|
it’s time to primary the mods.
|
# ? Jun 6, 2020 22:34 |
|
|
# ? May 6, 2024 02:39 |
|
Taintrunner posted:its time to primary the mods. So now you support electoralism, huh
|
# ? Jun 6, 2020 22:36 |
|
sleeptalker posted:Are you trying to suggest that voting for someone who isn't a rapist is a Russian plot?
|
# ? Jun 6, 2020 23:45 |
|
Gazpacho posted:nah i'm pointing out the futility of voting outside the party system for anyone who wants political outcomes and not revolutionary cred Voting thrid-party is marginally better then not-voting, and much better then voting for either of the majors parties. Electorialism is basically the bare-minimum you can do, and should be done in addition to all other political actions.
|
# ? Jun 6, 2020 23:46 |
|
what if biden is the accelerationist option like what if you're 100% sure that socialism will come if and only if Biden is president. would you vote for him then?
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 00:31 |
|
Chuka Umana posted:what if biden is the accelerationist option gently caress off btich
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 00:33 |
|
Chuka Umana posted:would you vote for him then? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsNHeSoABYQ
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 00:33 |
|
(i would not because you should never give a rapist your backing)
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 00:34 |
|
dex_sda posted:gently caress off btich i was just being flippant don't throw slurs at me
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 00:36 |
|
Gazpacho posted:nah i'm pointing out the futility of voting outside the party system for anyone who wants political outcomes and not revolutionary cred I don't know if anyone expects revolutionary cred from something as non-revolutionary as voting. Anyway the US technically has a public campaign funding thing that requires a party get 5% of the popular presidential vote. Reaching that goal might be a good seed for establishing a new party, or it might just get the funding bipartisanly repealed, but IMO it's better than telling the major parties you'll support them even if they pick rapists.
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 01:15 |
|
i'll sell my vote on SA-Mart
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 01:54 |
ban any body who voted for obama or clinton too.
|
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 01:59 |
|
exmarx posted:ban any body who voted
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 02:03 |
|
in an unprecedented reversal of C-SPAM policy I'm gonna ban everyone who doesn't write-in Avenatti
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 02:08 |
|
exmarx posted:ban any body who voted for obama or clinton too. ^ | ——— This
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 02:21 |
|
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 20:15 |
|
twoday posted:Came here to post something similar to this. No, the entire point of my OP is that it does not matter who the candidate is, even for what office they are running, or their party alignment. Full-stop it should be a bannable offense to advocate voting for a rapist. quote:
It isn't a marxist radicalization chamber effort. By arguing that there should be a discourse on if a candidate is good or not, even knowing they are a rapist, you are arguing that rape is somehow not an immediate disqualifying event. That someone can be a rapist, and it is OK because of other reasons. If someone comes in and makes a past about how biden is better than trump or whatever, the immediate response should be 'hey please do not advocate voting for a rapist for any reason' and if they continue, they get a ban for advocating voting for a rapist, again, someone who has done rapes to people why is this actually a debatable point? It's honestly pretty embarrassing to misread that hard, or to argue that this should be a policy for debate. If a lil baby lurker comes and posts about biden or whatever, there is a learning opportunity, but there is absolutely no reason after a good faith attempt to teach that any viewpoint other than "rapists shouldnt be voted for" is an opinion someone should be protected for having. Quoting Malcom X to advocate voting for Joseph R. Biden is uh, is something all right.
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 20:29 |
|
Gazpacho posted:nah i'm pointing out the futility of voting outside the party system for anyone who wants political outcomes and not revolutionary cred The funniest part of this is that it implies voting inside the party system is going to get a "political outcome" other than a change in the color of tie the president wears.
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 20:38 |
|
Skyl3lazer posted:Quoting Malcom X to advocate voting for Joseph R. Biden is uh, is something all right. what's interesting about the moment we're in now is that the elections have become like an afterthought to this much larger and spontaneous movement, which has many working-class characteristics and is making its own independent demands although the liberals have been trying their damndest to co-opt it into ruling class approved channels. it's also an interesting contrast to the bernie sanders campaign which, for all its positives, was still in the mold of "please sir may i have some more." like what do you think would've happened if bernie got elected? was the ruling class going to just give up and surrender? politicians don't make history, the people do when they move in the streets en masse. the masses make history.
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 20:43 |
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJYqQdtd2DQ
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 20:46 |
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:imo... knock biden all you want and you see my gang tag. and not saying don't condemn a person but don't be in such a hurry to do it either. i think you'll end up in a bad place if you make your war with the voters who made their own calculations to support biden over bernie. a lot of people thought biden would be better able to take on trump, were they wrong? maybe. but that's the decision they went with and it's worth considering why they drew that conclusion and what bernie could've done that would have captured the imagination of these voters -- particularly older african-americans, but that would've probably required a lot more groundwork laid in advance. you know some of these people were victims of KKK terror or when they were children and had relatives they knew murdered and never spoke about it with white people. do those voters think electing joe biden is going to solve racism? i dunno... but if you get super D&D about it and have a meltdown and condemn those people because of who they voted for the 2020 democratic party presidonkle primary... eh i wouldn't be in a huge hurry. This isn't an argument against banning people advocating voting for rapists, this is a bernie vs biden primary argument, or an argument for or against electoralism. None of that is the point of this thread, which is that people shouldn't be allowed to advocate voting for rapists. Skyl3lazer posted:My suggestion is a simple one: a single warning to desist, then immediate banning of anyone who places the safety and well being of victims secondary to winning a political football game. My dislike of joe biden (and of trump) on a political axis is completely immaterial to the point I'm making in this thread, which is that if someone has done a rape, then the person defending their actions (by advocating that you should vote for them) should be a bannable offense. If I went up and said, "Vote for Donald Trump because he would Restore Order to our Country" or whatever, that is the same as saying, "It does not matter that Joe Biden raped a staffer of his, vote for him because he would Restore Order to our Country." I believe that this should, for self explanatory reasons, and as stated already, be a bannable offense. Skyl3lazer has issued a correction as of 22:46 on Jun 7, 2020 |
# ? Jun 7, 2020 22:44 |
|
Skyl3lazer posted:This isn't an argument against banning people advocating voting for rapists, this is a bernie vs biden primary argument, or an argument for or against electoralism. None of that is the point of this thread, which is that people shouldn't be allowed to advocate voting for rapists. Okay, we get it
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 23:09 |
|
Skyl3lazer posted:
Skyl3lazer posted:No, the entire point of my OP is that it does not matter who the candidate is, even for what office they are running, or their party alignment. Full-stop it should be a bannable offense to advocate voting for a rapist. Skyl3lazer posted:This isn't an argument against banning people advocating voting for rapists, this is a bernie vs biden primary argument, or an argument for or against electoralism. None of that is the point of this thread, which is that people shouldn't be allowed to advocate voting for rapists.
|
# ? Jun 7, 2020 23:21 |
|
Skyl3lazer posted:No, the entire point of my OP is that it does not matter who the candidate is, even for what office they are running, or their party alignment. Full-stop it should be a bannable offense to advocate voting for a rapist. Alright, perhaps I inferred too much from your OP about your intentions, and my intense cynicism about electoral politics led me to unfairly presume that this was just a ploy to defeat Biden electorally rather than a legitimate gripe, and I apologize for that. It is a legitimate argument that one should not vote for a rapist. However, I still uphold the general spirit of my previous post, that you will be able to get more people on your side in this if we don't ban them for bringing it up. Allow me to explain: Skyl3lazer posted:If someone comes in and makes a past about how biden is better than trump or whatever, the immediate response should be 'hey please do not advocate voting for a rapist for any reason' and if they continue, they get a ban for advocating voting for a rapist, again, someone who has done rapes to people why is this actually a debatable point? I agree with all this, except for the part where we should adopt this ban rule. To return to my previous point, I think you're also presupposing some things. The first is that you presuppose that everyone knows in detail about the allegations against Biden. Not everyone follows politics as much as we do. Or have only heard a vague recap of these stories which was watered down by the way it was reported in the media. The second is that you presuppose that everyone knows that voting for a rapist is wrong. I agree that it is, but a lot of people know only that they should vote for the lesser of two evils, and are prepared to hold their nose while they cast their stinky Biden vote because they think it's the best they can do, given the circumstances. BrutalistMcDonalds did not post this to defend people who are going to vote for Biden, knowing that he is a rapist and that you shouldn't vote for a rapist. He posted this about people who think that it's better to vote for Biden than to vote for Trump, and don't know those other things. I think we shouldn't condemn those people, I think we should invite them in, and educate them. Those people should come here, they should hear those responses, we should show them why they should despise him as much as we do, and explain to them why voting for him is a bad and wrong thing to do. I would be happy to see that conversation happen in c-spam on a daily basis. Skyl3lazer posted:If a lil baby lurker comes and posts about biden or whatever, there is a learning opportunity, but there is absolutely no reason after a good faith attempt to teach that any viewpoint other than "rapists shouldnt be voted for" is an opinion someone should be protected for having. Yeah, good. Ok. I am saying that we need to focus on offering that learning opportunity. If we adopt this rule right now, that anyone advocating voting for Biden in C-SPAM will be banned, it will discourage people from approaching or listening to our opinions about presidential candidates, as I explained in my previous post. Most people are a lot less obsessed about politics than we are and haven't thought about this to anywhere near the same degree. During an election where they think their only choice is between the two candidates, and often haven't seriously considered that they should not vote for either, they are not going to listen very hard to people who immediately dismiss both candidates. If anything, they will probably be coming in here to try to convince you that you should vote instead of not voting, and you should have that argument with them and convince them that you're right. But no hearts and minds were ever won at the point of a bayonet. Skyl3lazer posted:It isn't a marxist radicalization chamber effort. I'm saying it should be. twoday has issued a correction as of 02:34 on Jun 8, 2020 |
# ? Jun 8, 2020 02:06 |
|
Also, not getting banned isn't "protecting" Biden supporters. Protecting them is what D&D is doing. You know, the forum we distinguish ourselves from by not making a bunch of dumbass rules about what people can say
|
# ? Jun 8, 2020 02:42 |
|
this thread was good as a bit but now it's boring
|
# ? Jun 8, 2020 02:45 |
talking about voting for a rapist < actually voting for war criminals imo. all obama/clinton voters should be banned.
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2020 05:27 |
|
a neat idea, but it implies that your vote matters ok i lied i think youre trying to stir up pointless dumb poo poo
|
# ? Jun 8, 2020 08:20 |
|
jesus christ the zipper on my pants broke and my weiner was just flopping around luckily everyone was at lunch
|
# ? Dec 1, 2021 01:05 |
|
|
# ? May 6, 2024 02:39 |
|
a lot of good points ITT
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 16:21 |