DNC Primary: Biden: Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > DNC Primary: Biden: Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.

«‹›271 »

Who do you wish to win the Democratic primaries? This poll is closed.
Joe Biden, the Inappropriate Toucher	18	1.46%
Bernie Sanders, the Hand Flailer	665	54.11%
Elizabeth Warren, the Plan Maker	319	25.96%
Kamala Harris, the Cop Lord	26	2.12%
Cory Booker, the Super Hero Wannabe	5	0.41%
Julian Castro, the Twin	5	0.41%
Kirsten Gillibrand, the Franken Killer	5	0.41%
Pete Buttigieg, the Troop Sociopath	17	1.38%
Robert Francis O'Rourke, the Fake Latino	3	0.24%
Jay Inslee, the Climate Alarmist	8	0.65%
Marianne Williamson, the Crystal Queen	86	7.00%
Tulsi Gabbard, the Muslim Hater	23	1.87%
Andrew Yang, the $1000 Fool	32	2.60%
Eric Swalwell, the Insurance Wife Guy	2	0.16%
Amy Klobuchar, the Comb Enthusiast	1	0.08%
Bill de Blasio, the NYPD Most Hated	4	0.33%
Tim Ryan, the Dope Face	3	0.24%
John Hickenlooper, the Also Ran	7	0.57%
Total:	1229 votes

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

King of Solomon: Oct 23, 2008; S S

WampaLord posted:

No one here is saying "you gotta hand it to Joe Rogan" they're saying it's good Bernie is getting his message out.

https://twitter.com/GarbageApe/status/1159102430925205506

Just gonna throw this out there, but I'm pretty sure it's not leftists complaining about Bernie going on these shows.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 17:06

OctaMurk: Jun 21, 2013

twodot posted:

I feel pretty strongly it is very possible to engage with morally impure voters without boosting morally impure media personalities.

Ok, so dont appear on, uh, pretty much any major media platform? Lmao

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:14

Cerebral Bore: Apr 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

And oh yeah, even leaving aside the fact that morally pure media platforms are rarer than a hen's teeth, the idea that already established large media platforms are somehow boosted by leftists appearing on them and blatantly contradicting the rest of their messaging is extremely loving stupid. So stupid, in fact, that the bad faith behind these complaints should be obvious to anybody with even half a brain.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:15

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

The Bernie Boost was so powerful it travelled years back in time and made Joe Rogan one of the most popular podcasts before Bernie ever appeared on it.

Thanks Bernie, and just after he appeared on Fox News and retroactively made it the most-watched news network in America.

Now we have to let Trump win in order to punish Bernard Sanders for his impure appearances.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:19

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

OctaMurk posted:

Ok, so dont appear on, uh, pretty much any major media platform? Lmao

No see they're going to draw some inane distinction between going on CNN or Fox versus going on a specific show that makes it bad. So sure CNN did their damndest to spread lies during the debate and are actively contributing to suppression of the climate crisis, but CNN is good because its "the media" while some specific host is bad and evil and if you go on their show you deserve the worst in the world.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:19

No Safe Word: Feb 26, 2005

twodot posted:

I feel pretty strongly it is very possible to engage with morally impure voters without boosting morally impure media personalities.

if you feel pretty strongly about it being "very possible", care to enumerate the ways in which it can be done?

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:22

B B: Dec 1, 2005

twodot posted:

I feel pretty strongly it is very possible to engage with morally impure voters without boosting morally impure media personalities.

Could you give us a list of 10 "morally pure media personalities" on CNN and MSNBC, twodot?

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:25

mcmagic: Jul 1, 2004; If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

WampaLord posted:

FYI Bernie's rural revitalization plan that's he had released for months has this as well

https://berniesanders.com/issues/revitalizing-rural-america/

Warren's plan is more specific. Bernie's plan is also good though.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:26

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

No Safe Word posted:

if you feel pretty strongly about it being "very possible", care to enumerate the ways in which it can be done?

twitch, youtube, facebook, Instagram, townhalls and rallies in whatever geographies watch Joe Rogan, live appearances at events that Joe Rogan viewers like, volunteers reaching out to Joe Rogan viewers individually, that's all I could think of in 3 minutes.
edit:

B B posted:

Could you give us a list of 10 "morally pure media personalities" on CNN and MSNBC, twodot?

I don't watch those, so no, if you've got a list of 10 CNN media personalities that are good I'm willing to listen.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:27

crazy cloud: Nov 7, 2012; by Cyrano4747; Lipstick Apathy

Warren's plan isn't more specific it's just more complicated so centrist wonk fuckers can climax faster when they circlejerk over another plan that matters zero because Warren will never be president.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:29

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

twodot posted:

twitch, youtube, facebook, Instagram, townhalls and rallies in whatever geographies watch Joe Rogan, live appearances at events that Joe Rogan viewers like, volunteers reaching out to Joe Rogan viewers individually, that's all I could think of in 3 minutes.
edit:

I don't watch those, so no, if you've got a list of 10 CNN media personalities that are good I'm willing to listen.

Joe Rogan is on YouTube you twit

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:30

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Cerebral Bore posted:

Gotta say it's pretty wild that the exact same libs who are super loud about how them only important thing is beating Trump and the need to reach out to win GOP voters are also the ones who get absolutely livid once somebody on the left tries to get their message out in non-liberal forums.

"Reach out to GOP voters" doesn't mean persuade GOP voters that progressive policy will help them, it means adopt the corporate-friendly policies of GOP donors and add a spoonful of racism to make them go down easier.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:35

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

crazy cloud posted:

Warren's plan isn't more specific it's just more complicated so centrist wonk fuckers can climax faster when they circlejerk over another plan that matters zero because Warren will never be president.

here's the entirety of the linked plan from bernie where it touches on broadband

https://berniesanders.com/issues/revitalizing-rural-america/ posted:

Ensure access to high-speed broadband internet to every American. It is absurd that we do not have universal, high quality, affordable broadband access for every single American. According to the FCC, 39% of Americans living in rural areas lacked access to high-speed broadband internet and 30% don�t have access to mobile LTE broadband. We need strong broadband coverage across this country if business is going to thrive, create jobs and be competitive in the national and global economies. Quality broadband is essential for health care services, education and for the day-to-day needs of rural Americans.

so the plan is: we should have it. agreed!

here's the entirety of warren's plan where it touches on broadband:

https://medium.com/@teamwarren/my-plan-to-invest-in-rural-america-94e3a80d88aa posted:

Make it clear in federal statute that municipalities have the right to build their own broadband networks. Many small towns and rural areas have turned to municipal networks to provide broadband access in places that the private market has failed to serve � but today, as many as 26 states have passed laws hindering or banning municipalities from building their own broadband infrastructure to protect the interests of giant telecom companies. We will preempt these laws and return this power to local governments.

Create an Office of Broadband Access in my Department of Economic Development that will manage a new $85 billion federal grant program to massively expand broadband access across the country. Under my plan, only electricity and telephone cooperatives, non-profit organizations, tribes, cities, counties, and other state subdivisions will be eligible for grants from this fund � and all grants will be used to build the fiber infrastructure necessary to bring high-speed broadband to unserved areas, underserved areas, or areas with minimal competition. The federal government will pay 90 cents on the dollar for construction under these grants. In exchange, applicants will be required to offer high-speed public broadband directly to every home in their application area. Applicants will have to offer at least one plan with 100 Mbps/ 100 Mbps speeds and one discount internet plan for low-income customers with a prepaid feature or a low monthly rate. Of these funds, $5 billion will be set aside specifically for 100% federal grants to tribal nations to expand broadband access on Native American lands. In addition to necessary �last mile� infrastructure, tribes will be able to apply for funds to build the missing 8,000 miles of middle mile fiber on tribal lands.

Appoint FCC Commissioners who will restore net neutrality. I will appoint FCC Commissioners who will restore net neutrality, regulating internet service providers as �common carriers� and maintaining open access to the Internet. And I will require all telecommunications services to contribute fairly into the Universal Service Fund to shore up essential universal service programs that provide subsidies to low-income individuals, schools, and libraries to increase broadband adoption, including signing into law and building on the Tribal Connect Act, so that we can work toward every tribal library having broadband access.

Bolster the FCC�s Office of Native Affairs and Policy. This office holds trainings, technical assistance, and consultations for Indian Country. Providing it with dedicated, increased funding to expand its capacity will help close the digital divide.

Improve the accuracy of broadband maps. Weak FCC oversight has allowed ISPs to greatly exaggerate how many households they serve and has given ISPs added fuel to downplay their failures and protect themselves from regulation. To provide universal broadband access and crack down on anti-competitive behaviors, the government has to know how extensive the problems are. I will appoint FCC Commissioners who will require ISPs to report service and speeds down to the household level, as well as aggregate pricing data, and work with community stakeholders � including tribal nations � to make sure we get this process right. Then, we will make these data available to the public and conduct regular audits to ensure accurate reporting.

Prohibit the range of sneaky maneuvers giant private providers use to unfairly squeeze out competition, hold governments hostage, and drive up prices. It�s time to crack down on all the anti-competitive behaviors that giant ISPs have used to steamroll the competition. We will return control of utility poles and conduits to cities, prohibit landlords from making side deals with private ISPs to limit choices in their properties, and ban companies from limiting access to wires inside buildings. We will make sure that all new buildings are fiber-ready so that any network can deliver service there, and we will also enact �Dig Once� policies to require that conduit is laid anytime the ground is opened for a public infrastructure project.

Ensure every person has the skills to fully participate in our online economy. Even when there�s access to broadband internet � and even when it�s available at an affordable price � people may still not take advantage of it because they don�t know how to use it. That�s why I will work to pass the Digital Equity Act, which invests $2.5 billion over ten years to help states develop digital equity plans and launch digital inclusion projects.

i know you've made it clear that you're literally going to vote for trump, crazy cloud, but surely you can do better than just yelling "NUMBERS FUCKSTEIN!!" any time warren's name is mentioned

eke out fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Aug 7, 2019

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:35

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

Heck Yes! Loam! posted:

Joe Rogan is on YouTube you twit

Yes, but non-Joe Rogan people are also on YouTube, so you can create YouTube videos that would be attractive to Joe Rogan viewers without actually sharing a screen with specifically Joe Rogan.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:37

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

twodot posted:

twitch, youtube, facebook, Instagram, townhalls and rallies in whatever geographies watch Joe Rogan, live appearances at events that Joe Rogan viewers like, volunteers reaching out to Joe Rogan viewers individually, that's all I could think of in 3 minutes.
edit:

I don't watch those, so no, if you've got a list of 10 CNN media personalities that are good I'm willing to listen.

Why is supporting Jeff Bezos more morally acceptable than going on Joe Rogan?

twodot posted:

Yes, but non-Joe Rogan people are also on YouTube, so you can create YouTube videos that would be attractive to Joe Rogan viewers without actually sharing a screen with specifically Joe Rogan.

Just fyi, Bernie's team is doing both. They even have their own youtube channel already. So you're still suggesting they reach fewer potential voters.

Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Aug 7, 2019

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:38

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

Trabisnikof posted:

Why is supporting Jeff Bezos more morally acceptable than going on Joe Rogan?

Cause I said so. Like Joe Rogan and Jeff Bezos are literally distinct human beings, you don't think I can make the case for one being better than other? If you want to argue that Jeff Bezos and Joe Rogan are indistinguishable in any moral framework, I feel the burden is on you.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:42

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

twodot posted:

Yes, but non-Joe Rogan people are also on YouTube, so you can create YouTube videos that would be attractive to Joe Rogan viewers without actually sharing a screen with specifically Joe Rogan.

You do know they already do this right? The issue is that some channels (Rogan) have millions of followers, and has a different demographic market than bernie's own channel. There's this thing called "appealing to voters" that requires you to speak with people that don't already agree with you.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:42

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

twodot posted:

I feel pretty strongly it is very possible to engage with morally impure voters without boosting morally impure media personalities.

Your campaign better consist of nothing but standing at the street corner and yelling, or you are going to lose the coveted twodot demographic.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:45

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

twodot posted:

Cause I said so. Like Joe Rogan and Jeff Bezos are literally distinct human beings, you don't think I can make the case for one being better than other? If you want to argue that Jeff Bezos and Joe Rogan are indistinguishable in any moral framework, I feel the burden is on you.

No, I'm arguing that it isn't immoral to promote your message using evil channels, as CNN et al all qualify.

You're the one saying there is a moral distinction between Bezos and Rogan and that Rogan is worse, all because "I said so."

Possibly among the least compelling arguments one can make.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:45

Cerebral Bore: Apr 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

twodot posted:

twitch, youtube, facebook, Instagram, townhalls and rallies in whatever geographies watch Joe Rogan, live appearances at events that Joe Rogan viewers like, volunteers reaching out to Joe Rogan viewers individually, that's all I could think of in 3 minutes.

So your idea is literally to blow a massive amount of time, money and resources to create some duplicate efforts to reach the same voters that you could reach for free just by going on the podcast? You're not very good at this whole political campaigning stuff, are you?

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:46

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

Trabisnikof posted:

No, I'm arguing that it isn't immoral to promote your message using evil channels, as CNN et al all qualify.

This is obviously stupid though, there clearly exists channels sufficiently evil that even you would say you shouldn't use them. The only reasonable difference is where to draw the line.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:47

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

twodot posted:

This is obviously stupid though, there clearly exists channels sufficiently evil that even you would say you shouldn't use them. The only reasonable difference is where to draw the line.

Can you specify one? There are certainly channels not worth going on because their audience is either irredeemable or too small.

Bernie shouldn't go on r/the_donald because there aren't convincible voters there, not because of a moral stand.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:50

MrFlibble: Nov 28, 2007; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS; Fallen Rib

twodot posted:

Cause I said so. Like Joe Rogan and Jeff Bezos are literally distinct human beings, you don't think I can make the case for one being better than other? If you want to argue that Jeff Bezos and Joe Rogan are indistinguishable in any moral framework, I feel the burden is on you.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:51

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

Trabisnikof posted:

Can you specify one? There are certainly channels not worth going on because their audience is either irredeemable or too small.

Bernie shouldn't go on r/the_donald because there aren't convincible voters there, not because of a moral stand.

What's the evidence you used to conclude that there are more convincible voters watching Joe Rogan than r/the_donald? How did we get from "You have to convince morally impure voters" to "Well the people on that channel are too morally impure to bother with"?

# ? Aug 7, 2019 17:55

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

twodot posted:

What's the evidence you used to conclude that there are more convincible voters watching Joe Rogan than r/the_donald? How did we get from "You have to convince morally impure voters" to "Well the people on that channel are too morally impure to bother with"?

Because you're trying to dodge away from your weird position that supporting Bezos is morally acceptable but going on Rogan is not. You're desperately trying to shift the conversation from the accusation that it was immoral for Bernie to go on Rogan to a question about anything else.

Which the only argument you use to support is "I said so" which always is convincing.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:00

joepinetree: Apr 5, 2012

The New York Times buried stories to help push for the war in Iraq, and right this second their deputy Washington bureau director is engaging in the sort of dog whistle racism that is generally associated with fox news. If your concern about "legitimizing" certain venues means not going to Rogan but still talking to the NY Times, you are not really concerned about real world harm, just acceptability among white middle class professionals.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:01

Cerebral Bore: Apr 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

twodot posted:

What's the evidence you used to conclude that there are more convincible voters watching Joe Rogan than r/the_donald? How did we get from "You have to convince morally impure voters" to "Well the people on that channel are too morally impure to bother with"?

You're making it pretty easy to cotton on to your bad faith bullshit when you demand that people prove a difference between some rambly guy who sometimes has chuds as guest and the literal reddit Trump fanclub, just so you know.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:05

crazy cloud: Nov 7, 2012; by Cyrano4747; Lipstick Apathy

eke out posted:

here's the entirety of the linked plan from bernie where it touches on broadband

so the plan is: we should have it. agreed!

here's the entirety of warren's plan where it touches on broadband:

i know you've made it clear that you're literally going to vote for trump, crazy cloud, but surely you can do better than just yelling "NUMBERS FUCKSTEIN!!" any time warren's name is mentioned

Wow you're right that Warren plan is really detailed, which is good, because the determining factor in whether plans get accomplished or not is how detailed they are.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:05

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

Trabisnikof posted:

Because you're trying to dodge away from your weird position that supporting Bezos is morally acceptable but going on Rogan is not. You're desperately trying to shift the conversation from the accusation that it was immoral for Bernie to go on Rogan to a question about anything else.

Which the only argument you use to support is "I said so" which always is convincing.

It's not a dodge for me to say "Yes I can distinguish different media strategies as having different moral outcomes, and then support some strategies and not others". You're the one dodging when you said using an evil channel is never immoral by claiming all the really evil channels don't have convincible voters anyways, without presenting any evidence about what channels have what number of convincible voters or even a coherent definition of "convincible voter".

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:06

punishedkissinger: Sep 20, 2017

twodot posted:

Cause I said so. Like Joe Rogan and Jeff Bezos are literally distinct human beings, you don't think I can make the case for one being better than other? If you want to argue that Jeff Bezos and Joe Rogan are indistinguishable in any moral framework, I feel the burden is on you.

Jeff Bezos is objectively a far far worse person than Joe Rogan.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:12

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

crazy cloud posted:

Wow you're right that Warren plan is really detailed, which is good, because the determining factor in whether plans get accomplished or not is how detailed they are.

crazy cloud posted:

Warren's plan isn't more specific it's just more complicated so centrist wonk fuckers can climax faster when they circlejerk over another plan that matters zero because Warren will never be president.

which is it? i'm confused

kidkissinger posted:

Jeff Bezos is objectively a far far worse person than Joe Rogan.

this is a good point, at least Rogan was on NewsRadio

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:13

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

kidkissinger posted:

Jeff Bezos is objectively a far far worse person than Joe Rogan.

Sure but the moral outcomes of "Sanders made an extra twitch post earning Bezos 0.0003 cents" and "Sanders appeared on Joe Rogan's show" are extremely easy to distinguish.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:15

MrFlibble: Nov 28, 2007; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS; Fallen Rib

twodot posted:

Sure but the moral outcomes of "Sanders made an extra twitch post earning Bezos 0.0003 cents" and "Sanders appeared on Joe Rogan's show" are extremely easy to distinguish.

You are a loving moron and/or your morals are loving trash.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:19

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

twodot posted:

Sure but the moral outcomes of "Sanders made an extra twitch post earning Bezos 0.0003 cents" and "Sanders appeared on Joe Rogan's show" are extremely easy to distinguish.

This is impressively stupid.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:20

punishedkissinger: Sep 20, 2017

twodot posted:

Sure but the moral outcomes of "Sanders made an extra twitch post earning Bezos 0.0003 cents" and "Sanders appeared on Joe Rogan's show" are extremely easy to distinguish.

yeah the moral outcome of Sanders going on a random twitch channel is that no one will see it and it won't matter. the moral outcome of him going on Joe Rogan's show is that a bunch of people who wouldn't normally be exposed to his ideas might actually learn about him and even vote for him.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:21

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

twodot posted:

Sure but the moral outcomes of "Sanders made an extra twitch post earning Bezos 0.0003 cents" and "Sanders appeared on Joe Rogan's show" are extremely easy to distinguish.

If they lead more people to leftism and help get him elected, they're both in the "positive karma" territory.

eke out posted:

which is it? i'm confused

There's nothing to be confused about; Warren's plan being complex and detailed doesn't make it "good" in and of itself.

Majorian fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Aug 7, 2019

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:21

MrFlibble: Nov 28, 2007; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS; Fallen Rib

Anyone who watches the Joe Rogan interview specifically for Bernie isn't going to be sucked into the rightwing and anyone who usually watches Joe Rogan can be led away from that way of thinking.

You Buffoon. You simple minded fool. You absolute slab of unthinking twatwaffle.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:24

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

Majorian posted:

If they lead more people to leftism and help get him elected, they're both in the "positive karma" territory.

Sure if you can convince yourself that this is more likely than not, then you go ahead and do it, but I don't think anyone here has presented a reasonable argument for why we should believe that, and all the arguments seem to be "Get the message out first, and worry about fall out later".

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:28

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

Majorian posted:

There's nothing to be confused about; Warren's plan being complex and detailed doesn't make it "good" in and of itself.

the person i was responding to said it was literally not any more specific! it seems like he's backed off that claim though

maybe you could explain why having actual details beyond "universal rural broadband good" is a bad thing? because it's hard to see why it's somehow bad, except that bernie was not the one to make those suggestions first

like read the proposal, i quoted the entire thing, you're not betraying bernie by admitting someone else said something good. he is not going to be mad at you

eke out fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Aug 7, 2019

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 17:06

Fritz Coldcockin: Nov 7, 2005

Majorian posted:

There's nothing to be confused about; Warren's plan being complex and detailed doesn't make it "good" in and of itself.

I don't think that's the argument eke was making; he was objecting to the fact that people were dismissing it out of hand because it was detailed. I read the plan. It's very good.

# ? Aug 7, 2019 18:29

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > DNC Primary: Biden: Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.

«‹›271 »