thepwnydanza t1_itxqccg wrote

You’re the one assuming that he wasn’t fit for the stage based on what? His speech patterns? Did you listen to what he actually said or how he said if? Because what he said is more important than whether or not he was speaking smoothly.

Some of us aren’t ableist and don’t assume a speech issue means a person isn’t capable and intelligent.

I mean, look at you, I’m sure you speak well but you’re neither capable or intelligent.

2

That_Guy704 t1_ity4nux wrote

Just because people criticize JF doesn’t make them an ableist. Just throwing that at everyone that has a different opinion than you diminishes the harm actual ableists cause to people with physical or mental disorders.

In all objective reality, JF looked absolutely lost. He had zero business being on that stage. His handlers and team should be ashamed of putting him out there so unprepared. The republicans are going to take that terrible performance and plaster it everywhere and use it to paint brush all Democrats in the midterms. JF needed to be at home, resting and getting back to 100% while someone else took over. His campaign has continuously lied about his condition for weeks and now the Dems are going to fight an even tougher battle because of this.

1

thepwnydanza t1_ity5nx0 wrote

> Just because people criticize JF doesn’t make them an ableist.

Where did I say that was the case?

> Just throwing that at everyone that has a different opinion than you diminishes the harm actual ableists cause to people with physical or mental disorders.

No one’s done that.

> In all objective reality, JF looked absolutely lost.

He responded to the questions with real answers. Oz dodged questions.

> He had zero business being on that stage. His handlers and team should be ashamed of putting him out there so unprepared.

Based on what? His speech?

> The republicans are going to take that terrible performance and plaster it everywhere and use it to paint brush all Democrats in the midterms.

Because they’re ableist and using a disability that has 0 effect on his ability to lead to attack him instead of going after his politics. That’s what ableism is.

> JF needed to be at home, resting and getting back to 100% while someone else took over.

He was fine. Despite your opinion.

> His campaign has continuously lied about his condition for weeks and now the Dems are going to fight an even tougher battle because of this.

No. They haven’t.

1

That_Guy704 t1_ity7u5y wrote

This… this is a joke, right?

You insinuated the commenter before is an ableist when you said “some of us aren’t ableist and don’t assume a speech issue…”

You then paint brushed all republicans as ableists.

Oz dodged questions 100% but Fetterman absolutely, objectively bombed that debate. Please highlight any response Fetterman had where he was actually able to defend any real position he was called out on.

I’m very curious as to what questions you feel Fetterman gave “real answers” to.

Also, Oz didn’t address Fetterman’s stroke or symptoms once in that debate and literally only made it about the policies.

Either you’re giving an A+ troll job or you watched a completely different debate

1

T-Hi OP t1_itv35wz wrote

Well put and thank you.

0

Janderss182 t1_ituomzx wrote

I’m sorry but how do you know that it won’t affect him from performing his duties? We really don’t even know where he’s at medically so you really can’t say that.

−6

Er3bus13 t1_ituqehp wrote

It's about policies. They don't run marathons. Hilarious you all don't care about the 80 years Olds in congress that fall asleep during sessions if they have an R beside their name.

8

Janderss182 t1_itutiom wrote

Well maybe don't make assumptions about me or me political beliefs. I think there should certainly be an age cap for the majority of political positions regardless of which party it is. They don't run marathons but they have to be able to use their brains and make decisions, many times major decisions. Neither you or I can say he is cognitively capable of performing his duties.

1

Er3bus13 t1_ituuw4f wrote

I'll assume whatever I want. What are you the thought police? /s

3

Janderss182 t1_ituv0uq wrote

No I'm not but I'm sure you'd love for their to be thought police lol

1

Er3bus13 t1_ituv5s7 wrote

No who is assuming? /glare

3

Janderss182 t1_ituvlt3 wrote

What's funny about you guys is that I can pretty accurately assume most your political beliefs if you just tell me one or two things.

4

Er3bus13 t1_ituw8e8 wrote

Size of me penis and? Small but diamond tipped

5

[deleted] t1_itusdoe wrote

[deleted]

7

Janderss182 t1_ituufag wrote

You dems and repubs are really all the same lol. "The other guy is a liar and my candidate is a genuine person who cares about me". Grow up and just admit that you're an ideologue and that's the reason you're voting for Fetterman. Do you think that Joe Biden is trying to destroy the USA? If no then he's certainly doing a good job at it.

−2

Collegenoob t1_iturq9a wrote

Mostly because he is recovering.

The stroke came at a poor time. But otherwise give it a year or so and he will be done with rehab and back to normal.

Even in an impaired state he won't support the more extreme republican policies that Oz will.

5

Janderss182 t1_itutzow wrote

Again, you're just making assumptions and trying to be hopeful for this guys future. You don't know how much more he'll recover in the future. Just be honest and say that you're voting for him because he's not a republican as opposed to just spewing this bs about his health and recovery

0

Collegenoob t1_ituuc28 wrote

Yes. I'm not choosing the guy who can speak better but completely opposes everything I believe in?

9

Janderss182 t1_ituunjx wrote

In other words you're a democrat and will only vote for democrats because you're an ideologue. You're just like most the republicans in that aspect lol

0

Collegenoob t1_ituw340 wrote

Give me a reasonable republican candidate and I'd vote for them. Heck besides his Marijuana stance fetterman could have passed for a republican 20 years ago.

But at this point I realize I'm talking to a troll. So w/e.

Yes. I'll vote for the placeholder who shares my Ideals over a fancy talker who shares none.

I got to be Pickler in the primary. Where I could have a lukewarm lamb or a progressive fetterman.

5

Janderss182 t1_ituwhe3 wrote

Well I can't because, again, you're an ideologue and because of that you would never be able to view any republican as reasonable. That's the gist of what the word ideologue means in this context.

1

Collegenoob t1_ituyfv6 wrote

Because you've begun worshipping an umpa loompa.

You had reasonable Republicans back with McCain, Kasich and, Romney. But chose to abandon that for a man who openly mocked a disabled reporter, spoke foundly of sexually assaulting women, and may have sold classified information and compromised our spy networks in the world.

Everyone always told me as I got older I'd get more conservative. But I found that conservatives were a lot more reasonable when I was younger compared to now.

6

Janderss182 t1_itv7ss2 wrote

If you consider the people who championed an illegal war and the deaths of millions of mostly innocent people reasonable, then your moral compass is incredibly skewed.

1

Collegenoob t1_itv8040 wrote

Lol. Troll trying so hard. I think you have a mess coming down your pantleg

3

Janderss182 t1_itv8am3 wrote

Yeah millions of people dying for the money machine is so funny isn’t it

1

Collegenoob t1_itv9tjq wrote

How you pivot is hilarious. You have 0 morals and your only objective is to disagree. It's perfect r/funnyandsad

3

Janderss182 t1_itva9tf wrote

I’m not pivoting, just addressing something really stupid that you just said

−1

Collegenoob t1_itvcftx wrote

Lololololololololololol

3

Janderss182 t1_itvcvgx wrote

I’m not the one that brought up warmongers and called them reasonable

0

Collegenoob t1_itvdbt8 wrote

Yea. You are just telling people to vote for the guy who denies the Armenian genocide.

3

Janderss182 t1_itvia4g wrote

I don’t think I ever said anyone should vote for Dr Oz lol. I’m just pointing out how delusional people are when they act like John Fetterman is all there

−1

joefred111 t1_ituyvi7 wrote

I'd like to point out that Ted Cruz attended just 17 of 50 public Armed Services Committee hearings, despite being on the committee.

There's no guarantee that a fully abled representative will "do their job."

I'd rather vote for the candidate who best represents my views, with a proven track record, and who will likely actually do their job and represent their constituents.

https://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/ted-cruz-2016-senate-vote-record-117201

5

Janderss182 t1_itv7e2s wrote

Yes because I bet Ted Cruz is the only example of a politician not doing their job correctly and abusing their power

2

joefred111 t1_itvatmx wrote

I'm merely giving an example of a fully hale and seemingly healthy individual who isn't doing his job, as a counterpoint to your argument that a speech impairment would prevent another person from doing his.

1

Janderss182 t1_itvbcis wrote

Well I’m not really convinced that it’s just a speech impairment

2

joefred111 t1_itvbju4 wrote

I'd trust a medical expert on this one vice a month-old account on Reddit.

Also, your argument is similar to saying that Galileo and Stephen Hawking were somehow mentally deficient because they couldn't speak English properly.

2

Janderss182 t1_itvcqdg wrote

No it’s not similar to that at all because I don’t think John fetterman is simply dealing with a speech impediment as I just said.

1

Earl-of-Jabroni t1_itunu2x wrote

“Ableism is disgusting”

“Fettermans disability is challenging”

−12

[deleted] t1_iturf00 wrote

[deleted]

6

Earl-of-Jabroni t1_iturlgi wrote

Why is it only ableism when the other side says the same thing?

−2

[deleted] t1_itustds wrote

[deleted]

8

Earl-of-Jabroni t1_itut9r8 wrote

Instead of name calling, can you please elaborate on why I am “dense” and what the difference is when the left does it and when the right does it?

2

HahaWeee t1_ituut62 wrote

We could but you're obviously dense so it'd be a waste of time

5

Earl-of-Jabroni t1_itv4wbp wrote

Tell me you don’t have an answer without telling me you don’t have an answer.

1

thepwnydanza t1_itxt9e4 wrote

A disability can be challenging. That’s not ableism. Ask any person with a legitimate whether it’s challenging and they’ll say yes

Ableism is thinking that having a disability prevents you from doing certain things. Ableism is using a person’s disability to try and keep them from participating. Ableism is trying to imply that someone having an issue with speech means they are unable to lead.

Again, admitting that a disability makes something more challenging isn’t ableist, it’s realistic.

Someone who lost their legs is going to find climbing a mountain more challenging than someone who hasn’t. Admitting that isn’t ableist. What is ableist is saying that someone who lost their legs can’t climb a mountain.

Does this clear it up?

2

Earl-of-Jabroni t1_ity3l8d wrote

Yes it’s clear that I’m being realistic. Thank you for that.

−1

thepwnydanza t1_ity3v00 wrote

What did you say that was realistic? You asked people to explain how saying something is challenging because of a disability isn’t ableist. I did that.

2