2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Timsup2nothin]

Here's a newsflash! If everyone on this thread pushed "the magic button" on you, the quality of content and debate would not diminish, but would probably only be bettered by the belligerent loudmouth - whose at least chosen a very apt avatar image for the role - stopping his bellicose running down of everyone and what they think and believe, like a wannabe tyrant's censor.

If you think my response wasn't apt, please explain why. Your comment was full of "if <insert absurd obvious impossibility>" statements. No, political advertising cannot be processed with the same sort of objective standards applied to a toothpaste commercial. That's that.

Meanwhile, when you call someone "naive" you aren't really in much of a position to whine about not getting your ass kissed over your displays of "brilliance," so get over yourself.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

<further effort to pick fight and disrupt thread>

Your "sincerely held opinions" vary from forum to forum, depending on what is most likely to cause disruption. So I've observed, and so I've been told, and now so you have said. Quit weaseling and be proud!

 

[Patine]

If you think my response wasn't apt, please explain why. Your comment was full of "if <insert absurd obvious impossibility>" statements. No, political advertising cannot be processed with the same sort of objective standards applied to a toothpaste commercial. That's that.

Meanwhile, when you call someone "naive" you aren't really in much of a position to whine about not getting your ass kissed over your displays of "brilliance," so get over yourself.

Well, at least I'm contributing, even if you personally and subjectively declare it as absurd in your own opinion (which is NOT absolute, irrefutable, cosmic fact). About half of your posts on this thread have been condemning other people's posts, telling them they're wrong (by your opinion and speculation, but portrayed as absolute fact), and telling them their posts are stupid, counter-productive, divisive, and repetitive. So, at least half of your posts have been pure "negative," content, with no real "contribution."

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Well, at least I'm contributing, even if you personally and subjectively declare it as absurd in your own opinion (which is NOT absolute, irrefutable, cosmic fact). About half of your posts on this thread have been condemning other people's posts, telling them they're wrong (by your opinion and speculation, but portrayed as absolute fact), and telling them their posts are stupid, counter-productive, divisive, and repetitive. So, at least half of your posts have been pure "negative," content, with no real "contribution."

Kinda like this one of yours?

Meanwhile, as usual, you dodge the substance. It isn't "just opinion" to call "if political ads could be measured in the same way as toothpaste ads so that the same standards could be applied..." a pretty much irrelevant point and discard it. They can't be measured using similarly objective standards, and that's just a fact. Get over it.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Hey, that's understandable. @Birdjaguar has liked my posts several times when I've eloquently defended myself or put him in his place when he's initially tried to shut me down or smack talk me, which is amazing grace and maturity on any Internet forum.

Damn and I thought my backhanded compliments were cutting

Access to this spending is assumed to be qualified because Republicans are proposing it.

Admonkey also somehow missed that Mnunchin is absolutely including means-testing in his proposal while telling us we're not paying attention. Yesterday or this morning I even wrote here that he was proposing to not give any checks to people over 75 or 100k in income.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

And despite that you here, four years ago, refused to acknowledge that Hillary was the worst possible candidate to run against Trump?

I could have named several million worse candidates just by opening phone books.

But, how about we get back to you explaining the strategies you would suggest to Sanders for the third party run you claim would be successful.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

bettered by the belligerent loudmouth - whose at least chosen a very apt avatar image for the role

A couple of posters complained that Patine was tagging them into garbage posts but honestly I preferred drive-by hits on people that are actually named than this vague stuff. At least when tagged in you have a chance to stand up for yourself. I have no idea who he's talking about here.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

A couple of posters complained that Patine was tagging them into garbage posts but honestly I preferred drive-by hits on people that are actually named than this vague stuff. At least when tagged in you have a chance to stand up for yourself. I have no idea who he's talking about here.

Me.

 

[Patine]

Kinda like this one of yours?

Meanwhile, as usual, you dodge the substance. It isn't "just opinion" to call "if political ads could be measured in the same way as toothpaste ads so that the same standards could be applied..." a pretty much irrelevant point and discard it. They can't be measured using similarly objective standards, and that's just a fact. Get over it.

"Dodging the substance?" Like you still dodging, after bringing it up in several different threads at numerous different, including this one, who all these real, died-in-the-wool Fascist by actual ideological and terminological definition who control the Republican Party of the United States, and how they actually live up to the label "Fascist," which actually has a REAL definition by historical concensus, and even those whose who actually deserve the label. That's one who've been dodging for a while now. I could probably dig up one or two other such issues you've been "dodging," but expecting your statement to be honoured and full credence and legitimacy on the issue, nonetheless.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I don't think you could make this argument without a screwy-louie idea of what constitutes "the economic left".

From the outside, it seems fairly clear that the leadership of the Republican and Democratic parties occupy similar economic positions. What distinguishes them is that the Republican voter-base has a clearer image of a deserving "us" who will benefit from this sort of spending, to the exclusion of an undeserving "them", and that these voters assume the Republican Party leadership shares, and will act upon, these assumptions. Access to this spending is assumed to be qualified because Republicans are proposing it.

The Democratic Party has a more demographically and ideologically diffuse voter base, who are more acutely aware than Republican voters of the differences within their party, and between ordinary voters and leadership, so there policies are not inherently coded with an "us" and a "them". The Democratic leadership are too conservative, and assume American voters to be still more conservative, to adopt a truly universal approach, to take the stance that no qualification should be required to access this spending, so they are forced to invent a spectre of "rational" and "objective" qualification, realised as economic means-testing.

Trump can play the benevolent ruler not because he is "economically left-wing", or because his supporters are enthusiastic about such policies, but because his supporters implicitly assume that the beneficiaries of his spending plans will be overwhelmingly white.

edit note: this has been re-written a couple of times to make more sense.

Reposted in entirety for those that missed the edits.

Anyways, I completely agree with you here. The Republicans assume means testing is both necessary and will exempt the people they care about. The Democrats go for means testing because they assume people demand it. I think there is also a recognition that this particular crisis likely won't be helped by paying people who don't need the spending money, especially when so many of them like me will end up paying back student loans and mortgages and other economic activity that doesn't increase demand where it's needed. So it's a pragmatic approach as much as a political one. But I do agree that the instant reflex to slap means-testing on everything is backward and is a symptom of the problems we face.

 

[Patine]

A couple of posters complained that Patine was tagging them into garbage posts but honestly I preferred drive-by hits on people that are actually named than this vague stuff. At least when tagged in you have a chance to stand up for yourself. I have no idea who he's talking about here.

Me.

It was pretty obvious who I was talking about, @hobbsyoyo, and I was even responding directly to him. And his response, there, shows he knew full well.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

"Dodging the substance?" Like you still dodging, after bringing it up in several different threads at numerous different, including this one, who all these real, died-in-the-wool Fascist by actual ideological and terminological definition who control the Republican Party of the United States, and how they actually live up to the label "Fascist," which actually has a REAL definition by historical concensus, and even those whose who actually deserve the label. That's one who've been dodging for a while now. I could probably dig up one or two other such issues you've been "dodging," but expecting your statement to be honoured and full credence and legitimacy on the issue, nonetheless.

Ignoring inane questions isn't dodging. Dodging is when you quote the question and pretend that you are giving an answer, but don't. This post would be an example of dodging, except I have now acknowledged that I did not in any way pretend that I was answering your question.

Said question, by the way, having a false premise. I have made abundantly clear that the self proclaimed "freedom caucus" subset of GOP representation, and the people who support them and consider them to be "their representatives" are who I mean when I talk about the US government's fascist faction. They are authoritarian extremists favoring rule by their minority. They favor nationalist themes demonizing "the other" in regards to foreign born people, citizens or otherwise. They are heavily committed to jingoistic patriotism and demonize their opposition as 'unpatriotic.' And they are committed to a close relationship between "industry" and state, with industry referencing ownership/management sharing the same sort of authoritarian position that they themselves want to hold in the state.

The main reason I don't answer your questions more frequently is that you have a demonstrable tendency to ignore answers, and it seems very likely that in as little as a week you will be asking the same thing, bolstered by the same false premise that I "have never answered." Which is annoying in the extreme and accounts for the general level of widespread abuse that you suffer.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

@Patine
You said something about an avatar that didn't grok and you regularly go after seemingly random people so you really gonna blame me for you not making sense?

 

[Takhisis]

I read it as such.

I cannot disagree with that reading.

Thanks for admitting that your only real interest on internet forums is in picking fights. There's a word for that, right? Ummm...what is that word again? @Arakhor? @Lemon Merchant? What is that word for posters who just come on forums looking to cause disruptions? I'm sure you must be familiar with it and get more reminders than I do...I've forgotten...

The same word for flamethrowers in Fallout games, I suppose.

Indeed. It's worthwhile to remember that Hitler, Mussolini, Putin, and Chavez, for four, all were essentially dictators originally elected to their leadership positions (or to be more precise in Hitler's case at least, brought to power via democratic processes). I suspect our OT folks can name more. Trump has been saying and doing many of the same things as these four did.

Mussolini took power in a straight-out coup d'etat.
Putin was the appointed successor of Yeltsin who was the Communist Party leader of Russia who'd declared independence and stayed in power, and continues to arrest people for running for president to this day.
Hitler got, as was said, 33% of the vote only after repeated ridiculous maneouvres and was handed the chancellorship by a conservative government in order to stop the red menace; he took over as president when von Hindenburg died soon after of old age.
Chávez is the only one who was elected, only after he had already tried (and failed) to seize power in a military coup, which speaks volumes about the imbecility of the mob, and the proceeded to stay on through sheer fraud.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

I cannot disagree with that reading.

I think it speaks volumes that he seems to take pleasure in people with less power and social standing than him being in bad situations, almost as if we're characters to laugh at.

 

[IglooDame]

Mussolini took power in a straight-out coup d'etat.
Putin was the appointed successor of Yeltsin who was the Communist Party leader of Russia who'd declared independence and stayed in power, and continues to arrest people for running for president to this day.
Hitler got, as was said, 33% of the vote only after repeated ridiculous maneouvres and was handed the chancellorship by a conservative government in order to stop the red menace; he took over as president when von Hindenburg died soon after of old age.
Chávez is the only one who was elected, only after he had already tried (and failed) to seize power in a military coup, which speaks volumes about the imbecility of the mob, and the proceeded to stay on through sheer fraud.

From wikipedia: "Following the March on Rome in October 1922, Mussolini became the youngest Italian Prime Minister up to that date. After removing all political opposition through his secret police and outlawing labor strikes,[10] Mussolini and his followers consolidated their power through a series of laws that transformed the nation into a one-party dictatorship."

I need to step away but will address Putin later.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think it speaks volumes that he seems to take pleasure in people with less power and social standing than him being in bad situations, almost as if we're characters to laugh at.

Maybe people would be more sympathetic if you didn't go around insulting them all the time and using hyperbole.

 

[Zardnaar]

From wikipedia: "Following the March on Rome in October 1922, Mussolini became the youngest Italian Prime Minister up to that date. After removing all political opposition through his secret police and outlawing labor strikes,[10] Mussolini and his followers consolidated their power through a series of laws that transformed the nation into a one-party dictatorship."

I need to step away but will address Putin later.

The King appointment Mussolini, he didn't exactly seize power.

The King also removed him. Theoretically Queen Elizabeth has this power as well.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Maybe people would be more sympathetic if you didn't go around insulting them all the time and using hyperbole.

So here's you:

Wonder if Cloud has figured out hormone drugs might be in short supply and transitional surgery will be goneburger.

Just so happening to openly remark about how SRS will now be non-existant and the hormones i rely on will be limited, as if i didn't ****ing know, just expressing your complete ignorance about what the situation is like already in an attempt to score points by sinking lower than i could ever hope to.

This might be business as usual going forward. If they can't vaccinate this in a year or so society might have to wind back the last 50-60 years if not longer.

Making a point of reminding me of how precarious my social and economic situation already is.

It's ghoulish and you clearly take relish or some sort of perverse delight in it, I'm posting here because im interested in confronting you with what you are.

@Zardnaar, I hope you and yours don't rely on any drugs to prolong your life, things might not go so well for you or them if that supply were to dwindle just as it might not for me or other transpeople, although I'm sure you wouldn't be so delusional to claim it'd be mere inconveniance, but i wouldn't actually wish that on you, you see that's the difference between me and you @Zardnaar so go on continue with the lie that you're somehow in anyway cleaner or above me, if that's what helps you continue.

 

[Hrothbern]

The King appointment Mussolini, he didn't exactly seize power.

The King also removed him. Theoretically Queen Elizabeth has this power as well.

Mussolinian fascist bands had taken over the practical power by harsh intimidations.
What happened thereafter was just the formalisation by the ruling class (King, corporate, landowners, etc). They believed that they could massage Mussolini into some moderate common sense once he was in power. Nothing of that happened.