Funny events in anti-woke world

[ObsidianJones]

I often get the impression that the right justifies their actions by insisting the left is secretly just as bad as they are and thus every attempt to sabotage the left isn't only justified, but would have been made against the right if they had the chance.

Your average demagogue often insist that ''the establishment'' is always lying and cheating which is partially just demonization but it might also be used to create a scenario where the demagogue feels he has permission to lie and cheat as much as he wants because ''the other side is doing it''

I think Tstorm's statement is trying to indicate something to that effect. That its secretly the left who's cheating in election and that Republican efforts to undermine democracy are thus justified and just there to level the playing field.

We're a video game forum (I sometimes forget that), so let's use gaming terms.

Say you're a popular streamer in... God, I don't want to use Fortnite. But fine. Fortnite.

Your stupid memes and skin machine game is going well. You have great aim. You're magically building structures to block your need to actually play the game and you're hiding like a champ. People for some reason love to see this, and you bring good numbers. You do outreach work with the community. And people are tuning into everyone of your twitch streams.

Here comes someone who's abrasive and a lot of his fans love that he's abrasive. They call it truth telling when everyone else calls it toxic. Also, he doesn't like that you're more popular than he is. He calls your outreach a publicity stunt, and draws focus on how he gives out gift cards to his number one patrons every month. So that makes him as good as you.

The actual game between you and him comes up. To make sure everything is on the up and up, you go to the... I don't know, the Fortnite gaming community and ask that your game will be judged by their licensed officials. There's months of smack talking. He says he won't lose the game. And the only way he could lose is by hacking. So look out for that. But there's no way he can lose and he's actually the more popular streamer. His numbers are real, your numbers are bots. But it doesn't matter, because you're going to be demolished by him by a landslide.

His viewers are going crazy. His viewers decide they hate you because they love him so much that everything he says has to be truth. You're obviously a cheater. You've always have been. His fans always thought you were full of yourself for giving to charity, so they have to believe you're hiding something. You're not good. You pretend to be good to do evil. Probably grooming. At any moment, all they do is yell about how horrible you are and all the lies you're about... when there's never been a shred of actual evidence to prove any of this.

Finally. The actual match. You floor him. Handily.

During the entire match, he's streaming and he's yelling how you must be cheating. He tells his viewers to go to your stream and look for bots. There must be bots. There's no way he's building this fast or aiming this well. He's obviously the better gamer and everything is going wrong because everyone's against him.

So some fans do go. And they claim they see red flashes that could be outlines of the toxic player on your stream. Forget the fact that the officials are actually in both streams and no one sees anything. His fans know what they saw and they bring their accusations to their ilk, who are getting up in a tizzy that their favorite streamer is being cheated on. They have really no proof. But their fellow fans said they saw it so that's all there ever could be. They are not getting a fair shake!

Match over. Toxic lost. And his fans go nuts. Like break into bars across the world nuts because this can't happen. Denial for months. The same screenshots of nothing goes around for months. Saying that if you won fairly, why won't you give up your gaming pc for them to look through it to make sure there's no cheat software.

When debunked, those debunkers are calling stooges for your side, and are doxxed. Finally, the Fortnite officials finally weigh in. They checked both computers. They had monitors in both streams. No foul play.

But that's not good enough. The toxic player fans go on about how there's a worldwide conspiracy against them. Sadly, at the same time, some of the Fortnite officials are retiring. So The Toxic player's fans get onto the board. First thing they do? Make sure that the qualifiers for you are more stringent for some reason. Not for the Toxic player. They'll cite ping or how he's always in a harder quailifer or something. But your bracket needs more verification of how good of a player you actually are. So you need a point system. You must submit to more and more 'anti-cheat' software to consider your rig clean.

And if you have nothing to hide, why do you care so much that we're going by the "rules"... that they just happen to set up. They just want good, fair matches from now on. Why don't you? Aren't you considered with the integrity of the game? Why shouldn't you submit and conform to the fears that are solely created by them because their side losing, and they can't comprehend why.

This stupid, asinine scenario is literally what politics in the US is nowadays.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

No, that's efforts to make elections fair by law. If you've got an explanation for how regulating mail in voting is supposed to advantage the party that carries those too old to leave the house or too far from civilization to get to their polling place easily, fire away. People just repeating the same talking points doesn't make them true.

Uh huh. And when your political party requests a breakdown of voting habits by race and then drafts a new law which restricts voting in ways mostly done by said race? You and they can claim it's a coincidence all day long but most people have enough pattern recognition to call bullshit on that

Texas Republicans say their proposed voting restrictions are color blind. But many see "Jim Crow in a tuxedo."

An outraged Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick castigated those implying that GOP efforts to restrict Texas voting are racist. But the state has a history of marginalizing voters of color, and many business leaders, voting rights advocates and Democrats see it taking another step down that path.

www.texastribune.org

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Hey, look: video of the thing tstorm claims doesn't happen:

Leaked video: Dark money group brags about writing GOP voter suppression bills across the country

“We did it quickly and we did it quietly,” said the executive director of Heritage Action.

www.motherjones.com

 

[tstorm823]

No it isn't. If that was the case it wouldn't conveniently make it harder to vote for democratic voters while just as conveniently not doing the same for Republican ones. No one buys the argument that the Republican simply have to make it harder for minorities to vote because this somehow makes the election more fair.

Why do you believe the laws make it harder for specifically minorities to vote? Prior to the last election, Democrats opposed mail-in ballots more than Republicans because mail-in votes tended to favor Republicans. Why is the push to better regulate mail-in votes expected to hurt minorities? Even in 2020, black voters were less likely to vote by mail than white voters, so how is that to hurt minorities? Your beliefs are entirely circular logic, you assume the laws are bad for Democrats and minorities because Republicans want them because you believe Republicans only want things that are bad for Democrats and minorities. There is no stable rationale for that.

I think Tstorm's statement is trying to indicate something to that effect. That its secretly the left who's cheating in election and that Republican efforts to undermine democracy are thus justified and just there to level the playing field.

It's neither secret nor cheating what the Democratic Party does. It's unfair and discriminatory, but it's not (usually) technically against the rules, hence the push for reforms. Democrats offer rides to only minorities, orchestrate vote drop boxes in urban spaces, set up voter registration drives on college campuses, pay for ad campaigns encouraging voting on only networks whose audience leans their way. They put a huge amount of money into dividing the American election experience along demographic lines, which isn't a good thing, and if Republicans suggest maybe that should be banned or regulated, they're accused of racism. The Democratic Party, among other things, has a perpetual manipulation machine aimed at Black Americans, pushing pure propaganda and offering absolutely no actual worthwhile policy, and any attempt to stop the machine is portrayed by the media as bigotry.

Uh huh. And when your political party requests a breakdown of voting habits by race and then drafts a new law which restricts voting in ways mostly done by said race? You and they can claim it's a coincidence all day long but most people have enough pattern recognition to call bullshit on that

Texas Republicans say their proposed voting restrictions are color blind. But many see "Jim Crow in a tuxedo."

An outraged Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick castigated those implying that GOP efforts to restrict Texas voting are racist. But the state has a history of marginalizing voters of color, and many business leaders, voting rights advocates and Democrats see it taking another step down that path.

www.texastribune.org

Ah, a left-leaning source that doesn't even support your claim. Lovely.

 

[tstorm823]

Hey, look: video of the thing tstorm claims doesn't happen:

Leaked video: Dark money group brags about writing GOP voter suppression bills across the country

“We did it quickly and we did it quietly,” said the executive director of Heritage Action.

www.motherjones.com

You really don't understand a word I say, do you? Your three minute video says nothing about making it harder for Democrats to vote. Nothing at all.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

You really don't understand a word I say, do you? Your three minute video says nothing about making it harder for Democrats to vote. Nothing at all.

No, I *really* don't understand a word you say. For example, you haven't elaborated on how getting legal voters to vote is cheating and why trying to stop that is good

 

[tstorm823]

No, I *really* don't understand a word you say. For example, you haven't elaborated on how getting legal voters to vote is cheating and why trying to stop that is good

Because using your political clout and piles of money to manipulate an election through racial discrimination in order to increase your political clout and piles of money is a toxic practice. I don't care that they're focused on getting more black votes this time.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Because using your political clout and piles of money to manipulate an election through racial discrimination in order to increase your political clout and piles of money is a toxic practice. I don't care that they're focused on getting more black votes this time.

So it's better to try and stop those people from voting via government action? Besides, the problem was democratic outreach to areas with *likely* democratic votes. Who mentioned anything about race?

Edit: You know it's actually about race, I know it's actually about race, Rand Paul knows it's actually about race, so let's stop pretending this shit isn't racist, yeah?

 

[Hades]

you assume the laws are bad for Democrats and minorities because Republicans want them because you believe Republicans only want things that are bad for Democrats and minorities.

You know the Republicans tend to admit what you're denying when they think they're behind closed door right? One even got caught saying that if everyone was freely able to vote then the Republicans wouldn't win any election. And considering the Republicans have not won the public vote in decades there is reason for them to assume that the fewer people vote the better.

And I think GX already put it best
''Uh huh. And when your political party requests a breakdown of voting habits by race and then drafts a new law which restricts voting in ways mostly done by said race? You and they can claim it's a coincidence all day long but most people have enough pattern recognition to call bullshit on that''

It's neither secret nor cheating what the Democratic Party does. It's unfair and discriminatory, but it's not (usually) technically against the rules, hence the push for reforms. Democrats offer rides to only minorities, orchestrate vote drop boxes in urban spaces, set up voter registration drives on college campuses, pay for ad campaigns encouraging voting on only networks whose audience leans their way. They put a huge amount of money into dividing the American election experience along demographic lines, which isn't a good thing, and if Republicans suggest maybe that should be banned or regulated, they're accused of racism. The Democratic Party, among other things, has a perpetual manipulation machine aimed at Black Americans, pushing pure propaganda and offering absolutely no actual worthwhile policy, and any attempt to stop the machine is portrayed by the media as bigotry.

You know why they offer rides? Because of nonsense like that Texas district where the Republicans decreed there would be only one poling booth for the whole district. Why have vote drop boxes in urban districts? Because more people live there which could lead to longer lines. The things you say are either very mundane or attempts to rectify Republican obstruction.

 

[Gergar12]

I am just going to rant against society. it seems to me that progressives and conservatives just hate groups of people for no reason.

Conservative business owners had to be dragged kicking and screaming just to hire white women, and whenever I see that they are hiring, or doing only POC or female or both events, my first reaction is that if they have to do that, that means their recruiters are doing a bad job of recruiting them in the first place.

Progressives love to say body-positive, body-positive, but only for women. They make fun of you if you are a man who is overweight and or a nerd.

Conservatives hate single mothers but want to increase the population for capitalistic reasons. They basically want the handmaid tale.

Progressives are wrong when it comes to attacking FDR as AOC did, FDR was popular with African Americans too. Hating rich progressives for no reason is dumb, they are the people who will donate to you, morons. Oh, and Progressive Twitter is STILL currently in a civil war due to that idiot Jimmy Dore.

Meanwhile, conservatives hate the same vaccine that Trump created with operation warp speed. It's insanity.

 

[tstorm823]

So it's better to try and stop those people from voting via government action? Besides, the problem was democratic outreach to areas with *likely* democratic votes. Who mentioned anything about race?

Edit: You know it's actually about race, I know it's actually about race, Rand Paul knows it's actually about race, so let's stop pretending this shit isn't racist, yeah?

It's about race because people like you deliberately make it about race! When a group is discriminating to deliberately benefit certain races over others, any rule that enforces fairness is going to hurt those races disproportionately. That's the fault of the people doing the discrimination!

And I think GX already put it best
''Uh huh. And when your political party requests a breakdown of voting habits by race and then drafts a new law which restricts voting in ways mostly done by said race? You and they can claim it's a coincidence all day long but most people have enough pattern recognition to call bullshit on that''

GX hasn't supported that claim with anything.

You know why they offer rides? Because of nonsense like that Texas district where the Republicans decreed there would be only one poling booth for the whole district. Why have vote drop boxes in urban districts? Because more people live there which could lead to longer lines. The things you say are either very mundane or attempts to rectify Republican obstruction.

It's not mundane when applied unequally. If you are working hard to make it so the urban person who walks two minutes to the poll doesn't have to wait 30 to vote, and not considering the rural person who drives 30 to the polling place and votes in two minutes, you have an agenda.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

It's about race because people like you deliberately make it about race! When a group is discriminating to deliberately benefit certain races over others, any rule that enforces fairness is going to hurt those races disproportionately. That's the fault of the people doing the discrimination!

And how are the Democrats discriminating to deliberately benefit certain races over others by... performing voter outreach by getting legal voters to vote legally?

Are you admitting that a "colorblind" effort can still have racist outcomes?

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

It's not mundane when applied unequally. If you are working hard to make it so the urban person who walks two minutes to the poll doesn't have to wait 30 to vote, and not considering the rural person who drives 30 to the polling place and votes in two minutes, you have an agenda.

The answer to that is to make voting easier for rural people too, not making it harder for urban voters to vote. Why does the GOP want to do the later, hmm?
And it's hilarious that you claim 30 minutes when there's constant reports of 4-8 hours. If it were just a 30 minute wait nobody would give a shit.

Hell, the GOP wants to make it *harder* for the wrong kind of rural voter to vote, hence the restrictions on vote by mail and extra difficulty with voter ID. 'Cause poorer rural folks are disproportionately effected by that, speaking as somebody who actually lives in a rural area

 

[tstorm823]

Are you admitting that a "colorblind" effort can still have racist outcomes?

No, racially disparate outcomes aren't inherently racist. If we implemented a racially colorblind effort in a place with Jim Crow, and it benefitted black people, would you call that racist?

The answer to that is to make voting easier for rural people too, not making it harder for urban voters to vote. Why does the GOP want to do the later, hmm?
And it's hilarious that you claim 30 minutes when there's constant reports of 4-8 hours. If it were just a 30 minute wait nobody would give a shit.

Hell, the GOP wants to make it *harder* for the wrong kind of rural voter to vote, hence the restrictions on vote by mail and extra difficulty with voter ID. 'Cause poorer rural folks are disproportionately effected by that, speaking as somebody who actually lives in a rural area

The longest waits are primarily in blue cities in blue counties in purple areas, where exactly these practices focus their efforts trying to get people to the polls, not actually knowing where the people they drive in are registered to vote. Better regulated voting and less third-party meddling would decrease the wait times for people, not increase them. Adding a bunch of extra polling places could add further confusion, not alleviate it. You've assumed for yourself that if Democrats have trouble voting, Republicans must have done it, and it's not that simple.

 

[Buyetyen]

No, racially disparate outcomes aren't inherently racist. If we implemented a racially colorblind effort in a place with Jim Crow, and it benefitted black people, would you call that racist?

The longest waits are primarily in blue cities in blue counties in purple areas, where exactly these practices focus their efforts trying to get people to the polls, not actually knowing where the people they drive in are registered to vote. Better regulated voting and less third-party meddling would decrease the wait times for people, not increase them. Adding a bunch of extra polling places could add further confusion, not alleviate it. You've assumed for yourself that if Democrats have trouble voting, Republicans must have done it, and it's not that simple.

Do you ever get tired of being such a goddamn liar?

 

[tstorm823]

Do you ever get tired of being such a goddamn liar?

Do you ever get tired of typing useless, single-sentence nonsense posts?

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

The longest waits are primarily in blue cities in blue counties in purple areas, where exactly these practices focus their efforts trying to get people to the polls, not actually knowing where the people they drive in are registered to vote. Better regulated voting and less third-party meddling would decrease the wait times for people, not increase them. Adding a bunch of extra polling places could add further confusion, not alleviate it. You've assumed for yourself that if Democrats have trouble voting, Republicans must have done it, and it's not that simple.

Sure it is, you just don't want to see it. Your belief system requires it to not be true.

Texas closes hundreds of polling sites, making it harder for minorities to vote

Guardian analysis finds that places where black and Latino population is growing by the largest numbers experienced the majority of closures and could benefit Republicans

www.theguardian.com

Southern U.S. states have closed 1,200 polling places in recent years: rights group

States across the American South have closed nearly 1,200 polling places since the Supreme Court weakened a landmark voting-discrimination law in 2013, according to a report released by a civil-rights group on Tuesday.

www.reuters.com

Why Do Nonwhite Georgia Voters Have To Wait In Line For Hours? Too Few Polling Places

The state's voter rolls have grown by nearly 2 million since the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, but polling locations have been cut by almost 10%.

www.npr.org

How GOP lawyers intimidated a blue Texas county into shutting down 9 polling sites

This is not how the law is supposed to work.

www.vox.com

The cities and counties might be blue, but the states tend to be very much red, and running elections is state-level politics

So, again: Why do you support making it harder for legal voters to cast votes legally? And how is legal voters casting legal votes "stealing an election"?

 

[BrawlMan]

So, again: Why do you support making it harder for legal voters to cast votes legally? And how is legal voters casting legal votes "stealing an election"?

Because he supports cowards, traitors, and bitches-in-boxstands. If the person he wants to win doesn't win the league away, he'll cheat or support cheating anyway possible just to feel better about himself. And now he's going to do some on the fly, made up bullshit to make excuses, derail the argument, or extend the goal post further. You know, the usual.

 

[Buyetyen]

Do you ever get tired of typing useless, single-sentence nonsense posts?

As long as it keeps winding you up.

But hey, at least my nonsense doesn't advocate for disenfranchising people in the name of winning. It would be less galling if you were just honest about your anti-democracy stance.

 

[tstorm823]

The cities and counties might be blue, but the states tend to be very much red, and running elections is state-level politics

Running elections is primarily county-level, though that does vary slightly state to state. The opening, closing, and staffing of polling places is Georgia is done on the county level, with the state being relatively hands off in that process.

So, again: Why do you support making it harder for legal voters to cast votes legally? And how is legal voters casting legal votes "stealing an election"?

Closing polling places doesn't necessarily make voting harder. Polling places need to close, open, and move as the population move about. Resources are wasted keeping open spots that have depopulated, and those resources could be used to speed up the voting process in other places. The federal law prohibiting the southern states from moving around polling places could be part of the reason it's such an unkempt mess down there, pointing out a bunch of closed polling places says absolutely nothing about whether it's more difficult to vote, and it definitely doesn't mean it's more difficult to vote for specifically Democratsa lot of those closures are in rural places that used to have more voters.

As long as it keeps winding you up.

It doesn't. I have fun here.