2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Hrothbern]

But this is a mistake. At least, leaving it at this is. Voters are motivated to vote against people they don't like, but one must also give them something to vote for. It's psychological. When one pulls the lever, one wants to be able to tell oneself that one is voting for something. Biden needs a policy agenda. He can couch it in "once we've recovered from Covid" or "as circumstances allow." But he needs to name something that people will be voting for if they vote for him.

This is my basic critcism on the Dems since long.

How many conservatives they convert with it remains to be seen

Democracy means convincing voters first
All the tactics and spinning is a layer on top of that... whether offensive or defensive

On Kamala Harris:
Is not one of her features that she is able to draw the flak away from Biden ?... whereby she has the capabilities for sharp debate with Trump

 

[Sommerswerd]

So, anyway, yeah... The idea that a Southerner has either party in her blood is pure "monkey muffins", as Col. Potter once said. Try thinking for yourself today, lady, just to see what happens.

She is thinking for herself.. and frankly she is keeping it simpler than a lot of folks. What I mean by that, is a lot of people make the emotional decision to stick with a particular party, candidate, etc., then go back and try to reverse engineer the "reasoning" or rationale for their decision, in order to make it feel intellectually sound. But then when confronted with all the holes and inconsistencies in their logic they demonstrate all kinds of textbook cognitive dissonance.

But this lady is in a better position, because she has gone with a completely non-intellectual justification, which is much easier to defend from a cognitive dissonance perspective. She's essentially No-true-Scotsman'ing it. "I'm a Southerner, and down here we're Republicans and that's all there is to it", is a much easier thing to defend/conceptualize than trying to reconcile, for example, being evengelical with Trump paying off Stormy Daniels.

 

[EgonSpengler]

She is thinking for herself.. and frankly she is keeping it simpler than a lot of folks. What I mean by that, is a lot of people make the emotional decision to stick with a particular party, candidate, etc., then go back and try to reverse engineer the "reasoning" or rationale for their decision, in order to make it feel intellectually sound. But then when confronted with all the holes and inconsistencies in their logic they demonstrate all kinds of textbook cognitive dissonance.

But this lady is in a better position, because she has gone with a completely non-intellectual justification, which is much easier to defend from a cognitive dissonance perspective. She's essentially No-true-Scotsman'ing it. "I'm a Southerner, and down here we're Republicans and that's all there is to it", is a much easier thing to defend/conceptualize than trying to reconcile, for example, being evengelical with Trump paying off Stormy Daniels.

Provided no one in her immediate vicinity unleashes the power of Wikipedia on her like I just did (I'm assuming she doesn't frequent CFC ), then yeah, she shouldn't have any trouble imagining the world to be anything she wants it to be.

I don't really get the Evangelicals, either, but that's another thing.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I was listening to a radio program in which the reporter was talking to some regular folks somewhere in the US South about issues around the upcoming election. One thing that struck me was when a woman said something like, "I'm a Southerner, so I've got the Republican Party in my genes." The South being a bastion of Republican politics is relatively recent.

The other thing I forgot to mention, is that while the South being a bastion of Republicans may be too recent a phenomenon for a middle aged woman to claim its "in her blood"... the South being a bastion of racism is by no means a new thing... so if she's a racist, from a long line of racists then she can, in-fact claim that she has it "in her blood" to be a member of whatever party is currently the harbor de jour of the racists.

 

[Farm Boy]

Lipinski? Who TF is that? You got one guy who's name you respect enough to actually use, and another you call "Assclown". I ask you to choose between Biden and "Assclown"... your words... and you go all "both sides are bad" on me and start telling about how you would have voted for She-Ra and Luke Skywalker if only they had been choices... I'm asking for real choices not fake ones. Who TF are these people?? Again, if its team sports, its team sports, fine, whatever, but what I'm asking is for you to give me a real name. If you can't fine... team sports. But if you're gonna really take a stab at it... I'm talking about the folks who were actually running for POTUS and who got at least 5-10% in polling at some point... the real choices, not fake choices.

EDIT: You've already said that it was Biden, so I have to acknowledge that, but now he's pissed you off so forget it... and I guess there was nobody else... fine.No I didn't. What "win"? She got nominated, she hasn't won **** yet. She "won" about as much as Stacey Abrams and Beto O'Rourke did.

Even putting that aside. I'm talking about the POTUS election not some House race.

You asked for Democrats I would vote for against Assclown. I gave you three. But point taken, Killbot doesn't deserve a name anymore. I went back and looked at all the primary frontrunners, since I guess that's the only people you actually wanted me to look at, I had defined "teamzzzz" wrong, and you're right. They've all gone full killocrat. If that Lipinski take is the mood of the party and that's what it represents, then fine, I guess. I can extend the sentiment all the way down.

But he needs to name something that people will be voting for if they vote for him.

Subsidized late term abortions? Social eugenics lite?

 

[Gori the Grey]

No Farm Boy. I wasn't thinking anything along those lines.

 

[Sommerswerd]

You asked for Democrats I would vote for against Assclown. I gave you three. But point taken, Killbot doesn't deserve a name anymore. I went back and looked at all the primary frontrunners, since I guess that's the only people you actually wanted me to look at, I had defined "teamzzzz" wrong, and you're right. They've all gone full killocrat. If that Lipinski take is the mood of the party and that's what it represents, then fine, I guess. I can extend the sentiment all the way down.

If i'm correctly interpreting what you mean by "take", then no, that isn't the take of the party in general at all, which is why Biden ended up with nomination. I'm trying to figure out whether it was ultimately for naught.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, then the killocrat wing is driving the presidential platform's take on those. And we're trying to figure out why you all can't nominate a progressive. Crap, man, it's worse than that. They're full back to those videos Formaldehyde used to link that basically boiled down to "better to spend a couple grand now than pay for a lifetime of incarceration later."

 

[Sommerswerd]

Freakonomics? That chapter was pointing out correlation, it didn't come across as advocacy so much... if anything it was undermining the efficacy on all the tough-on-crime policies of the 90s... but yeah, like I said before, if we're one-issue'ing it, there's really no way around that.

Although it feels... I don't know. If it wasn't you I'd have questions, but I'm resigned to just be unhappy about it.

 

[Farm Boy]

It also ignored lead in the air and paint if I remember right, it had that as a point. It was certainly the point of where it was repeatedly posted.

Well, I was wrong about Sanders, too. He can also go burn. So here's my hat. Happier?

 

[Sommerswerd]

Same issue? Why would you have thought otherwise? Dude is as blue as the day is long... he's the guy that's too liberal even to be a Democrat... except on guns, that's his one thing.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, if the take is wrong, then why the hell are the eugenicists driving the bus?

 

[Sommerswerd]

I had to go look this up...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/11/did-bernie-sanders-consistently-vote-against-hyde-amendment/

I don't know man... it seems like this issue has been rendered into a paper tiger because Congress is in a permanent détente on it. Its essentially unassailable since its inserted into spending bills that members of Congress can't really vote against simply on those grounds. So regardless of what they say about it to curry political points... no one can actually make any changes to it.

So declaring that as the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back is looking... Just give it some consideration is all I'm saying.​

 

[Farm Boy]

Oh whatever, as if I've been inconsistent. But fine, you want to call me a liar over the killbot platform, quit pussyfooting about it.

 

[El_Machinae]

I get your pain. If it were up to me, there wouldn't be federal funding of abortion services. It would cost fractions of percents of the budget, could easily be compensated by liberal charity, and is a breaking point for a lot of people that I know. But the other half of me wonders if conceding in that arena is politically worth it. The same people offended by the funding of abortion services I suspect would then just redraw their boundaries so that they're basically always voting any type of pro-choice politician. I suspect my suspicion is true, since in Canada I know enough single-issue pro-life voters that would never consider voting for someone who even voices support for pro-choice policies.

But yeah, it's fair to say that eugenicists are driving the bus.

 

[Farm Boy]

You don't have to convince me on Assclown's supporters.

I'd vote for Colin Powell. He's on record as pro-choice. I do vote for plenty of people that aren't trying to overturn Roe v. Wade. But that isn't the battle line in my state. My state repealed late term bans and restrictions on reason past viability.

 

[El_Machinae]

I know: that's why I wrote a paragraph expressing sympathy for your concern.

 

[Farm Boy]

They've just totally given up on maintaining any sort of mask, it's like Google dropping their original motto.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Oh whatever, as if I've been inconsistent. But fine, you want to call me a liar over the killbot platform, quit pussyfooting about it.

Oh spare me the melodrama. I told you I had to go look it up. So I didn't even know myself, until I looked it up I thought the thing was in real jeopardy too and I was begrudgingly accepting your one-issue'ing. All I'm saying is that after looking into it, the whole thing might be a tempest in a teapot. Wouldn't be the first time our esteemed elected officials used a fake-ass wedge issue to manipulate our votes.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, then I guess the fate comes down to the Republicans holding the Senate in your calculus. But I've been taking the platforms as the platforms.