Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Bifner McDoogle posted:

The issue is that you are arguing for Gambling Abuse Preparation in Education, but in reality the only way that is better than DARE is the acronym.

DARE to GAPE is definitely a slogan...

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Google Jeb Bush posted:

setting aside whether homeless people count as a genocidable demographic, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about (at least if we don't count everything about the handling of the homeless since the Roanoake Colony)

I can't speak for what the OP meant, but the war in Gaza is an ongoing genocide that has caused nearly the entire population of the territory to be homeless.

CNBC calls it 85%
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/11/desperate-palestinians-in-gazas-rafah-fear-coming-israeli-assault.html

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Zwabu posted:

Population growth is somewhat offset by Trump's voting cohort dying at a greater rate both due to being an older demographic as well as one inclined towards idiotic defiance of vaccination and public health practices during Covid. And I choose to be encouraged by the fact that Dems have performed relatively well in midterms and specials, even when Trump is NOT on the ballot, Dem voters have been doing okay turning out, I find it a bit hard to believe that they all suddenly hate Biden within the last year or so but will try to keep an open mind.

The ongoing support for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza really has me leaning towards only voting down ballot.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Skex posted:

Here's the deal, both sides are going to support Israel one reluctantly and the other full throatedly.

But only one is determined to commit genocide here in the United States.

I'm voting against that second.

I'm no longer convinced

a) one side thinks they need to wait until they are in control to commit genocide
b) the other will do anything meaningful to stop the first

But I get where you're coming from.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Dapper_Swindler posted:

yeah sounds about right. what i am curious about is if they actually rule for him. I doubt it because its loving stupid even for them.

They can rule after the election that he's ineligible but because it was not decided until then, and there can be no ex post facto, he's still president because he was duly election.

Chaos option, this happens between the election and the electoral college votes and the electoral college picks his VP instead of him.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Zwabu posted:

I think the person you are responding to was talking about the "President is immune from being prosecuted for any crimes" argument, not being on the ballot.

drat, way too many lawsuits at once

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Kith posted:

part of the reason that you shouldn't take polls seriously this far out is because the people who respond to them tend to not be a great demographic. like if you're polling via landlines in this day and age, what do you think those respondents are going to be like?

pretty much the only polls worth keeping an eye on right now are exit polls for the primaries, since those tend to be answered by a broader variety of people and therefore be more representative of the average citizen.

e: mostly representative.

https://x.com/_cingraham/status/1765461345808580786?s=20

"We definitely have to vote for Trump to make sure he doesn't try to execute a coup at Biden's second inauguration" is definitely a take...

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Raenir Salazar posted:

I'm not sure this falls at all under "Dem propaganda", maybe "US propaganda" as its the political consensus of mainstream politics in the US, but not specific to Biden or the Democrats; rather they are operating within a cultural and political framework in which they themselves are constrained by it. Much in the sameway China and Chinese politics are similarly constrained by a desire to avoid losing face even in circumstances they (Chinese politicians) know that the current course of action is not in their long term best interest re: China: Fragile Superpower by Susan Shirk as an example of this that's readily applicable to US politics and this issue.

As a result I think you've misunderstood my point and got cause and effect a bit mixed up. The political consensus is X, consequently because of X Dems are locked into a situation they aren't able to take decisive moral leadership regarding and instead have to thread the needle of giving lipservice to the political reality on one hand even if it is still tragic, while doing what they can quietly on the other. The point of this is to provide a nuanced response to the idea that "Biden supports genocide" or that this is a result of "Dem propaganda" and definitely nothing to do with "Biden Old".

Sending a carrier group to provide air and special forces support and fast tracking military aid to Israel is more than enough nuance for "Biden supports genocide" since he has directed actions that have supported a genocide.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Raenir Salazar posted:

The carrier group sent barely within a week after the events of October 7th? I don't think that at all supports the claim. As to the second point about fast tracked military aid I already responded to earlier on the previous pages for why it doesn't necessitate "supports genocide" as the only possible meaning.

The genocide has been ongoing for years. Believe what you want, but Biden supports genocide. The US is actively funding and supporting the genocide of Palestinians. Has been for years and is making no steps to stop.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Mendrian posted:

I think there's a valid question around how we handle the separation of trans persons in sports (and even cis persons based on biological sex, as other people have pointed out hormone distribution is hardly uniform even among cis people) and I think the society we live in is not even remotely mature enough to address it and it makes make actively anxious to think about. Like if we can settle on 'it doesn't matter in 90% of cases and people should be able to compete with their chosen sex/gender' that would be swell.

Or even stop differentiating based on arbitrary societal norms and find measurable KPIs to group competitors.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Rebel Blob posted:

One of those high-society groups, the Opperman Foundation, has been handing out the "Ruth Bader Ginsburg Award" since 2019. Well, they changed something about the award for this year...

Now that equality prevails across the land and anyone can be awarded in RBG's name, which "trailblazing" figures won it this year you ask? Elon Musk and Rupert Murdoch.

RBG's family is not involved with the award and, like anyone who isn't a wealthy ghoul, isn't happy.

Are they updating the purpose of the award to recognize people with problematic racial inclinations, because that would track.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

OAquinas posted:

With interconnects between them, so you have a fully redundant RAIB-5.

I don't know if I like how entrenched RAIB culture is becoming on this forum.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Xiahou Dun posted:

Remember months ago when I said I really hope the dems put some really popular things like abortion and weed up for a vote to increase turn out?

I was talking about this.

Such positive moves... it's too bad they're making them while also supporting a genocide :/

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

75 million is way too low a number. At best that's the union of "I'm all about the racism" and "I can be bothered to get up and vote"

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

ColdPie posted:

Hang on, if it's that easy, why isn't Sotomayor retiring? She watched RBG wad up her legacy and drop it in the toilet and said "I wanna do that, too"?

Because our oligarchs and their sock puppets would rather die than give up any hold on power.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Civilized Fishbot posted:

I'd say "must" - it *must* view those lives as just as valuable, or it's neither modern nor liberal, it's barbaric tribalism.

Whatever voting decision anyone makes, it must be motivated by a well-informed thought process about the consequences it will have for the Palestinian people, or already it is an immoral decision.

My point is that trying to separate "practical" from "moral" is an act of profound disrespect toward everyone who stands to be practically affected by the vote, which is more than just who wins the whole election - like you said, political actors will infer information and make choices based on how many votes the winner collects, on how this compares to downballot races, etc. So even a vote with no probability of changing the ultimate winner can have a practical consequence, and all its moral importance comes from that.

The message you described earlier is a legitimate consequentialist approach to voting - voting for Joe Biden would send this message, not voting would send this other message, I think the other message will have better consequences for the Palestinian people. That's logical and admirable, frankly it's what I'll be doing (I also live in a state where the electoral vote outcome is basically predetermined).

But separating the moral and the practical, as if there's some moral dimension of the core that isn't captured by how it practically affects people's lives - that sort of deontological thinking is disrespectful to the people who will be affected by your vote, because you are worrying about something other than how it will affect them.

If you believe that Voting Decision X, compared to the other voting decisions available to you, will be best for the Palestinian people and everyone else who's at risk of dying a horrible death because of US policy, you have a moral obligation to choose Voting Decision X, entirely because of its practical consequences, even if Voting Decision X disgusts or disturbs or demoralizes you. Whether Voting Decision X is voting for Biden or staying home or voting third party or writing in "Gaza" etc.

Sadly, both options made available to the US Electorate will provide material support for the genocide of the Palestinians. Party control of government changes... loving over Palestine is evergreen.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Hamas is a political and military group and not a race. Until 2006, they explicitly had antisemitism as part of the charter for the group.

Conflating all Palestinians with Hamas is Bibi's dream.

In which peoples might those ancient desires have existed, since Hamas isn't ancient?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

zoux posted:

I think that people who feel very strongly about Israel/Palestine are massively overrepresented in media coverage and poll after poll shows most voters don't care.

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1787791459464126681



I don't think it's a mystery why Biden isn't catering to a minority position among an already low-propensity voting demographic, at least rhetorically. In fact, this poll would seem to indicate that he'd face more backlash among the relevant age group that supposed to tank the election for him.

I like how they've intentionally split up the "It's a single Israeli's fault" from "It's every Israeli's fault" and "It's Israel and the USs fault" to make "It's Hamas's fault" look like the biggest group.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply