Deny, Defend, Depose

[Arwon]

Democrats are a big tent party progressive left to center right with around 30% support combined.

Remember my comments shot the actual numbers of progressives? Sub 20% in most countries imho.

You shouldn't shoot people, even in America where it's mostly legal

 

[Zardnaar]

You shouldn't shoot people, even in America where it's mostly legal

Well it's counter productive. He's not the most sympathetic victim but his death won't change much.

 

[Narz]

Biden had the best economy in decades.

People keep repeating that as if it will magically come true with enough reptitions.

Economy was much better in 90s, 00s.

There might be some metrics that are better now but cost of basics way too high.

Pretending everything is fine is main reason Harris lost.

 

[Syno]

Well it's counter productive. He's not the most sympathetic victim but his death won't change much.

Depending on how much stock you want to put in these things, but an insurer was going to revoke coverage for full anesthesia during general surgery, the assassination happened, and this idea was very suddenly reversed. Another insurer also cleared a significant amount of medical debt shortly afterward.

Even if you want to chalk those up to coincidences or unrelated to the killing, it seems far too early to say with confidence that nothing will change. Especially when the people attempting to prosecute him are overcompensating (with the media hit pieces and the overwhelming perp walk). If this were a meaningless instance of random murder, I don't think the powers that be would be investing so many resources toward it.

 

[Senethro]

You offer false options to choose from. There is no necessity a thing be thought heinous to be politically costly. Being ridiculous explains that sufficiently. There was no need for Joe Biden to declare his pronouns. That question was never in real doubt.

Interestingly, I last saw FDR make a pop culture appearance in a Reddit thread. R/Presidents. They're sorta knowledgable. Not atrocious. Despite the success of his New Deal programs, many judged him harshly. "He was racist, systemic racism present in the New Deal". It dawned on me that he is being evaluated by activists as though political figures are activists themselves. He's a politician. You judge figures and even ideas on comparable grounds. Activism first.

The problem is that the activism is always initially unpopular(or youre sorta a bad activist), and an election is basically a popularity contest. In the Biden/pronouns thing, it was ridiculed, not stridently opposed nor thought particularly heinous, by a public fatigued by increasingly bizarre moral busibodiness. He signaled to the activists he gets it. He, unfortunately, also signaled to a greater number, who are not activists, that he will entertain the absurd, something already irritating the public like a bad rash. There are many other comparable instances of this nature.

when that is a cultural expectation, which it has become amongst the modern left, politician analyzed as activist, the politics are gonna be unsatisfactory. The politician is always a horsehocky activist, always concerned with their popularity and often wavering(seen by Dems going right every 4 years) but, simultaneously, alienating the general public by entertaining every demand on every issue to an extent. It's lose/lose.

What is the cost of the reforms associated with Biden pronoun signalling, whatever they were? Or if by costly, you mean cost him the election then that's approaching a circular definition of costly. If they had no cost associated with them, then what was their rejection based on?

You're trying to claim that they don't matter and that they have a gigantic opportunity cost. I don't see the cost, and if Democrat candidates are rejected for simple association, that suggest those issues do in fact matter.

As regards the popularity contest paragraphs that I initially thought were you providing an example of USA being unable to advance along both axes - Really, you're making it sound like you'd be complaining about bizarre moral busybodies in FDRs era too.

 

[aelf]

People keep repeating that as if it will magically come true with enough reptitions.

Economy was much better in 90s, 00s.

There might be some metrics that are better now but cost of basics way too high.

Pretending everything is fine is main reason Harris lost.

People also keep pretending and repeating that the Dems ran on a woke platform.

Wokeness triggers conservatives and moderates, but the Dems didn't even run a woke campaign.

 

[r16]

the Hollywood did .

 

[Zardnaar]

People also keep pretending and repeating that the Dems ran on a woke platform.

Wokeness triggers conservatives and moderates, but the Dems didn't even run a woke campaign.

GoP ran anti woke that progressives push. Kamala not so much.

 

[aelf]

GoP ran anti woke that progressives push. Kamala not so much.

Yeah, and Kamala's campaign was the Dem campaign.

Which is why it's delusional for people to recommend the Dems drop the woke platform to win. As if they hadn't already. What such people are asking is for the Dems to be the same towards minorities as the Reps.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah, and Kamala's campaign was the Dem campaign.

Which is why it's delusional for people to recommend the Dems drop the woke platform to win. As if they hadn't already. What such people are asking is for the Dems to be the same towards minorities as the Reps.

Probably more like they talk about things more relevant to them?

 

[r16]

Depending on how much stock you want to put in these things, but an insurer was going to revoke coverage for full anesthesia during general surgery, the assassination happened, and this idea was very suddenly reversed. Another insurer also cleared a significant amount of medical debt shortly afterward.

Even if you want to chalk those up to coincidences or unrelated to the killing, it seems far too early to say with confidence that nothing will change. Especially when the people attempting to prosecute him are overcompensating (with the media hit pieces and the overwhelming perp walk). If this were a meaningless instance of random murder, I don't think the powers that be would be investing so many resources toward it.

ı remember mention of medical issues . So , while the thread goes in the expected direction , the new stuff about profits can wait the next year . What we see here is some particularly rich men doing their thing about the governance of the US , which should like be leading to one of the entire planet . They need extremist stuff to distract , with belief in some that they will discover immortality next week or next decade . The war in Ukraine , after delayed as much as possible will end in some "Unamerican" way . It will pump up Antisemitism in ways one wouldn't think to be feasible these days . Because Stormshadow and Javelin and turrets flying in the air and yet ... it must be some cabal , right ? It is one thing to be pushed back in the media and giving way to some redneck in Twitter , it will be something else , when that something else happens . Luigi is being romanticised if that's the word and will kept in that state , to explain why more CEOs have been killed . There will be no organized resistance . Like none of them thinks they might have actually have a pressing need to escape to Mars .

 

[Voidwalkin]

What is the cost of the reforms associated with Biden pronoun signalling, whatever they were? Or if by costly, you mean cost him the election then that's approaching a circular definition of costly. If they had no cost associated with them, then what was their rejection based on?

You're trying to claim that they don't matter and that they have a gigantic opportunity cost. I don't see the cost, and if Democrat candidates are rejected for simple association, that suggest those issues do in fact matter.

As regards the popularity contest paragraphs that I initially thought were you providing an example of USA being unable to advance along both axes - Really, you're making it sound like you'd be complaining about bizarre moral busybodies in FDRs era too.

This is not correct. It's not to be viewed in isolation. It's to be viewed holistically. The important phrase, "there are many such instances, many such frivolities" is a time saver for us all(especially me who does not want to write a book!). The instances in sum weary the public.

You also missed the point of FDR: in his own time, he was much less likely to be evaluated as if he were a social activist. This is largely a modern phenomenon applied retrospectively to him. It was then pointed out even hopes, much less demands, for politicians to be social activists are dumb. It's asking those who depend on popularity to consistently do the unpopular. They can't.

Modern leftists establish informal bonafides amongst well educated peers with consistently unpopular activism, and demands politicians implement these preferences. It's smart, from a selfish perspective. It benefits one socially. But as a change agent, it's unserious. There can be no expectation a politician could be a successful social activist. It's a terrible mix: what is by necessity unpopular does not win popularity contests. At most, they can mirror changes that have already transpired; it's a bottom-up, not top-down game, and yeah, a growing expectation it be top-down is consistently damaging.

 

[Voidwalkin]

Yeah, and Kamala's campaign was the Dem campaign.

Which is why it's delusional for people to recommend the Dems drop the woke platform to win. As if they hadn't already. What such people are asking is for the Dems to be the same towards minorities as the Reps.

I giggled.

Either A: you genuinely think the public forgot the entire Biden admin, the persistent attempts to morally illegitimize some really mainstream positions, while legitimizing some really weird ones

Or B: you're trying to score partisans points with the same process of illegitimization that has seen the actual working class defect in sufficient mass to give Trump the win.

In either event, it's, uh, idk. I kinda hope it's A. I suspect it's B. Neither is really good to me. The scale of the problem Dems face is much greater if it's B, which is more concerning.

 

[Farm Boy]

Just curious what the negative aspect you perceive from the parasite perishing is. Most of the criticism seems to be, essentially, that shooting a coyote won't eradicate the species and make the domesticated safe from them forever. I mean, fair enough, right? But everyone is safe from him, at least, now.

 

[Voidwalkin]

Just curious what the negative aspect you perceive from the parasite perishing is. Most of the criticism seems to be, essentially, that shooting a coyote won't eradicate the species and make the domesticated safe from them forever. I mean, fair enough, right? But everyone is safe from him, at least, now

It's a system. It'll keep on going. Retirement, early or otherwise, notedly pretty unimpactful. Reaction is more interesting.

Question, then, is does the reaction increase, decrease, or have no impact, on the likelihood of repeats? There are reasons every politician on the left prefaces with some variation of "its totally unacceptable". If you have any foresight at all, you know where repeats would lead.

Americans aren't cut out for wild west ****. They'll demand security, if it becomes a trend. Radicals are gonna watch their milquetoast compatriots(the majority) morph into fascists in that happening. Why would it be expected otherwise? These are people who've never been in anything as minor as a fistfight. They're not gonna tolerate a trend of violence, which would inevitably mean collateral. If Mangione missed left, and took some bystander out, far fewer would call him a hero. Bad trail, partner.

 

[Farm Boy]

I'd prefer to judge both of them for what they actually did.

I'm glad the dead one is dead. Go with God, brave little CEO.

 

[Senethro]

This is not correct. It's not to be viewed in isolation. It's to be viewed holistically. The important phrase, "there are many such instances, many such frivolities" is a time saver for us all(especially me who does not want to write a book!). The instances in sum weary the public.

You also missed the point of FDR: in his own time, he was much less likely to be evaluated as if he were a social activist. This is largely a modern phenomenon applied retrospectively to him. It was then pointed out even hopes, much less demands, for politicians to be social activists are dumb. It's asking those who depend on popularity to consistently do the unpopular. They can't.

Modern leftists establish informal bonafides amongst well educated peers with consistently unpopular activism, and demands politicians implement these preferences. It's smart, from a selfish perspective. It benefits one socially. But as a change agent, it's unserious. There can be no expectation a politician could be a successful social activist. It's a terrible mix: what is by necessity unpopular does not win popularity contests. At most, they can mirror changes that have already transpired; it's a bottom-up, not top-down game, and yeah, a growing expectation it be top-down is consistently damaging.

Oh OK so very little of your post was in response to what I actually said? I mean, effective debate tactic to just say what you wanted to say regardless, but it does make me somewhat superfluous.

 

[Lexicus]

I giggled.

Either A: you genuinely think the public forgot the entire Biden admin, the persistent attempts to morally illegitimize some really mainstream positions, while legitimizing some really weird ones

Or B: you're trying to score partisans points with the same process of illegitimization that has seen the actual working class defect in sufficient mass to give Trump the win.

In either event, it's, uh, idk. I kinda hope it's A. I suspect it's B. Neither is really good to me. The scale of the problem Dems face is much greater if it's B, which is more concerning.

The idea that the Biden administration was "woke" or really in any way designed to please left-wing social activists is genuinely insane

 

[Voidwalkin]

The idea that the Biden administration was "woke" or really in any way designed to please left-wing social activists is genuinely insane

To you, I imagine it is, because you're one of the most strident activists I have ever spoken to(but have absolutely no idea how far your positions and viewpoints are from vast swathes of America).

You once seriously asked me why they don't take tackling out of football, lol.

Oh OK so very little of your post was in response to what I actually said? I mean, effective debate tactic to just say what you wanted to say regardless, but it does make me somewhat superfluous.

You focused on the specific to deliberately ignore the trend when it was made clear it was a trend from the beginning.

 

[aelf]

The idea that the Biden administration was "woke" or really in any way designed to please left-wing social activists is genuinely insane

This is the guy who still hasn't admitted to the fact that his take on the subject matter of this thread is vastly removed from the views of the people he's claiming to speak for. So, yeah expect a lot of deviation from reality.