2018 PotWR Round 5: The General Election

[Mr Holmes]

This is probably the last one of the season, boys. Hope you enjoy it!

This is great

 

[Captain Davis]

Those were jokes, the election is imaginary, and I'm the only guy who'll be held to any standard here.

Is normal.

The internet is not imaginary and this is no joke. It’s all on you now to lead this great sub forum and make it great again.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Lefties always pick and choose little nuggets to be outraged over. They can’t be content unless they feel like they are fighting for something. They need a cause, even if one isn’t there.

Not sure about "lefties", but he's being a real cunt for some reason. Based on the vague nature of his complaints and admitted ignorance, there's nothing I can really do.

 

[Captain Davis]

Not sure about "lefties", but he's being a real cunt for some reason. Based on the vague nature of his complaints and admitted ignorance, there's nothing I can really do.

Admit it. Lefties do it. They feel this need to fight for something. Even if it’s just “the man.”

 

[Lead]

Those were jokes, the election is imaginary, and I'm the only guy who'll be held to any standard here.

Is normal.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

The internet is not imaginary and this is no joke. It’s all on you now to lead this great sub forum and make it great again.

I'm more a leader by example than a preacher. I've posted my track-record on walking the unified walk by reaching out with gifts and hospitality. I can lead horses to water but can't make them drink. Especially in this watering-hole.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Jack said he should kill himself over accurately calling out Jack's lies about Elizabeth Warren.

This is a lie, of course. I told zero lies about Warren (even Cubo was never able to explain what he thought I was lying about). Calling a person a liar without being willing to back it up is deeply disgraceful, and Cubo should have at least fallen on his sword figuratively as a result, though. There's also a distinction between "wished him dead" and the reality that you're not grasping.

 

[Lead]

Admit it. Lefties do it. They feel this need to fight for something. Even if it’s just “the man.”

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Admit it. Lefties do it. They feel this need to fight for something. Even if it’s just “the man.”

If I'm gonna characterize what I don't like about "left" on this board, the word would be "smug". I'll leave it at that.

 

[Captain Davis]

I'm more a leader by example than a preacher. I've posted my track-record on walking the unified walk by reaching out with gifts and hospitality. I can lead horses to water but can't make them drink. Especially in this watering-hole.

Thsts all you can do. Lets see now if they move to their favorite tactic of "resist, resist, resist"

 

[Jack V Savage]

Thsts all you can do. Lets see now if they move to their favorite tactic of "resist, resist, resist"

My favorite tactic is "clarify and analyze" but Cubo is intensely resistant to both of those things.

This is the exchange that sent him off the deep end:

"We've had you, and we've had Homer. Both dudes clearly on one side and happy to stick it to the other. As long as we have these elections those options won't go away. But there's a third way of doing things that I'm hoping people will support for this, our third election. I bring an independent mindset and don't care what side someone is on."

"The thing that gives me some pause here (and we've discussed this before, coming to a more agree-to-disagree resolution than a real understanding) is that you were perfectly OK with the presidential election being decided by arresting the frontrunner on frivolous charges that no one has been arrested for in 100 years, even after the FBI made it clear that they had no evidence to justify even an indictment (much less a conviction). That would essentially be the end of our democratic gov't and of the rule of law. I understand how unscrupulous partisans would support that, but I don't get how anyone else would. I respect that you don't consider yourself a partisan Republican, but would you agree that "I'm not biased" is generally best translated as "I'm not aware of my biases because I haven't deeply considered them."? I could give other examples (Democrats being "anti-white," for example). I'm not trying to start anything here, but I think that the guy who stumbles to fit his keys in his ignition while insisting that he's totally stone-cold sober may be a more-dangerous driver than the guy who thinks, "fuck, I don't want to sleep in my car, but I'm pretty borderline." It's important because you are making an ethical appeal, and if it's accepted in error, the sticky could end up being a big disappointment. And again, no disrespect intended, and I accept that you're being honest and sincere when you discuss your independence of thought. I'm raising the possibility that you can be honestly and sincerely mistaken."

 

[Captain Davis]

If I'm gonna characterize what I don't like about "left" on this board, the word would be "smug". I'll leave it at that.

Smug, snootie, elitist, condescending, rude, angry, I could go on

 

[irish_thug]

This is probably the last one of the season, boys. Hope you enjoy it!

Man, I could have used you in my camp last year. Top shelf sir.

 

[Bald1]

It's not primarily the Religious Right that is dogmatic. We see dogmatic rejection of reality from the right on economic policy, budgeting, climate, healthcare, and more. And absurd defenses of gov't corruption on top of all of it now.



What fact/science denial are you referring to? And the notion that bigotry and prejudice is becoming more socially acceptable on the left is crazy, IMO. Can you elaborate?



Again, I have to ask for elaboration? Social trends dictate policy how? Do you just mean because we have a democratic system?



We're all fallible, for sure, and the majority of any kind of voter is pretty ignorant. But the punishment/reward system for politicians on the left and right is vastly different. The media point is key to understanding that. Even if, you think that the MSM leans left (IMO, that belief can't withstand scrutiny but put that aside), you have to realize that A) they do criticize left-leaning politicians and B) those politicians fear that criticism in a way that right-leaning politicians do not. Thus, for example, Republican politicians can pass debt-exploding regressive tax cuts, and trust that their base will not recognize either that the cuts are regressive (with benefits going almost exclusively to the rich) or that they are, in fact, debt-exploding. Democratic politicians simply don't have the same luxury and are thus tethered to reality.

I'm on my phone, so not going to reply paragraph by paragraph.

Yeah, trickle down is dubious at best, climate change isn't being denied but global warming is questioned, and from my pov many seem accepting of universal healthcare as long as it doesn't adversely affect their bottom line too much. Perhaps I'm looking at the most reasonable folks on the right while you're examining the most entrenched and unreasonable?

Lol. Come on Jack! How can you ask this when an editor for a prominent newspaper gets a pass for racist, misandristic behavior because a) she's a she, and b) she's asian. Wage gap. Denial of intrinsic differences between the sexes. There are numerous examples of all of those by the fringe left.

At the most basic level, yes. People will vote according to their beliefs, however misguided they may be. You think anyone who voted for Trump is misguided or idiotic and I think the same of anyone with a Communist bent. History has proven me right time and again, and it seems you'll be proven right as well.

See, in my estimation the right, with the exception of fringes is moving towards the traditional center while the left is moving away from it due to the fringes.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Thsts all you can do. Lets see now if they move to their favorite tactic of "resist, resist, resist"

I'm gonna be focused on my own standards of behavior between now and January 1st. Let's call it an adjustment period.

 

[Captain Davis]

My favorite tactic is "clarify and analyze" but Cubo is intensely resistant to both of those things.

This is the exchange that sent him off the deep end:

"We've had you, and we've had Homer. Both dudes clearly on one side and happy to stick it to the other. As long as we have these elections those options won't go away. But there's a third way of doing things that I'm hoping people will support for this, our third election. I bring an independent mindset and don't care what side someone is on."

"The thing that gives me some pause here (and we've discussed this before, coming to a more agree-to-disagree resolution than a real understanding) is that you were perfectly OK with the presidential election being decided by arresting the frontrunner on frivolous charges that no one has been arrested for in 100 years, even after the FBI made it clear that they had no evidence to justify even an indictment (much less a conviction). That would essentially be the end of our democratic gov't and of the rule of law. I understand how unscrupulous partisans would support that, but I don't get how anyone else would. I respect that you don't consider yourself a partisan Republican, but would you agree that "I'm not biased" is generally best translated as "I'm not aware of my biases because I haven't deeply considered them."? I could give other examples (Democrats being "anti-white," for example). I'm not trying to start anything here, but I think that the guy who stumbles to fit his keys in his ignition while insisting that he's totally stone-cold sober may be a more-dangerous driver than the guy who thinks, "fuck, I don't want to sleep in my car, but I'm pretty borderline." It's important because you are making an ethical appeal, and if it's accepted in error, the sticky could end up being a big disappointment. And again, no disrespect intended, and I accept that you're being honest and sincere when you discuss your independence of thought. I'm raising the possibility that you can be honestly and sincerely mistaken."

I'm all for clarification. However, some things don't need to be over analyzed.

 

[WhiteMousse]

This is probably the last one of the season, boys. Hope you enjoy it!

Fucking kek you glorious asshole.

"Ice Cubo"

Is that Clippy and Zebby you put in? How do you make these??

 

[HereticBD]

This is a lie, of course. I told zero lies about Warren (even Cubo was never able to explain what he thought I was lying about). Calling a person a liar without being willing to back it up is deeply disgraceful, and Cubo should have at least fallen on his sword figuratively as a result, though. There's also a distinction between "wished him dead" and the reality that you're not grasping.

He backed up his assertion just fine. You lied about what Warren has said about her heritage in the past. I got into it with you over the same shit. You are a liar. A...fucking liar.

Your outrageously large and unwarranted ego, just couldn't handle being called out on it, so you lost your cool and wished that Cubo would exterminate himself. No matter how you want to spin it, it was uncalled for and extremely pathetic on your part.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

He backed up his assertion just fine. You lied about what Warren has said about her heritage in the past. I got into it with you over the same shit. You are a liar. A...fucking liar.

Your outrageously large and unwarranted ego, just couldn't handle being called out on it, so you lost your cool and wished that Cubo would exterminate himself. No matter how you want to spin it, it was uncalled for and extremely pathetic on your part.

Jack's lack of humility on that helped motivate my campaign. Thanks @Jack V Savage. You'e been instrumental.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yeah, trickle down is dubious at best, climate change isn't being denied but global warming is questioned, and from my pov many seem accepting of universal healthcare as long as it doesn't adversely affect their bottom line too much. Perhaps I'm looking at the most reasonable folks on the right while you're examining the most entrenched and unreasonable?

Climate change encompasses global warming and other changes related to the overall warming trend. And what I'm talking about with healthcare isn't opposition to UHC, which is a matter of opinion, as much as objectively false claims made about actual reforms and bad analysis of the potential impact of other proposed reforms. If the argument were just "UHC entails a level of redistribution that I feel is objectionable," there would still be powerfully felt disagreement, but it would be on reasonable grounds. But instead we see a kind of acceptance of the ends that liberals want with a promotion of means that could not plausibly lead to those ends and objectively false criticisms. And, no, I'd bet that I read more high-level right-wingers than you do. The particularly unreasonable folks are the ones I see here (who tend to regurgitate half-digested already-poor arguments made by more prominent figures).

Lol. Come on Jack! How can you ask this when an editor for a prominent newspaper gets a pass for racist, misandristic behavior because a) she's a she, and b) she's asian. Wage gap. Denial of intrinsic differences between the sexes. There are numerous examples of all of those by the fringe left.

Well, your given in the first bit is simply false. And there is a wage gap. One can reasonably argue that it disappears if you apply certain controls, but then one can argue that those controls gloss over real issues, etc. It's a matter of differing values rather than a denial of facts. I don't think there is anyone who would deny that men tend to be physically stronger than women and even that there are differing behavioral means among the sexes. And at any rate, that's not a political issue at all.

At the most basic level, yes. People will vote according to their beliefs, however misguided they may be. You think anyone who voted for Trump is misguided or idiotic and I think the same of anyone with a Communist bent. History has proven me right time and again, and it seems you'll be proven right as well.

I mean, people with a Communist bent are universally rejected in America. That's not an active political issue. And voting for anyone in particular isn't really a philosophical issue, though it can reflect some. I do think that Trump was manifestly unready for the job, ignorant of an uninterested in policy, lacking the inherent intellect required to do the job well, temperamentally unsuited, compromised, and grossly lacking in the character that we expect of a president, FWIW.

See, in my estimation the right, with the exception of fringes is moving towards the traditional center while the left is moving away from it due to the fringes.

This is objectively false. The right has been moving right at all levels of the scale, while the left on average has moved left mostly because Southern conservatives have left the coalition.

I'm all for clarification. However, some things don't need to be over analyzed.

Agreed. They should be analyzed just the right amount, which is more than many people would like, unfortunately.