Biden v. Trump Election Mega Thread

Who will win the election?

  • SleepyJoe

    Votes: 15 30.6%
  • Donald Trump

    Votes: 9 18.4%
  • It doesn't matter who wins, because we will all lose in some way.

    Votes: 25 51.0%

  • Total voters
    49

Iron

BOI
Aug 13, 2020
711
103
48
Country
Occupied Palestine
The choice to be a hateful bigot doesn't take away others' rights to free association, amigo. 🤷‍♀️
In 40 years when eating meat is outlawed, your grandchildren will abandon you because of your heinous actions. In minecraft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gergar12

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,511
416
88
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
Don't know if anyone linked this and I'm too lazy to look through this monster.
 

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
209
177
48
Country
United States
In 40 years when eating meat is outlawed, your grandchildren will abandon you because of your heinous actions. In minecraft.
Maybe they will, maybe they won't. Though you seem to have missed the point. If in 40 years I make the choice that eating meat is worth more to me than my grandchildren's company, I deserve to be abandoned by them.

I mean, this is all ignoring the fact that you've compared sexism, racism, xenophobia, and general bigotry to eating meat of all things...
 

Iron

BOI
Aug 13, 2020
711
103
48
Country
Occupied Palestine
Maybe they will, maybe they won't. Though you seem to have missed the point. If in 40 years I make the choice that eating meat is worth more to me than my grandchildren's company, I deserve to be abandoned by them.

I mean, this is all ignoring the fact that you've compared sexism, racism, xenophobia, and general bigotry to eating meat of all things...
Abortion was universally illegal 50 years ago in the states. Xenophobia was fine and dandy - The immigration act was only repealed in 1965. Fair labor laws for women - signed in '63. Your grandparents were from that era, no? Maybe a little later in time.
Take some perspective. In 40 years there could be a massive right-wing swing and all of the things that you see now would be immoral and illegal. In 40 years eating meat could be illegal as well.
I'm afraid of the backlash if Republicans win 2020.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gergar12

Houseman

The horse. The house. The man.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,623
413
88
Hollywoo, LA
Maybe they will, maybe they won't. Though you seem to have missed the point. If in 40 years I make the choice that eating meat is worth more to me than my grandchildren's company, I deserve to be abandoned by them.
That kind of sounds like "If my son makes the choice that being gay is worth more to him than to his family, then he deserves to be abandoned by us."
 

Houseman

The horse. The house. The man.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,623
413
88
Hollywoo, LA
The point is: choosing to eat meat =/= not being able to choose a sexual orientation.
The comparison doesn't hold water.
Would it be a better comparison if the hypothetical parents had said "If my son makes the choice that having sex with another man is worth more to him than to his family, then he deserves to be abandoned by us"?

That way it's not about "being", it's about "doing"
 

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
209
177
48
Country
United States
Would it be a better comparison if the hypothetical parents had said "If my son makes the choice that having sex with another man is worth more to him than to his family, then he deserves to be abandoned by us"?

That way it's not about "being", it's about "doing"
Oh sunshine, no it wouldn't. God bless you for trying though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dalisclock

Houseman

The horse. The house. The man.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,623
413
88
Hollywoo, LA
Oh sunshine, no it wouldn't. God bless you for trying though.
And why not?

I don't know if you've noticed, but this is a forum, not twitter. Forums are not limited to 140 characters. You can do more than post witty one-liners. You can explain your point of view and go into detail. You can have discussions.

I really would like to have a discussion with you, but your posting style seems to consist only of posting one-liners or gifs and then disappearing for several days.
 
Last edited:

Elijin

Elite Member
Legacy
May 10, 2020
86
177
38
And why not?

I don't know if you've noticed, but this is a forum, not twitter. Forums are not limited to 140 characters. You can do more than post witty one-liners. You can explain your point of view and go into detail. You can have discussions.

I really would like to have a discussion with you, but your posting style seems to consist only of posting one-liners or gifs and then disappearing for several days.
Short answer:
No one wants to give your nonsense comparing sexual orientation to being a vegetarian any legitimacy by actually seriously engaging with it.

Long answer is basically the same, but with a selection of colourful descriptors aimed towards you.
 

Houseman

The horse. The house. The man.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,623
413
88
Hollywoo, LA
Short answer:
No one wants to give your nonsense comparing sexual orientation to being a vegetarian any legitimacy by actually seriously engaging with it.
Y'know, I'm starting to think that understanding analogies is a skill that few people actually have.

Iron's point that avnger seemed to disagree with was: "Not everyone who gets "disowned" deserves it, or is a bigot". He gave many examples of how morals change over time. The hypothetical example of disowning someone over eating meat was one of them.

Now what comes to mind when you think of parents disowning children? Homosexuality.
Do we agree with parents who disown their children because they come out as gay? No, we don't. We recognize that this is an unreasonable response.

So we have established that not everybody who gets disowned deserves it, or is a bigot.

That's the point. Not everybody who gets disowned is automatically a bigot. Sometimes the people doing the disowning are the bigots. Sometimes the thing they are getting disowned over is not even wrong.

Now was that insulting? Was that bigoted? Did I make any sort of delegitimizing arguments against homosexuality? Have I offended anyone?
No, it was a perfectly fine analogy and you just didn't get it.
 

Iron

BOI
Aug 13, 2020
711
103
48
Country
Occupied Palestine
Y'know, I'm starting to think that understanding analogies is a skill that few people actually have.

Iron's point that avnger seemed to disagree with was: "Not everyone who gets "disowned" deserves it, or is a bigot". He gave many examples of how morals change over time. The hypothetical example of disowning someone over eating meat was one of them.

Now what comes to mind when you think of parents disowning children? Homosexuality.
Do we agree with parents who disown their children because they come out as gay? No, we don't. We recognize that this is an unreasonable response.

So we have established that not everybody who gets disowned deserves it, or is a bigot.

That's the point. Not everybody who gets disowned is automatically a bigot. Sometimes the people doing the disowning are the bigots. Sometimes the thing they are getting disowned over is not even wrong.

Now was that insulting? Was that bigoted? Did I make any sort of legitimatizing arguments against homosexuality? Have I offended anyone?
No, it was a perfectly fine analogy and you just didn't get it.
It could be argued that claiming homosex is a choice is in itself somewhat of an insult, as I have mentioned earlier.
Your persistence is admirable. Do you enjoy smacking your head against a brick wall around here? That's how I feel around here.
 

Houseman

The horse. The house. The man.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,623
413
88
Hollywoo, LA
It could be argued that claiming homosex is a choice is in itself somewhat of an insult, as I have mentioned earlier.
I didn't claim that.
That's what the hypothetical bigoted parents claimed. They're SUPPOSED to be the bad guys here.

If you're offended by what those hypothetical parents said, well good, you should be. And this should also make it clear that sometimes, those who disown are the bigots.

But to say to me, "HOW DARE YOU MAKE SUCH A COMPARISON!" is to completely miss the point.

Your persistence is admirable. Do you enjoy smacking your head against a brick wall around here?
I believe that nearly everyone can learn. I do not believe in "brick walls" when it comes to people.
 
Last edited:

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
358
124
48
Country
United States
China is still at least a decade away from being anything more then a regional superpower in military terms. Their navy is still mostly littoral and the term "green water navy" (coastal and ocean near the own nation) was invented more or less to explain what China's current capability is. Their air force is large but lacks long distance bombers and their army is in the transition from a conscript-based foot infantry dominated force into a modern mechanized army. China's neighbors should be very, very scared of the PLA, but it still doesn't have the capability to challenge the USA. If current ratios for both are sustained the PLA will be a contender in the late 2020's or early 2030's and that's assuming that the USA doesn't react and that NATO decides to look the other way if China tries to military challenge the USA.

This is one of those situations when no one can realistically invade China, because their military is just that large. But China can't strike against anyone outside of their immediate home region which prevents them from being a global contender or a serious military threat to the USA or Europe. And even in 2035, the USA will still have twice the number of aircraft carriers that China plans to have and US carriers are decidedly bigger.
Does this look like a green-water fleet to you?


And I never mentioned 2020 or 2035, I mentioned 2050.
 

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
358
124
48
Country
United States
An ABM system doesn't guarantee no ballistic missiles get through. It especially doesn't guarantee against submarine launched missiles (which can be launched from anywhere there's ocean, and the US has a lot of that around), or guided missiles (which aren't ballistic), and presumably the Chinese would have more of those in this scenario. It absolutely doesn't defend against other delivery methods.

Now, a good ABM system only needs to ensure that some enemy missiles will be intercepted, and so some places will be saved, and the enemy won't know which in advance, making it too risky to attack. But that's something else.

(Also, Patriot?)

How many Chinese nuclear devices initiated in US cities is acceptable? I'm going to go with "zero". Just one device, in New York or Washington or LA, and the US is not having a good day.
Zero is my answer as well, but with new DEWs or directed energy weapons, and advancements in tech. We should be able to be safe from PLA missiles with a future ABM system. And I did mention a next-generation anti-submarine weapon in my posts.

Also, Patriot means PAC-3 a short-range SAM system.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
604
220
48
Zero is my answer as well, but with new DEWs or directed energy weapons, and advancements in tech. We should be able to be safe from PLA missiles with a future ABM system. And I did mention a next-generation anti-submarine weapon in my posts.
What, you can guarantee to intercept 100% of enemy missiles? And these anti-submarine missiles are going to destroy all Chinese submarines before they can launch? That seems optimistic.

Also, Patriot means PAC-3 a short-range SAM system.
I know what Patriot is, it's that thing they built in the 80s that failed to adaquately deal with Iraqi Scuds fired at Israel in the first Gulf War. Not saying it's useless, but it's not on the list of things to guarantee no missiles at all get through.
 

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
358
124
48
Country
United States
What, you can guarantee to intercept 100% of enemy missiles? And these anti-submarine missiles are going to destroy all Chinese submarines before they can launch? That seems optimistic.



I know what Patriot is, it's that thing they built in the 80s that failed to adaquately deal with Iraqi Scuds fired at Israel in the first Gulf War. Not saying it's useless, but it's not on the list of things to guarantee no missiles at all get through.
Not right now, but we can make progress on making a nuclear-free world, with no CCP dictatorship in China as well.