Politics 20/20 now with extra hindsight!

[Malcador]

59 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

So the real harm they pose is the direct negative economic impact sustained  protests have on any city or region and then people committing criminal acts in the name or support of BLM

Doesn't really seem that much of a threat then.  People using BLM as an excuse to smash windows are the type to do that for any reason, so you handle that as you would any disorganized violence. That they can supposedly hurt the economy by pushing their "wrong" ideas is the same as any political organization, as well.

 

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

I am confident the US police have learnt lessons  

Well sure, whether or not these lessons benefit the public is another matter.

[Guard Dog]

4 hours ago, Gromnir said:

off-putting for gd 'cause obama were "the government." gotta embrace the false equivalency o' gd where all candidates representing the government is corrupt and vile and is only a matter o' degree which separates best from the worst. "yes we can," and "we love you," is necessarily equivalent 'cause in both situations, the government is using emotion to create support for misdeeds current and future...

fast-forward to ~1:20

https://www.c-span.org/video/?476584-1/president-trump-motorcade-walter-reed

"i will die for that man." 

any evidence o' popular and emotional support for a candidate or politician is gonna cheese off gd. none o' them deserve it. all the same, or same enough. 

you are not gonna hear Gromnir yelling, "i will die for that man," regarding any politician. public servants. the President and other politicians in this country work for us and not the other way around. what sacrifices will the President make on our behalf? we will sacrifice for the Constitution and free speech and America, but not for a politician. 

that said, bothered by "yes we can" requires the gd false equivalency and blanket condemnation o' "the government" we cannot manage to evoke. 

HA! Good Fun!

You know it’s a good thing you were a lawyer. You would’ve made a poor behaviorist or psychiatrist. 

Edited November 1, 2020 by Guard Dog

[Guard Dog]

Three words that haunt Biden “Dewey defeats Truman“

[Gromnir]

7 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

You know it’s a good thing you were a lawyer. You would’ve made a terrible behaviorist or psychiatrist. 

exactly. we don't care if gd has daddy issues or suffered harsh potty training. who is the real gd and what made him concerns us not at all when we make observations 'bout how predictable is gd on certain subjects.

a lawyer looks for patterns. ignore claimed motivations and look for patterns in laws as written. look for patterns in how those laws is applied. look for actual application o' law through individual action. look for patterns in arguments reveal flaws or strengths. 

seeing gd patterns doesn't require a lawyer. is none o' our business what were gd's relationship with his mother, and such details, while no doubt important in illuminating who is gd don't matter from our pov. is not meant to be an insult, but am just not interested in psychoanalyzing gd. 

HA! Good Fun!

 

[213374U]

5 hours ago, Raithe said:

Is it politics, is it covid....

any contact tracing

[Gorth]

53 minutes ago, 213374U said:

any contact tracing

Darwin's theory in action?

[Skarpen]

@Gromnir@GorthSo neither of you provided any substance, but you did write a wall of text to defend beheading people. Why?

[213374U]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

Darwin's theory in action?

No, I mean, really. Statistical inference is great and all, but is there any actual evidence that Trump's rallies have (indirectly) killed 700 people?

There isn't, and the paper's authors are the first to admit it. This is all purely mathematical modeling.

Of course, it may be possible to argue that the Trump Administration has to accept part of the blame for the failure to conduct effective contact tracing programs. But that's a more complex story, not to mention nowhere near as attention-grabbing as "TRUMP KILLED ELEVENTY BILLION!!1". Nuance is for chumps, and you can't very well farm likes on twatter with that boring crap.

[Skarpen]

Kamala puts a final nail into Biden campaign by outing herself as a communist. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dailycaller.com/2020/11/01/communist-propaganda-kamala-harris-equality-equity-video

[Gorth]

59 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

@Gromnir@GorthSo neither of you provided any substance, but you did write a wall of text to defend beheading people. Why?

 

Try this. A free 7 day trial for online English courses...

https://www.lingoda.com/en/

 

 

[Gorth]

48 minutes ago, 213374U said:

Nuance is for chumps, and you can't very well farm likes on twatter with that boring crap.

Ah yes, something about only have a limited number of characters per message, isn't it? No interest in twitter, but I remember somebody telling me it was for those with short attention spans/limited time to read, who just wants headline/announcement type info.

[Malcador]

Pathetic fallacy for sure

https://www.newsweek.com/scaffolding-holding-american-flag-trump-north-carolina-rally-collapses-1543896

[Darkpriest]

2 hours ago, 213374U said:

No, I mean, really. Statistical inference is great and all, but is there any actual evidence that Trump's rallies have (indirectly) killed 700 people?

There isn't, and the paper's authors are the first to admit it. This is all purely mathematical modeling.

Of course, it may be possible to argue that the Trump Administration has to accept part of the blame for the failure to conduct effective contact tracing programs. But that's a more complex story, not to mention nowhere near as attention-grabbing as "TRUMP KILLED ELEVENTY BILLION!!1". Nuance is for chumps, and you can't very well farm likes on twatter with that boring crap.

I wonder, if they used that modeling to cover how many were killed as a result of BLM riots? 

 

On a more serious topic though. 

I find it amuzing, that the people obsessed with so called 'wokeness' (a terrible term by the way) would rather submit to voilence and shut the hell up on matters touching one religion, but they would go all out all ballistic against another religion, which does not commit acts of terror. 

I'm really curious, if those people realize, the moment you start bending knee on jokes etc. and will let fear rule your actions, you will lose your liberties... Look at what is going on with ubelieviers, gays and feminists in the muslim countries. Why you think the same people will behave differently, if you are already ready to submit your freedoms of expression because of unlawful acts of voilence by groups, which are not a part of the legal system enforcement. Do you think they will not turn into hard crackdowns and executions once those people will become the majority? 

 

Edited November 2, 2020 by Darkpriest

[Skarpen]

2 hours ago, Gorth said:

 

Try this. A free 7 day trial for online English courses...

https://www.lingoda.com/en/

 

 

You might want to take this course yourself considering that in your examples of how bad w.supremacy is all from years prior (when I asked for recent) and all are "allegedly" w.supremacists "allegedly" commited. Funny that I don't think I ever seen an alleged muslim terrorist commiting alleged beheading info.

[Darkpriest]

Do you really believe such? Even in an altered form from the original post, which was much worse? 

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1322885651541405709?s=20

[MedicineDan]

So much to observe.  I will say, I still say it's Biden's to lose.  This is especially true since early voting came in before people realized that this is truly a binary election.  No, not Trump or not Trump.  It's Trump or Biden.  Will the thousands... tens... hundreds of thousands... millions?  of Demosthenes carry the day?  Probably.  For a recovering nihilist like me, defeat isn't forgone.  It's a way of life.  Still, it's really interesting.  If there really is a shy voter in any number, this will be interesting.  I'll give permission in advance for the anti-Trumpers to gloat if he loses.  They were going to do that in any event, of course.  They really want nothing more than to gloat.  We're alike in this, however.  When Trump won in 2016, I had pity on the people who thought he was terrible.  I assiduously avoided sounding triumphant.  I imagine the leftists will spare no time stuffing crow down my throat.  This time, if we win, it's time to remind them that you. threw. every. thing. at. US!  If we win this time, stop trying to destroy the fabric of our society.  Stop trying to pit us against each other.  Start trying to have reasonable and rational conversations.  Stop trying to be lawyers and try being decent and amenable human beings for once.

BTW:  I'll forgo responding to people who's mantras ping pong between "muslim ban" and "Fox news" (as if I didn't have a better record in understanding the electorate than these misguided people) and simply point out the irony of Hurlshot, for whom I have a certain fondness, calling me out for ambiguity and then citing his gut feelings after a 60 Minutes segment.  Aw, who am I kidding.  I'm fond of everyone here.  Even the terrible hypocrites.

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, MedicineDan said:

I'll give permission in advance for the anti-Trumpers to gloat if he loses.

No, not going to gloat. Regardless of the outcome, I think the US lost. In more ways than one. If anything, a miracle is needed after whoever is the sitting president 2020-2024 to salvage the pieces of a political culture that has been steadily demolished and what seems to be constitutional safeguards being gradually dismantled. It *feels* like the system has become a playground for special interest groups, from Exxon to the NRA and the sacrificial cattle is the "ordinary" American. In the meantime, Putin and Xi are laughing their asses off and various autocrats, populists and despots in the rest of the world are following events with amused interest, wondering how they can benefit the most from the chaos.

[Darkpriest]

Tbh what's going on now shows more of the weakness of the democracy understood as the system, where everyones vote equals the same. It is easy to collapse a nation in such a way, and in the past it even allowed raise to power of people, who should not come to it (certain Adolf guy). 

I think, that the original idea of Greek democracy or early Roman republic were better versions of it. 

You had to pass certain criteria in order to have a vote, and not just be given because you exist. There are way more stupid people than the smart ones, so in the current form, you give more power to the stupid.

 To be honest, it's difficult to say, what is the best system for a society. Autocratic ones, really depend on the individuals leading those systems. Democratic ones, depend on how smart, cohesive and communal the society is. Even then, even the smartest society might decide that some minority is disposable and committ acts, which many would deem unethical. (spartans killed weak newborns, modern society would genetically eliminate weak individuals) 

Edited November 2, 2020 by Darkpriest

[Guard Dog]

1 hour ago, Darkpriest said:

 

 To be honest, it's difficult to say, what is the best system for a society. Autocratic ones, really depend on the individuals leading those systems. Democratic ones, depend on how smart, cohesive and communal the society is. Even then, even the smartest society might decide that some minority is disposable and committ acts, which many would deem unethical. (spartans killed weak newborns, modern society would genetically eliminate weak individuals) 

I think heavily armed, anti-social hermits living alone with dogs on isolated farms is underrated. But that's me.

[Raithe]

I don't get useful politics out of twitter, but more interesting talking points to look into in greater depth or general snark/amusements.

[Malcador]

1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

I think heavily armed, anti-social hermits living alone with dogs on isolated farms is underrated. But that's me.

350 million fortresses is not my idea of the 'land of the free'.

[Guard Dog]

30 minutes ago, Malcador said:

350 million fortresses is not my idea of the 'land of the free'.

LOL true it’s not for everyone. But the fortresses are easy to live in peace with. Don’t tell them what to do, don’t try and take their stuff, and basically just leave them be. 
 

Know what my biggest problem with modern politics is? It’s becoming impossible to just opt out. The choose not to participate. And you know that was a thing I hated the most about the affordable care act. For the first time doing nothing opened you up to sanction.

I really don’t care who wins the presidential election. For completely different reasons I have no use for either candidate. I am far more interested in who controls Congress because I think will all be better off if the government neutralizes itself. But even if it doesn’t, don’t screw with my constitution, don’t screw with my property rights, don’t screw with my gun rights, don’t screw with my first amendment rights, my 5th amendment  at least pay lip service to the 10th and 14th amendments, and will all get along fine.

Edited November 2, 2020 by Guard Dog

[Elerond]

3 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

Tbh what's going on now shows more of the weakness of the democracy understood as the system, where everyones vote equals the same. It is easy to collapse a nation in such a way, and in the past it even allowed raise to power of people, who should not come to it (certain Adolf guy). 

Adolf rise in power because system allowed to circumvent will of majority.

As Nazis didn't achieve majority in parliamentary, but because how Weimar political system work they were able to make it difficult for chancellors with small majority to do anything, so they increased president's emergency powers. This lead to situation in 1932 when Nazis were losing their support in election, but chancellor Franz von Papen, who was losing control of parliament to socialist democrats, made back room deal with Hitler that if Hitler makes him vice chancellor then Papen will use his influence towards president Paul von Hindenburg (who had beaten Hitler in presidential election) to make Hitler as chancellor. Then short after Hitler become chancellor there was arson in Reichstag (where German parliamentary gathered), Nazis succeeded to throw communists out from the parliament (as they were suspected to be behind the arson) and get parliament to vote for Enabling Act which gave Hitler temporarily act without consent of parliament and without constitutional limitations. Act was supposed to be balanced by fact that it didn't hinder president's powers, but when president Hindenburg died in 1934, people were excepting Hitler to appoint himself as president and somebody else as chancellor, but Hitler surprised everybody by combining chancellor and  president offices and with fact that Germany's military supported Hitler and took Hitler Oath in day of Hindenburg's death.

[213374U]

4 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

Tbh what's going on now shows more of the weakness of the democracy understood as the system, where everyones vote equals the same. It is easy to collapse a nation in such a way, and in the past it even allowed raise to power of people, who should not come to it (certain Adolf guy). 

A bit of a digression but... that's actually not how American "democracy" (but muh republic) works. Everyone's vote isn't worth the same (and indeed, in some states depending on what you vote, your vote may be worth **** all), due to the Electoral College and winner-takes-all setup they have going over there.

I know this isn't exactly where you were going with that, but I'm not sure that a different way of assigning non-uniform and/or non-universal suffrage value would produce better results. An inherent risk of democracy is that it may collapse because those tasked with maintaining it either stop caring or make the wrong decisions. Would you like to know more?

 

2 hours ago, Raithe said:

I don't get useful politics out of twitter, but more interesting talking points to look into in greater depth or general snark/amusements.

Fair enough. As with everything else, it's just a tool. But I get a feeling that it tends to be abused by people who know a fair bit more about psychological manipulation than the subjects they are supposed to be writing about.

I figure it's time I stopped beating on this particular dead horse anyway.

[Hurlshort]

27 minutes ago, 213374U said:

A bit of a digression but... that's actually not how American "democracy" (but muh republic) works. Everyone's vote isn't worth the same (and indeed, in some states depending on what you vote, your vote may be worth **** all), due to the Electoral College and winner-takes-all setup they have going over there.

That's only for one thing on the ballot though. Most of the stuff we vote for is evenly weighed.

People make way too much out of the Presidential election. Democracy at the local level is where its at!