UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-26-2016, 01:19 PM   #1526
phoopes
Double Dragon
 
phoopes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuckle View Post
His comments have not been objectively terrible; most of what makes them objectionable is in his tone, identity, etc. Whether you like him or not, you are forced to concede that his attacks are not on women, not on minorities, but on specific people or governments who are female or minority. This has been taken to mean that he dislikes the groups they belong to, and it would be surprisingly easy to set a stance consistent with earlier comments that is not divisive or bigoted that fits in with the idea that he wants to fix problems in government and "make america great again" etc. etc,
"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the Hell is going on."

Please rephrase in a way that is not "divisive or bigoted."
__________________
phoopes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2016, 03:38 PM   #1527
Shuckle
Mage of Mind
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Land of Thought and Melody
Posts: 3,154
It's difficult for me to say anything without coming across as though I'm in agreement. I'm not. Objectively, the facts say that foreign Muslims who emigrate or even just visit the US are the least likely to commit acts of terror; and a ban on them would accomplish next to nothing.

However, I'm really not seeing where the bigotry lies. He is not suggesting this attitude out of a hatred or fear of Muslims specifically; it seems to me that he is drawing a clear line between ethnic groups and governments. If ISIS is sending Muslim agents into the US, it would be logical (if insensitive) to suggest that the travel of Muslims be stopped entirely until there is a better and more secure way of handling that problem.
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2016, 03:53 PM   #1528
Slash
Poison Jam
 
Slash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Tokyo Underground Sewage Facility
Posts: 6,023
Send a message via Yahoo to Slash Send a message via Skype™ to Slash
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuckle View Post
His comments have not been objectively terrible
Now, Imma let you finish, but that clause is dead wrong. Painting the majority of Mexicans immigrants as thieves and rapists, wanting to ban all Muslims from coming into the country (nearly a quarter of the world's population, and let's not forget they worship the same God he purports to worship), leading the idiocy that was the "birther" movement, stereotyping seemingly every group... he's practically the anthropomorphic manifestation of bigotry.

And honestly, when he rants out about Muslims, it's pretty clear he doesn't mean white Muslims. He means the ones that "look like" Muslims, whether or not they're actually Muslim at all. While clearly and indisputably a xenophobic thing, it's also got a fair amount to do with racism as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuckle View Post
However, I'm really not seeing where the bigotry lies. He is not suggesting this attitude out of a hatred or fear of Muslims specifically
Except he totally is

Quote:
it seems to me that he is drawing a clear line between ethnic groups and governments.
blaming an ethnic group for the crimes of one government is pretty damn racist

Quote:
If ISIS is sending Muslim agents into the US, it would be logical (if insensitive) to suggest that the travel of Muslims be stopped entirely until there is a better and more secure way of handling that problem.
Not... really? Did we stop all Christians from coming into the country during Hitler's power trip (or resulting from all the Christian domestic terror attacks?)? If Israel starts acting out just a bit worse than they already are, are we going to stop Jews from coming in? Because of all the white folks shooting up schools all across the US, are we going to have a "no white immigrants" policy?

Last edited by Slash; 05-26-2016 at 03:58 PM.
Slash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2016, 04:28 PM   #1529
Concept
Archbishop of Banterbury
 
Concept's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Nipple-Hunting with Elsie and Kairne
Posts: 6,999
Send a message via Skype™ to Concept
Lines are pretty much firmly drawn now for Trump vs Not Trump, and the Trump side is smaller. He's had so much limelight and been so divisive that I doubt there are a great number of truly floating voters left.

Trumps strategy at this point really has to be twofold. First, make sure to turnout the faithful; both the Trump faithful and, by working with the Republican establishment, the Republican faithful. It's in the party's best interests to work with him on this as well because higher turnout of the party faithful helps down ballot Republicans. Second, he needs to play on the fact that Clinton is nearly as unpopular as he is and drive down turnout amongst traditionally Democrat voters by slinging as much mud her way as possible. Democrat voters tend to turn out better for Presidential elections than other elections, but if he can drag Clinton through the mud he can drive turnout down. Republican voters are more likely to turn out to a Presidential race with two unpopular candidates (just to vote in other elections on the same day, which Republicans are better at driving turnout for) and thrn just throw a vote to him while there because he's not a Democrat named Clinton, so it's in his interest to make the race as toxic as possible for both candidates.

Tl;dr toxic race with two unpopular candidates much more negatively impacts Democrat turnout than it does Republican turnout, so being as unpleasant as possible whilst cosying up to the Republican establishment is a potentially winning strategy. He'll walk back his campaigns most controversial points just far enough to get the bulk of the Republican establishment behind him and ramp up the same childish personal attacks he used during the primary race for Clinton.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTerry
What can the harvest hope for, if not the care of the reaper man?

Last edited by Concept; 05-26-2016 at 04:38 PM.
Concept is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2016, 05:15 PM   #1530
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
The last week has demonstrated to me quite clearly that no-one on UPN has any idea what objectivity is lol.

The race looks fun! A man who is woefully unqualified to be President (or be in charge of anything, for that matter) vs a woman who is known to be corrupt, ineffective and a pathological liar to boot. Veeps yet to be picked, a number of stragglers still in the race for reasons that have varying degrees of sense, and a political system which is straight up designed to be incredibly unrepresentative.

Democracy!
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2016, 04:54 AM   #1531
Shuckle
Mage of Mind
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Land of Thought and Melody
Posts: 3,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concept View Post
Lines are pretty much firmly drawn now for Trump vs Not Trump, and the Trump side is smaller. He's had so much limelight and been so divisive that I doubt there are a great number of truly floating voters left.
Which is irritating me greatly because he had the potential to begin uniting starting when he cinched the nomination. While the Democrats are playing hungry hungry hippos with their core voter base, it would have been the perfect time for Trump to start appealing to centrist sentiments.

Unfortunately he seems to be going with the other strategy, the one you mentioned:

Quote:
First, make sure to turnout the faithful; both the Trump faithful and, by working with the Republican establishment, the Republican faithful.
Ugh ugh ugh. Ugly race, ugly strategy. If he reached across party lines even a little bit more it would be in the bag for him, but as UPN clearly demonstrates he hasn't even bothered.

The worst part is that Clinton and Sanders are both not bothering to appeal to conservative voters. Trump could set himself as an obvious leftist candidate and his core voter base would still love him + he'd snap up Democrats who find Clinton and Sanders too far left for their tastes.

Presumably Trump's political analysts know better than I do, but it's hard to say that in good conscience when the easy move goes ignored for this long. He has the nation's attention, and he keeps throwing it away on reinforcing his image as a divisive bigoted asshole. I can't figure out for the life of me why he would willingly do that.

Quote:
The last week has demonstrated to me quite clearly that no-one on UPN has any idea what objectivity is lol.

The race looks fun! A man who is woefully unqualified to be President (or be in charge of anything, for that matter) vs a woman who is known to be corrupt, ineffective and a pathological liar to boot. Veeps yet to be picked, a number of stragglers still in the race for reasons that have varying degrees of sense, and a political system which is straight up designed to be incredibly unrepresentative.
Trump's a pretty good business owner. Don't let the NeverTrump propaganda fool you; he has a pretty incredible success rate on businesses he personally manages, and he did literally write the book on negotiation tactics. Lyndon Johnson was like this as well, and Johnson was arguably one of the greatest Presidents ever at the negotiating table.

Clinton may be corrupt, ineffective, and dishonest, but she has connections that might keep things from getting too out of hand. And even if a Hillary presidency hits its worst case scenario to delay the country's recovery for another four long, draggy years, she's still the first female president and that's noteworthy. ;)

Tbh our system is misleading. You may think that a Democrat majority in congress plus a Democrat president plus a Democratic SCOTUS would mean that the Democrats do what they want, but in fact the Republicans still have the power to stall and block if they really dislike something. Our system lends huge amounts of weight to individuals and small groups, and there is no way to guarantee that you can push anything through Congress. Filibusters, committee votes, and other small political processes can kill a bill before it's even heard.

That said I totally agree with you, this election is a huge farce. But that's why I love it!
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2016, 05:55 AM   #1532
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Sadly the fact that it takes Hillary Rodham Clinton to be a conceivable female candidate says a whole lot about sexism in America.

And by unrepresentative I was more talking about how unashamedly rigged the constituency and EC systems are.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2016, 07:16 AM   #1533
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,734
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
My eyes are dollar signs.

If Trump gets elected, I could retire after the killing I make this Fall.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2016, 07:31 AM   #1534
Shuckle
Mage of Mind
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Land of Thought and Melody
Posts: 3,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercutio View Post
Sadly the fact that it takes Hillary Rodham Clinton to be a conceivable female candidate says a whole lot about sexism in America.

And by unrepresentative I was more talking about how unashamedly rigged the constituency and EC systems are.
Hey now, Warren is another viable left-wing candidate, and though they weren't great candidates the Republicans tried pretty hard to get Fiorina and Palin into the executive branch. Congress may be dominated by old white farts but that's mostly because only old white farts have any desire to go into politics and that's only going to change after 50 or so years of having women and minorities in power.

Gameable? Yes. Absolutely. Clinton just proved that by being senator of a key swing state and doing basically nothing in order to easily secure the delegates from that state in the convention. But I dunno about rigged, that's a little different.

Unless Hillary engaged in voter fraud to secure votes she otherwise would not have gotten thanks to her position in power over New York polling, in which case the States have a bigger problem than the College system itself.
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2016, 02:18 PM   #1535
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
It's fun watching Trump talk energy policy. He's straight up lying/comically-mistaken about COP 21 in order to get coal miner votes.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2016, 12:07 AM   #1536
Talon87
Nebby. Back into the bag.
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,496
Send a message via AIM to Talon87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercutio View Post
It's fun watching Trump talk energy policy. He's straight up lying/comically-mistaken about COP 21 in order to get coal miner votes.
Unsurprising. Rewinding to the Democratic primary, Clinton's courting of the environmentalist left cost her West Virginia, a state well-known for its poverty and reliance on coal mining to provide jobs. Sanders didn't have to really say "COAL IS AMAZING!" so much as not say "COAL IS THE DEVIL!" to give him a huge leg up over Clinton.
Talon87 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 09:56 AM   #1537
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/20...t-dull-hillary

This is fun.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 04:03 PM   #1538
deh74
Noted homosexual
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,090
Have we gone over Donald Trump's desire to "open" California's water yet? Because that was actually really interesting.

Also I'm done with the primary and the last thing I'm going to say about this is that the Bernie Bros really lost me when they started going after poor little retiring Barbara Boxer for absolutely no reason and calling one of the most liberal members of Congress a DINO. I really hope that once Bernie's gone his "movement" quickly evaporates and doesn't try to become a left wing tea party.

On a note unrelated to the presidential election I am going to be a delegate at the Massachusetts Democratic Party's convention this Saturday so that should be a fun and interesting experience.
__________________




PASBL
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.

deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 05:56 PM   #1539
deoxys
(づ-̩̩̩-̩̩̩_-̩̩̩-̩̩̩)づ
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A Place Further than the Universe
Posts: 6,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by deh74 View Post
Have we gone over Donald Trump's desire to "open" California's water yet? Because that was actually really interesting.

Also I'm done with the primary and the last thing I'm going to say about this is that the Bernie Bros really lost me when they started going after poor little retiring Barbara Boxer for absolutely no reason and calling one of the most liberal members of Congress a DINO. I really hope that once Bernie's gone his "movement" quickly evaporates and doesn't try to become a left wing tea party.

On a note unrelated to the presidential election I am going to be a delegate at the Massachusetts Democratic Party's convention this Saturday so that should be a fun and interesting experience.
Can you please step off with 'Bernie Bros'? Seriously. This shit does nothing but alienate Bernie supporters from voting for Clinton in the general if she is the nominee. Like me. I'm pretty sure any time I hear the term, any chance that I'd vote for Clinton just lessens and lessens.

Did you not watch ANY of the Nevada state caucus? Prior to this, Bernie had secured more delegates in Nevada than Hillary did. Barbara Boxer and the out-of-state establishment democrats came to the convention, suspended the rules when the votes against doing so were VERY OBVIOUSLY louder and more prevalent than those in favor of it, and then basically allowed roughly 30 more delegates to represent Clinton, which allowed her to overtake Bernie's narrow lead over her, ultimately securing her a few more delegates on a national level, even though prior to this Bernie actually had more. And yeah, there is a conflict of interest - Boxer's grandson is Hillary's nephew. They're practically family. When "Bernie Bros" got angry and protested what the democrats in control of the convention were doing, Boxer basically told them all to shut the fuck up and deal with it.

Tell me, Deh, how can you in good conscience be so obviously biased? Like, to such an extreme? And before you try to say 'pot calling the kettle black', you don't even need to read a single article on any of this. You can go on YouTube and watch pure, live recorded, unadulterated footage of the convention yourself. I'm not sure how anyone could watch it and not think "Wow, maybe there really are some shenanigans afoot!"

edit:

Quote:
I really hope that once Bernie's gone his "movement" quickly evaporates and doesn't try to become a left wing tea party.
The Democrats have done nothing the entire election season but shown how corrupt they are. Progressivism is dead, we should just be complacent with what we get, and we should shut the fuck up and let the big kids make all of the decisions for what's best for us, but first they need to negotiate the price. That's what I've learned has become of the democratic party. I guess the party just naturally adapts to whoever the clear leader of it is - and while the party appeared strong in 2008 and 2012, perhaps that was only because the party as a whole adapted to Obama's leadership and beliefs. Look at the party now. What a disgrace. What a sorry answer to the Republicans. The only thing the Democratic party has going for it at this point is "Vote democrat. Just be logical."

This movement isn't going anywhere. Neither you nor anyone else will diminish the millions of angry American democrats and independents who are fed up with so many broken things in the system. You can pretend it's gone, but it's not going anywhere but up. Even if Bernie loses, the movement only manifested itself because so many of us feel the same way. It's not going anywhere. And I do hope that perhaps the outcome means a new Progressive party, if that's what it takes.

Last edited by deoxys; 06-01-2016 at 06:08 PM.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 06:39 PM   #1540
Talon87
Nebby. Back into the bag.
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,496
Send a message via AIM to Talon87
Maybe it's because I am less invested in Sanders than many who prefer Sanders to Clinton, but when I read deh's post I didn't take "Bernie Bros" as a personal attack. I felt like he was attacking the *ahem* "neckbeard fedora tippers" who ardently support Sanders. The types who support Sanders with as much fanaticism and fervor as the woman with the creepily joyous face oozing religious ecstasy who supported Trump. You remember the one. Her. When deh says something like "Bernie Bros," I don't feel like he's talking about me. I feel like I've been pretty calm, level-headed, even dispassionate. And I don't even feel like he's talking about you or Rangeet. I feel like he's calling out the Bernie Sanders equivalents of the fanatical Trump supporters.
Talon87 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 06:53 PM   #1541
deoxys
(づ-̩̩̩-̩̩̩_-̩̩̩-̩̩̩)づ
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A Place Further than the Universe
Posts: 6,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Maybe it's because I am less invested in Sanders than many who prefer Sanders to Clinton, but when I read deh's post I didn't take "Bernie Bros" as a personal attack. I felt like he was attacking the *ahem* "neckbeard fedora tippers" who ardently support Sanders. The types who support Sanders with as much fanaticism and fervor as the woman with the creepily joyous face oozing religious ecstasy who supported Trump. You remember the one. Her. When deh says something like "Bernie Bros," I don't feel like he's talking about me. I feel like I've been pretty calm, level-headed, even dispassionate. And I don't even feel like he's talking about you or Rangeet. I feel like he's calling out the Bernie Sanders equivalents of the fanatical Trump supporters.
Thus far every use of 'Bernie Bros' that I have seen has been used with the intent of grouping all Bernie supporters under that flag, and I was in fact essentially told as such by an acquaintance and Clinton supporter who uses the term himself. The intent in its usage more often than not has become malicious in an attempt to posture all (male) Bernie supporters as 'Bernie Bros' - the kinds of people who use the term meninist unironically and dislike Clinton for actually sexist reasons - and it is supposed to range from the dorito stained neckbeard euphorics to the obnoxiously loud alcoholic frat boy stereotypes.

And the best part is they've done this song and dance before, you just might not remember it (because it wasn't nearly as widespread).

Bonus post-primary aftermath reaction
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 06:56 PM   #1542
deh74
Noted homosexual
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,090
Thank you for demonstrating what I think has gone wrong among a surprisingly large portion of the progressive movement. They are unwilling to accept the fact that their favored candidate lost the primary fair in square, even though their candidate has explicitly come out and said that the primary was not rigged against him, many of them refuse to consider supporting Hillary Clinton once Bernie finally admits he's been defeated and in doing so make it that much easier for fucking Donald Trump to become president. They threaten violence against the convention and send death threats to party members. They complain about the primary system when in fact undemocratic caucuses are a large part of their candidates success and once it becomes clear they're not going to win a majority of pledged delegates they start running around telling the unpledged delegates that they should vote for their candidate even though that goes against the national popular vote.

This isn't to say that I think everything is fine as is, i was a VERY early supporter of Senator Sanders and I voted for him in the Massachusetts primary, but since then the level of vitriol and immaturity coming from his campaign, his supporters, and even the man himself and being directed at literally anybody who doesn't agree with them 100% of the time on 100% of the issues has driven me and many other progressives away from him, destroyed our faith in his ability to govern good faith, and seriously damaged my lpersona opinion of the man himself. And now this stunt he's pulling by pretending he can win in California and pretending he can still win the nomination is seriously hurting the party, himself, and the progressive movement and granting Donald Trump an early boost. Bernie Sanders said that his main priority would be defeating Donald Trump but it seems to me and many others that he intends to burn down the Democratic Party just to prove a point and hope that Trump will be so bad at the job that a"#TrueProgressive" (whatever that means) is elected in 2020. In case you weren't aware of this that's what Nader supporters said in 2000, accelerationism didn't work then, it didn't work with Reagan, and it's not going to work now. What us progressives can do is try as hard as we can to elect as good a person as we can. We tried to elect Bernie and failed, now it's time to go to the next best option, Hillary Clinton, who was more liberal than Obama in 2008, and who's campaign in 2016 is so liberal that it makes Obama 2008 look like a Blue Dog in comparison.

And before you reply, everything that happened in Nevada was as a result of a highly undemocratic caucuses that less than 10,000 people participated in, and what happened at their convention was completely legal according to the rules of the party, which isn't too say that those rules shouldn't be changed, just saying it was fully and completely allowed and the Sanders campaign knew that.

Now please excuse me while I go back to focusing on my own personal issues of education, LGBT rights, infrastructure, housing, and transportation, work that I do with a variety of progressive groups and organizations in Massachusetts. While you sit around and pray to your Great God of Politics hoping that he'll magically make things better. That is, of course, unless you actually do on the ground work with progressive organizations to further progressive causes beyond the presidential level.
__________________




PASBL
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.

deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 07:01 PM   #1543
deoxys
(づ-̩̩̩-̩̩̩_-̩̩̩-̩̩̩)づ
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A Place Further than the Universe
Posts: 6,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by deh74 View Post
Thank you for demonstrating what I think has gone wrong among a surprisingly large portion of the progressive movement. They are unwilling to accept the fact that their favored candidate lost the primary fair in square,
Stopped reading there. You don't need to rig a system to still create voter suppression. I'm not sure why I even bothered. While it obviously blows that Bernie has been losing to Clinton, I've never been delusional enough to believe that it was anything but a difficult and unlikely battle to win from the start. That doesn't mean that despite having the upper hand the entire way that there hasn't been some pretty obvious bullshittery going on to create voter suppression, and if you don't think that the case, then we're simply done here.

edit:

Decided to be polite enough to skim the rest of what you had to say.


Quote:
many of them refuse to consider supporting Hillary Clinton once Bernie finally admits he's been defeated and in doing so make it that much easier for fucking Donald Trump to become president.
Then perhaps you should be INVITING Bernie supporters to Clinton's side with open arms instead of riding a wave of cynicism to the top. She is going to need those votes, and if you continue to treat them in a similar way you treat Trump supporters, then no one is going to want anything to do with her. Something about being a gracious victor. And Clinton supporters have been showing themselves as anything but gracious.

Quote:
but since then the level of vitriol and immaturity coming from his campaign,
Fucking please. Sanders has run one of the tamest campaigns against a same-party opponent practically ever. Remember "Americans are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails"? Or how about literally all of the other thousands of ridiculously easy shots he could have taken at her but hasn't? In fact, it's going to be the biggest thing to talk about in his campaign's post-mortem. It's so frustrating because he so very clearly is trying hard to not step on her toes, and yet, what he does say gets interpreted by people such as yourself as "disgusting" and "vitriolic". Hi, yeah, do you remember Hillary's campaign against Obama in 2008, where she started the birther movement and then insinuated that she was staying in the race in case he was assassinated, or that time when she threw fuel to the fire that Obama was a muslim - or countless of other times? But when Bernie calls her out on her Wall Street shenanigans et al, he gets called vitriolic? Really? How hilarious that you were so easily able to swap to Clinton's side for... essentially non-issues.

Quote:
everything that happened in Nevada was as a result of a highly undemocratic caucuses that less than 10,000 people participated in, and what happened at their convention was completely legal according to the rules of the party, which isn't too say that those rules shouldn't be changed, just saying it was fully and completely allowed and the Sanders campaign knew that.
Okay, well -

Quote:
Now please excuse me while I go back to focusing on my own personal issues of education, LGBT rights, infrastructure, housing, and transportation, work that I do with a variety of progressive groups and organizations in Massachusetts. While you sit around and pray to your Great God of Politics hoping that he'll magically make things better. That is, of course, unless you actually do on the ground work with progressive organizations to further progressive causes beyond the presidential level.
You know what? Nevermind. Congrats, you've managed to ascend to a level of holier-than-thou high horse riding that I am pretty sure I've never seen before. Thanks for the discussion.

Last edited by deoxys; 06-01-2016 at 07:13 PM.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 07:01 PM   #1544
deh74
Noted homosexual
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,090
I'd just like to add that Talon's assessment of my use of the phrase Bernie Bros is spot on, just that, as a former volunteer for his campaign, I've seen how these people have been becoming more prevalent as the primary continued and eventually can't that I could not work in the same campaign as them while they ran around praising fucking Jill Stein and attacking people like Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer, and Barney Frank, who I have actually had the pleasure to meet on multiple occasions, with vicious half truths and blatant lies, even resurrecting things like whitewater and the Vince Foster conspiracy.
__________________




PASBL
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.

deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 07:06 PM   #1545
deh74
Noted homosexual
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
Stopped reading there. You don't need to rig a system to still create voter suppression. I'm not sure why I even bothered. While it obviously blows that Bernie has been losing to Clinton, I've never been delusional enough to believe that it was anything but a difficult and unlikely battle to win from the start. That doesn't mean that despite having the upper hand the entire way that there hasn't been some pretty obvious bullshittery going on to create voter suppression, and if you don't think that the case, then we're simply done here.
Yes, there's been a lot of voter suppression in the states that use caucuses, thank you for acknowledging that. This unwillingness to debate people who don't completely agree with everything you say is why people have these impressions of Sanders supporters being assholes. This also proves my point that many Sanders supporters have no idea how activism actually works and why Sanders was doomed crash and burn from the moment he harnessed the support of this group. The Democratic Party is rapidly becoming more progressive and it looks as though it will do so without people like you.
__________________




PASBL
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.

deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 07:16 PM   #1546
deoxys
(づ-̩̩̩-̩̩̩_-̩̩̩-̩̩̩)づ
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A Place Further than the Universe
Posts: 6,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by deh74 View Post
Yes, there's been a lot of voter suppression in the states that use caucuses, thank you for acknowledging that. This unwillingness to debate people who don't completely agree with everything you say is why people have these impressions of Sanders supporters being assholes. This also proves my point that many Sanders supporters have no idea how activism actually works and why Sanders was doomed crash and burn from the moment he harnessed the support of this group. The Democratic Party is rapidly becoming more progressive and it looks as though it will do so without people like you.
I updated my comment with an edit shortly after I made it. My unwillingness to debate you comes from the fact that I am having difficulty seeing you given how tall your horse is (and literally every other vocal Clinton supporter). Which is funny because I've actually had some relatively calm and nice debates with some Clinton supporters with no issue - but whatever. I'm not your enemy, but keep attacking me, us, anyway.

I'm leaving it at that because this discussion has been seriously skimming the rules of the debate forum as it is and I'd rather not invoke the wrath of our overlords.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 07:17 PM   #1547
Talon87
Nebby. Back into the bag.
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,496
Send a message via AIM to Talon87
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
Thus far every use of 'Bernie Bros' that I have seen has been used with the intent of grouping all Bernie supporters under that flag, and I was in fact essentially told as such by an acquaintance and Clinton supporter who uses the term himself. The intent in its usage more often than not has become malicious in an attempt to posture all (male) Bernie supporters as 'Bernie Bros' - the kinds of people who use the term meninist unironically and dislike Clinton for actually sexist reasons - and it is supposed to range from the dorito stained neckbeard euphorics to the obnoxiously loud alcoholic frat boy stereotypes.
People have told me similar things about the label "social justice warrior", or SJW, when I have used it here on UPN. That it refers to all men and women who support the rights of minorities. That it mocks anyone who stands up for the rights of someone else, no matter how infrequently or how rightly. And I just plain disagree. Because I know me, and I know how I'm using it. And I'm an intelligent young man, literate, who can read how others are using the term. And I know that when I and most other people speak of SJWs, we're referring to the career Tumblr users, the teenagers who spend over 90% of their free time on the Internet and most of that on Tumblr, the misanthropes, the ones who mock heterosexuals, the ones who watched The Angry Video Game Nerd's video about why he wouldn't be reviewing Ghostbusters 2016 and labeled him a misogynist. (Previous sentence is one giant "AND" statement.) The ones who would label me a misogynist if I said I don't plan to go see Ghostbusters 2016, even if that was the only sentence out of my mouth and they don't know a single other thing about me. People like that? SJWs. I can't control other people from trying to rewrite the narrative, from trying to appropriate the term and redefine it in a way that suits their own agenda. We all know, we heralds of common sense, what is meant by SJW -- someone who is white knighting for oppressed minorities but has gone way way off the deep end and is guilty of 21st-century McCarthyism.

And it's the same for me with a label I had never even heard before June 1, 2016, like "Bernie Bros." First I've ever heard it. But I see a label like that and my mind instantly shifts to the recent kerfuffle in Nevada. Hardcore Sanders supporters who are doing his movement more harm than good. The ones that delegate after delegate has been quoted on record as saying, "I had been on the fence"/"I had been going to vote for Sanders," either/or!, "but now I'm not going to. If that's what his supporters are like, then no thanks." They don't see passionate youth fighting to rid a corrupt system of its poison. They see a nutjob angry mob. They see people they would be uncomfortable sharing a bus seat with, much less inviting into their homes for tea and cake. They see people they sincerely diagnose as deranged. They worry about concealed weaponry and how it might be used by the crazies to harm them. They distance themselves. They want no part of it, of any of it. "Get me outta here!"

If deh is saying that anyone who dislikes Clinton as a candidate but identifies as liberal is "a leftist Tea Partier," then yeah, I'm with you in your disapproval of his post and his attitudes. But I didn't take his post that way. When he spoke of a "leftist Tea Party," of "Bernie Bros," I took him to mean the Sanders supporters who have already donated thousands of dollars despite working a minimum wage job less than 40 hours a week. I took him to mean the fanatics who have attended every convention in the country. I took him to mean the ones who stroke Bernie's decrepit electronic dick at every opportunity Reddit and Facebook permit them. Like ... I don't think he's entirely wrong. There are radical liberals coming out of the woodwork now, who are every bit as fervent and ideological as their conservative Tea Party counterparts. Sanders has reopened a discussion in this country about socialism and you have more than teens reading The Communist Manifesto for their first time weighing in on this. Many of Sanders' proposals are as impossible to see passed into legislation in the next ten years than the craziest of Tea Party wishlists. I can well understand why a more moderate liberal, and one who identifies as a party Democrat to boot, would be disturbed by the Sanders movement. I have moderate Republican friends who have been there for the past eight years with respect to the Tea Party.

EDIT: In the time it took me to proofread my reply before posting, you each got in an additional three posts and are at each others' throats, it seems. Holy cow. Will be back soon, I need to read what you all wrote. But ... uh ... I would suggest you both not lose more time on this thread right now. You both deserve better than that. Life's too short to waste an hour on Internet arguments.
Talon87 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 07:24 PM   #1548
deh74
Noted homosexual
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,090
I've gone off and thought for a few minutes and I've realized that in this exchange I've been guilty of some of the things i accused you of. I would like to take this time to apologize for any perceived personal insults and I hope that we can work together in the future.
__________________




PASBL
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.

deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 07:26 PM   #1549
deoxys
(づ-̩̩̩-̩̩̩_-̩̩̩-̩̩̩)づ
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A Place Further than the Universe
Posts: 6,505
Talon: Really quickly - while you may have not heard the term until today, I just want to leave this here and here are two articles a quick google search returned on the term and the short history of its use

Quote:
Originally Posted by deh74 View Post
I've gone off and thought for a few minutes and I've realized that in this exchange I've been guilty of some of the things i accused you of. I would like to take this time to apologize for any perceived personal insults and I hope that we can work together in the future.
Thank you. I actually really appreciate this. I apologize for the same as well. I think that at the end of the day, despite our differences, we do share far more in common in worldviews and ideology than we realize when we get caught up in such heated debates.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 07:33 PM   #1550
deh74
Noted homosexual
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
Talon: Really quickly - while you may have not heard the term until today, I just want to leave this here and here are two articles a quick google search returned on the term and the short history of its use



Thank you. I actually really appreciate this. I apologize for the same as well. I think that at the end of the day, despite our differences, we do share far more in common in worldviews and ideology than we realize when we get caught up in such heated debates.
This is true, I we're probably on the same side on many issues and it's just that the heat of the campaign had brought up some tensions within the left. I'm glad we're both able to realize this and reach an understanding.

I'd like to turn our attention now to an experiment in Oakland that is trying to test the effects of a universal basic income on people's lives. This has been proposed by many in the face on a potential mass automation of jobs in coming decades.

http://techcrunch.com/2016/05/31/y-c...nt-in-oakland/

On a side note Switzerland may also be implementing such a program on a nationwide scale pending the results of a referendum on the issue.
__________________




PASBL
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.

deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:19 AM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.