Poker and compromise

[neviander]

This is a response to thread http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=382465

I thought of this after I woke up from a nap shortly after I read that thread.
Politics is like a poker game, sometimes you lay down a pair to win the hand, sometimes you fold with a full house, the idea is to take their bank (I honestly don't remember if I read that somewhere, but it sounded good when I thought of it )I believe the way our governmental political system works is strikingly similar to the mechanics of poker.

One goal, or strategy is to convince your opponent that what you're holding is more powerful than what he is holding. The only difference is, we know what they are holding and they know what we are holding, factually speaking. Ideology is where the bluffs come into play.

Of course the consequences of say, a lib putting all his chips in the middle on a vote that would restrict gun ownership, we might fold right then, seemingly giving him the upper hand, knowing, that down the road when crime goes up and his constituency is angry is when we lay down a straight flush and take his bankroll; restoring the citizen's 2A rights with a sane (Heller esque) vote. All in all, facts are on our side. Until a majority of Americans want to hand over their God given right to defend themselves with the best means possible, I believe this poker game will go on and on.

No, the system/game is not perfect, but that's the best explanation I can come up with for compromise being a valid and valuable course of action.

 

[guitarhero323]

i dont like thinking that my rights are gambled away like money in a poker game.

 

[FCFC]

I have never folded a full house....

 

[yokel]

Some people look to a compromise as the way to settle everything. Especially politicians, as in the sickening words: 'Bi-partisan compromise'. Perhaps that's fine in some cases, but a slavish devotion to the almighty idea of meeting in the middle is a poor way to run a government. It's an especially poor way to run a life.

An example to illustrate the point is in order. Find a compromise in this case: Your goal is to live your life in peace without injury. The goal of the deranged drug addict who just broke into your home is to kill you. Ok? Got the terms? Ready..... Set...... Compromise!

What.... you think living your life in peace is a perfectly valid goal and you aren't willing to be maimed, let alone murdered, in the name of compromise? How about just beaten senseless and left for dead? Kicked in head a few times? No?

My, how counter social an attitude!

Not every situation can be solved by splitting the pot.

 

[neviander]

a slavish devotion to the almighty idea of meeting in the middle is a poor way to run a government. It's an especially poor way to run a life.

I agree, but look where we're at. The amount of people that believe.. hell, the amount of Christians that believe there is no such thing as absolute truth is INCREASING every day. When there is no moral high ground, we all drown.

Find a compromise in this case: Your goal is to live your life in peace without injury. The goal of the deranged drug addict who just broke into your home is to kill you. Ok? Got the terms? Ready..... Set...... Compromise!

...I believe in the golden rule. I wouldn't want to be shot, but does that mean I'm going to let a criminal walk over me and kill my family? absolutely not. We can't apply one philosophy to every aspect of life, life is full of shades of grey.

I have never folded a full house....

been there

 

[wally]

We have guns and ammo. If we don't give them up, who's gonna come and take 'em? No bluff! I ain't folding.

--wally.

 

[yokel]

We must challenge ourselves and each other to think and act as if these politicians, judges, and nameless bureaucrats have put our Liberty -our very lives- in peril.

The proponents of appeasement regularly proceed from a blind preference for negotiation and are willing to compromise the righteousness of their cause.

To people having the ability to think and accurately discern truth, it is generally recognized that the age-old lure of appeasement fosters neither liberty nor freedom. Conciliation to those who would destroy said liberties and freedoms encourages suppression.

 

[MIL-DOT]

(quote) " I have never folded a full house"

I've folded only one,a few months ago,turned out it was to a bigger boat.True story. Gotta know when to fold 'em.

 

[Poor East Texan]

I'm not folding! I have no kids and don't own my house or truck (just rent 'em from bank).

Maybe they'll get me but I'm taking some of them with me!

 

[neviander]

The proponents of appeasement regularly proceed from a blind preference for negotiation and are willing to compromise the righteousness of their cause.

Appeasement is a strong word, compromise does not always imply it. If I'm up against a wall with my family behind me, facing 20 guys with guns aimed at me, I'll take the bullet, but I won't risk my family over my guns....in that situation, you decide where the righteousness is in a situation like that. Gun rights are re-attainable, life is not.

 

[Frank Ettin]

As usual, talking in vague and broad generalities doesn't mean much. The question is always going to be whether or not you can get what you want, or something acceptably close to it, and at what price. Clearly there may be results for which, desirable as they may be, the cost will be too high. And then there will be times you'll be able to get a sub-optimal, but acceptable, result at a sufficiently modest cost to make it reasonable.

But "the devil is in the details." And these things need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. And remember, if you insist on all or nothing, you wind up with nothing.

In a particular case, you may decide that the cost, i. e., the thing compromised, is too great. But still, if you can't negotiate a resolution satisfactory to you, a resolution unsatisfactory to you will be imposed on you. Do you have a Plan B?

One Plan B may be litigation. But remember that litigation is very expensive, takes a long time and the outcome is never certain. That needs to be factored into your thinking.

Revolution is a really lousy Plan B.

 

[neviander]

Err, the revolution bit is part of my sig line and wasn't really pertaining to the subject at hand. And concerning

vague and broad generalities

, that's all politics is, you CAN'T be specific. Don't get me wrong, I hate politics, but I also understand it's necessity.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...that's all politics is, you CAN'T be specific....

What I mean is that one must evaluate each particular issue, each matter being negotiated, individually. Discussing principles and compromise in the abstract gets us nowhere.

The reference to revolution was largely preemptive. Someone often brings in the notion of overt resistance when these sorts of issues are discussed.

 

[yokel]

Gun rights are re-attainable, life is not.

Please don't be so sure of that.

How and when do we get back our basic rights?

Appeasement is a strong word, compromise does not always imply it.

Let us call it by its proper name and face it for what it is, for a denial of human rights is now tantamount to a denial of humanity.

Discussing principles and compromise in the abstract gets us nowhere.

Here's the straight skinny. Core values and guiding principles must be expanded and translated into operating principles -- a code of conduct -- for maximum effectiveness. This code must be communicated to each member of an organization in easy-to-understand terms. Failure to have a shared code of conduct can produce disastrous results in any organization, as we have at best a blurred vision and a nebulous direction.

 

[RobTzu]

I lost with a full house to quad 9s a while back. That one cost my 400 bucks.

At any rate, how many years under Stalin would be acceptable to get full 2nd amendment rights restored?

 

[Frank Ettin]

Let us call it [appeasement] by its proper name and face it for what it is, for a denial of human rights is now tantamount to a denial of humanity.

Sounds pretty, but what does it really mean in real life? How do we apply this in our efforts to preserve, as well as we can, the RKBA in an often antagonistic political environment? What are you trying to accomplish?

...Core values and guiding principles must be expanded and translated into operating principles -- a code of conduct -- for maximum effectiveness. This code must be communicated to each member of an organization in easy-to-understand terms...

An excellent idea. Why don't you give it a shot and post a draft for all of us to look at and consider?

 

[PaulBk]

"I have never folded a full house"

"I've folded only one,a few months ago,turned out it was to a bigger boat.True story. Gotta know when to fold 'em."

Yep, dueling boats make for an interesting hand. Been on both sides more than once. Congrats on a very difficult lay down.

-Paul

 

[FCFC]

Cannot win if you fold....and it is possible to win with a smaller boat...

 

[Navy joe]

Playing Omaha as I type this. I think the better thought is keeping your opponent in sheer terror. They should feel that any little bluff they make could result in you pushing all in right back at them. So in gun context anytime someone advocates a ban they should be in fear that someone is going to call them on it. Forcefully. Your right to bear arms is your ace, don't lay it down.

At the same time, pick your battles. If your name is Randy Weaver you hold a weak pair and no chips. Fold now, go for the win later.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Navy joe, he might not be bluffing, and he might not be afraid of you calling him.

 

[yokel]

There appear to be some divisions amongst us about how best to approach these issues, and whether to take a militant and confrontational stance.

You see, the fact that we need to engage in strategic planning and concern ourselves with defining our mission, our core values and our raison d'être or reason to be is not really such an arcane concept.

Until we answer these questions:

Where did I come from?
Why am I here?
Where am I going?
Does the right to keep and bear arms have any meaning and purpose? If so, precisely why does it matter?

We are like ships adrift on the vast sea of life without a rudder.

We have an entire universe of values, but some of them are so primary, so important to us that through out the changes in society, government, politics, and technology they are STILL the core values we will abide by. In an ever-changing world, core values are constant.

 

[Frank Ettin]

yokel, would you care to be more specific?

 

[Poor East Texan]

I won't pretend to know what yokel means.

One of my core values is to do the right thing, even when no one is looking.

I also believe in Molon Labe!!!!

 

[yokel]

Perhaps we can begin by resolving that domestic disarmament is simply not an acceptable option for any of us. Period.

It never was acceptable; it never will be acceptable.

 

[neviander]

Gun rights are re-attainable, life is not.

Please don't be so sure of that.

I hope you mean only the rights part.

How and when do we get back our basic rights?

What was Heller? How many years have law abiding citizens been COMPLETELY denied their right to bear arms in D.C.? We are gaining ground there. Is that not a clear case of us gaining our rights back? However meager it may seem right now, we are still gaining ground.