|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
![]() |
#361 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,809
|
|
__________________
"As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#362 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,809
|
|
__________________
"As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#363 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#364 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 91,292
|
You know, all you needed to do was say, for instance, that Booker was worse than the others in that respect, in your opinion, and that would've done it. But instead you turn it immediately personal. You can't even tolerate a minor challenge to one of your claims.
So maybe he wasn't worse than the others in that respect. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#365 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 48,640
|
My view is that every election is unique, and every candidate is unique. Even the same candidate is different when they're an incumbent rather than a challenger.
Certain patterns can be observed, but they don't lead to reliable conclusions based on past performance. There's nothing FDR can really tell us about the viability of a non-"moderate" candidate today. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#366 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,809
|
And the corporatists within the party made it a point to get rid of him when it became clear that FDR's VP in the '44 campaign would finish out Roosevelt's last term.
THe level of shennanigans they got up to to keep Wallace from being the VP nom were beyond outrageous. This in my opiniion marked the start of the neoliberal era in the party that culminated in BJ Clinton selling out to the Republican agenda during his presidency. |
__________________
"As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#367 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
For the record about that bolded part, anecdotal evidence is used all the time. You simply collect it systematically and use ruling out variables. Giving an anecdote along with other evidence is incredibly common in medical science.
That said, WTF? You ignored the whole post except that one anecdote. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#368 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#369 |
post-pre-born
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 24,840
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#370 |
![]() Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 58,972
|
|
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#371 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,030
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#372 |
![]() Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 58,972
|
FDR was a politician. There's no reason to suppose he'd lose interest in his own field that was such a large part of his life just because he'd died. Do you think Shakespeare wouldn't be interested in talking about theater, or Lister about medicine, or Walt Disney about cryogenics?
|
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#373 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 4,861
|
FDR would tell Bernie he's being too soft on his opponents and the establishment.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#374 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 27,986
|
Different time, different person. Go back and look at the 1932 Presidential election. Hoover had no chance winning reelection after the Bonus Army incident. He was hardly welcome in public. He very often had things thrown at him. And it's kind of hard to believe, but Roosevelt originally ran on belt tightening.
You simply can't compare one election to the next without taking into consideration one hell of a lot of variables. I'm convinced the right candidate can win almost regardless of the policies they espouse. And I dont care how great your solutions might be if you stink at selling it. And the times matter. I really don't think elections are won or lost on policy positions. I think they are won based on the persuasive capabilities of the candidate more than anything. Trump is a policy and principle moron. He barely knows anything about anything. Hillary was the greatest political wonk I've ever seen. She knows issues and government probably better than anyone running for POTUS in the last 100 years or more. This should have been a landslide victory for her. That it was not was because Hillary couldn't sell. |
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. . |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#375 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,598
|
Evidence of what? That some people refuse to vote for socialists? I accept that as obvious, the evidence is literally self evident. On the other hand: Evidence that socialists are unelectable? Then it's a bad choice, as I claimed: Obama won. Twice. And therefore it is not evidence of unelectability. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#376 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
My brother didn't vote for him.
Let it go Cab. I am not your enemy. If you have some counter evidence, that the voting public in the US is ready to elect a socialist, does not think socialism is a dirty word, and/or that it's a positive for a candidate and not a negative, let's see it. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#377 |
Crazy Little Green Dragon
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 7,354
|
Even moreso, HOW she works to make her plans is one of the best things about her, I think.
The better question here is... what feud? Quite literally, at last check, Bernie's pretty much outright forbidden his campaign members from attacking Warren, with penalty attached. I think Warren's done similar, but I haven't looked beyond the pointed instructions not to attack. That doesn't mean that their supporters won't cynically or otherwise go after the other, of course, but it makes it pretty clear that talk of a "feud" is nonsense. It may surprise you how very distinctly different and complex their pools of supporters actually are, contrary to the narrative that much of the media is trying to sell. The whole "moderate vs. progressive" narrative is overwhelmingly overblown compared to the facts at hand, either way, last I checked... and honestly, I strongly suspect that that's just yet another one of the many ploys by the corporate media to try to reduce or limit support for the actually left leaning Democrats. A bit like CNN tacking on a video of a completely unrelated Democrat getting busted for corruption into an article about AOC that had nothing to do with any crime, but much louder. |
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#378 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,598
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#379 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 18,168
|
|
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#380 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
Which post, I'll go look.
If you are claiming some people believed Obama was a socialist yet they still elected him, that is not sufficient. 1) Obama wasn't a socialist. 2) The people who believed it were not a majority. 3) It bears no relevance to the election of a candidate who actually does lean heavily socialist. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#381 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,598
|
The very post you just quoted.
Quote:
Why bring him up if he was not a socialist and he got elected, then? He doesn't really seem relevant on any level--Indeed, you, yourself said so in point 3). |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#382 |
Woof!
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,590
|
|
__________________
Quantum physics means that anything can happen at anytime and for no reason. Also, eat plenty of oatmeal, and animals never had a war! - Deepak Chopra |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#383 |
Crazy Little Green Dragon
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 7,354
|
To poke at this a little, I'm not sure why you think that your responses actually address what she actually said in the first place. Her anecdote about her brother was putting forth an example of a person who refused to vote for Obama because he thought that Obama was a socialist, regardless of whether Obama actually was a socialist or not. She also linked a number of polls dealing with how accepting people are of "socialism," which were of much more value in making the point. Now, as she said, Obama wasn't much of a socialist and most people who actually paid any real attention knew that (at least among the population that might have been willing to vote for him), so your response was a bit wrong-headed, both before and here.
And why not bring him up as she did? Her anecdote worked just fine as she used it. That you seem to be having difficulty following along with what she's actually said is probably decent reason to step back for a little, reread for comprehension, and recheck your assumptions. |
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#384 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,598
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#385 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#386 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 7,305
|
Is this the part where Warren supporters pretend that everyone on the planet wasn't talking about the effects sexism had on HRC's run in 2016 or how sexism might be a general problem for any woman candidate?
The smear that Bernie discouraged a woman from running or thinks Warren shouldn't run because she's a woman is absurd on its face. |
__________________
Gobble gobble |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#387 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
|
Well the conversation happened over a year ago, so there has to be a reason warren thought it was worth bringing up now.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#388 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 91,292
|
I understood your earlier post about Booker having a specific flaw, which is that he didn't have clear solutions to clear problems. Since the flaw is rather generalised in the current Democratic candidate field, I'm not sure then what your original point was. If it's not a flaw unique to him, then why mention it?
It's really a simple question. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#389 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,332
|
|
__________________
SuburbanNerd A blog for making tech make sense |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#390 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#391 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 91,292
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#392 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
I don't see that she did. It looks like the news media (CNN and Politico) brought it up.
bizpacreview (assuming they are a reliable source)
Quote:
Quote:
The news media almost certainly went looking for sexism given the Clinton rivalry. But Sanders made it easy paying female staff less than male staff. GQ: Women who worked on his 2016 campaign have come forward alleging harassment, sexism, and gender-based pay gaps over the course of the Democratic primaries. The issues were reportedly more systemic than just outright sexual harassment. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#393 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#394 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#395 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 5,293
|
I guess first we need to firmly nail down is it actually being socialist that's the problem or vulnerability to the label sticking.
Because I'm starting to feel that "hopping back and forth every other go around" vibe. That describes the conversation as a whole, not saying any single participant is doing so. That makes it hard to have a consistent discussion. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#396 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 48,640
|
Donal mentioning Lev Parnas and Russia hacking Burisma suggests that he seriously thinks Trump eavesdropped on the conversation and leaked it now to distract from his own troubles.
Me? I figure it has to have been someone close to Sanders or Warren. Coincidence notwithstanding. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#397 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 91,292
|
Give what up? I'm trying to understand your point, which had nothing to do with him dropping out, and it wasn't an objection.
You said you didn't support Booker because of the flaw you mentioned. You didn't seem to disagree with me that the other candidates have the same problemn, so I have to ask: do you support any one of them? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#398 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#399 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,883
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#400 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 91,292
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|