TexasCHLforum.com

NiMexicatl wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

NiMexicatl wrote: I 100% understand where you're coming from. This election isn't ideal, for me or a lot of others. I struggle with the contradiction of my political stances and the anti-gun association that seems to be hard to avoid these days. All I can say is I put my votes where I feel I must, based on both personal importance and compromise where I feel it is either unavoidable or unlikely to to truly occur. I don't want this to be taken as a specific statment on the 2nd ammendment. It's just my approach in a general sense.

I try to make it as informed as possible. I try to urge moderation and education in my personal life. I've made the mistake of not being careful enough with my words on the internet before. I try to avoid it where I can, but admittedly that's not always the case.

Nuances of conversation can be lost on these forums, and a lot of people fall directly into attack mode when backed by the majority. So I'll stay out of this one and most others where I can help it.

If I voted base on how I feel about this election and the two main candidates, I wouldn't vote. Neither candidate is anywhere near ideal in my opinion. However, based on what I know and think I have to vote for Trump. Sometimes as adults, we can't just go along with what we "feel". Sometimes we have to make hard decisions and do what is right based on what we think and know.

We know Hillary's history and where she stands on most major issues. We know what Trump is saying his position is. That is what we need to make our decision on and do what is right for the country even if both candidates are less than palatable.

I also think a republican majority congress will be able to reign in Trump than they would Hillary. Hillary would just run over congress like Obama has.

I hope I spoke clearly enough so there are no nuances that get lost in my conversation as I do not intend this as nothing but a direct non beating around the bush pleading to vote based upon what you know and think and not so much what you "feel".

And this is why I try to stay out of it. I post something basically stating I have an opinion and respect yours, but want to stay out of the conversation because on internet people are just going to jump on anything I say.

You read too much into my choice of words. You're trying to discredit my point of view by implying I act on emotion instead of reason. An opinion is nothing more than a feeling backed (and sometimes not backed) by observation.

If someone tries to harm you or your family I would assume you would FEEL the need to act. And what drives this feeling? Is it a purely irresponsible, emotional drive that compels you? Is it not possible that you could logically conculed based on reason and observation that there is a need to act to prevent something bad and/or facilitate something good? And through this could be compelled to FEEL the need to defend someone or yourself? Is your action negated because you felt something?

I would argue that if you felt nothing about "things you know" that you would not vote at all, or respond to my post, etc.

Me stating that I feel the need to do something does not necessarily imply that it is without thought. Again, I have done my research. My conclusion is very different from yours. You can say what you want, I'm just not going to get into it. We both have access to all the same information. Do what you will with it and I will do the same.

I FEEL that often people make up their mind before they even start the conversation.