US 2024 Presidential Election

[tstorm823]

After all, that's what it's about, suffering: it is the governing principle, not life.

I believe tstorm has quite explicitly said he considers the reduction of suffering to be a hedonistic pursuit.

It's not "a hedonistic pursuit", it's not an insult or euphemism, it's actual hedonism that Agema is expressing. Hedonism is the idea that the determinant of moral goodness, the governing principle you might say, is maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain.

It is not only me the puts life and death above pleasure and pain in the moral hierarchy, it's nearly every moral philosophy that would care to comment except that one.

 

[Schadrach]

that (exclusively human) life for him is indeed the overriding concern, even if it has zero thought or feeling or awareness.

It doesn't matter that it is capable of thoughts or feelings, but it is vitally important that it is part of a diploid cell line. The very instant that two haploid cell lines merge to be a single diploid line is the key event that gives worth or value to human life. Mostly because the number of haploid cells that do not achieve even that becomes incredibly unwieldy to even consider and would make everyone a serial killer, even those that followed his every religious tenet in exacting detail and that makes that line of thought untenable.

None of this makes any sense unless you start factoring in magical entities who happen to feel the same way he does and whose priorities are objectively correct.

Which is usually the case for the pro-life - it's not about anything but religious faith, at the core. It's just a bigger, weirder map vs territory problem than most, largely because most of the map is from the bronze age and there is great psychological pain tied with admitting it isn't precisely correct.

And exactly what everyone expected.

Special counsel Jack Smith moves to drop Trump election case citing 'categorical' DOJ policy

Special counsel Jack Smith has moved to dismiss his federal election interference case against President-elect Donald Trump due to a long-standing Justice Department policy that bars the prosecution of a sitting president.

abc7ny.com

Hopefully he's moving to dismiss without prejudice so it can be picked up again in four years, presuming Trump still lives. That's the main advantage of moving to dismiss now rather than waiting for Trump's DOJ to move to dismiss with prejudice on day one. I don't *think* Trump's DOJ can add a retroactive "with prejudice" to a case that's already dismissed...

 

[Silvanus]

It's not "a hedonistic pursuit", it's not an insult or euphemism, it's actual hedonism that Agema is expressing. Hedonism is the idea that the determinant of moral goodness, the governing principle you might say, is maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain.

It is not only me the puts life and death above pleasure and pain in the moral hierarchy, it's nearly every moral philosophy that would care to comment except that one.

Most secular moral philosophies don't impose any sort of hierarchical list of priorities.

And certainly very few (except for the supernatural-reliant ones such as yours) would explicitly value the existence of an unfeeling cell clump over the quality of life of a sentient person.

I'm a utilitarian. I don't identify with hedonism. But you're welcome to keep mischaracterising your opponents if you like-- why stop now?

 

[tstorm823]

Most secular moral philosophies don't impose any sort of hierarchical list of priorities.

And certainly very few (except for the supernatural-reliant ones such as yours) would explicitly value the existence of an unfeeling cell clump over the quality of life of a sentient person.

I'm a utilitarian. I don't identify with hedonism. But you're welcome to keep mischaracterising your opponents if you like-- why stop now?

I mean, I can let people speak for themselves:

 

[Silvanus]

I mean, I can let people speak for themselves:
View attachment 12366

"Utilitarianism of the hedonistic variety", indicating that other varieties exist. Like that of Singer.

Of course, even if one does prioritise pleasure/pain, that doesn't necessarily indicate an association with hedonism.

 

[meiam]

And exactly what everyone expected.

Special counsel Jack Smith moves to drop Trump election case citing 'categorical' DOJ policy

Special counsel Jack Smith has moved to dismiss his federal election interference case against President-elect Donald Trump due to a long-standing Justice Department policy that bars the prosecution of a sitting president.

abc7ny.com

Yeah. Honestly everybody involved in this from the beginning should be in the jail right next to Trump considering how incoptent they handle everything. It really shouldn't take 4 years to throw in jail.

 

[tstorm823]

"Utilitarianism of the hedonistic variety", indicating that other varieties exist. Like that of Singer.

Of course, even if one does prioritise pleasure/pain, that doesn't necessarily indicate an association with hedonism.

I mean, that second sentence is debatable. Like, you can consider moral goodness as measured by utility of outcome and not personally call yourself utilitarian, but you can hardly be surprised if other people describe you as such, right? So you can also prioritize pleasure/pain without calling yourself a hedonist, but that's what the word hedonism means, so you can't be surprised to be described that way. It may not be your chosen association, but it is conceptually associated nonetheless.

Setting that aside, I am aware that google results are context dependent and know I had recently googled about hedonism, and I know one guy with a website is not some authoritative source (I mostly went digging for the inevitable article about how abortion is wrong from a utilitarian perspective, cause I guarantee that exists somewhere), but that result presenting itself right at the top was too good to pass up.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

And exactly what everyone expected.

Special counsel Jack Smith moves to drop Trump election case citing 'categorical' DOJ policy

Special counsel Jack Smith has moved to dismiss his federal election interference case against President-elect Donald Trump due to a long-standing Justice Department policy that bars the prosecution of a sitting president.

abc7ny.com

Imagine how embarrassed the Garland cheerleaders are. I'm glad he managed to maintain the appearance of not being politically motivated.

Oh wait, everyone he wanted to soothe still think it was, and they're going to use the results of his inaction as proof he was. If only he moved faster than a turtle.

 

[Trunkage]

Imagine how embarrassed the Garland cheerleaders are. I'm glad he managed to maintain the appearance of not being politically motivated.

Oh wait, everyone he wanted to soothe still think it was, and they're going to use the results of his inaction as proof he was. If only he moved faster than a turtle.

Partly true. Trump is also fantastic at running out the clock. Then you have the problem of most of the crimes being interconnected and disentangling it was a mission

I respect the need for proprietary, even if no one else cares. He also should have ignored far more of Trump's requests because most were ridiculous and, as you say, pointless to try to achieve

 

[Trunkage]

I mean, that second sentence is debatable. Like, you can consider moral goodness as measured by utility of outcome and not personally call yourself utilitarian, but you can hardly be surprised if other people describe you as such, right? So you can also prioritize pleasure/pain without calling yourself a hedonist, but that's what the word hedonism means, so you can't be surprised to be described that way. It may not be your chosen association, but it is conceptually associated nonetheless.

Setting that aside, I am aware that google results are context dependent and know I had recently googled about hedonism, and I know one guy with a website is not some authoritative source (I mostly went digging for the inevitable article about how abortion is wrong from a utilitarian perspective, cause I guarantee that exists somewhere), but that result presenting itself right at the top was too good to pass up.

Just gotta remind everyone. Most of us aren't Catholics. The Sadomasochistic relationship most Catholics have with God is one major reasons why Catholics will never be universal, despite the name. I'd really love for Catholic guilt not being a thing anymore but it's pretty entrenched in that identity

Apparently, I read the Bible in a hedonistic manner, because I read the Bible as more of a reducing suffering if you believe in God. Who knew?

 

[tstorm823]

Apparently, I read the Bible in a hedonistic manner, because I read the Bible as more of a reducing suffering if you believe in God. Who knew?

Did you get that from the ten commandments? Or perhaps the beatitudes? Where in the Bible you are pretending to have read is the part that says your job in life is to end suffering?

 

[Silvanus]

I mean, that second sentence is debatable. Like, you can consider moral goodness as measured by utility of outcome and not personally call yourself utilitarian, but you can hardly be surprised if other people describe you as such, right? So you can also prioritize pleasure/pain without calling yourself a hedonist, but that's what the word hedonism means, so you can't be surprised to be described that way. It may not be your chosen association, but it is conceptually associated nonetheless.

Firstly, from my understanding, hedonism tends to carry with it an exclusivity surrounding pleasure/pain-- the idea that they're not just prioritised, but that they're necessarily the sole form of moral value.

That aside, there's a lot more to a philosophical name/descriptor than how it may be described in an encyclopedia, which will necessarily be broad and vague. There's a host of associations, history, intellectual tradition, a whole movement.

Setting that aside, I am aware that google results are context dependent and know I had recently googled about hedonism, and I know one guy with a website is not some authoritative source (I mostly went digging for the inevitable article about how abortion is wrong from a utilitarian perspective, cause I guarantee that exists somewhere), but that result presenting itself right at the top was too good to pass up.

Understandable. But utilitarianism can be applied as a framework to a wide range of priorities, and doesn't require the imposition of one over others.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Snip

You gonna admit you were wrong about abortions in the US yet? Funny how you never reply to stuff you're wrong about.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Funny how you never reply to stuff you're wrong about.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Sheinbaum responds to Trump's threats of a tariff. Wasted energy, Trump can't read all that in one sitting.



But very predictably, the MAGA crowd are taking it to mean that she knuckled under in under 12 hours and will be stopping the migrants. This was of course the plan from the start, wait for the leaders to respond saying what they're already doing, declare victory, and don't even implement the tariffs. They already did their "job".

 

[Trunkage]

Did you get that from the ten commandments? Or perhaps the beatitudes? Where in the Bible you are pretending to have read is the part that says your job in life is to end suffering?

1. You are the one pretending suffering is important and not having it is hedonism. If you don't want to be a stereotypical Catholic, you can just stop
2. No, I got it from Mass and school. No one does self flagellation like a Catholic
3. My wife is Catholic and, like many Catholics before, I helped her realise that the church doctrine telling you your evil all the time isn't healthy
4. So maybe the creation story... how you guys interpret Original Sin leads to everyone being a Matt Murdoch
5. It would be great if you focus on Jesus and stop worrying about suffering. Please and thank you

 

[tstorm823]

1. You are the one pretending suffering is important and not having it is hedonism. If you don't want to be a stereotypical Catholic, you can just stop
2. No, I got it from Mass and school. No one does self flagellation like a Catholic
3. My wife is Catholic and, like many Catholics before, I helped her realise that the church doctrine telling you your evil all the time isn't healthy
4. So maybe the creation story... how you guys interpret Original Sin leads to everyone being a Matt Murdoch
5. It would be great if you focus on Jesus and stop worrying about suffering. Please and thank you

1. Never said that, and if I had, I don't think you understand what that word means.
3. So you gaslit your wife about her own religion. That's not a good thing, you should feel ashamed. I understand now why you think that suggestion is unhealthy, as you clearly have deep shame in your heart that is making you miserable as you try to both ignore it and drag others down with you. Ignoring your guilt is unhealthy, acknowledging your errors and imperfections is necessary to find peace.

 

[Avnger]

You gonna admit you were wrong about abortions in the US yet? Funny how you never reply to stuff you're wrong about.

Its funny how you solely reply to things you're wrong about...

 

[Seanchaidh]

Understandable. But utilitarianism can be applied as a framework to a wide range of priorities, and doesn't require the imposition of one over others.

The broader form you're talking about is often called consequentialism for the sake of clarity. Because Bentham and Mill, the philosophers associated with Utilitarianism with a capital U do emphasize in their own ways pleasure and pain (Mill in a more developed and nuanced fashion that doesn't sound hedonistic except in a narrow philosophical sense).

 

[Chimpzy]

Exclusive: The Harris Campaign On What Went Wrong | Crooked Media

crooked.com

David Plouffe: Well, Dan, I mean, I think, listen, there was the Biden-Trump 1.0, which is obviously pretty catastrophic in terms of where the race stood. When we got in, my recollection is some of that snapped back, but you know, we were behind. I mean, I think it surprised people because there was these public polls that came out in late September, early October, showing us with leads that we never saw. You know, I mean, it was just basically a race that in the battlegrounds was 46-47, 47-48. So that's not where we started. We started behind. She was able to climb out. I think even after the debate, we might have gained, what, .5-1? It wasn't a race that moved a lot. And so I think when you think about our own internal analytics, you know, if you have Wisconsin at 47-47, or Pennsylvania 48-47 Trump, let's say, which I think is where we had it at the end, you know, you've got to have undecideds break your way more than your opponents, and you've got to get a little benefit from turnout, which we weren't able to do.

Dan Pfeiffer: David, when you say it was a margin of error race you needed high turnout, what did your polls tell you where the race was heading into election day?

David Plouffe: Well, Dan, you and I talked prior to the election, and just to rewind, I think when Kamala Harris became the nominee she was behind, we kind of, you know, climbed back. And even post debate, you know, we still had ourselves down, you know, in the battleground states, but very close. And so I think by the end it was a jump ball race, and I think we needed some things to break our way. Maybe Trump's Election Day turnout would underperform. Our election day turnout would, you know either be at level or over perform and, you know, we'd win more of the people who decided in the last three or four days. I think our data and the New York Times data and other public data suggested we did have some progress with undecideds at late October. So it was a dead heat race. But, you know, at the end of the day, you know, the political atmosphere was pretty brutal and that's not an excuse. You had right track, wrong track, I think 28-72, about 70 percent of the country saying they were angry and dissatisfied. You had Trump's approval rating on his first term frustratingly high, 48 to 51, depending on the state. Obviously, the incumbent president's approval rating around 38 to 41, depending on the state. And you know, I think the economy and inflation is still driving a lot of votes. So I think given that we had a challenging political environment, the fact that we got the race to dead heat was positive, but boy, it was slow moving. And I think we were focused on seven states. You know, that's our windshield into the world, the battleground states. But, you know, what we saw on election day was, you know, New Jersey and California and Connecticut and New York, massive shifts. So I think where Kamala Harris campaigned, we were able to keep the tide down a little bit, but it ended up being a pretty strong, you know, tailwind for Donald Trump.

And I think it's worth reminding everybody we saw in '22, even though that was a pretty decent democratic year, we saw these shifts, we saw them in '20, we saw them in '16. You know, Trump, specifically, but Republicans generally improving their vote share amongst non-college voters, particularly non-college voters of color. And this was a surprising race because Kamala Harris actually did, I think, better with senior voters than I think a lot of people would have thought. So, margin of error race where we inherited a deficit, we got it to even, but the thing never moved. So, to Jen's point, I think we were, you know, we were hopeful.