Being Neutral is a Terrible Choice

Yes, there are 'independents' in Congress who dont like either party. So people can dislike both parties without being a member of one and lying about it.
No they're aren't. But that doesn't necessarily disprove the second part of your claim, which demonstrates how pointless it is for you you to keep trying to insist on the first part... It's totally unconnected to the point you are trying to make... which is incidentally... the tired, refrain of "both sides are bad"... which yes I get it.
I wasn't talking to you, I'm not independent and this aint my thread. I'm just glad to see you've overcome your anger with thread derailing, hopefully you wont accuse others of that in the future.
You weren't talking to me huh? Puh-leese... you quoted me. I'm on topic. I'm talking about "neutrality" which is the topic of the thread. If anything is "derailing" its your ranting about you personal butthurt over a post that wasn't even addressed to you. And nah... you can fully expect that I'll keep hammering you for derailing threads with your strawmen and whataboutisms.
 
Last edited:
The U.K. is not really anymore, and nor is my home country of Canada (which I noticed you neglected to acknowledge as an English-speaking country - at least majority English-speaking) - both have had many elections where parties outside the biggest two have been spoiler parties, or minority governments have had to be shouldered by them, and provincial or devolved governments have been formed by such parties outright - not the traits of a true two-party system. Australia is a bit wonky, because technically there's three major parties, but two of them have been in a coalition for decades, but they're not actually bound into such by anything more than convention, in truth. New Zealand (also an English-speaking country) is also having greater frequency of spoiler parties and parties shouldering minority governments.
I didn't plan on mentioning every English speaking state on Earth. Just the big three. Canada is but a province of the US empire, and New Zealand is my nation's bastard stepchild.

Australia is often referred to as a "two-and-a-half party system" because of that little quirk, but for all tents no purposes the Nationals are just the rural branch of the Liberals. In fact, the Greens are a larger party than the Nats, yet somehow are considered a minor party, whereas the Nats are a major party. Because logic and politics don't mix, I guess.

If anything, the UK has reverted back to two parties with the decimation of the Liberal Democrats in the last two elections.
 
I like staying neutral on an issue as long as I can to gather the most information as possible without all the bias that comes along with it.
I will eventually take a stand but refuse to make it based on what side I'm supposed to be on or the one I've been on in the past. While many issues share commonality, they still might be different enough that I will chose differently. The more complex the issue the longer it takes my feeble mind to figure it out usually. To make a decision in haste is just plain silly in my opinion. Unfortunately while I'm usually deciding, I'm hated by both sides which is actually pretty screwed up.
 
Actually, I think the question of how something affects the natural environment is the number one trumper over if I will support or abstain from a certain action or opinion.
 
Canada is but a province of the US empire,

You obviously have never been to, or lived in Canada, at all, but only sup from the American propaganda and media mill, who core demographic of recipient is the braindead, sheepish, willfully ignorant masses unused to thinking for themselves - not all inline with the self-biographical clips you've given several times of late. I suggest sources on Canada (and other nations you haven't personally visited) more up to par with the erudite and respectable status of a man of letters like you claim to be.
 
Quebec will become the 51st US state soon enough.

Also a professional tally of discernment suggests that Australia and New Zealand are pretty much the same thing.
 
I didn't plan on mentioning every English speaking state on Earth. Just the big three. Canada is but a province of the US empire, and New Zealand is my nation's bastard stepchild.

Australia is often referred to as a "two-and-a-half party system" because of that little quirk, but for all tents no purposes the Nationals are just the rural branch of the Liberals. In fact, the Greens are a larger party than the Nats, yet somehow are considered a minor party, whereas the Nats are a major party. Because logic and politics don't mix, I guess.

If anything, the UK has reverted back to two parties with the decimation of the Liberal Democrats in the last two elections.

I dunno, if you actually care about the continued existence of the UK (which personally I don't), I think there would be something worrying about the 2 main parties both being effectively regional parties now.
 
Quebec? Only if we get the prairie provinces on board with the idea as well, surely. Right? Please?
 
Ontario is about to get interesting.
 
Quebec will become the 51st US state soon enough.

Also a professional tally of discernment suggests that Australia and New Zealand are pretty much the same thing.
Quebec is less likely to become a U.S. State, statistically, than any other Canadian Province, all-in-all. The Quebec separatists' big gripes are the social, political, and economic dominance of Anglophones (English-speakers) irrelevating their "unique" culture and language. Why you would honestly think they're more likely to join a nation with MORE Anglophones, and bigger percentage of them, known for more aggressive social, political, and economic dominance and less tolerance for their "unique" culture and language is beyond me. Sounds like yet another uninformed, bad stereotype instead of real facts or information.
 
You shall know our seriousness by our steely gaze.
 
The picture bubble is right there.

<CARE BEAR STARE>
 
But people perceive me as a neutral because of those stances since I can't neatly fall into either box.

That's not surprising because many people don't actually care about your opinion (unless it matches their own)

Like 90% of the time people ask me something about an issue; it's almost always seeking confirmation over anything else.
 
It's an English language forum, and the US, Australia, and the U.K. are all two-party systems. Makes sense that we'd focus on it.

You are threatening my existence!!!!111 (on this board).

Also you've just neglected to properly placate Canadians.
And that's a whole different can of worms, buddy. *sternlook*

Edit:
Oh, wow, reality overtaking satire in just two posts worth of time.
Hmkay.
I didn't plan on mentioning every English speaking state on Earth. Just the big three. Canada is but a province of the US empire, and New Zealand is my nation's bastard stepchild.
Dude.
Harsh.
 
Pfffft! One of these days, the US will be annexed by Canada. Except Texas, Florida and the Bible Belt. We'll let The Bahamas annex those parts.
 
Pfffft! One of these days, the US will be annexed by Canada. Except Texas, Florida and the Bible Belt. We'll let The Bahamas annex those parts.
But Erika, our national debt would instantly skyrocket!
 
Pfffft! One of these days, the US will be annexed by Canada. Except Texas, Florida and the Bible Belt. We'll let The Bahamas annex those parts.
Why would Canada want 330 million problems? Small nations are better suited to actually solving their problems. The only reason I see for it would be a real estate play for rich Canadians. I think that before Canada annexes the US, the US will annex Mexico.
 
Top Bottom