Jay

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

That’s a false equivalence. Trump’s emboldening of neoNazis is not just as ludicrous as Pizzagate conspiracies. Nice false equivalence. You almost got away with it, but alas, nope.

My goal wasn’t to make a direct comparison, but to demonstrate that Russian disinformation tactics rely on lack of intelligence and critical thinking ability to rile up their target. Neo-Nazis being emboldened by Trump is a real thing; Trump supporting Nazis isn’t, but that’s what less intelligent liberals buy into. Keep trying.

Trump’s refusal to condemn neoNazis or disavow their support is arguably supportive of Nazis. It definitely legitimizes their cause.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be

Roughly the 2-minute mark is what you’re looking for.

It’s a weak and pathetic offhand comment made only to defend the merits if the Unite the Right rally, which was organized by neoNazis.

You: “He never denounced them.”

Me: “Yes he did, see here.”

You: “It wasn’t enough.”

Decent attempt at moving the goalpost. Try again, though.

Look, stealing someone’s schtick only makes you look embarrassing, especially when you use the “try again” thing when I was actually right. Try again, for fuck’s sake.

Keep deflecting.

Try again.

Just admit that you believe Trump is a Nazi sympathizer, his supporters are morons, and nothing he ever says will be enough to convince you otherwise. That would be more respectable than pretending his words matter.

He didn’t condemn them. He said they “should be condemned” and then proceeded to defend their rally without actually condemning them and their rally or denouncing their support of him.

Semantics. You’re playing grammar games for the sake of proving your point, because…

I do think he’s a Nazi sympathizer and I think his supporters are morons

Thanks for finally admitting it. You’ve dodged it for pages and pages of posts, so it’s nice that you’re being genuine for once.

I mean it’s completely wacko and it’s the logic that contributed to the Democrats losing the last election and quite possibly the upcoming election, and also why mainstream media has lost the trust of much of the public, but at least it’s honest.

Is this the part where I whine that you didn’t acknowledge my other post? Not sure how that works.

I didn’t acknowledge your other post because it didn’t actually say anything of value.

Or it said things you can’t reasonably counter because you know them to be true, deep down.

No, it was mostly just faux centrism that I found unexciting. I’ll reexamine and counter it point by point if you want me to.

Why? It’ll just be more contrarian blather.

So what’s your problem then? And what, Am I not allowed to disagree with your shit without being a contrarian? How does that make me a contrarian? Plus you seem to the less popular opinion in this forum so how is me going after the less popular opinion contrarian?

Of course you can disagree. I’m just saying the discussion won’t be productive, as the last few pages of this thread have shown.

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

That’s a false equivalence. Trump’s emboldening of neoNazis is not just as ludicrous as Pizzagate conspiracies. Nice false equivalence. You almost got away with it, but alas, nope.

I believe he’s talking hypothetically. I don’t think Russian bots actually pushed the Pizzagate theory – that was Cernovich saying that. Similarly, Russian bots haven’t been comparing the Trump administration to the early days of the Nazis – that was Holocaust survivors saying that. But Russian bots theoretically could post on either topic.

Oh, you’re comparing Cernovich to Holocaust survivors. Nice try! Almost got away with it!

What a terrible attempt to parody my post. It doesn’t even make sense. If he’d implied both topics were false then you’d have a point. Try again.

This was almost an effective way to distract from the fact that you got called out on an erroneous assumption. Keep trying.

Uh, no. Not at all. Plus you’re just using my own style of mockery against me which indicates a near total lack of creativity on your part. My assumption wasn’t erroneous. Your post implied an equivalence between Pizzagate and Trump-Nazi connections. The same way you implied an equivalence between Black Lives Matter and white nationalists a few days ago.

I didn’t imply parity between Pizzagate and Neo-Nazis. You inferred it—which you do quite often, and usually mistakenly, which is what happens when your emotions dictate your state of mind and you’re intent on finding boogeymen everywhere.

I inferred it because it was the obvious implication. And you find boogeymen too. Remember when I debunked your claim that Youtube was targeting conservatives with demonitization by offering several leftwing examples of demonitized channels? You just responded with a conspiracy theory that “the left” thought they had deviated too much, or something. How is that not a boogeyman?

You provided names and no data, and let it drop when I asked for further info. You debunked nothing.

I just found the obvious implication in your statement that conservatives repost Pizzagate and liberals repost Trump Nazi things. If I say that people will buy into anything, and then provide you with two examples, one being climate change and the other being faith healing, that implies that I’m equating the two or at least placing them on the same plane. Obviously.

Except that Trump…isn’t a Nazi…nor is he a sympathizer. The worst thing he seems to be guilty of in this scenario is not disavowing Nazis using the exact language you’d find acceptable. Not that it would change your mind in the slightest.

Also, I took back what I said about BLM, which wasn’t equating them to white nationalists, but Antifa, which was a mistake because they’re not equivalent. But feel free to interpret it in whatever way best fits your argument so you can continue to label me as “far-right” or “on the wrong side of history” or whatever other looney lefty slogan strikes you.

You equated BLM to Antifa, which you were equating to white nationalists. You did take it back when I pointed out how terrible and inaccurate the equation was. So I guess you deserve a little credit for that.

Far-right isn’t a slogan. It’s a clearly-defined term that is relevant to the discussion. As for history, I don’t think you have any grasp of this country’s history, especially given your confusion on black history over the last sixty years where you couldn’t figure out why blacks overwhelmingly vote Democrat and instead offered a revisionist history explanation from a far-right commentator (again, why do we all think you’re far-right?) about how Republicans are actually the lesser of the two evils for Black America.

I think I understand why most blacks have traditionally voted Democrat and don’t require a history lesson from you, thanks. Same reasons I did, mostly. I just don’t think it has paid off for them. And with the left doubling down on identity politics while continuing to paint minorities and women as victims instead of individuals with agency, I don’t see why things would change in the future, so denying the Democratic Party their votes is really the only message they can send. I don’t think I suggested that blacks should vote Republican instead, though I could be wrong. Staying home on election day would send an effective message.

And once again, I’ve allowed myself to get sucked into this line-by-line war of attrition, so I’m letting this go.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

pleasehello said:

moviefreakedmind said:

pleasehello said:

American police officers have one of the most difficult jobs in the world and I’m not sure how they can be expected to do their jobs if they’re not allowed to protect themselves from perceived deadly threats.

Not true. It’s not even in the top ten most dangerous jobs in America:

http://time.com/5074471/most-dangerous-jobs/

I said most difficult, not most dangerous. Cops have to make split-second decisions that can make them either heroes or villains or dead. I couldn’t do it and neither could you, but someone has to.

I didn’t say I could do it. I’m just pointing out all of the hideous examples that are in this profession and how they almost always get away with their crimes.

EDIT: I should add, though, that I could easily get a job as a police officer. I’d be terrible at it, but I could get that job. That’s the problem. The standards are low and there’s next to no accountability.

That cop was in no danger and he shot an underage person sixteen times needlessly. I’m tired of cops operating on a >different moral plane than us. If I had done this to someone, I’d be in jail for the rest of my life for murder. This >fucker should be too. Cops should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one. If they perceive a deadly threat >where there is none, then their asses should be in prison.

So when is it okay for a police officer to shoot a suspect who’s wielding a knife? After it’s already stuck in the cop’s ribs?

I think they should wrestle it out of the suspect’s hands, especially when there’s multiple cops there.

The idea that a cop should have to risk getting stabbed to deal with someone wielding a knife is ludicrous.

Why? It’s their job. If they can take him alive, them they should.

While I agree that it’s their job to protect the public and that includes suspects in their care, I don’t agree that it’s their job to risk their safety in a potentially deadly way in order to subdue a suspect who fails to heed their instructions. Besides, cops wrestling suspects to the ground doesn’t have such a great track record either. That’s why I said Tase them if they fail to comply. Tasers can be abused, of course, and they’ve led to deaths, so there should be specific scenarios under which they’re deemed acceptable, but Tasing seems like a reasonable middle ground between letting a suspect wander around freely and lunging at them to disarm them. Stun them and cuff them before anything really bad happens.

In this scenario, I think they could’ve let the dude continue walking along and tried to talk him down until he agreed to surrender peacefully, and if that goes on too long or they encounter other civilians who might be put in danger, Taser. Someone on the radio asked if anyone in the vicinity had a Taser, which shocked me because I would’ve assumed they were standard issue for all officers.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

That’s a false equivalence. Trump’s emboldening of neoNazis is not just as ludicrous as Pizzagate conspiracies. Nice false equivalence. You almost got away with it, but alas, nope.

My goal wasn’t to make a direct comparison, but to demonstrate that Russian disinformation tactics rely on lack of intelligence and critical thinking ability to rile up their target. Neo-Nazis being emboldened by Trump is a real thing; Trump supporting Nazis isn’t, but that’s what less intelligent liberals buy into. Keep trying.

Trump’s refusal to condemn neoNazis or disavow their support is arguably supportive of Nazis. It definitely legitimizes their cause.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be

Roughly the 2-minute mark is what you’re looking for.

It’s a weak and pathetic offhand comment made only to defend the merits if the Unite the Right rally, which was organized by neoNazis.

You: “He never denounced them.”

Me: “Yes he did, see here.”

You: “It wasn’t enough.”

Decent attempt at moving the goalpost. Try again, though.

Just admit that you believe Trump is a Nazi sympathizer, his supporters are morons, and nothing he ever says will be enough to convince you otherwise. That would be more respectable than pretending his words matter.

Is this the part where I whine that you didn’t acknowledge my other post? Not sure how that works.

I didn’t acknowledge your other post because it didn’t actually say anything of value.

Or it said things you can’t reasonably counter because you know them to be true, deep down.

No, it was mostly just faux centrism that I found unexciting. I’ll reexamine and counter it point by point if you want me to.

Why? It’ll just be more contrarian blather.

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

That’s a false equivalence. Trump’s emboldening of neoNazis is not just as ludicrous as Pizzagate conspiracies. Nice false equivalence. You almost got away with it, but alas, nope.

I believe he’s talking hypothetically. I don’t think Russian bots actually pushed the Pizzagate theory – that was Cernovich saying that. Similarly, Russian bots haven’t been comparing the Trump administration to the early days of the Nazis – that was Holocaust survivors saying that. But Russian bots theoretically could post on either topic.

Oh, you’re comparing Cernovich to Holocaust survivors. Nice try! Almost got away with it!

What a terrible attempt to parody my post. It doesn’t even make sense. If he’d implied both topics were false then you’d have a point. Try again.

This was almost an effective way to distract from the fact that you got called out on an erroneous assumption. Keep trying.

Uh, no. Not at all. Plus you’re just using my own style of mockery against me which indicates a near total lack of creativity on your part. My assumption wasn’t erroneous. Your post implied an equivalence between Pizzagate and Trump-Nazi connections. The same way you implied an equivalence between Black Lives Matter and white nationalists a few days ago.

I didn’t imply parity between Pizzagate and Neo-Nazis. You inferred it—which you do quite often, and usually mistakenly, which is what happens when your emotions dictate your state of mind and you’re intent on finding boogeymen everywhere.

Also, I took back what I said about BLM, which wasn’t equating them to white nationalists, but Antifa, which was a mistake because they’re not equivalent. But feel free to interpret it in whatever way best fits your argument so you can continue to label me as “far-right” or “on the wrong side of history” or whatever other looney lefty slogan strikes you.

moviefreakedmind said:

pleasehello said:

moviefreakedmind said:

pleasehello said:

American police officers have one of the most difficult jobs in the world and I’m not sure how they can be expected to do their jobs if they’re not allowed to protect themselves from perceived deadly threats.

Not true. It’s not even in the top ten most dangerous jobs in America:

http://time.com/5074471/most-dangerous-jobs/

I said most difficult, not most dangerous. Cops have to make split-second decisions that can make them either heroes or villains or dead. I couldn’t do it and neither could you, but someone has to.

I didn’t say I could do it. I’m just pointing out all of the hideous examples that are in this profession and how they almost always get away with their crimes.

EDIT: I should add, though, that I could easily get a job as a police officer. I’d be terrible at it, but I could get that job. That’s the problem. The standards are low and there’s next to no accountability.

That cop was in no danger and he shot an underage person sixteen times needlessly. I’m tired of cops operating on a >different moral plane than us. If I had done this to someone, I’d be in jail for the rest of my life for murder. This >fucker should be too. Cops should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one. If they perceive a deadly threat >where there is none, then their asses should be in prison.

So when is it okay for a police officer to shoot a suspect who’s wielding a knife? After it’s already stuck in the cop’s ribs?

I think they should wrestle it out of the suspect’s hands, especially when there’s multiple cops there.

The idea that a cop should have to risk getting stabbed to deal with someone wielding a knife is ludicrous. If someone charges a cop with a knife, I have no problem with them getting shot. If the suspect is just sitting there holding a knife and refuses to disarm after multiple commands, Tase them and then disarm them.

After watching the video, there was no reason to shoot even once in my opinion, let alone empty your clip into someone who’s on the ground immobilized. That kid wasn’t making any threatening motions when he was on his feet and once he went down, he stayed down.

This is why I’m in favor of undefeatable dash cam and body cam footage (with audio) for all officers.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

That’s a false equivalence. Trump’s emboldening of neoNazis is not just as ludicrous as Pizzagate conspiracies. Nice false equivalence. You almost got away with it, but alas, nope.

My goal wasn’t to make a direct comparison, but to demonstrate that Russian disinformation tactics rely on lack of intelligence and critical thinking ability to rile up their target. Neo-Nazis being emboldened by Trump is a real thing; Trump supporting Nazis isn’t, but that’s what less intelligent liberals buy into. Keep trying.

Trump’s refusal to condemn neoNazis or disavow their support is arguably supportive of Nazis. It definitely legitimizes their cause.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be

Roughly the 2-minute mark is what you’re looking for.

Is this the part where I whine that you didn’t acknowledge my other post? Not sure how that works.

I didn’t acknowledge your other post because it didn’t actually say anything of value.

Or it said things you can’t reasonably counter because you know them to be true, deep down.

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

That’s a false equivalence. Trump’s emboldening of neoNazis is not just as ludicrous as Pizzagate conspiracies. Nice false equivalence. You almost got away with it, but alas, nope.

I believe he’s talking hypothetically. I don’t think Russian bots actually pushed the Pizzagate theory – that was Cernovich saying that. Similarly, Russian bots haven’t been comparing the Trump administration to the early days of the Nazis – that was Holocaust survivors saying that. But Russian bots theoretically could post on either topic.

Oh, you’re comparing Cernovich to Holocaust survivors. Nice try! Almost got away with it!

What a terrible attempt to parody my post. It doesn’t even make sense. If he’d implied both topics were false then you’d have a point. Try again.

This was almost an effective way to distract from the fact that you got called out on an erroneous assumption. Keep trying.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

That’s a false equivalence. Trump’s emboldening of neoNazis is not just as ludicrous as Pizzagate conspiracies. Nice false equivalence. You almost got away with it, but alas, nope.

My goal wasn’t to make a direct comparison, but to demonstrate that Russian disinformation tactics rely on lack of intelligence and critical thinking ability to rile up their target. Neo-Nazis being emboldened by Trump is a real thing; Trump supporting Nazis isn’t, but that’s what less intelligent liberals buy into. Keep trying.

Is this the part where I whine that you didn’t acknowledge my other post? Not sure how that works.

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

That’s a false equivalence. Trump’s emboldening of neoNazis is not just as ludicrous as Pizzagate conspiracies. Nice false equivalence. You almost got away with it, but alas, nope.

I believe he’s talking hypothetically. I don’t think Russian bots actually pushed the Pizzagate theory – that was Cernovich saying that. Similarly, Russian bots haven’t been comparing the Trump administration to the early days of the Nazis – that was Holocaust survivors saying that. But Russian bots theoretically could post on either topic.

Oh, you’re comparing Cernovich to Holocaust survivors. Nice try! Almost got away with it!

Russian bots post, share, and promote all kinds of content with the purpose of sowing discord. Right or left has nothing to do with it. The goal is maximum damage.

pleasehello said:

Jay said:

pleasehello said:

moviefreakedmind said:

and probably put in place some kind of IQ test requirement for people running for president so that someone as stupid as Trump can’t run again.

What about an IQ test requirement to allow people to vote? I don’t think that’s the worst idea either.

Do you think that would affect the outcome of elections? Are low-IQ voters shifting the results? I’m sure there are those who think cutting out less intelligent voters would shift election results to the left, but believing you’re smart when you’re not isn’t exclusive to the right.

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

Not sure. I don’t think progressive or democratic voters are more intelligent than conservative voters at all. But it’s hard to deny that President Stable Genius pandered quite a bit to the uneducated contingent of conservative voters.

A Democrat voter has to believe in all sorts of fears and fantasies in order to buy into what that party is selling them. What makes a vote for Hillary based on patriarchy or rape culture any more rational than a vote for Trump based on Mexican drug dealers and rapists?

I don’t know if it would effect election outcomes, but hopefully it would result in voters making more informed decisions. Too many people vote with their hearts and their guts instead of their heads.

It’s a myth that more intelligent people are more rational. They might make more informed decisions, but ultimately their decision-making is still guided by their emotions and they tend to twist their decisions to match their feelings rather than the other way around.

pleasehello said:

moviefreakedmind said:

and probably put in place some kind of IQ test requirement for people running for president so that someone as stupid as Trump can’t run again.

What about an IQ test requirement to allow people to vote? I don’t think that’s the worst idea either.

Do you think that would affect the outcome of elections? Are low-IQ voters shifting the results? I’m sure there are those who think cutting out less intelligent voters would shift election results to the left, but believing you’re smart when you’re not isn’t exclusive to the right.

Besides, it’s my experience that most people overestimate their own intelligence and don’t realize a minimum IQ would exclude them. They take an “IQ test” they found on Facebook and it tells them they’re a genius, after which they like and share a post made by a Russian bot about Hillary and pizzerias or Trump and Nazis.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

In an ideal world, once Trump is out of office, we’d be able to remove all of his appointees.

Democrats can allow themselves to indulge in fantasies of impeaching justices (and even Trump himself) or they can ruminate over how things got to this place and, as you suggested, change their approach to get themselves back in the majority.

I’m not a Democrat. I just think that the only way to reverse the assaults on American freedom that Trump and his cronies have brought on us is to remove them from office. Things got to this place because Trump was savvy enough to appeal directly to the proud ignorance and stupidity that the Republican base likes while Hillary was too stupid and corrupt to appeal to what American voters actually wanted. To prevent this shit from happening again we need to abolish the Electoral College and outlaw corporate donations to political candidates and probably put in place some kind of IQ test requirement for people running for president so that someone as stupid as Trump can’t run again.

So we’re back to attributing Trump’s victory to ignorant, stupid Republicans. I could’ve sworn you’d said previously that wasn’t how Trump won and you didn’t label Republicans broadly. I didn’t believe you then, but at least your bias is back on full display now and you’re not pretending anymore.

Ignorant, stupid Republicans are part of it. He definitely mobilized them. It’s not the only reason why he won, but it’s a big part. And of course I’m biased. I’ve never pretended not to be biased. I hate the rightwing and wish it didn’t even exist. I’ve called Hillary supporters worse than Trump supporters. I’ve advocated for the removal of every corporate representative from office. I’ve even admitted to being in favor of some acts of political violence. When have I ever pretended to not be biased? That’s what you do.

I don’t pretend; I do my best not to be biased, but I acknowledge we all have biases. I try to consider mine when weighing issues, while you’re clearly ruled by yours.

Since you’re so obviously biased and admit as much, any judgment you’d place against another person about their beliefs would be suspect. Since you see everything through a far-left lens, I naturally appear far-right. I’m not.

I don’t have a strong opinion about the Electoral College. I do believe it has a purpose, but is open to abuse. However, I think addressing gerrymandering will solve those problems and is actually within the realm of possibility, whereas abolishing the EC is unlikely. I do agree that campaign finance reform is a massive issue and corporate donations should be banned.

It’s only unlikely because it gives Republicans an opportunity to win the Presidency without coming close to being selected by a plurality of the voters.

It’s unlikely in the same way all constitutional amendments are unlikely. They’re tough to pass and unless the issues they address are persistent, they fade from memory. It takes a long time to pass an amendment. As soon as the next Democrat president is elected, nobody will be saying anything about the EC (unless it’s a really bizarre election where the Dems win by EC but not popular, in which case hypocritical Republicans will be screeching about how the EC has to go).

EDIT: Do you think Trump should be impeached for his blatant obstruction of justice? He admitted that he fired James Comey simply because he was investigating him. I know you’re very sympathetic to the far-right, so I’m guessing not, especially given how you ignore the legitimate reasons why Trump should be impeached.

Again with the far-right nonsense. You know nothing, as you prove time and time again with your broken-record hot takes.

I actually do know a lot of things. I’m pretty well-informed. I’m not any more intelligent than most people, but I’m very well-read and I generally have at the very least a layman’s understanding of what I’m talking about. So, once again you’re wrong.

I meant you know nothing in regards to my thought patterns. You’ve lumped me in with the far-right and believe my sympathies always lie there, despite the fact that anyone reviewing my posts over the last year would find someone who falls right on some issues and left on others.

Anyone reading your posts would find your opinion always falls incontrovertibly to the left and there isn’t a hint of balanced thought to be found.

I’ll let Mueller make the case for Trump’s impeachment when he shares his findings since I’m neither a constitutional scholar nor an attorney/prosecutor. I’m glad you’re confident in your armchair legalese and that it brings you peace of mind. Part of me wishes I still subscribed to a hopelessly binary mode of thinking so that I could once again be certain about everything.

Why do you even talk about things then? Presumably you’re not an expert anything you’ve talked about in this thread before but that didn’t stop you from babbling about it. I don’t need to be a prosecutor to see that firing the person investigating you is obstruction of justice. I don’t even have a hopelessly binary mode of thinking, either. I’m just confident in what I believe. That’s not a bad thing when what you believe is grounded in reality. Why would I want to float around being unsure of everything and unwilling to just take a stance on something? That would a pathetic and sad existence.

It’s this simple: even legal scholars don’t agree that Trump committed a crime, so what’s the point in debating it with you? I’m generally avoiding direct debates with you now because your position is always clear and immovable from the outset. There’s no discussion to be had.

I’ve taken strong stances on plenty of issues. Setting aside this one thing isn’t “float[ing] around being unsure”. It’s recognizing a gap in my own knowledge and deciding I’m not informed enough to make a determination.

If I were to rely upon my limited knowledge of the legal situation, the separation between the DOJ and the executive isn’t a law, but a custom, and the AG serves at the pleasure of the President, which would mean Trump firing Comey was legal. But if Mueller’s investigation determines Trump himself was in bed with the Russians, they directly intervened in the election (systems breaches that altered vote tallies), and Trump fired Comey to keep him from digging up the truth, then I’d assume that’s a crime and an impeachable offense. But I don’t know what happened for sure, just like you don’t.

I’m comfortable with “I don’t know” and it doesn’t make me far-right because I won’t condemn Trump with the same uninformed fervor as you.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

In an ideal world, once Trump is out of office, we’d be able to remove all of his appointees.

Democrats can allow themselves to indulge in fantasies of impeaching justices (and even Trump himself) or they can ruminate over how things got to this place and, as you suggested, change their approach to get themselves back in the majority.

I’m not a Democrat. I just think that the only way to reverse the assaults on American freedom that Trump and his cronies have brought on us is to remove them from office. Things got to this place because Trump was savvy enough to appeal directly to the proud ignorance and stupidity that the Republican base likes while Hillary was too stupid and corrupt to appeal to what American voters actually wanted. To prevent this shit from happening again we need to abolish the Electoral College and outlaw corporate donations to political candidates and probably put in place some kind of IQ test requirement for people running for president so that someone as stupid as Trump can’t run again.

So we’re back to attributing Trump’s victory to ignorant, stupid Republicans. I could’ve sworn you’d said previously that wasn’t how Trump won and you didn’t label Republicans broadly. I didn’t believe you then, but at least your bias is back on full display now and you’re not pretending anymore.

I don’t have a strong opinion about the Electoral College. I do believe it has a purpose, but is open to abuse. However, I think addressing gerrymandering will solve those problems and is actually within the realm of possibility, whereas abolishing the EC is unlikely. I do agree that campaign finance reform is a massive issue and corporate donations should be banned.

EDIT: Do you think Trump should be impeached for his blatant obstruction of justice? He admitted that he fired James Comey simply because he was investigating him. I know you’re very sympathetic to the far-right, so I’m guessing not, especially given how you ignore the legitimate reasons why Trump should be impeached.

Again with the far-right nonsense. You know nothing, as you prove time and time again with your broken-record hot takes.

I’ll let Mueller make the case for Trump’s impeachment when he shares his findings since I’m neither a constitutional scholar nor an attorney/prosecutor. I’m glad you’re confident in your armchair legalese and that it brings you peace of mind. Part of me wishes I still subscribed to a hopelessly binary mode of thinking so that I could once again be certain about everything.

moviefreakedmind said:

In an ideal world, once Trump is out of office, we’d be able to remove all of his appointees.

Democrats can allow themselves to indulge in fantasies of impeaching justices (and even Trump himself) or they can ruminate over how things got to this place and, as you suggested, change their approach to get themselves back in the majority.

Looks like Kavanaugh is going to be confirmed now that Collins and Manchin have indicated they’ll vote yes. It would take an unexpected defection to have it go the other way at this point.

The whole situation has been embarrassing for us as a country regardless of what side you’re on.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Jay said:

This whole “issue” is proof that people want to be outraged and will remain willfully ignorant in order to do so.

I don’t think it’s really an “issue,” it’s just something mildly annoying that people are poking fun at because of the test today. It’d have had a similar reception if the test had happened while any other President was in office.

Trump’s penchant for Twitter just makes it a little easier to make fun of.

The remarks about propaganda in this thread didn’t read like jokes to me. We’ll have to agree to disagree that the reception would’ve been the same with another person in office.

It depends on the person. If Obama did this, then conservatives would be up in arms. It happened with Trump so the other people are up in arms.

Probably true.

It’s actually not probably true, it’s definitely true. I remember a ton of idiot conservatives thinking that Obama’s attempt in 2009 to deliver a “stay in school” message to the children was a brainwashing attempt to destroy Christianity or something stupid.

I respect your ability to take an area of general agreement and still manage to make it sound contentious.

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Yeah, I’m not concerned that the alert system is in place, nor am I worried that it was tested. I’m mildly worried that Trump could start using it for campaigning. I wouldn’t put it past him to send out an “alert” on election day that the country is in danger if people vote a certain way.

This is somewhat tinfoil hat-ish, sorry. The alert system is maintained by FEMA and there’s nothing in the law (again, passed by Obama) that would allow the president to abuse the system in this way.

You can’t say that everything is a joke and no one on the left is actually concerned, then turn around and express legitimate concerns, however mild, about possible abuse. This is why I believe that deep down, liberals really are as prone to believe in conspiracies as conservatives despite the intellectual veneer.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Jay said:

This whole “issue” is proof that people want to be outraged and will remain willfully ignorant in order to do so.

I don’t think it’s really an “issue,” it’s just something mildly annoying that people are poking fun at because of the test today. It’d have had a similar reception if the test had happened while any other President was in office.

Trump’s penchant for Twitter just makes it a little easier to make fun of.

The remarks about propaganda in this thread didn’t read like jokes to me. We’ll have to agree to disagree that the reception would’ve been the same with another person in office.

It depends on the person. If Obama did this, then conservatives would be up in arms. It happened with Trump so the other people are up in arms.

Probably true.

http://www.infomine.com/investment/metal-prices/aluminum/all/

After the market crash, aluminum spiked after both presidential elections.

ChainsawAsh said:

Jay said:

This whole “issue” is proof that people want to be outraged and will remain willfully ignorant in order to do so.

I don’t think it’s really an “issue,” it’s just something mildly annoying that people are poking fun at because of the test today. It’d have had a similar reception if the test had happened while any other President was in office.

Trump’s penchant for Twitter just makes it a little easier to make fun of.

The remarks about propaganda in this thread didn’t read like jokes to me. We’ll have to agree to disagree that the reception would’ve been the same with another person in office.

Often wrong, never in doubt.

moviefreakedmind said:

He downplayed the suspicious circumstances and is pretending that it’s merely a tragic accident. It obviously wasn’t and is another example of cops getting special treatment.

It’s this kind of thinking that I find disturbing. Accusing the cop in the video of “pretending” and saying that it “obviously wasn’t” a tragic accident are firm statements about a man’s thoughts that you can’t possibly know and a situation where you weren’t present. I tend to think the accused is lying, but I don’t know and I don’t think it’s obvious at all. Thinking she’s lying is my gut; it’s not evidence.

How many innocent black men have spent decades in prison because their accuser was certain and the prosecutor thought their guilt was obvious, only to be exonerated through DNA or recanted testimony?

Being certain about such things reveals bias more than truth.

This whole “issue” is proof that people want to be outraged and will remain willfully ignorant in order to do so.

screams in the void said:

oojason said:

screams in the void said:

I wonder if some were in this very thread that seemed to come out of the woodwork , think I may have come across a few on Facebook as well …https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-last-jedi-was-targeted-by-russian-trolls-study-says-1148475

Unfortunately mate, even with a headline of ‘Star Wars: The Last Jedi Negative Buzz Amplified by Russian Trolls, Study Finds’ for the article with the link to the study paper in, some will ignore that (and this below)…
 

“Among the 967 tweets analyzed, 206 expressed a negative sentiment towards the film and its director, which is 21.9% or a little more than one in five fans. This number includes all negative tweets analyzed, i.e. also those who came from the 44 accounts identified as bots, sock puppet accounts and trolls."
 

… and instead focus on the political aspects of the study - or have a pop at Rian Johnson at even mentioning it (who has stated he doesn’t have a problem with those not liking the film; he does have a problem with the more toxic elements of ‘criticism’ - by that I think he means the racists, sexists, bots and trolls - and likely those who post death threats and announce his death too?).

Johnson himself alluded to Russian bots being behind a campaign to ‘save’ a character in TLJ too in one of the bonus material feature on TLJ blu ray - seems he may have more of an idea what is going than some.
 

I’ve seen a few people cast doubt as to Russian bots targeting a film - well, it evidently does happen. It’s not an excuse - just a fact, though some people seemingly have difficulty accepting the truth of such a thing. Russian bots and trolls target this very site - frequently - along many more other popular sites.
 

At least there is the ‘Culture, politics, and diversity in Star Wars’ thread on here to talk about the political aspects of criticisms towards the series (or parts of it).
 

" Russian bots and trolls target this very site -frequently-along many other popular sites " - I had a strong suspicion this might be the case , especially when I see threads with titles in Russian language that mysteriously pop up in the wee hours between 2 and 4 in the morning and then disappear . As a former mod , I would think you would have first hand knowledge .

I’d like to say something before these statements get blown out of proportion. We frequently delete threads/posts and ban accounts from spammers and bots who have IPs traced all over the world—not just Russia—and try to promote all kinds of random sites and products. There’s no evidence to suggest that any of it is politically motivated or geared towards a specific agenda besides driving traffic to questionable web sites where they can steal your personal info. The presence of Russian spam is no more ominous than spam in any other language.

I’d also like to add that while the purpose of this thread as intended by the OP is to promote the positive aspects of standing up against hate in the community while avoiding the political discussions that tangentially arise from that topic, once you start posting articles that are clearly biased in one direction and cite studies that appear less than neutral, you invite the counterpoint and it becomes unreasonable to insist the topic’s scope remain narrow. Discussing the validity of the study and the points it raises is fair game.

chyron8472 said:

Jay said:

hairy_hen said:

If we start getting non-defeatable political propaganda messages forcibly coming through our phones, then we’ll know we really are living in a dictatorship.

Any bets on how long before that starts happening?

I’ll take that bet. What’s the timeframe? If Trump is reelected, he’ll be in office until January 2025. I’ll bet we don’t get any propaganda forced to our phones using this system by then.

How does $1000 sound?

I’ll bet my new racing pod against, say… the boy and his mother.

No pod is worth two slaves, not by a long shot.

hairy_hen said:

If we start getting non-defeatable political propaganda messages forcibly coming through our phones, then we’ll know we really are living in a dictatorship.

Any bets on how long before that starts happening?

I’ll take that bet. What’s the timeframe? If Trump is reelected, he’ll be in office until January 2025. I’ll bet we don’t get any propaganda forced to our phones using this system by then.

How does $1000 sound?

SilverWook said:

And seriously? Presidential Alert? The ego of this guy…

https://www.businessinsider.com/r-trump-administration-to-send-us-cellphones-a-test-alert-on-thursday-2018-9

Former President Barack Obama signed a law in 2016 requiring FEMA to create a system that lets US presidents send cellphone alerts regarding public safety issues like natural disasters and “terrorism.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/03/us/presidential-alert-trump.html

The test, originally planned for last month but delayed by Hurricane Florence, was the culmination of many years of work. The federal government developed a system to issue the alerts, which are scripted in coordination with numerous government agencies. They are limited to 90 characters, but will be expanded to 360 in the future.

Trump didn’t personally send a message to your phone.

Stop.

Politics, or leave.

Thanks.

Peterson v. Peterson

https://twitter.com/rsbukesm/status/1043644258241134593?s=21

moviefreakedmind said:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kanye-west-13th-amendment_us_5bb1f4a1e4b0343b3dc1f15f

Kanye West has got to be one of the stupidest people in human history. This is no surprise though because almost 40% of Trump supporters wish that the South had won the Civil War, so he’s right at home with the rest of the pro-slavery crowd.

The 13th Amendment didn’t abolish all slavery.

Kanye’s tweets:
https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1046466533973590016
https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1046490057522085888
https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1046495010500182016
https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1046802196388446210

Sane interpretation:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/10/01/kanye-wests-baffling-13th-amendment-twitter-outburst-maybe-not-so-baffling-after-all/?utm_term=.5a0899dd98e7

Stop reading HuffPost. It feeds outrage and rots the brain.

moviefreakedmind said:

I wish there was still the Random Political Thoughts thread, because it’d be great for this lighthearted video.

Rightwing fraud, Jordan Peterson, claims to have not slept “at all” for 25 days!! Holy fuck I’ve never heard a more blatant lie! I guess I’m just misguided.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfoKwQ2Cw6A

I can see now why you think he’s some kind of existential threat to humanity. You take him literally, always.

You’d sound just as insane if I put a microphone in front of you, gave you an audience, and they took everything you said literally.

Your obsession with the man is unhealthy.

Video was funny, though.