IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


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.
Tags 2020 elections , donald trump , joe biden , presidential candidates

View Poll Results: April Presidential Poll: Biden, Trump or ?
Biden 64 83.12%
Trump 5 6.49%
None of the above, third party, Planet X, etc. 8 10.39%
Voters: 77. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Old 20th April 2020, 10:38 PM   #121
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 28,347
I think what fails us is guessing. It's easy to determine after the fact that your vote didn't make a difference, and most of the time you're right, but if you're wrong it's too late. I realize this ends up sounding a little like some philosophy 101 puzzle, or categorical imperative for dummies, but I think it's wiser to act as if your vote counted and kick yourself later for wasting it, than the far less likely but far worse alternative of presuming it doesn't and kicking yourself later for the presumption.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2020, 10:40 PM   #122
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 17,371
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now. We have to wait for events to play out.
Well, first of all, Churchill was popular during the war (never falling below 70%). So it is not just a case of people liking Churchill in hindsight. Compare that to Trump, who's approval rating usually sits around 40%, and even during the pandemic didn't really increase much. (In most other cases, disasters like the pandemic cause a large increase in the popularity of a leader.)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwa...ction_01.shtml

Secondly, you seem to be suggesting that the only reason Churchill became "popular" is because he was "good at war". But the thing is, he's actually good at something... his government acted in a non-partisan fashion, his skills as a speaker helped rally Britain, etc.

Compare that to Trump, who seems to be an abject failure at, well, everything. Incapable of appealing to anyone who is not part of his base, a failure economically (trade wars and a spike in the deficit even before the pandemic), and whenever confronted with a major disaster (e.g. hurricanes, the pandemic) he screws up.

The only way Trump might be seen more favorably in the future is if society goes the same way as it did in the movie Idiocricy.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2020, 11:35 PM   #123
fishbob
Seasonally Disaffected
 
fishbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chilly Undieville
Posts: 7,283
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Well, first of all, Churchill was popular during the war (never falling below 70%). So it is not just a case of people liking Churchill in hindsight. Compare that to Trump, who's approval rating usually sits around 40%, and even during the pandemic didn't really increase much. (In most other cases, disasters like the pandemic cause a large increase in the popularity of a leader.)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwa...ction_01.shtml

Secondly, you seem to be suggesting that the only reason Churchill became "popular" is because he was "good at war". But the thing is, he's actually good at something... his government acted in a non-partisan fashion, his skills as a speaker helped rally Britain, etc.

Compare that to Trump, who seems to be an abject failure at, well, everything. Incapable of appealing to anyone who is not part of his base, a failure economically (trade wars and a spike in the deficit even before the pandemic), and whenever confronted with a major disaster (e.g. hurricanes, the pandemic) he screws up.

The only way Trump might be seen more favorably in the future is if society goes the same way as it did in the movie Idiocricy.
It boggles the imagination that somebody could be that wrong so often. But if you step back a bit and think about it, there is not one action Trump has taken that has not benefitted, directly or indirectly, his buddy Vladimir.
__________________
"When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder.
"It looks like the saddest, most crookedest candy corn in an otherwise normal bag of candy corns." Stormy Daniels
I hate bigots.
fishbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 02:28 AM   #124
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Yes, yes, the Biden bros are quite good at twisting the arm of the hostage to make them squeal in pain.

There's never a good time to question why "lesser evil" is the only option with these people.

Failure to act boldly is worthy of scorn if the moment demands it. The right is stampeding towards reactionary politics and open fascism and the best the DNC can put up is lowering the medicare age by 5 years.

These people would rather lose to Trump than betray their corporate masters. It's plain as day.
It seems to me that it is you who would rather lose to Trump than vote for someone that isn't pure enough.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 04:22 AM   #125
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
It seems to me that it is you who would rather lose to Trump than vote for someone that isn't pure enough.
It strikes me that the corporate democrats would rather retain control of a minority party rather than make the necessary changes to ensure victory. Pelosi would be perfectly content to clap back at Trump for another 4 years, so long as her position remained safe.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 04:35 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 04:44 AM   #126
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
It strikes me that the corporate democrats would rather retain control of a minority party rather than make the necessary changes to ensure victory. Pelosi would be perfectly content to clap back at Trump for another 4 years, so long as her position remained safe.
But it wasn't the corporate Democrats who brought Biden to victory. It was the primary voters. It doesn't matter anyway, because in the situation we're in, it is you who are risking another 4 years of Trump because you are sour your guy didn't win the primary.

That's fine. Be sour. Take a couple of months. Just vote Biden in november, because not doing so is not irresponsible.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 04:45 AM   #127
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I get that you don't have an answer, but at this point I can't even figure out what your question is.

You said:

"There's never a good time to question why "lesser evil" is the only option with these people."

What option besides "lesser evil" are you wanting to ask them about?

And assuming that when you say you don't know what the options are, then why the **** are you complaining that they don't know either?

Because I gotta say, "there's never a good time to ask people about options nobody can imagine" seems like a perfectly reasonable position for "these people" to take.
The option is for the "lesser evil" party to become less evil.

That's my point with these people. There's never a good time to discuss why they seem to be working at cross purposes with those they claim to represent. There's never a good time to hold them accountable for their failures, because doing so means aiding the worse evil.

We can't question why the party that supposedly wants universal healthcare in this country is so doggedly defending privatization policies that make the goal impossible. We can't question why the political party is moving heaven and earth to prevent primary challenges against entrenched candidates in safe districts.

Time and time again, it's been shown that the Democratic party is trying to serve two masters and, when the inevitable contradiction arises, is prioritizing their corporate paymasters over their constituents. But there's never an acceptable time to demand that this change. Vote blue or else someone worse gets in power.

The alternative is to speak plainly about the many failures of the party and demand real accountability. That means we can stop pretending someone like Biden is a good candidate. He is the best candidate on offer at the moment, and by no accident. Perhaps this failure of the party should be discussed too.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 04:53 AM   #128
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
I get the frustration, I really do. But to act on that frustration is to ensure a worse country not just for yourself, but for everyone else as well. The best way to affect change is to get involved with the process. Bernie has managed to change the Democratic party. He has done so indirectly through educating the voters to be more progressive. He has not done so by holding the country hostage to a wannabe dictator, which seemingly is your plan.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 04:55 AM   #129
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
That wasn't my assumption.

Once again, I said that someone who supported and voted for Trump in 2016 but who does not vote for him in 2020 does not help Trump. That didn't 'fail us last time'. That doesn't even make sense in this context. No, it was people who normally voted Democrat who instead chose none of the above combined with the electoral college that won Trump the election last time.



No they were considered battleground states but as I already clarified for you last post it's irrelevant anyway because I was not talking about those states. I'm talking about the states that are overwhelmingly democratic such as California or New York.



No they weren't, you just keep ignoring what was actually said in favor of something easier to argue against. I think there is a term for that.
Once again, those were reasons given in 2016 why it was safe to not even try to stop Trump last time. The Libertarian Party candidate in 2016 even came out and told people to vote for Clinton, not him. But poutraged holier-than-thou privileged children still voted for Johnson, or Stein, or wrote in Sanders, all sure in the knowledge that it was safe because Clinton was going to win. They were wrong.

Now here we are in 2020, we already know the damage Trump has caused to the country and to the progressive causes some here claim to want, but those very same progressives are trying to justify taking the same actions that allowed Trump to win last time. You just keep ignoring what the actual results of your course of action were in favor of making the same error again. Is there a term for that?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:03 AM   #130
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Once again, those were reasons given in 2016 why it was safe to not even try to stop Trump last time. The Libertarian Party candidate in 2016 even came out and told people to vote for Clinton, not him. But poutraged holier-than-thou privileged children still voted for Johnson, or Stein, or wrote in Sanders, all sure in the knowledge that it was safe because Clinton was going to win. They were wrong.

Now here we are in 2020, we already know the damage Trump has caused to the country and to the progressive causes some here claim to want, but those very same progressives are trying to justify taking the same actions that allowed Trump to win last time. You just keep ignoring what the actual results of your course of action were in favor of making the same error again. Is there a term for that?
I know politics isn't an exact science, and that makes such assessments difficult, but...

Is there any credible political analysis out there that has third party voters as a driving factor in Hillary's loss in 2016?

There has been a lot of thoughtful analysis of the Hillary campaign that has identified several key factors in her loss: the series of unforced errors she handed to Trump, her lackluster campaign message, her intensely unpopular persona, her cavalier attitude to campaigning in key states, etc etc.

If there was a perception that HRC was a sure thing, it was heavily enabled by HRC herself by the way she treated the entire process as a prolonged coronation. Jill Stein didn't make that happen, neither did Gary Johnson or Bernie Sanders or Vermin Supreme or any other write-in candidate.

No, let's focus on Jill Stein voters. Anything to take the critical eye to outside the party, rather than hold those in power accountable for their failures.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 05:05 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:06 AM   #131
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
The option is for the "lesser evil" party to become less evil.

That's my point with these people. There's never a good time to discuss why they seem to be working at cross purposes with those they claim to represent. There's never a good time to hold them accountable for their failures, because doing so means aiding the worse evil.

We can't question why the party that supposedly wants universal healthcare in this country is so doggedly defending privatization policies that make the goal impossible. We can't question why the political party is moving heaven and earth to prevent primary challenges against entrenched candidates in safe districts.

Time and time again, it's been shown that the Democratic party is trying to serve two masters and, when the inevitable contradiction arises, is prioritizing their corporate paymasters over their constituents. But there's never an acceptable time to demand that this change. Vote blue or else someone worse gets in power.

The alternative is to speak plainly about the many failures of the party and demand real accountability. That means we can stop pretending someone like Biden is a good candidate. He is the best candidate on offer at the moment, and by no accident. Perhaps this failure of the party should be discussed too.
Why is it that when the Democrats are not in power, and are fighting to get in power, that is the best time to demand accountability, complain about the party, disparage the candidate with outright falsehoods, etc? If you want Dems to work for your goals, you shouldn't do your best to prevent them from being in a position to work for your goals.

Especially, as you know, because the Reps are actively working against your goals.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:11 AM   #132
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I know politics isn't an exact science, and that makes such assessments difficult, but...

Is there any credible political analysis out there that has third party voters as a driving factor in Hillary's loss in 2016?

There has been a lot of thoughtful analysis of the Hillary campaign that has identified several key factors in her loss: the series of unforced errors she handed to Trump, her lackluster campaign message, her intensely unpopular persona, her cavalier attitude to campaigning in key states, etc etc.

If there was a perception that HRC was a sure thing, it was heavily enabled by HRC herself by the way she treated the entire process as a prolonged coronation. Jill Stein didn't make that happen, neither did Gary Johnson or Bernie Sanders or Vermin Supreme or any other write-in candidate.

No, let's focus on Jill Stein voters. Anything to take the critical eye to outside the party, rather than hold those in power accountable for their failures.
It's clear you don't get complicated explanations for complicated situations. No one factor was the one and only reason. There is no focus on and blame only for Stein voters, they were one of the many factors leading to a loss. Heck, they were one of several that I listed in the post you quoted, but you still claim I said only them?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:19 AM   #133
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
It's clear you don't get complicated explanations for complicated situations. No one factor was the one and only reason. There is no focus on and blame only for Stein voters, they were one of the many factors leading to a loss. Heck, they were one of several that I listed in the post you quoted, but you still claim I said only them?
I see no reputable analysis that finds third party candidates as playing any substantial role in HRC's disastrous loss. The Libertarian ticket was the highest vote getter of the third party candidates, and it's probably safe to generalize these voters as likely conservatives that would not have voted for Hillary as a second choice. Gary Johnson probably helped Hillary more than Stein hurt her, and she still lost.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...gh-but-he-did/


Most seem to focus on Hillary's many scandals (real and imagined), her completely uninspiring campaign message, and her failure to prioritize swing states.

Even mentioning third party candidates is giving them way too much influence in this context.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 05:24 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:23 AM   #134
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I see no reputable analysis that finds third party candidates as playing any substantial role in HRC's disastrous loss.

Most seem to focus on Hillary's many scandals (real and imagined), her completely uninspiring campaign message, and her failure to prioritize swing states.

Even mentioning third party candidates is giving them way too much influence in this context.
Clinton lost Michigan in 2016 by 0.3 percent of the vote. Stein got 1.1% of the vote, and the candidate that actually told voters to vote for Clinton instead of him got 3.6% of the vote.

Clinton lost Wisconsin by 0.7%. Johnson (he who told people to vote Clinton instead of Johnson) got 3.6%, Stein got 1%, and write in/other was 1.2%

Care to revise your claim?

Last edited by wareyin; 21st April 2020 at 05:26 AM.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:25 AM   #135
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Clinton lost Michigan in 2016 by 0.3 percent of the vote. Stein got 1.1% of the vote, and the candidate that actually told voters to vote for Clinton instead of him got 3.6% of the vote.

Care to revise your claim?
See my edit.

Do you think Libertarians would have voted for Clinton as their second choice? Regardless of Johnson directed these conservative wingnuts to do, they weren't going to vote for HRC. That's absurd.

It seems overwhelmingly likely that Johnson mostly siphoned likely Trump voters and aided Hillary with a record (for them) Libertarian turnout, and she still lost.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 05:27 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:28 AM   #136
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
See my edit.

Do you think Libertarians would have voted for Clinton as their second choice? Regardless of Johnson directed these conservative wingnuts to do, they weren't going to vote for HRC. That's absurd.
When you claim third party candidates played no significant role, and I gave you 2 pivotal states that Clinton lost by less than 1% while third party votes topped 5%, this is your response?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:34 AM   #137
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
When you claim third party candidates played no significant role, and I gave you 2 pivotal states that Clinton lost by less than 1% while third party votes topped 5%, this is your response?
The only play a pivotal role if you apply tortured math to a tiny fraction of voters who went third party. Yes, if you apply fantasy scenarios in which a majority of these third party candidates voted for Hillary, she may have won. Is there any reason to believe this is what these voters would have ever done? No, of course not. In what world do Libertarians vote for HRC at higher rates than a conservative like Trump?

instead of trying to divine the intentions of people who deliberately cast votes for nonviable candidates, perhaps it is best considering why Clinton was running such razor thin margins in key states. Perhaps it has something to do with the rather poor turnout results, which we know tends to hurt Democrats.

Edit: Johnson told his supporters to vote Hillary and they still had a record turnout for LP. These voters rejected an explicit plea from their own leader to support Hillary. How can you suggest that they should be counted as lost HRC votes?

A baseball pitcher sets up on the mound. He winds up, trips over his own shoelaces and throws the ball directly into the dirt. Later, he blames the failed pitch on a 2 mph crosswind.

This is what Hillary revisionists sound like when they talk about Gary Johnson in 2016.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 05:44 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:42 AM   #138
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
The only play a pivotal role if you apply tortured math to a tiny fraction of voters who went third party. Yes, if you apply fantasy scenarios in which a majority of these third party candidates voted for Hillary, she may have won. Is there any reason to believe this is what these voters would have ever done? No, of course not.

instead of trying to divine the intentions of people who deliberately cast votes for nonviable candidates, perhaps it is best considering why Clinton was running such razor thin margins in key states. Perhaps it has something to do with the rather poor turnout results, which we know tends to hurt Democrats.
The discussion is about the results of those 5% of voters affecting the results when Trump won by 0.3% of the vote in one state and 0.7% in another. This is evidence that the course of action being proposed by you and The_Animus had the result of helping Trump win last time, and will likely do so again. Your response of complaining about the last candidate and now the current candidate? Still not going to help further your professed goals. As evidenced by 2016, will further harm your goals, possibly make them impossible to approach within your lifetime. But hey, you can lead a horse to water and all.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 05:47 AM   #139
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
The discussion is about the results of those 5% of voters affecting the results when Trump won by 0.3% of the vote in one state and 0.7% in another. This is evidence that the course of action being proposed by you and The_Animus had the result of helping Trump win last time, and will likely do so again. Your response of complaining about the last candidate and now the current candidate? Still not going to help further your professed goals. As evidenced by 2016, will further harm your goals, possibly make them impossible to approach within your lifetime. But hey, you can lead a horse to water and all.
Yes, they affected the results as they made the race more winnable for HRC, and she still failed. Gary Johnson narrowed the race for Hillary and she still couldn't get enough people out to vote for her. Her lackluster campaign completely failed to mobilize the traditional Democratic coalition.

We should be so lucky to have disaffected conservatives pissing away their votes for LP in 2020. Between that and nominating a conservative dinosaur like Biden, the party should pick up all the never-Trump conservatives that are floating around out there.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 05:51 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:05 AM   #140
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 9,368
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
But it wasn't the corporate Democrats who brought Biden to victory. It was the primary voters.
...which includes any supporters of corporate democrats who might be out there somewhere, plus people who think a non-corporate candidate is better but get duped into voting otherwise by "ELECTABLE!!!", largely because of the myths they're told by corporate media.

Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
...risking another 4 years of Trump because you are sour your guy didn't win the primary.
When you've already been told what people who think differently from you actually think more than once, what do you think is the point of perpetually lying about that reasoning, to the very same people whose reasoning it is that you're lying about? You know you can't fool somebody into thinking he thought something he didn't think. So who is this show being put on for? Just the others who keep reciting the same lies as you?

Last edited by Delvo; 21st April 2020 at 06:15 AM.
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:18 AM   #141
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
...which includes any supporters of corporate democrats who might be out there somewhere, plus people who think a non-corporate candidate is better but get duped into voting otherwise by "ELECTABLE!!!", largely because of the myths they're told by corporate media.

When you've already been told what people who think differently from you actually think more than once, what do you think is the point of perpetually lying about that reasoning, to the very same people whose reasoning it is that you're lying about? You know you can't fool somebody into thinking he thought something he didn't think. So who is this show being put on for? Just the others who keep reciting the same lies as you?
What am I lying about exactly? Are you not sour Bernie didn't win? Is that not the reason you are here telling everyone you'll "vote your concience" in November - the most important election in your lifetime, where the stakes are the continuation of Democracy in the US?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:28 AM   #142
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
What am I lying about exactly? Are you not sour Bernie didn't win? Is that not the reason you are here telling everyone you'll "vote your concience" in November - the most important election in your lifetime, where the stakes are the continuation of Democracy in the US?
If Trump wins MA, I'll videotape myself eating my steel toe boot. Arguments about lesser evil have no legitimacy in the deep blue state of MA. Safe Democratic states and districts are exactly the place to start dragging the party to the left.

The party will never change unless they are facing credible threats.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 06:36 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:38 AM   #143
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
If Trump wins MA, I'll videotape myself eating my steel toe boot. Arguments about lesser evil have no legitimacy in the deep blue state of MA. Safe Democratic states and districts are exactly the place to start dragging the party to the left.
If Trump wins MA there will be worse consequences than you eating your footwear. The issue isn't that you probably couldn't vote for someone else and not affect Biden's chances. You probably could. The issue is that it's morally repugnant to do so. Because by doing so, you are relying on everyone else doing the right thing while not doing so yourself. You are shirking responsibility at a time of national crisis.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:39 AM   #144
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 9,368
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
What am I lying about exactly? Are you not sour Bernie didn't win? Is that not the reason you are here telling everyone you'll "vote your concience" in November - the most important election in your lifetime, where the stakes are the continuation of Democracy in the US?
Wow... not only lying about being mystified about what your prior lies could possibly have been (such a mysterious mystery to the liar who lied them in the first place), but even throwing in one more new extra lie on the pile.

Nevermind then.
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:41 AM   #145
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
Wow... not only lying about being mystified about what your prior lies could possibly have been (such a mysterious mystery to the liar who lied them in the first place), but even throwing in one more new extra lie on the pile.

Nevermind then.
Wouldn't it have been easier to point out my lies? Now you're forcing me to repeat my question. What did I lie about? Put up, or kindly shut up.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:45 AM   #146
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,058
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
See my edit.

Do you think Libertarians would have voted for Clinton as their second choice? Regardless of Johnson directed these conservative wingnuts to do, they weren't going to vote for HRC. That's absurd.

It seems overwhelmingly likely that Johnson mostly siphoned likely Trump voters and aided Hillary with a record (for them) Libertarian turnout, and she still lost.
I am Libertarian, and I would have. I was in fear for the country when Trump won. I thought he was an incompetent boob, a failed reality star and divisive.

I had no idea he would pile up over 40,000 bodies by April of 2020, because he had no care for pandemic planning and execution, and would engage in wishful thinking for 2 months.

This is no longer about Policy, or Health Care access, or Judges.

This is pure human survival. Whining about Biden and the DNC and "Corporations" is whistling by a very real graveyard.

No longer has the question "Is this the hill you want to die on?" been so literal, except in maybe wartime.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:55 AM   #147
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
If Trump wins MA there will be worse consequences than you eating your footwear. The issue isn't that you probably couldn't vote for someone else and not affect Biden's chances. You probably could. The issue is that it's morally repugnant to do so. Because by doing so, you are relying on everyone else doing the right thing while not doing so yourself. You are shirking responsibility at a time of national crisis.
That's a tough spot, because lending legitimacy to the "lesser evil" seems like a morally objectionable, if pragmatic, approach to voting.

Harm reduction is only viable in situations where harm can actually be reduced. I have no opportunity to do so. No one in MA has an obligation to add to the Biden dogpile in 2020, that's absurd.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 06:56 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:56 AM   #148
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
I am Libertarian, and I would have. I was in fear for the country when Trump won. I thought he was an incompetent boob, a failed reality star and divisive.

I had no idea he would pile up over 40,000 bodies by April of 2020, because he had no care for pandemic planning and execution, and would engage in wishful thinking for 2 months.

This is no longer about Policy, or Health Care access, or Judges.

This is pure human survival. Whining about Biden and the DNC and "Corporations" is whistling by a very real graveyard.

No longer has the question "Is this the hill you want to die on?" been so literal, except in maybe wartime.
Indeed, in the liberal state of MA there have still been over 1800 deaths so far. But it's more important to some to stop the competent people who would handle the crisis than it is to actually stop the guy who has caused such high numbers.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 06:58 AM   #149
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
That's a tough spot, because lending legitimacy to the "lesser evil" seems like a morally objectionable, if pragmatic, approach to voting.

Harm reduction is only viable in situations where harm can actually be reduced. I have no opportunity to do so. No one in MA has an obligation to add to the Biden dogpile in 2020, that's absurd.
When you find it morally objectionable to prevent the greater evil, you should get your morals calibrated.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:00 AM   #150
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: People's Democratic Republic of Planet X
Posts: 40,935
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
I am Libertarian, and I would have. I was in fear for the country when Trump won. I thought he was an incompetent boob, a failed reality star and divisive.

I had no idea he would pile up over 40,000 bodies by April of 2020, because he had no care for pandemic planning and execution, and would engage in wishful thinking for 2 months.

This is no longer about Policy, or Health Care access, or Judges.

This is pure human survival. Whining about Biden and the DNC and "Corporations" is whistling by a very real graveyard.

No longer has the question "Is this the hill you want to die on?" been so literal, except in maybe wartime.
This.

I voted for Bernie in the NH primary. I will be voting for Biden in November. I live in a state where every vote matters.

We are not going to get progress in America if there is no America left by the time Trump is done destroying it. This isn't the time to bicker about details. There may be no America in four years if Trump is reelected.
__________________
If being a twat was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set.
"...just as a magnet attracts iron filings, Trump shemp attracts, and is attracted to, louts." - George Will
"[shemp is] a most notable coward, an infinite and endless liar, an hourly promise breaker, the owner of no one good quality." - Shakespeare

Last edited by shemp; 21st April 2020 at 07:01 AM.
shemp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:02 AM   #151
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
That's a tough spot, because lending legitimacy to the "lesser evil" seems like a morally objectionable, if pragmatic, approach to voting.

Harm reduction is only viable in situations where harm can actually be reduced. I have no opportunity to do so. No one in MA has an obligation to add to the Biden dogpile in 2020, that's absurd.
Like I said, you are relying on other people doing the right thing without doing it yourself.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:02 AM   #152
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
When you find it morally objectionable to prevent the greater evil, you should get your morals calibrated.
The entire predication of the "lesser evil" argument is that, if you game it out, there are really only two choices.

That same game theory also reveals that MA is not really a contested state.

I would encourage anyone in a swing state to think very deeply about the position they are in and what it means to not vote for Biden.

I have no qualms telling someone in an non-swing state to vote Vermin Supreme.

Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Like I said, you are relying on other people doing the right thing without doing it yourself.
I happen to think I am doing the right thing and that everyone else is endorsing a status quo that allows for easily preventable suffering to continue in order to benefit the rich.

Luckily, I don't have to confront practical realities because the system has decided that my vote is largely meaningless. Lucky me.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st April 2020 at 07:03 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:07 AM   #153
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I happen to think I am doing the right thing and that everyone else is endorsing a status quo that allows for easily preventable suffering to continue in order to benefit the rich.

Luckily, I don't have to confront practical realities because the system has decided that my vote is largely meaningless. Lucky me.
You think wrong. You are counting on Biden winning in order to justify your vote for "your conciousness". The only way that happens is if other people vote for him. You are using a privilege in order to accomplish nothing but stoking your own ego.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:09 AM   #154
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,601
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
You think wrong. You are counting on Biden winning in order to justify your vote for "your conciousness". The only way that happens is if other people vote for him. You are using a privilege in order to accomplish nothing but stoking your own ego.
I would prefer if neither Biden nor Trump won. I would be very happy if lots of other people who are picking up my slack joined me and ditched both of these ghouls.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:10 AM   #155
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: People's Democratic Republic of Planet X
Posts: 40,935
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Indeed, in the liberal state of MA there have still been over 1800 deaths so far. But it's more important to some to stop the competent people who would handle the crisis than it is to actually stop the guy who has caused such high numbers.
Charlie Baker is the one Republican governor who could stand up to Trump and denounce him, and still get reelected. Baker's poll numbers are ridiculously high, even among Democrats.

I dream of a group of Republican governors who are closer to the center (Baker, perhaps Sununu of NH, Hogan of Maryland, maybe even DeWine of Ohio) coming together and denouncing Trump, stating the truth: that Trump's actions have killed thousands of people in their states, and that their duty is to the people of their states, ALL the people not just Trump supporters, and refusing to endorse him for reelection or even endorsing Biden. It might ruin their careers, or it might make them heroes in their states. I'm sure Baker would get reelected anyway, and under these circumstances, Sununu would get my vote in November. Won't happen, of course.
__________________
If being a twat was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set.
"...just as a magnet attracts iron filings, Trump shemp attracts, and is attracted to, louts." - George Will
"[shemp is] a most notable coward, an infinite and endless liar, an hourly promise breaker, the owner of no one good quality." - Shakespeare
shemp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:11 AM   #156
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,181
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I would prefer if neither Biden nor Trump won. I would be very happy if lots of other people who are picking up my slack joined me and ditched both of these ghouls.
The result of that would be a Trump victory, and I think you know that.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:11 AM   #157
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,314
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
That's a tough spot, because lending legitimacy to the "lesser evil" seems like a morally objectionable, if pragmatic, approach to voting.

Harm reduction is only viable in situations where harm can actually be reduced. I have no opportunity to do so. No one in MA has an obligation to add to the Biden dogpile in 2020, that's absurd.
It's only pragmatic in the short term.

If you don't have any lines in the sand that will cause you to vote third party (or decline to vote), then there is no limit to how corrupt, and self serving each party can be, so long as they can pass themselves off as marginally better than the other guy. The possibility of people walking away to third parties keeps the main two, at least, somewhat constrained.

If you don't want to endlessly be presented with the choice between a douche and a turd sandwich, eventually to have to start rejecting both.

Last edited by shuttlt; 21st April 2020 at 07:17 AM.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:24 AM   #158
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
If you don't want to endlessly be presented with the choice between a douche and a turd sandwich, eventually to have to start rejecting both.
It is certainly true that the Republican Party is attempting to take away the ability to vote. In that sense, yes, not stopping the Republican party will stop your (for US voters) being presented with a choice.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 07:40 AM   #159
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,314
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
It is certainly true that the Republican Party is attempting to take away the ability to vote. In that sense, yes, not stopping the Republican party will stop your (for US voters) being presented with a choice.
In that case, you should keep voting Democrat and the party will have no motive to not be corrupt. The Republican's will be able to point to the corruption of the Democrats and scare their voters into playing the same game. If there isn't a limit beyond which you won't vote for them, it's a race to the bottom.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2020, 08:05 AM   #160
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,710
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
The option is for the "lesser evil" party to become less evil.
I know things get pretty contentious, and that there's a lot of active dislike between us. So thank you for taking the time to give me a civil and thoughtful answer. Several in a row, in fact.

Quote:
That's my point with these people. There's never a good time to discuss why they seem to be working at cross purposes with those they claim to represent. There's never a good time to hold them accountable for their failures, because doing so means aiding the worse evil.
I think the party gets about three years to do this kind of discussion. The fourth year, the election year where the party is trying to get its head together and wrest the presidency from a terrible incumbent, is probably not the right time. I think you're getting pushback mostly because people are baffled that you don't agree with this.

Quote:
We can't question why the party that supposedly wants universal healthcare in this country is so doggedly defending privatization policies that make the goal impossible. We can't question why the political party is moving heaven and earth to prevent primary challenges against entrenched candidates in safe districts.

Time and time again, it's been shown that the Democratic party is trying to serve two masters and, when the inevitable contradiction arises, is prioritizing their corporate paymasters over their constituents. But there's never an acceptable time to demand that this change. Vote blue or else someone worse gets in power.
I think you may need to reconsider your overall strategy. Americans are pretty conservative, overall. Even the progressives aren't often revolutionary progressives. A lot of Americans - Republicans and Democrats alike - want to make incremental improvements to some things. Very few Americans want to make revolutionary changes to everything. This dynamic becomes more clear the more specific and concrete you get with your policy proposals.

Even progressive policy has to orbit the attractor at the center of America's Overton Window.

Quote:
The alternative is to speak plainly about the many failures of the party and demand real accountability. That means we can stop pretending someone like Biden is a good candidate. He is the best candidate on offer at the moment, and by no accident. Perhaps this failure of the party should be discussed too.
People are questioning the propriety of waiting until the party is in the middle of a presidential election, trying to support a candidate to beat a terrible incumbent from the other party, to launch your full-throated condemnation of the party and undermining of the candidate.

I think most people on the left would have been very tolerant, even supportive, if you'd spent three years condemning the party for its failures, and then spent the fourth year withholding your condemnation in favor of actually winning an election.

Especially if your condemnation isn't working, because you're trying to drag the party further left than most progressive Americans want to go. If you haven't had much success for the past three years, what makes you think the fourth year is the right time to double down on your attacks, instead of supporting Biden against Trump, and thinking about how you're going to adjust your strategy for the three years that follow?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:19 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.