The Democratic Primary is Upon Us! - Biden is the Presumptive Nominee

[tstorm823]

Although at this point, I think the Democrats should just play Trump's game, and bend every rule to breaking point. Do stuff like increase the size of SCOTUS to 11 with two ultra-liberals, for instance, grotesquely fiddle the voting rolls, etc. Make sure everyone in the country knows the USA's pretty much become an unusually wealthy banana republic and then ask if they want to do something about it.

That's literally been a Democratic suggestion since FDR. When I tell you Trump is a Democrat, and then you say Democrats should play Trump's game, and your suggestion is something Democrats have been considering on and off for nearly a century, you should probably be considering maybe I'm right. Trump is not some unprecedented rule-breaking dictator, he's just playing Democratic politics with an "R".

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Although at this point, I think the Democrats should just play Trump's game, and bend every rule to breaking point. Do stuff like increase the size of SCOTUS to 11 with two ultra-liberals, for instance, grotesquely fiddle the voting rolls, etc. Make sure everyone in the country knows the USA's pretty much become an unusually wealthy banana republic and then ask if they want to do something about it.

AOC last evening found herself in a minor kerfuffle, which irked both progressives and upon which corporate media and moderate Democrats have seized to make farting noises this news cycle, which is that she pointed out M4A may not pass Congressional muster and that Sanders would likely have to negotiate down to a single payer system.

Which...well, yeah. Bad-faith behavior from moderates, the media, and conservatives aside, Democrats have completely forgotten how to negotiate which is why they keep getting overrun by Republicans on policy issues. You don't open with your compromise position and make further concessions from there, you open with your ideal offer from as strong a position as possible. The Democratic party has been so eaten alive by conservatives and moderates acting in bad faith, and from leadership acting in bad faith, behavior and attitudes contrary to self-interest has become the norm.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Hey Dreiko
What's your thoughts on when YouTube cancelled groups like Al Qaeda beheading people? I'm assuming you think this is bad on Youtube's part as well because you're so against cancelling. What about the current crackdown on Pedophiles?

Never heard of a crackdown or canceling either of these things, honestly it sounds surprising this is something to ask because criminal behavior can't be promoted on sites like youtube or the site would be liable so it's just enforcing the law and not "cancelling" something.

This is something that the law decides, not unelected uneducated unidentified internet denizens, which is what makes it ok. Cancelling is what happens when a mob feels like the law failed or is ill-equipped to bring justice so they have to take it into their own hands. Situations like with creeps or terrorists are already being dealt with by the law so there's no need for them to be canceled.

That's great
Hey Dreiko. What do you think of a guy that fabricates evidence and lies about certain individuals and tells his peeps to take them out via social media?

He should be sued for defamation and made to apologize. This has already happened a bunch of times with Jones years before he was canceled in particular, a specific case involving the maker of a brand of turkish yogurt I enjoy (chobani, means shepherd haha), so the system is already working. No need for mobs to be involved.

Alrighty, since I can't gather the information I need, these next questions are going to have some assumptions in it

Here's some internet mob groups:
death threats to pretty much everyone and everything
doxing of political opponents
swatting
homophobic, racist, sexist etc attacks
cancelling

Most of those have threats on the victim. Only one of those doesn't include death threats. Can you pick the one? But apparently you think this is the worst thing ever and MUST BE DEALT WITH RIGHT NOW. How does this not come off as you not having your priorities straight? Yes, having your job attacked is not a nice feeling. Having you life threatened is worse. Deal with the latter before the former.

Let's talk about Freedom of Speech. Because here's what you should be saying through this whole thing Drieko. "I don't like what they say, but I defend their right to say it." Anything less is hypocritical.

Now, what you are doing right now is the exact same route as those talking about Hate Speech. I'm all for that. Put the word Cancel in along side offensive words that are banned (and I personally put even words like racist in there). That would cure all your ills

So, I am assuming that you think Cancelling is only a Leftie thing. There's a massive cottage industry that are all about cancelling people on YouTube. Literally creating accounts so they can review bomb people. Send the mob it to DESTROY other's and attack their job. All to suit a political agenda. But sure, if you add the word Cancel, that's when we need to stop it. This has been going on for years, but once the Leftie do it, it must be the worst thing ever.

What about that thread I created a few weeks ago Dreiko? Sam Harris said he'd never talk to a political opponent. What about last week when Rogan say he wouldn't have people on again because their message is dangerous? Because, if you don't think this is cancelling, (which I don't) how far are they really from this Cancel culture you're against? They don't like talking to a person based on their political views. So... they just need a mob? I've seen Harris' and Rogan comments, there is definitely an attack mob ready to go. So... they just need to attack someone's job? But attacking someone is absolutely fine because 'Free Speech'.

But then, the cheery picking of Free Speechers has always fascinated me. Deriding people because of their political views but defending people who are allies by shouting Free Speech... without thinking about why they really aren't Free Speechers by breaking their own rules

I don't want to stop people from attempting to cancel people, I want to neuter their power to succeed at it. They should still be able to attempt to do so, anything less is tyranny.


Unlike with having your life threatened, having your job threatened is something that can actually affect reality and isn't just a hollow threat like the actual death threats are. I think to pretend that there's any comparable risk of harm coming from the average death threat is absurd.

How many people have been killed due to reasons stemming directly from threats over the internet where someone was motivated to kill them due to that? The only cases come to mind is with gang-affiliated people having "online beef" which is not the typical thing we think of when we picture 4chan trolls sending death threats lol.


Hate speech laws claim certain conduct should be banned, my approach is that certain conduct should be ridiculed and lose it's capacity for power. People should still certainly be free to act in this way though, we simply should judge them like we judge the people who think non-whites are inferior humans or what have you.

 

[Seanchaidh]

That's literally been a Democratic suggestion since FDR. When I tell you Trump is a Democrat, and then you say Democrats should play Trump's game, and your suggestion is something Democrats have been considering on and off for nearly a century, you should probably be considering maybe I'm right. Trump is not some unprecedented rule-breaking dictator, he's just playing Democratic politics with an "R".

Even you must recognize how flimsy this argument is.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Morning primary news round-up!

The first post-NH poll has been released for Nevada, published by the Las Vegas Review-Journal. The results show Biden at 18%, Warren at 13%, Steyer at 11%, Buttigieg and Klobuchar tied at 10%, and other candidates at 25%. A decisive victory for union leaders who happen to be Center for American Progress advisory board members and not at all conflicted in interest.

Meanwhile, other candidates seem to have taken the lead in Texas, which nobody cares about because it's a red state and will never flip blue to demographic shifts, and California, which has prompted concerns among establishment Democrats whether an individual state should have that much influence over the nomination process.

Chris Matthews is said to be in intensive care this morning suffering crippling lower gastrointestinal pain, as during last evening's Bernie rally in Texas a woman seemed to suffer a medical emergency. Bernie stopped his stump speech, requested medical assistance for her, offered her his water, and didn't resume speaking until she was being cared for. But someone in the crowd jokingly called it holy water and Bernie said the word "bullshit" a couple times in his stump speech, so we know what's going to be the headline.

Michael Bloomberg's meme stampede continues, as mockery of his campaign's brilliant plan to contract the people responsible for Fyre Fest's advertising reaches new heights. Leaks from Plarium Games hint at the most ambitious crossover: the addition of Bloomberg as a playable character to RAID: Shadow Legends. A new mod for Total War: Three Kingdoms is also said to be in development, allowing players to replace Cao-Cao with Michael Bloomberg. This accompanies the mod for Total War: Warhammer 2 that was released last week, adding Buttigieg to the list of available Skaven leaders.

A new spooky PAC called "Beat Bernie 2020" announced its existence yesterday. Citing the "divisiveness" of Bernie, Sanders' supporters' toxicity, and that his supporters may not vote for any other candidate, the PAC supports the criticism and marginalization of Bernie supporters, and nomination of anyone other than Bernie. So, you know, Bernie supporters get pissed and stay home all but guaranteeing the re-election of Donald Trump, who according to this PAC must be defeated in November regardless of consequence. As coincidence would have it, the PAC refuses to disclose donors, its leadership or founders, affiliations, or any financial information at all including donor dollar amount of contributions, citing the need to remain anonymous for safety from Sanders supporters.

Peak Citizens United right there. Bare minimum, never mind parallels to the fraudulent Democratic Coalition Against Trump PAC, or when PUMA was revealed to be a false flagging/pied piper strategy by the RNC and McCain campaign. By now one would think the no-brainer answer to "why do we keep getting caught corrupting the electoral process" is "don't be corrupt", but apparently doubling down on whatever it is this PAC is trying to do is clearly the answer someone came to.

 

[Trunkage]

That's literally been a Democratic suggestion since FDR. When I tell you Trump is a Democrat, and then you say Democrats should play Trump's game, and your suggestion is something Democrats have been considering on and off for nearly a century, you should probably be considering maybe I'm right. Trump is not some unprecedented rule-breaking dictator, he's just playing Democratic politics with an "R".

Even you must recognize how flimsy this argument is.

I would point out that, while not dictating from his office as much as Trump, Obama still dictated quite a lot. Not as much as Bush. In fact, I think if I've done my math right, he's the lowest EO per year since FDR. Now unprecedented and rule breaking, that unfortunately comes down to interpretation. Regan put a bunch of people in jail because they were striking. Even Trump hasn't gone that far yet. I would point out that Trump has a bunch of his stuff publicly knocked back by the supreme court. So the actual EO 'should' end up legal. He also gave some pardons I do like. And Republicans called lots of things Obama did illegal eg. DACA. But those also ended being legal. So... who actually knows. Trump is probably going to pull Regan numbers and I think he was the closest the US got to a dictator.

 

[tstorm823]

Even you must recognize how flimsy this argument is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bill_of_1937

Agema's plan to "play Trump's game" was proposed by FDR, the most beloved of all Democrats.

 

[Silvanus]

So there's just no difference between someone who'd do that to you and someone who thinks that the person doing that to you is a primitive asshole with ignorant beliefs? Both are homophobic? Alrighty then.

That's not what I said, and you're well aware.

I personally think that's insane and that you're alienating folks by likening the two attitudes. I think you are making people think "well, if the guy who is cool with gay folks is also homphobic because he's not 100% in alignment with all of their issues, then being homophobic can't be that bad!", it's kinda like what's happening when people call things like slavery and people not liking white superheroes turning black for no narrative reason to tick a box both racist. One thing is not like the other lol.

I didn't "liken" your attitude to that of the people who harassed and threatened me. But it's blatantly obvious that prejudice can take more than one form. Assault is merely one; child abandonment is another. The belief that gay people do not have a right to live without those cruelties is, to my mind, another.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Even you must recognize how flimsy this argument is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bill_of_1937

Agema's plan to "play Trump's game" was proposed by FDR, the most beloved of all Democrats.

And surely you can fill in the blanks of why that's such a flimsy case.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Evening primary news round-up...

I took the day off from primary news. So, I guess I'll just do what cable news pundits do.

The day began light, when Joe Biden's leg hair achieved sentience and forcefully depilated itself. Calling itself Chewie Biden, the Presidential hopefully appointed it Biden's new campaign advisor. Chewie Biden immediately went to work, launching several new voter outreach initiatives across the country, which the campaign hopes will buoy his declining polling numbers in South Carolina.

Things quickly turned sour, when millions of Bernie Sanders supporters across the country were stricken blind and sick. The cause of this sickness was rapidly discovered: Hillary Clinton falsely endorsed the Vermont Senator via tweet, but also included a selfie of her genitalia. Schadenfreude quickly turned to horror, as Bernie supporters were unable to look away before permanent damage was done. When approached for comment, the former Presidential hopeful stated, "delete that e-mail, fuckbois!".

Bill Weld continues challenging Trump for the Republican Presidential nomination.

An event horizon suddenly manifested around the state formerly known as Iowa at approximately 6:27 pm local time. No details as to how or why this rogue celestial phenomenon developed, but leading astrophysicists and experts in quantum mechanics theorize it may have had something to do with decoding delegate math. Witnesses outside the state are reported to be repeating the phrase "Iowa! Iowa! Cthulhu fhtagn!". Updates will come as the story continues, but for now, onlookers and travelers are advised to avoid Iowa at all costs. No changes to traffic patterns are expected.

In a surprise press conference, former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg revealed that he is actually an extra-terrestrial being from the world Billionabulon, situated in the Cassiopeia constellation. He offers the secrets to matter replication and faster-than-light travel, but only in trade for Earth's "hottest pieces of ass". President Trump immediately ordered the Department of Justice to file suit against the Democratic National Party, as the revelation of Michael Bloomberg's alien status renders him ineligible for the Presidency.

Tulsi Gabbard's hopes of unifying the Democratic party and urging them to seek non-billionaire sources of funding by creating and publishing a not-for-profit "Democrats of 2020" swimsuit calendar were dashed when fellow candidate Bernie Sanders showed up wearing a Wicked Weasel.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

So there's just no difference between someone who'd do that to you and someone who thinks that the person doing that to you is a primitive asshole with ignorant beliefs? Both are homophobic? Alrighty then.

That's not what I said, and you're well aware.

I personally think that's insane and that you're alienating folks by likening the two attitudes. I think you are making people think "well, if the guy who is cool with gay folks is also homphobic because he's not 100% in alignment with all of their issues, then being homophobic can't be that bad!", it's kinda like what's happening when people call things like slavery and people not liking white superheroes turning black for no narrative reason to tick a box both racist. One thing is not like the other lol.

I didn't "liken" your attitude to that of the people who harassed and threatened me. But it's blatantly obvious that prejudice can take more than one form. Assault is merely one; child abandonment is another. The belief that gay people do not have a right to live without those cruelties is, to my mind, another.

Sure, prejudice can even be non-phobic order-based concessions aimed at maintaining normalcy such that progress can be achieved smoothly and more people can be willingly brought on with it rather than dragged forward against their will. But such a thinking is actually nuanced and you need to remove the charmingly powerful tool of accusing people of being homophobic hence automatically wrong from your arsenal in order to have this discussion, which not many people are willing to do.


But yeah, I wanna be charitable and say you didn't intend to liken it, but I'm 100% positive anyone reading what was said would come off with the impression that you were heavily implying it or why even bring it up.

I don't think anyone has the right to live without those cruelties, gay or not. I think it's always someone's good graces and charity that allow people to for the most part avoid them. There's way more children abandoned each day because their parents are incompetent or destitute or horrible people than there are gay kids being disowned. To pretend this is a unique issue you face just doesn't make sense. Whether you're abandoned for being gay or not isn't the important thing, the important thing is just the fact that this is happening to people in general and being equipped to deal with the abandoned kids. Trying to just make the deadbeat dad who has 7 kids with 7 different women be an upstanding man isn't gonna happen any more than trying to make the homophobe accept his gay kids. Focusing on those people is just our instinct for revenge kicking in and overshadowing the need to actually help people.

 

[Silvanus]

Sure, prejudice can even be non-phobic order-based concessions aimed at maintaining normalcy such that progress can be achieved smoothly and more people can be willingly brought on with it rather than dragged forward against their will. But such a thinking is actually nuanced and you need to remove the charmingly powerful tool of accusing people of being homophobic hence automatically wrong from your arsenal in order to have this discussion, which not many people are willing to do.

You want me to be painfully polite when describing your position, whilst you're being supremely dismissive and insulting towards me (again, saying I have no right to live without discrimination, and that my innate characteristics are a "life choice").

I don't think anyone has the right to live without those cruelties, gay or not. I think it's always someone's good graces and charity that allow people to for the most part avoid them. There's way more children abandoned each day because their parents are incompetent or destitute or horrible people than there are gay kids being disowned. To pretend this is a unique issue you face just doesn't make sense.

Nobody is pretending assault and child abandonment are unique to one community. This is another misrepresentation. My point was that the incidence is severely higher.

If you believe nobody has the right to live free of discrimination, assault, and abandonment, then you're so far from the legal and moral norm in Western society I don't think theres any reconciling.

Whether you're abandoned for being gay or not isn't the important thing, the important thing is just the fact that this is happening to people in general and being equipped to deal with the abandoned kids. Trying to just make the deadbeat dad who has 7 kids with 7 different women be an upstanding man isn't gonna happen any more than trying to make the homophobe accept his gay kids. Focusing on those people is just our instinct for revenge kicking in and overshadowing the need to actually help people.

What do you mean "focusing on"? Do you believe society should ignore it when these phenomena disproportionately affect certain groups for specific reasons?

Extend that further. Should we deliberately leave racism not addressed, because assault can happen to anyone?

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

If you address assault, you will end up addressing racist-flavor assault in the process, because that's a subgroup of it, whereas addressing racist assault addresses no other type of assault. Even were you to have a situation where minorities are over represented in these crimes, you do still benefit more people overall by just generally addressing assault, hence it's the more moral approach. The only prism it isn't moral through is one aiming for equity, often to the expense of the greater good.

Can't sinplify this any more.

 

[Silvanus]

If you address assault, you will end up addressing racist-flavor assault in the process, because that's a subgroup of it, whereas addressing racist assault addresses no other type of assault. Even were you to have a situation where minorities are over represented in these crimes, you do still benefit more people overall by just generally addressing assault, hence it's the more moral approach. The only prism it isn't moral through is one aiming for equity, often to the expense of the greater good.
O
Can't sinplify this any more.

You can't simplify it any more because simplistic solutions to endemic, societal problems are destined to fail. Simplicity in policy is not a virtue.

Underneath the above approach, I notice, is the false premise that this is an "either/or" situation; as if addressing racism and homophobia somehow preclude addressing assault and crime generally. There's no reason whatsoever for that to be true; it's a false binary to give the impression that those of us who want to address discrimination are somehow detracting from something else. It's just patent nonsense, "us vs them" stuff.

Deliberately ignore inequalities and injustice, and you let them fester. If anyone doubted that people in today's day and age genuinely argue that we shouldn't tackle discrimination, there it is, dressed up in sophistry.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

If you address assault, you will end up addressing racist-flavor assault in the process, because that's a subgroup of it, whereas addressing racist assault addresses no other type of assault. Even were you to have a situation where minorities are over represented in these crimes, you do still benefit more people overall by just generally addressing assault, hence it's the more moral approach. The only prism it isn't moral through is one aiming for equity, often to the expense of the greater good.
O
Can't sinplify this any more.

You can't simplify it any more because simplistic solutions to endemic, societal problems are destined to fail. Simplicity in policy is not a virtue.

Underneath the above approach, I notice, is the false premise that this is an "either/or" situation; as if addressing racism and homophobia somehow preclude addressing assault and crime generally. There's no reason whatsoever for that to be true; it's a false binary to give the impression that those of us who want to address discrimination are somehow detracting from something else. It's just patent nonsense, "us vs them" stuff.

Deliberately ignore inequalities and injustice, and you let them fester. If anyone doubted that people in today's day and age genuinely argue that we shouldn't tackle discrimination, there it is, dressed up in sophistry.

There is an either/or, since we have finite amounts of resources and time. Surely by addressing assault in a way that reduces it, that'll reduce racist and homophobic flavors of it, by definition. I don't see what the issue is.

Surely addressing assault doesn't preclude people of addressing homophobic assault too, unless you are trying to say that it's less violent by default and if it wasn't homophobic it wouldn't even meet the criteria of assault. (which is the only scenario my approach would NOT cover, any other one is covered)

I think in the past the issue was that if assault was racist or homophobic it wasn't treated as assault, it was tolerated, so I think my suggestion fixes the issue.

Your approach basically over-focuses on one thing when proportionally it doesn't deserve nearly as much focus. I think there's an element of glory-seeking here, an element of righting wrongs and correcting injustices, a cynical approach that aims at exalting the virtues of the supporters more so than just generally helping people the most possible which is where I come from when discussing such subjects.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Late-breaking primary news this evening! This is a thing that actually happened [https://twitter.com/banditelli/status/1229950357976969216]. I mean, fuck it. I give up. Not even jokes about Elder Gods rising in Iowa due to delegate math can compare to reality this year.

EDIT: Not to be outdone, Warren says "hold my beer [https://twitter.com/CANCEL_SAM/status/1229972078755008512]".

 

[Trunkage]

Late-breaking primary news this evening! This is a thing that actually happened [https://twitter.com/banditelli/status/1229950357976969216]. I mean, fuck it. I give up. Not even jokes about Elder Gods rising in Iowa due to delegate math can compare to reality this year.

EDIT: Not to be outdone, Warren says "hold my beer [https://twitter.com/CANCEL_SAM/status/1229972078755008512]".

I can't tell if it's sexist because Warren is telling women tonclean or sexist because men cant clean themselves

Maybe it's double sexist. Sexist all the way down

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Late-breaking primary news this evening! This is a thing that actually happened [https://twitter.com/banditelli/status/1229950357976969216]. I mean, fuck it. I give up. Not even jokes about Elder Gods rising in Iowa due to delegate math can compare to reality this year.

EDIT: Not to be outdone, Warren says "hold my beer [https://twitter.com/CANCEL_SAM/status/1229972078755008512]".

I can't tell if it's sexist because Warren is telling women tonclean or sexist because men cant clean themselves

Maybe it's double sexist. Sexist all the way down

I think it points to the fact that women have, on average, higher standards of cleanliness, whereas men, on average, tend to be less affected by messy surroundings and lower hygiene. Not sure if it's sexist or not but to observe that it's "a thing" surely isn't sexist.


The only way it can be sexist is to indirectly imply that men can't clean as well as women can if you pay them just because they don't care if something is dirty. No, you can not care and still clean just as well as a woman, cause it's your job lol. Though that's too nitpicky for my taste so I give her a pass.


(and I don't get the issue with the thing Klobucher said above, is the name she mentioned some sort of slang slur or something? lol)

 

[tstorm823]

(and I don't get the issue with the thing Klobucher said above, is the name she mentioned some sort of slang slur or something? lol)

Well, trying to use your elementary school Spanish class experience to connect to fluent Spanish speakers is some really poorly thought out pandering. As it turns out, people who speak other languages likely connect to shared human experiences rather than those things they explicitly didn't do but happened in a language they speak.

And then of course Bernie Bros go way over the top, and decide that she's enunciating clearly (like politicians giving speeches always do) and telling that story because she's a racist who thinks Spanish-speaking people are intellectually equivalent to 4th-graders, which is an insane suggestion.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

(and I don't get the issue with the thing Klobucher said above, is the name she mentioned some sort of slang slur or something? lol)

Well, trying to use your elementary school Spanish class experience to connect to fluent Spanish speakers is some really poorly thought out pandering. As it turns out, people who speak other languages likely connect to shared human experiences rather than those things they explicitly didn't do but happened in a language they speak.

And then of course Bernie Bros go way over the top, and decide that she's enunciating clearly (like politicians giving speeches always do) and telling that story because she's a racist who thinks Spanish-speaking people are intellectually equivalent to 4th-graders, which is an insane suggestion.

Lol that sounds like SJWs to me more so than any sort of bro, bros don't typically tend to find such suggestions insulting or damaging so they'd have not much to gain from the accusation, they find them funny if anything.

But yeah, I won't really care if someone can speak Greek, but if someone speaks Japanese (and isn't actually Japanese) that's infinitely more interesting cause it tells me something about that person rather than about the place they happened to be born in.