O noes! The theme is gone!

Just like change, some people being unhappy with any given change is inevitable. Can't please everyone as they say.

And I totally missed the over/under for first mention of election results. Thought it would be a lot sooner. Though maybe people remember the futility of those discussions better than I expect. Hoping that is also true when I host 20 family members on Thanksgiving.

Lord Gonchar:

I've long wished a cult would recruit me.

I always assumed that you would be the leader.

Seat belts be damned.

Well yeah…that would obviously be the name of his cult.

And I’d probably be the first to join.

I don’t support the orange dude, but I also don’t support seatbelts. I’m just an outlier like that I suppose.

Here's the way I define the series of disqualifiers:

• Disregard for the Constitution, fomenting an insurrection, lying about election integrity
• Literally everything else

If you're gonna bring it up, let's go there. This idea that right and wrong is some nebulous matter of opinion is insane. Yeah, it does go in circles, because no one can ever give one example, from any president or candidate of either party in our lifetime, that is worse than the above.

Jeff:

This idea that right and wrong is some nebulous matter of opinion is insane.

This seems to be where you're stuck.

All you have to do is accept that at least 76 million people (over half of voters, a quarter of our population) assessed it differently. At least enough so to cast a vote in that direction. Call it insane. It happened. The reality is that those people don't share your morality to the point that it caused them to not vote for Trump.

In your mind the choice was as simple as one between a criminal and a prosecutor. Given the results of the election, I don't think that was necessarily how most people saw it - most voters, at least.

Yeah, it does go in circles, because no one can ever give one example, from any president or candidate of either party in our lifetime, that is worse than the above.

Not sure why anyone has to. Again, the voters decided (for whatever reasons) that they trusted the horrible felon more.

At this point even if someone could give what you judge a worse example - so what? What would that do to ease your mind or make the country's decision more acceptable to you?

My guess is it would do nothing to change your opinion or make you feel better about the election outcome. And that is why this keep going in circles.

TheMillenniumRider:
I don’t support the orange dude, but I also don’t support seatbelts. I’m just an outlier like that I suppose.

I don't think you are. I know a place where there's a lot of people like you...like us. Why don't you come spend the weekend at our getaway meet & greet retreat?

Shades:
I always assumed that you would be the leader.

I like your sense of humor. I like to laugh too. I know a lot of people like you...like us. Why don't you come spend the weekend at our getaway meet & greet retreat?

Vater:
Well yeah…that would obviously be the name of his cult.

See you again this weekend at the monthly recruiting...err, meet & greet retreat?

The best thing about Seatbelts Be Damned is the acronym.

I hated both candidates and refused to vote for either one. So I threw away my vote.

Yeah, I can respect that. I did the same four years ago and still got called out for voting wrong.

I've voted third-party or write-in for three consecutive elections after trying to get a different Republican candidate in the 2016 primary. Heck, this time I voted non-Republican even on some down-ticket spots. I maintain that it's not voting wrong in that it lowers the threshold for victory for an opponent, but I realize my view is not widely shared.

But moral truth and objective fact aren’t subject to vote. It doesn’t matter how many people vote for or against some things. Those things are still wrong/false/incorrect.

Of course the question then becomes how do we know what those things are and where different lines fall, but sometimes they just are. I mean, I think racism is just wrong, even though it’s very hard to come up with an argument that couldn’t be debated by someone.

Morality is a slider. Simple as that. There is no objective morality. (that's where I'm coming from, YMMV)

Facts are indeed facts. I don't think anyone is suggesting a majority vote changes fact...or even one's personal sense of morality.

But not everyone is going to vote based on the same set of morals (obviously, and I can't believe as middle-aged adults we're really having that discussion) or consider the same facts with the same weight in making a voting decision.

What we're really saying here if we boil it all down is, "I can't believe someone would think differently than I do!"

And that's silly.

The slider makes a comeback!

Lord Gonchar:

(obviously, and I can't believe as middle-aged adults we're really having that discussion)

Alas, here were are, having that discussion, and that is a fact.

As far as moral truth, that would be a thing that everyone 100% would agree on, is there such an item, topic, or statement? If nothing can be said that 100% agree on, then is there moral truth, or is it all a slider as Gonch claims?

Is objective fact not subject to vote? This country voted for a factual felon, who has factually attempted to overthrown election results and the government in the past. Or am I reading objective fact in the wrong manner?

Scrolling through the Desantis/Disney thread was a stroll down memory lane. Discussion was even more of a cluster than I remember. And Monday morning it (from posts more than a year before the election) is interesting.

Lord Gonchar:

There is no objective morality.

This is the impasse, because my response is "you're objectively wrong" but obviously there's no real conversation beyond that point to be had.

TheMillenniumRider:

This country voted for a factual felon, who has factually attempted to overthrown election results and the government in the past.

Exactly. We absolutely did.

(I just hope this is a sign that some of those programs to get convicted felons into the workforce is actually working)

The disconnect seems to be in understanding that someone else (let alone at least 76 million someone elses) would weigh the importance of those facts (and others in such a decision-making process) differently than you or I might.

There's still a slider.

There's always a slider.

If there weren't, we'd all be indistunguishable from one another and all just agree on everything.

What is morally repehensible to Jeff wasn't to 76 million voters. Being a convicted felon didn't disqualify Trump from being a viable choice for 76 million people the same way it did for Jeff. They weighed it differently.

Imagine that. People see things differently. It'd be strange to expect otherwise.

And, finally...

Sliders. (just because I like to imagine that somewhere people are betting on the over/under on the number of times I'll say "sliders" in this one post and I'm trying to screw the betting markets...and I took the over.)

ApolloAndy:

This is the impasse, because my response is "you're objectively wrong" but obviously there's no real conversation beyond that point to be had.

At least we both recognize that fact.

The funny thing about morality is you can break it or go against it.

Science or actual fundamental truths - not so much.

ApolloAndy:

But moral truth and objective fact aren’t subject to vote. It doesn’t matter how many people vote for or against some things. Those things are still wrong/false/incorrect.

This. It's the "everybody's doing it" excuse, which is something children say. Half the country took up arms to defend slavery at one point. Does that make it morally OK?

Trump is a racist. If someone says racist things, over and over for a decade now, they're a racist. I don't understand why it's taken so long for people to call it what it is.

Am I having a problem accepting that a third of eligible voters voted for a racist? Yes, of course I am. Because racism is bad. If you voted for Trump, you're sending a signal that says racism is OK. I don't need to accept racism as normal, and I'd love for someone to make an argument that racism is morally correct. Despite the election, people who want to remain a part of our society don't try to make that argument in public. That's why those Nazi idiots in Columbus last week were wearing masks.

Politicians are liars. Is voting for any of them sending a signal that lying is OK?