ISF Logo   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 , joe biden , presidential candidates

Reply
Old 29th May 2020, 05:57 AM   #161
TellyKNeasuss
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,441
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Who is your intended audience, for this appeal to incredulity? I hope it's not me.
If I state that if I flip a coin 10 times I am unlikely to get 10 "heads", am I making an "appeal to incredulity"?
__________________
"Facts are stupid things."
Ronald Reagan


TellyKNeasuss 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 29th May 2020, 05:59 AM   #162
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by TellyKNeasuss View Post
If I state that if I flip a coin 10 times I am unlikely to get 10 "heads", am I making an "appeal to incredulity"?
Who is your intended audience for your argument, regardless of how you characterize it?
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 06:08 AM   #163
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Perhaps it's time for a moderator to split this thread, so those who want to have their self-described infinite argument over Reade's credibility can troll each other elsewhere? It's obvious none of those involved are ever going to move on from that subtopic, and their childish exchange is preventing everybody else from discussing the topic. Which is Biden, not the nature of credibility or other posters' feelings on the nature of belief.
I tried to bring up what I interpret as Klobuchar losing her shot at being Biden's VP, but nobody wanted to respond to that. I feel your pain.
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 29th May 2020, 06:25 AM   #164
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
I tried to bring up what I interpret as Klobuchar losing her shot at being Biden's VP, but nobody wanted to respond to that. I feel your pain.
I'm sorry I missed this. If you can link to the post, I'll happily respond to it.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 06:48 AM   #165
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm sorry I missed this. If you can link to the post, I'll happily respond to it.
Post #149
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 29th May 2020, 06:55 AM   #166
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 20,514
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/polit..._blogfooterold

It's nice to see there are some Republicans who still love their country. A group Republicans got together and is running TV and digital ads to get conservatives to vote for Biden and return to American values.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 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 29th May 2020, 07:14 AM   #167
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Looks like Klobuchar's chances of getting the VP spot may have dropped. Apparently she chose not to prosecute the Police Officer who murdered Floyd in a previous excessive force citation while she was the county attorney. Whether or not that action was justified, it will definitely cause Biden to lose votes if he picks her.
Lose votes from whom, though?

Because of the way votes are allocated by the EC, a lot of votes for president are actually redundant. Biden could lose a lot of votes in some blue states, and it wouldn't change the outcome at all. On the other hand, losing a few votes in a few swing states could change everything.

The question when picking a VP isn't, "will I gain or lose votes?" The question is, "which votes will I gain, which will I lose, and which do I need to win?"

Also, every potential pick is going to have dirt on them somewhere. It's not hard to dig it up. The real concern is whether or not the media decides to make something of it, and whether people actually decide to care. If Biden picks Klobuchar, and the media doesn't start blasting the message that she's a bad pick and Biden is a bad candidate for this reason, then it won't matter.

I almost wish he would pick Klobuchar, just to see what would happen. Would Fox News run with the above story? Would their audience overlap with the votes Biden needs, enough for it to matter?

Which PACs would run campaign ads about it? I guess that's probably the real concern: Biden picks Klobuchar, and right-wing PACs start running attack ads on this point in states where Biden needs to keep or gain votes.

So the goal is to pick a candidate whose unavoidable dirt isn't the kind of thing that turns to mud and sticks in swing states (or whatever demographic Biden needs his VP to pick up votes with*).
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 07:20 AM   #168
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,657
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I almost wish he would pick Klobuchar, just to see what would happen. Would Fox News run with the above story? Would their audience overlap with the votes Biden needs, enough for it to matter?

Which PACs would run campaign ads about it? I guess that's probably the real concern: Biden picks Klobuchar, and right-wing PACs start running attack ads on this point in states where Biden needs to keep or gain votes.
Do you think for a second that they wouldn't?
Beelzebuddy 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 29th May 2020, 07:32 AM   #169
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 56,435
I think the sort of person who would object to any of the VP choices is already holding their nose to vote for Biden. If they're overcoming their dislike of Biden himself already, then why would the VP matter? It's not going to be a tipping point for people who already loathe Biden and are voting for him anyway.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 29th May 2020, 07:37 AM   #170
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 10,994
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
.....
Also, every potential pick is going to have dirt on them somewhere. It's not hard to dig it up. The real concern is whether or not the media decides to make something of it, and whether people actually decide to care. If Biden picks Klobuchar, and the media doesn't start blasting the message that she's a bad pick and Biden is a bad candidate for this reason, then it won't matter.
.....
There's dirt, and then there's dirt. If Klobuchar had a proven history of letting bad cops walk while prosecuting minorities for lesser crimes, it's a legitimate criticism and a political deficiency.
https://nypost.com/2020/05/29/amy-kl...prosecute-cop/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...5e6_story.html
Bob001 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 29th May 2020, 07:37 AM   #171
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Lose votes from whom, though?
Lose votes from those who would otherwise support him. Biden currently has support from most black voters. Picking someone that a significant number of black voters have good reason to be upset with will certainly cause a loss of at least some of those votes. It would give ammo to the dishonest trolls promoting the "both sides are the same" idea all over social media, and people stay home when they think it doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Because of the way votes are allocated by the EC, a lot of votes for president are actually redundant. Biden could lose a lot of votes in some blue states, and it wouldn't change the outcome at all. On the other hand, losing a few votes in a few swing states could change everything.
Trump seems to think he can win Minnesota. Biden picking a VP that a lot of Minnesotans are unhappy with would help Trump.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The question when picking a VP isn't, "will I gain or lose votes?" The question is, "which votes will I gain, which will I lose, and which do I need to win?"

Also, every potential pick is going to have dirt on them somewhere. It's not hard to dig it up. The real concern is whether or not the media decides to make something of it, and whether people actually decide to care. If Biden picks Klobuchar, and the media doesn't start blasting the message that she's a bad pick and Biden is a bad candidate for this reason, then it won't matter.
There have been riots in multiple states over the killing of Floyd. Klobuchar chose not to prosecute the officer for a similar but lesser offence than the one causing riots. This to you is merely dirt that would have to be dug up?

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I almost wish he would pick Klobuchar, just to see what would happen. Would Fox News run with the above story? Would their audience overlap with the votes Biden needs, enough for it to matter?

Which PACs would run campaign ads about it? I guess that's probably the real concern: Biden picks Klobuchar, and right-wing PACs start running attack ads on this point in states where Biden needs to keep or gain votes.

So the goal is to pick a candidate whose unavoidable dirt isn't the kind of thing that turns to mud and sticks in swing states (or whatever demographic Biden needs his VP to pick up votes with*).
Fox News would certainly run with the story, as would the rest of the right-wing noise machine. It's too obvious, too controversial, and too immediate in the minds of voters not to.

Last edited by wareyin; 29th May 2020 at 07:39 AM. Reason: copy pasta error
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 29th May 2020, 07:49 AM   #172
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
Do you think for a second that they wouldn't?
Time, money, and advertising slots are all limited resources. They might decide that some other line of attack is a better use of those resources. The Tara Reade thing, for example, or Biden's obvious senility.

Attacking Biden/Klobuchar 2020 over the Floyd cop thing at least has the merit of being a valid objection, even if it is being raised for cynical partisan advantage, rather than a sincere concern about putting the best candidate forward.

The way I see it:

Would Klobuchar get hammered by right-wing PACs about the Floyd Cop Thing, if Biden picks her?

Probably yes.

Would it matter to Biden's election chances?

I don't know. I think it depends on the details of voter demographics and which votes Biden needs to win. I don't have good info on this, though.

It's funny that wareyin is complaining about not discussing Biden's VP options and implications. Some of us, including me, were on that topic a few days ago. Then it turned into an Abrams-Onion slapfight, and then swung right back to bUt tArA ReAdE ThO. With even wareyin getting right back in on that action.

If you want to talk about Biden's veep options, talk about Biden's veep options. Stacy and Telly aren't forcing you to stay stuck on their topic.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 07:59 AM   #173
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
There's dirt, and then there's dirt. If Klobuchar had a proven history of letting bad cops walk while prosecuting minorities for lesser crimes, it's a legitimate criticism and a political deficiency.
https://nypost.com/2020/05/29/amy-kl...prosecute-cop/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...5e6_story.html
I agree that it's a legitimate criticism*. I'm not sure it's actually a political deficiency in this particular context. I think it probably is, but again, it comes down to electoral demographics.

It would be a political deficiency for Klobuchar during the primaries, when she's trying to convince a majority of Democrats to nominate her. But that ship has already sailed.

There's always the possibility that this all blows over by the convention, and attack ads at that point will just fall flat.

I don't have the answers, but I think those are the kinds of questions that probably get asked when selecting a VP. So that's kind of what I'm watching for, in the run-up to the convention.

---
*In principle. I'm not sure it's legitimate to criticize her for cynical partisan advantage.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 08:02 AM   #174
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I think the sort of person who would object to any of the VP choices is already holding their nose to vote for Biden. If they're overcoming their dislike of Biden himself already, then why would the VP matter? It's not going to be a tipping point for people who already loathe Biden and are voting for him anyway.
I think this is probably true for mainstream Democratic voters. The question is really about undecideds in swing states.

If you subscribe to the theory that there's no such thing as an "undecided" voter, then it's about subsets of voter turnout in swing states. How many left-wing Democrats will stay home in swing states, because Biden isn't leftward enough, or doesn't care enough about police brutality? How many moderate conservatives will bother to turn out, because they're sufficiently motivated to stop a Biden presidency? Etc.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 08:06 AM   #175
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Time, money, and advertising slots are all limited resources. They might decide that some other line of attack is a better use of those resources. The Tara Reade thing, for example, or Biden's obvious senility.

Attacking Biden/Klobuchar 2020 over the Floyd cop thing at least has the merit of being a valid objection, even if it is being raised for cynical partisan advantage, rather than a sincere concern about putting the best candidate forward.

The way I see it:

Would Klobuchar get hammered by right-wing PACs about the Floyd Cop Thing, if Biden picks her?

Probably yes.

Would it matter to Biden's election chances?

I don't know. I think it depends on the details of voter demographics and which votes Biden needs to win. I don't have good info on this, though.
Unfortunately for the state of US Politics, Biden basically needs every vote to win. Trump and the GOP are consistently winning elections with fewer voters than their competition already. Any further loss, especially in potential swing states like Minnesota, will be devastating.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It's funny that wareyin is complaining about not discussing Biden's VP options and implications. Some of us, including me, were on that topic a few days ago. Then it turned into an Abrams-Onion slapfight, and then swung right back to bUt tArA ReAdE ThO. With even wareyin getting right back in on that action.
1:Abrams was and still is a potential VP pick, despite certain conservative posters getting fooled by satire pieces.
2:Sorry for responding to you about Reade. It doesn't quite seem honest to complain that people respond to you about stuff you post, but if that's the way you want to roll...

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
If you want to talk about Biden's veep options, talk about Biden's veep options. Stacy and Telly theprestige and xjx388 aren't forcing you to stay stuck on their topic.
ftfy
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 29th May 2020, 08:12 AM   #176
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 10,994
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I think the sort of person who would object to any of the VP choices is already holding their nose to vote for Biden. If they're overcoming their dislike of Biden himself already, then why would the VP matter? It's not going to be a tipping point for people who already loathe Biden and are voting for him anyway.

The VP choice always matters. McCain hurt himself badly by picking Sarah Palin. Newcomer Obama strengthened his ticket by picking one of the most respected and experienced (and white male) senators. I think Hillary hurt herself by picking competent and inoffensive Tim Kaine rather than somebody who could function as an attack dog against Trump. I don't think too many potential Biden voters will turn to Trump, but they might just stay home if they don't like his VP.
Bob001 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 29th May 2020, 08:17 AM   #177
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Unfortunately for the state of US Politics, Biden basically needs every vote to win. Trump and the GOP are consistently winning elections with fewer voters than their competition already. Any further loss, especially in potential swing states like Minnesota, will be devastating.



1:Abrams was and still is a potential VP pick, despite certain conservative posters getting fooled by satire pieces.
2:Sorry for responding to you about Reade. It doesn't quite seem honest to complain that people respond to you about stuff you post, but if that's the way you want to roll...



ftfy
LOL. And yet you keep getting stuck on it.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 08:25 AM   #178
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
The VP choice always matters. McCain hurt himself badly by picking Sarah Palin. Newcomer Obama strengthened his ticket by picking one of the most respected and experienced (and white male) senators. I think Hillary hurt herself by picking competent and inoffensive Tim Kaine rather than somebody who could function as an attack dog against Trump. I don't think too many potential Biden voters will turn to Trump, but they might just stay home if they don't like his VP.
Exactly. Personally a much younger me was turned off of Gore by his pick of Lieberman. I was already unhappy that Gore's wife was very pro-censorship of music, and Lieberman's pro-censorship stance was the tipping point.
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 29th May 2020, 08:27 AM   #179
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
LOL. And yet you keep getting stuck on it.
What, that Minnesota is a potential swing state and that picking someone Minnesotans are unhappy with would be a bad idea?
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 29th May 2020, 08:28 AM   #180
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 56,435
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
What, that Minnesota is a potential swing state and that picking someone Minnesotans are unhappy with would be a bad idea?
Aren't Minnesota busy being on fire with riots at the moment? Surely whatever's left of the place by November will have bigger fishes to pizza.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 29th May 2020, 08:31 AM   #181
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 10,994
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Exactly. Personally a much younger me was turned off of Gore by his pick of Lieberman. I was already unhappy that Gore's wife was very pro-censorship of music, and Lieberman's pro-censorship stance was the tipping point.
It's hard to believe that it was 20 years ago.
Bob001 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 29th May 2020, 08:32 AM   #182
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 56,435
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It's hard to believe that it was 20 years ago.
It was a prior millenium.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 29th May 2020, 08:34 AM   #183
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
What, that Minnesota is a potential swing state and that picking someone Minnesotans are unhappy with would be a bad idea?
It would probably be a bad idea if he did it today.

It'll probably be a bad idea if he does it at the convention. But maybe not. By the convention, this may have blown over, and there might be other picks that are even worse.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 08:41 AM   #184
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 31,085
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Now, now, what does a history of lying under oath in court at least twice have to do with her credibility regarding lying? Stop smearing her character!
Conservatives used to say that credibility was very important. Now, not so much.


I guess it's refreshing to see that they are finally admitting that they could care less about credibility.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken 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 29th May 2020, 09:05 AM   #185
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,657
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Time, money, and advertising slots are all limited resources. They might decide that some other line of attack is a better use of those resources. The Tara Reade thing, for example, or Biden's obvious senility.

Attacking Biden/Klobuchar 2020 over the Floyd cop thing at least has the merit of being a valid objection, even if it is being raised for cynical partisan advantage, rather than a sincere concern about putting the best candidate forward.

The way I see it:

Would Klobuchar get hammered by right-wing PACs about the Floyd Cop Thing, if Biden picks her?

Probably yes.

Would it matter to Biden's election chances?

I don't know. I think it depends on the details of voter demographics and which votes Biden needs to win. I don't have good info on this, though.

It's funny that wareyin is complaining about not discussing Biden's VP options and implications. Some of us, including me, were on that topic a few days ago. Then it turned into an Abrams-Onion slapfight, and then swung right back to bUt tArA ReAdE ThO. With even wareyin getting right back in on that action.

If you want to talk about Biden's veep options, talk about Biden's veep options. Stacy and Telly aren't forcing you to stay stuck on their topic.
That's a lot of words just to say "of course not."
Beelzebuddy 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 29th May 2020, 09:10 AM   #186
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
That's a lot of words just to say "of course not."
Good thing I was actually saying, "probably, but I'm not sure." Most of the words were there to give some explanation of my thought process for saying that.

Anyway, I apologize for the confusion. Please tell me which of those words made you think I was saying "of course not". I'd like to see if there's anything I can do to avoid confusing you like that in the future.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 10:22 AM   #187
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Aren't Minnesota busy being on fire with riots at the moment? Surely whatever's left of the place by November will have bigger fishes to pizza.
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It would probably be a bad idea if he did it today.

It'll probably be a bad idea if he does it at the convention. But maybe not. By the convention, this may have blown over, and there might be other picks that are even worse.
The VP announcement is slated for August. That's three months away, not a lot of time for people to forget. Will the officers have even been arrested by that point?

The general election is 6 months away. Even if the DA decides to arrest and try the officers involved, will the case have made it before a judge yet?

I think that this will still be fresh in the minds of many voters, especially with daily reminders on Fox and Friends, Limbaugh, and every 2 minutes in a commercial break on TV.
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 29th May 2020, 10:39 AM   #188
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
The VP announcement is slated for August. That's three months away, not a lot of time for people to forget. Will the officers have even been arrested by that point?

The general election is 6 months away. Even if the DA decides to arrest and try the officers involved, will the case have made it before a judge yet?
I see three and six months as being very long time frames, in modern political campaigns.

Quote:
I think that this will still be fresh in the minds of many voters, especially with daily reminders on Fox and Friends, Limbaugh, and every 2 minutes in a commercial break on TV.
I stopped watching TV years ago. They have commercials every two minutes, now?

Anyway, I'm pretty sure it would be a waste of resources to run these ads for the Fox-Limbaugh audience.

What even would be the strategy there? Turn out the conservative vote in Minnesota by telling them Biden is soft on police brutality? "Oh wow, I better vote for Trump; he'll really crack down on all those racist cops!"

It could be used to depress progressive turnout in Minnesota. But not by airing it on Fox and Limbaugh, I think.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 11:03 AM   #189
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I see three and six months as being very long time frames, in modern political campaigns.
You do, huh? I see people bringing up stuff from years or decades ago to use against various candidates. Heck, people are arguing about Obama's "If you like your doctor" claim today in another thread, and he isn't even running. 3-6 months is nothing, and considering that any court case will take at least that long it won't be 3-6 months ago as it's daily news.


Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I stopped watching TV years ago. They have commercials every two minutes, now?
Depends on the show, and the medium.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Anyway, I'm pretty sure it would be a waste of resources to run these ads for the Fox-Limbaugh audience.
Oh, you misunderstand. Fox and Limbaugh will be saying that stuff in their programs, for free. Not charging PACs to run them in the commercial breaks.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What even would be the strategy there? Turn out the conservative vote in Minnesota by telling them Biden is soft on police brutality? "Oh wow, I better vote for Trump; he'll really crack down on all those racist cops!"

It could be used to depress progressive turnout in Minnesota. But not by airing it on Fox and Limbaugh, I think.
Are you seriously asking what the strategy of noted pro-Trump media like Fox and Friends and Rush Limbaugh attacking Trump's opponent would be? Is this some sort of performance theater?
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 29th May 2020, 11:39 AM   #190
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 46,506
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
1:Abrams was and still is a potential VP pick, despite certain conservative posters getting fooled by satire pieces.
Oh, I never doubted that Abrams was still a potential VP pick, and I never said she wasn't. I don't think the odds are in her favor, but I could be wrong and I'm not counting her out anyways. What I mocked was the idea that she could be a serious presidential candidate in 2024. What's the difference? Well, Palin was the actual VP candidate pick in 2008, but she wouldn't have had a shot if she tried running for president in 2012. So it's not at all out of the realm of possibility that Abrams could become the next Palin. What's not within the realm of possibility is her becoming the next Obama.

As for getting fooled by a satire piece, nobody was fooled. I linked to the Bee for the same reason I always link to the Bee: it's often hilarious, including in this case. I've been linking to them for some time, as I already showed, and always with full knowledge that they're satire. What's odd about you trying to pass off the idea of anyone being fooled, though, is that nothing in the Bee link suggests Abrams won't or couldn't get picked. So even if someone had been fooled by it, there wouldn't be any "despite" involved.
__________________
"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
Ziggurat 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 29th May 2020, 12:19 PM   #191
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Oh, I never doubted that Abrams was still a potential VP pick, and I never said she wasn't. I don't think the odds are in her favor, but I could be wrong and I'm not counting her out anyways. What I mocked was the idea that she could be a serious presidential candidate in 2024. What's the difference? Well, Palin was the actual VP candidate pick in 2008, but she wouldn't have had a shot if she tried running for president in 2012. So it's not at all out of the realm of possibility that Abrams could become the next Palin. What's not within the realm of possibility is her becoming the next Obama.
Abrams may not be a good candidate for Pres in 2024. I don't really have a firm opinion on that one. She's definitely not as easy to mock as Sarah Palin, though.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
As for getting fooled by a satire piece, nobody was fooled. I linked to the Bee for the same reason I always link to the Bee: it's often hilarious, including in this case. I've been linking to them for some time, as I already showed, and always with full knowledge that they're satire. What's odd about you trying to pass off the idea of anyone being fooled, though, is that nothing in the Bee link suggests Abrams won't or couldn't get picked. So even if someone had been fooled by it, there wouldn't be any "despite" involved.
Abrams was brought up as a candidate. You cited a satire article (and sure, let's go with that it didn't fool you, no skin off my nose) as to why she wouldn't be a good candidate. Then there was a fair bit of back and forth about informing you that it was satire. theprestige somehow thought that this discussion of potential VP pick Abrams wasn't a discussion of potential VP picks. And, despite the side conversation over whether you were fooled, it was still a conversation about a potential VP pick.

So, yes, despite your claims, despite was accurate to use in a shorthand/single sentence refutation when I didn't feel the need to use a paragraph to explain it.

Then again, I guess if a poster can't accurately remember the conversation over the last couple of days, 3-6 months is going to feel like a lifetime. Huh.
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 29th May 2020, 12:35 PM   #192
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
You do, huh? I see people bringing up stuff from years or decades ago to use against various candidates. Heck, people are arguing about Obama's "If you like your doctor" claim today in another thread, and he isn't even running. 3-6 months is nothing, and considering that any court case will take at least that long it won't be 3-6 months ago as it's daily news.
There's always going to be someone, somewhere, digging up something old. Hell, I pulled up a two year old Michelle Obama quote not to long ago.

But that's a lot different than voters keeping stuff from last week's news cycle at the top of their minds this week, or retaining that interest and outrage for months. Will people remember it for years? Sure. Will some people be justifiably bitter about it, and keep their bitterness fresh for the rest of their lives? Of course.

Will there be a sustained wave of public anger about this, from now until August, really hurting Biden's chances if he picks Klobuchar? I don't think that's necessarily true.

Quote:
Oh, you misunderstand. Fox and Limbaugh will be saying that stuff in their programs, for free. Not charging PACs to run them in the commercial breaks.
Gotcha. My bad.

Quote:
Are you seriously asking what the strategy of noted pro-Trump media like Fox and Friends and Rush Limbaugh attacking Trump's opponent would be? Is this some sort of performance theater?
I'm seriously asking what you think the strategy is.

Here's what I think the strategy is: Preaching to the choir. I think these attacks are mainly to reinforce and reward the mindset of their target audience, which is already a pro-Trump, anti-Democrat audience.

I don't think there are a lot of swing voters who pay attention to Fox and Limbaugh. I think attacks from those sources have much effect on other audiences, mainly because those audiences aren't actually following Fox and Limbaugh.

I dunno. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe one of the characteristics of a swing voter is that they watch MSNBC and Fox & Friends with equal favor.

But I lean towards the theory that there's not really a lot of "swing" voters, in the sense of people who could vote either way with equanimity. I think what characterizes swing states is roughly balanced populations of partisan voters, and that what "swings" those states is turning out your partisan voters more than the other guy turns out his.

And I think that attacking Biden as soft on police brutality won't make much difference to the audience of Fox and Limbaugh. I'm sure there are things that will increase conservative voter turnout in swing states, but I doubt that's one of them.

I think picking Klobuchar would depress progressive voter turnout. I don't think Fox or Limbaugh talking about it would make much difference to those voters.

And I don't see any other reason why Fox and Limbaugh would attack Biden for being soft on police brutality. It just doesn't seem on-message for them, you know what I mean?
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 12:48 PM   #193
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 46,506
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Abrams was brought up as a candidate. You cited a satire article (and sure, let's go with that it didn't fool you, no skin off my nose) as to why she wouldn't be a good candidate.
Well, no. Go back a bit further. TGZ said, "The best VP Biden could pick would be a someone who could credibly run on their own in 2024." I jokingly responded that this meant Abrams, since I think she cannot credibly run in 2024. Stacyhs responded in seriousness that she agreed with me that Abrams fit TGZ's criteria. That's what led me to post the Bee link. The post of mine that Stacyhs agreed with was satire, so I followed it up with more satire. The Bee link makes sense in the context of Abrams not being fit for 2024, and mocks one of her more absurd moments. That link isn't really why she's not fit, but if you already understand why she's not fit, it's funny. And if you actually believed the Bee was a real news link (ie, you just read the headline, not the whole story, and didn't know she's not the governor), then it would be essentially meaningless as a way to laugh at her. But all of this revolved around TGZ's criteria regarding 2024, it had nothing to do with whether or not Abrams would get picked as VP now.

And no, let's not just "go with" me being fooled. I've already documented multiple cases of using the Bee as satire in the past. They aren't unfamiliar to me.
__________________
"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

Last edited by Ziggurat; 29th May 2020 at 12:50 PM.
Ziggurat 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 29th May 2020, 01:27 PM   #194
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Well, no. Go back a bit further. TGZ said, "The best VP Biden could pick would be a someone who could credibly run on their own in 2024." I jokingly responded that this meant Abrams, since I think she cannot credibly run in 2024. Stacyhs responded in seriousness that she agreed with me that Abrams fit TGZ's criteria. That's what led me to post the Bee link. The post of mine that Stacyhs agreed with was satire, so I followed it up with more satire. The Bee link makes sense in the context of Abrams not being fit for 2024, and mocks one of her more absurd moments. That link isn't really why she's not fit, but if you already understand why she's not fit, it's funny. And if you actually believed the Bee was a real news link (ie, you just read the headline, not the whole story, and didn't know she's not the governor), then it would be essentially meaningless as a way to laugh at her. But all of this revolved around TGZ's criteria regarding 2024, it had nothing to do with whether or not Abrams would get picked as VP now.
I read the link. It wasn't particularly funny. It certainly wasn't "I can see Russia from my house" funny. But hey, humor is subjective.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
And no, let's not just "go with" me being fooled. I've already documented multiple cases of using the Bee as satire in the past. They aren't unfamiliar to me.
I didn't say let's go with you being fooled. I said let's go with you not being fooled. Whether or not you were fooled by this article or this publication really doesn't matter to me, so feel free to claim whatever makes you feel good.
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 29th May 2020, 01:29 PM   #195
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,327
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Clearly some of us are able to respond ad infinitum. What is it about this story that makes you feel like you haven't yet responded enough?
Stacyhs 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 29th May 2020, 01:37 PM   #196
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,327
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/polit..._blogfooterold

It's nice to see there are some Republicans who still love their country. A group Republicans got together and is running TV and digital ads to get conservatives to vote for Biden and return to American values.
I'm pleased to read this. It's time for disaffected Republicans to stand up and let their voices be heard. People often need reassurance from others that it's OK to change their minds and admit to themselves they made a mistake. This won't change hardline Trump supporters but it may help those who have misgivings now about voting for Trump to make that decision.
Stacyhs 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 29th May 2020, 01:40 PM   #197
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,827
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There's always going to be someone, somewhere, digging up something old. Hell, I pulled up a two year old Michelle Obama quote not to long ago.

But that's a lot different than voters keeping stuff from last week's news cycle at the top of their minds this week, or retaining that interest and outrage for months. Will people remember it for years? Sure. Will some people be justifiably bitter about it, and keep their bitterness fresh for the rest of their lives? Of course.
1:The murder happened this Monday, not last week.
2:The officer was just arrested today, while news has come out that he had 18 previous citations. I'm not sure how many of those Klobuchar was involved in.
3:Presuming this goes to trial, the trial will be ongoing during the election, not old news.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm seriously asking what you think the strategy is.
To do everything they can to ensure another Trump victory. Whether that is fanning the flames of any and every anti-Biden story for as long as it takes, or actively making stuff up, these organizations don't a reason to do what they already do.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Here's what I think the strategy is: Preaching to the choir. I think these attacks are mainly to reinforce and reward the mindset of their target audience, which is already a pro-Trump, anti-Democrat audience.

I don't think there are a lot of swing voters who pay attention to Fox and Limbaugh. I think attacks from those sources have much effect on other audiences, mainly because those audiences aren't actually following Fox and Limbaugh.

I dunno. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe one of the characteristics of a swing voter is that they watch MSNBC and Fox & Friends with equal favor.

But I lean towards the theory that there's not really a lot of "swing" voters, in the sense of people who could vote either way with equanimity. I think what characterizes swing states is roughly balanced populations of partisan voters, and that what "swings" those states is turning out your partisan voters more than the other guy turns out his.

And I think that attacking Biden as soft on police brutality won't make much difference to the audience of Fox and Limbaugh. I'm sure there are things that will increase conservative voter turnout in swing states, but I doubt that's one of them.

I think picking Klobuchar would depress progressive voter turnout. I don't think Fox or Limbaugh talking about it would make much difference to those voters.

And I don't see any other reason why Fox and Limbaugh would attack Biden for being soft on police brutality. It just doesn't seem on-message for them, you know what I mean?
Fox and Limbaugh attacked Obama on the number of Executive Orders, the color of his suit, how many times he played golf, drone strikes etc. They attacked Hillary Clinton on being friendly with Russia (Uranium One), private email servers, and coughing that one time. Then, when Trump took office EO's suddenly became praiseworthy, badly fitting suits were cool, golf was praiseworthy, drone strikes were no longer an issue, friendship with Russia was great, private email servers were a good idea, etc.

What is on-message for Fox and Limbaugh is Trump/GOP good, Biden/DEM bad.
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 29th May 2020, 02:11 PM   #198
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
1:The murder happened this Monday, not last week.
2:The officer was just arrested today, while news has come out that he had 18 previous citations. I'm not sure how many of those Klobuchar was involved in.
3:Presuming this goes to trial, the trial will be ongoing during the election, not old news.
Well, if the outrage against Klobuchar is real in three to six months, I'll admit I was wrong on this one. You may have to remind me, though.

Quote:
To do everything they can to ensure another Trump victory. Whether that is fanning the flames of any and every anti-Biden story for as long as it takes, or actively making stuff up, these organizations don't a reason to do what they already do.
I honestly don't think they care whether Trump wins or not. As long as ratings are good and the ad revenue is flowing in, they don't care who is in the White House. I think they can make just as much money off a Democrat president as a Republican, and they know it.

Quote:
Fox and Limbaugh attacked Obama on the number of Executive Orders, the color of his suit, how many times he played golf, drone strikes etc. They attacked Hillary Clinton on being friendly with Russia (Uranium One), private email servers, and coughing that one time. Then, when Trump took office EO's suddenly became praiseworthy, badly fitting suits were cool, golf was praiseworthy, drone strikes were no longer an issue, friendship with Russia was great, private email servers were a good idea, etc.

What is on-message for Fox and Limbaugh is Trump/GOP good, Biden/DEM bad.
Granted. The question isn't, do they attack Democrats. The question is, do attacks on Democrats for the Fox audience have a significant effect on voter turnout in swing states?

I think probably not, but I could be wrong. Again, if I turn out to be wrong, I'll admit it.
theprestige is online now   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 29th May 2020, 02:22 PM   #199
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,327
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Time, money, and advertising slots are all limited resources. They might decide that some other line of attack is a better use of those resources. The Tara Reade thing, for example, or Biden's obvious senility.
Oh, god. Please don't start banging that drum again. It went nowhere before and isn't going to go anywhere this time.

Quote:
It's funny that wareyin is complaining about not discussing Biden's VP options and implications. Some of us, including me, were on that topic a few days ago. Then it turned into an Abrams-Onion slapfight, and then swung right back to bUt tArA ReAdE ThO. With even wareyin getting right back in on that action.

If you want to talk about Biden's veep options, talk about Biden's veep options. Stacy and Telly aren't forcing you to stay stuck on their topic.
Stacyhs 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 29th May 2020, 02:53 PM   #200
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,489
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Oh, god. Please don't start banging that drum again. It went nowhere before and isn't going to go anywhere this time.
As you can see, I've been talking about other stuff.

I threw that one in there so you'd have something to talk about.

If you'd prefer to talk about the other stuff, feel free to skip right over it. Like I said the other day, I'm not really interested in dinging Biden on gaffes and whatnot.

Wanna talk about veep choices and implications instead? It'll be tricky, dodging the Babylon Bee articles about Abrams, but I think it's do-able.


Actually, forget all that. We have a huge long thread about how laypeople and professionals alike can totally diagnose mental health from footage of public appearances. So I'm not going to argue with you about it.

Quite frankly, an argument between us doesn't really matter. What matters is how voters perceive Biden. If Dem turnout in swing states is depressed because of how Biden talks and acts in his video clips, that's a problem even if he's not even remotely senile. Don't worry about me saying it. Worry about CNN saying it. Worry about Rachel Maddow* saying it.

---
*I kid. Maddow would never say it, especially if she thought it was true. Plus, even if she did, I don't think she has the ratings to make it worrisome.

Last edited by theprestige; 29th May 2020 at 03:10 PM.
theprestige is online now   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 06:47 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.