|
Does Nina Turner have a shot? I tell you what though, it's basically guaranteed the VP is gonna be the most boring old white centrist man you ever did see unless Bernie or some mythical unknown white democrat is at the top of the ticket.
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
yronic just understands that if a racist votes for you then you're clearly pandering to racism.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I don't think you know what a false dilemma is. You claim legal strategies are bad because legislative strategies are better. Setting aside the fact that this is far from obvious, there's no reason why both strategies cannot be pursued simultaneously. The dilemma that you've created, where we must choose one or the other, is false. Explain why people should be able to sue manufacturers for manufacturing items that conform to legal specifications, perform as advertised, and are sold through legal means. If Sandy Hook happened because the gun went off accidentally or shot wildly off target due to a manufacturing defect or they hid the possibility that their guns could be used to shoot children or something like that then you can sue the manufacturer. You can't sue someone for their product working as intended just because someone put that intended use to something horrible. It's not suddenly their fault when the government at large, with full knowledge of the risks, has very clearly decided the risks were acceptable.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2017 02:03
|
|
|
stone cold posted:i have real issues with making out johnson in vietnam to be a tragic figure, because he wasn't, he was an rear end in a top hat Why does is matter so much to you? Re-litigating the primaries makes sense in spite of how annoying it can be because both sides are still fighting over control and all the players are still relevant. What does talking about Johnson in Vietnam actually achieve? And it's not like Crowsbeak was even going on about how Vietnam was good, they were just saying they put more blame for Vietnam on JFK than Johnson. It was never about apologism for imperialism or whitewashing the war in general. I don't get how this blew up into a big derail. Is Johnson a weird pet president/hate for some of you?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
This sort of thing is why "purity tests" are important. What Al Franken did wasn't bad because it violated some accepted norms, it was bad for very fundamental reasons that don't require anything more than empathy and having regard for the welfare of others to see. You don't even need the concept of consent to know that something like the kiss was wrong. You just need to have the thought pattern of "I know person does not want me to do thing" -> "I don't want to do to someone something they don't want done, without very good reason" -> "I have no good reason" -> "I won't do thing". How many liberals are really just conservatives whose orthodoxy is liberalism? How many are just cultural liberals going through the motions the way a christian might put stockings above the fireplace at Christmas and hide chocolate eggs in the garden for Easter? How many are just straight up acting in order to further their careers or fit in with their peers? If there's no consistency, no underlying principle at play, then what stops these people from doing horrible things that the orthodoxy hasn't covered yet, or that they think they can get away with? Al Franken should have known better. And he would have known better if his actions were determined by principle instead of what was known to be right and wrong. He's not some 25 year old who did a lot of growing in 10 years. He only knows better now because the orthodoxy advanced. Great. That's what we want to happen to all those people who don't have the necessary internal drive to do the right thing without being told explicitly, and there should be a pathway to redemption for those people too. But those people shouldn't be in positions of leadership. Leaders should drive social morality forward, not be dragged along by it, and we should have our "purity tests" to ensure only the right kind get through.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Well, a combination of this being the thread that prompted the post and the topic of purity tests being hotly debated made me put it here. It did feel a little weird though. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2017 12:46
|
|
|
Feminism is also a massive tent without a uniform immediate goal (like suffrage was) at this point. It would basically be impossible for every aspect of it to be good.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Oh come on, I don’t even like JC and that’s not a fair reading. His first reason is that “so more victims can come forward” and he explicitly said “before he resigns.” Your post seems to imply we should take JC's expressed motivations at face value.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
I hope you're not really trying to defend pizzagate, but in case you are I have to point out that it's always been most likely that pizzagate was a stupid conspiracy theory with no basis and nobody should have given it any attention AND that there are pedophiles in powerful political positions. Frankly I wasn't surprised when the brits found out about their pedophiles in power, I'd be even less surprised now to find another pedo coverup conspiracy at the top.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
I'm sure there's a point where you can just declare it old news whenever a new person comes forward.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
Weird. I might have gone with "I wasn't aware you volunteered, donated, or voted in the election" myself.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 13:37
|
|
|
The black community in Alabama did insanely well in their GOTV efforts and were easily the most decisive factor on the good side of the victory and every state in the union needs to learn from their example. I'm not interested in fighting KM or another black person over their personal takes, but if you white guys wanna go on brandishing black people like a talisman and boil down the narrative of the election into the magical negro saving the white man then I'm saying you might wanna think about it further.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
Hold up a sec while I slap down this super exceptional outcome as an example of the norm.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
Ganson posted:I'm not going to pretend to have empathy when I don't. I have empathy for poor black and hispanic citizens who are stuck in awful conditions in rural areas though a combination of generational poverty and actively racist policies by white politicians. As far as rural whitey is concerned outside of lgbt people they can get hosed for all I care. They'll never change and aren't worth a Wendy's dollar menu items worth of What about all the poor rural white people that vote Democrat? Alabama was a victory gained through insane turnout from the black vote, but even then almost half of the votes cast for Jones were white people. White people vote for Republicans statistically overall, but behind the statistics there's plenty of white people voting against them. Everywhere the white people vote breaks for Republicans there's a sizeable (though smaller) cohort of white people who vote Democrat, even white rural voters. From the shaky information we have the very worst demographic for voting for Trump was non-college whites who did so at 67%. That's still 33%, fully a third, who didn't vote for Trump (plus however many didn't go to the polls). It's a loving terrible showing for the demographic overall, but when it comes to empathy we're talking actual people here not just some data points. Do you have no empathy for those 33% because they share the same skin color and class as people who voted Republican?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2017 19:58
|
|
on my part. Their towns will continue to die their slow deaths while the children they have that are worth anything will flee to the cities at the first opportunity.
|
Love watching people be surprised Richard Spencer isn't banned from Twitter when he clearly isn't banned because he understands liberals and can play their game. All he has to do is be Liberal Polite and he's covered because the Twitter ban wave was never about nazism or the alt-right, it was about breaking the special rules you have to play by to be a good boy who should be debated in the marketplace of ideas.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
On the other hand we all willingly contributed to the upkeep and welfare of our community. That's socialism.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
Exactly. Country clubs and Something Awful alike teach us that... we... all want the socialism deep inside. We just don't yet view everybody as part of our club. Once we do... That's socialism.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
Using someone's legacy to push their political views is a good thing. You probably wouldn't be doing it if you didn't share his views, as we can see from all the people who conveniently ignore them, but that doesn't change the fact that the views were his.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 03:49
|
|