Lurker > HeroDelTiempo17

What gave it away? Was it the 7 superhero movies that broke $1 billion at the box office in the past two years?
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

hockeydude15 posted...

I mean it doesn't even have to be negligence for it to happen. He was off of suicide watch which means he only needs to be checked on every 30 min, more than enough time for him to pull off a suicide if he really wanted to.

Even this can be negligence! Maybe whoever signed off on taking him off watch truly does not give a shit if he dies.

I just can't buy that the prison system is both corrupt enough to allow a massive cover-up and also that they are legitimately trying their best to keep such a notable trash human from killing himself.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

I mean why are people assuming you have to have complete faith in the prison system for it to have been an actual suicide? Literally all it would take is one of the MANY people involved with protecting him to say, at any point, "hey, maybe protecting this millionaire piece of shit pedophile from death by suicide isn't worth my time." That's not a conspiracy, that's just our prison system at work. I think a deliberate act of negligence is way more likely than conspiratorial orders being passed down from higher up.

Hopefully they get to the bottom of what happened but I kind of doubt they will.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

HashtagSEP posted...

That and older people that just didn't want a woman president

And men of all ages!
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

I also looked into it before the topic went up but there's not a lot of news coming out of it due to the total communications blackout in the area. It's obviously sketchy as hell and terrible shit is probably going down (there ARE people being detained by the Indian government) but all the world leaders are just kind of shrugging and wringing their hands right now.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

I know Biden is a walking gaffe machine and so goofy that he has a high resistance to them, but I can't deal with his death by a thousand cuts shit. I need whatever gaffe that will inevitably damage him to the public to happen NOW and not after he wins the nomination.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

If you think Trump's base legitimately has the support to launch a civil war, then they'll do it regardless of who he loses to. If he feels like it, Trump will just call the election results fake news. Doesn't matter who it's against.

Honestly think Hillary would do better than Biden in the upcoming political climate. Biden would be an "okay" president but he seems to think he can play nice with Republicans and they'll walk all over him. I think Hillary would fight more. Neither are ideal though.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I cant trust any of these polls with Biden up by so much, its purely anecdotal, but I dont see ANYONE excited about him anywhere outside of the hardcore Neolibs.

I imagine because outside of that his audience is old people and people who aren't as tuned in politically and online.

ALSO anecdotal but there's a Bernie fan at my work who is convinced Trump is going to win nearly no matter what and Biden is the best shots to beat him. I feel like that defeatist attitude in general is relatively prevalent and giving Biden a boost in numbers as well as forces the media to give him a pass.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

GuessMyUserName posted...

Reg posted...

One where he spends a ton of time repeating idiotic alt-right/neo-nazi talking points while simultaneously claiming to not be part of those groups

GamerGate tho

Ah, but you see, Gamergate predates the alt-right, even though it was later weaponized and absorbed into it, so it's clearly not the same thing.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Jakyl25 posted...

Like, if you cast Trump as the root of the problem, then you create a mindset where defeating him in 2020 SOLVES the problem, and we all know thats not true.

That's very true. The issue is that the argument has become asking if Trump is part of the problem at all. He obviously is, as are the GOP members standing by him, the media refusing to really examine the issue, and even to an extent the Democrats who are painting Trump as its sole source and saying things will go back to normal if he loses the election. Nationalism is a very broad problem.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Wanglicious posted...

and what exactly would this "one huge thing" be? because it ain't "The Great Replacement." the idea's simple enough, one generation being fully replaced in the next on every aspect. not a new concept, not what's pushed. also arguably not even the right Great Replacement since Christchurch's manifesto is called that and neither of those parties agrees with it either. hell, in terms of immigration the two don't align well either: Trump has no problem with corporations becoming stronger, which strengthens the appeal of immigration, which is something El Paso's shooter had major issues with and why he didn't like Republicans.

You are arguing over gritty details that don't really matter, as if white nationalism is something you can have a nuanced stance on. White nationalism is the connecting thread. I have no idea if Trump has read either manifesto or the book and it doesn't matter. If you don't see how Trump wanting to keep out latino immigrants and Muslims but wants more immigrants from predominately white European countries, and how that aligns broadly with white supremacist ideals and the idea that white culture is being erased by diversity then you honestly aren't worth discussing this with.

The absolute most charitable case that can be applied here is that the rise of alt-right groups, white supremacy, and nationalism is a worldwide phenomenon and that Trump is both a symptom and enabler of it. It's still all connected.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Wanglicious posted...

the very first words in his manifesto are supporting the christchurch shooter. so much so that he literally says "the Hispanic community was not my target before I read The Great Replacement." that clear enough? he's a copycat shooter from New Zealand's. his beliefs predated Trump by years, his target wasn't selected because of Trump,

So he didn't agree with Trump on anything except the one huge thing he, Fox News, and Trump all agreed on? No one has accused Trump of personally inventing white supremacy. Just normalizing and promoting it for nutcases like these here and around the world. By the way, the Christchurch shooter also praised Trump for being a symbol of white supremacy so don't act like there's zero connection.

Wanglicious posted...

believes that people need to die for the environment and welfare state to be better. hell, he considers automation to be one of the biggest problems facing us, outright saying that "the job of my dreams will likely be automated."

Also this is called "ecofascism" and is just white supremacy dressed up with an environmentalist twist. And I guess with some stuff about automation thrown in because he can't handle having to compete with brown people AND robots.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Okay but all this shit is in the GND. It seems like you do agree broadly with the goals it set forth but have issues with certain wording. Which is good, because the GND is meant as a framework on which to build, and so far every single climate plan has accepted and used it as a base while fleshing out details.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

LordoftheMorons posted...

Creating some fixed number of jobs that need doing in areas that will experience heavy job loss due to shifting energy production is very different than providing a job guarantee (particularly as the legislation demands they be jobs with decent pay/benefits). The latter provides a strong incentive for people with low paying private sector jobs to jump to the guaranteed government jobs, massively increasing the cost of the guarantee. This becomes even worse if the government jobs arent actually things that need to be done (which becomes more likely as the number of people employed by the guarantee increases) as this saps labor from the private sector.

Well, these people in low-paying jobs will also be massively affected by the plan, climate change itself, and the shift in infrastructure. The poor will be affected the most, so you have to account for them, too. It's not just the workers, but the communities that will need taken care of. This is also a staple of every climate plan!
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Like even Biden's plan involves creating jobs for people. Come on.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

LordoftheMorons posted...

The actual GND as proposed by AOC is bad and would likely be unpopular if Dems actually pushed it. That's because it tacks on essentially the entire DSA wishlist (single payer, a job guarantee, etc) to the unrelated task of combating climate change.

This is because the process of making meaningful action on climate will cause coal miners and oil workers etc. to lose their jobs. Everyone knows this. That's literally in there to protect the working class that Republicans have been trying to convince climate action will be the end of. Railing against these "socialist" clauses shows a fundamental lack of understanding as to what will be necessary to meet climate goals.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Not to mention, Mitch McConnell made a big miscalculation (as did Democrats) in assuming that the Green New Deal would be unpopular. It turns out that climate change action is broadly popular, and the mainstream Democratic party has even begun to embrace it to win coveted swing voters with concerns about the environment. I be Mitch feels pretty foolish now that only Republicans are on the record as opposing action on climate change!
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

red sox 777 posted...

It succeeded. The Democrats looked like complete fools in voting down their own legislation. The Democrats should have just voted for it.

I'm sorry, but only the Republicans voted against the bill. Democrats did not vote one way or the other, and are still considering the issue. If I was from a midwestern state impacted by climate change, I would consider voting out my Republican senator who clearly opposes the GND.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

red sox 777 posted...

Listen, if Democrats are so scared of their own legislation that not one of them will vote for it when no strings are attached whatsoever, you really can't blame Republicans.

But the person who instructed them to vote this way was the author of the legislation. Why are you disparaging this remarkable show of unity and political maneuvering by the Democratic party? McDonnell's plan failed.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Corrik7 posted...

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Passing gun reform for the low low price of endorsing white supremacy. What a bargain!

I am sure you can be less radical and admit immigration reform does not equal white supremacy.

Sure I can. But Trump's goals on the matter are textbook xenophobia.

Also, the Democratic House (and Democrats in the Senate) has already acquiesced to the Republicans on this issue by passing the Senate's $5 billion funding plan. If anything, Democrats are now owed a victory on an agenda of their own.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Passing gun reform for the low low price of endorsing white supremacy. What a bargain!
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Independents are not centrists
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

She has no personality when she isn't attacking the other candidates, though. She's no better than deBlasio or Delaney. She has a couple good shareable moments and that's it. But then again, that's the goal of this debate format.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Grimlyn posted...

https://twitter.com/politico/status/1158679130835214338

are you having a laugh DNC

who is asking for this

no god please no
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

the only REAL conservatives are the hunter-gatherer tribes who refused to migrate out of Africa
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Corrik7 posted...

You act like it is compatible with any ideology. It is a perversion. There is no ideology stating women are property.

Oh good, then we agree. Incels can't be leftists even if they claim to support Bernie and antifa.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

red sox 777 posted...

And real conservative would also disavow them. SephG - confirm?

Was referring to how real conservatives disown white supremacists while repeating those talking points but go off
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Corrik7 posted...

I would love to know how you have determined that. That is what you want it to be.

I guess I need to add the disclaimer that women aren't property and that Chad/Virgin is a humorous internet meme and not a legitimate worldview and that these are the parts incompatible with the left because I briefly forgot that you can't let idiotic viewpoints speak for their own absurdity anymore
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Corrik7 posted...

Incel are Alt-Right according to the last debate on it. And, vehemently argued it isn't all across the spectrum as I said it was.

The vast majority are alt-right or alt-lite. But there are definitely "leftist" incels that want to basically "socialize" women. Basically since they already view women as property and less than human, it makes sense to them for the government to redistribute them from the Chads to the Virgins. Obviously this isn't real leftism, but incels can doublethink themselves into believing it is. It's possible incels have moved on from this though, I sure as shit don't pay too much attention to them.

Any real leftist would disavow both them and the ideology. As opposed to just disowning them but still humoring their talking points in good faith as you see in certain other situations. So that's why it isnt a "both sides" thing.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

It's too bad the mainstream doesnt know what incels are so they can't point out that's a way more important indicator of his behavior than him supporting leftists and Antifa
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Members of the press: what the fuck?
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

I agree with what you outlined and I'm curious.

Do you include any restrictions on type of firearms allowed to the public or the sale itself, or is the registry the only requirement? Also what is your ideal penalty or enforcement (if any) for owning an unregistered gun?
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Corrik7 posted...

foolm0r0n posted...

You never condemned white supremacy

I have never not. Anyone who treats others poorly based upon their race or gender is awful to me.

So, Donald Trump?
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Corrik7 posted...

So if you want to save the environment your entire life and when u are 48 someone unleashes a plague to kill half the planets population with a manifesto of how it will save the environment.

You are "obliging" (providing kindness and service) the person by still wanting to save the environment afterwards?

Well no, but since you want to go full cartoonish supervillain. If part of your "saving the environment" was explaining how the world is overpopulated and humans are a stain on the earth and need to be reigned in, and the manifesto cites you directly, then you go "what a shame but he had the right idea and I stand by my goals" yes, you would be obliging them.

In actuality Trump didn't do anything that extreme. He merely said that Mexican immigrants are rapists, murderers, and drug dealers with the caveat that "some" are good people to maintain plausible deniability.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Corrik7 posted...

His argument is that Trump is only going for immigration reform because he is trying to give into the demands the shooter killed people for.

"so the President is literally obliging a mass murderer."

He's not saying that, he's saying the President and the mass murderer agree on this issue and Trump is literally still doing what the mass murderer wants anyways.

Do you disagree? What exactly do you think Trump's "immigration reform" is?
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Corrik7 posted...

False quotes pretty sure and also entirely out of order. Nice try.

If you're having trouble finding the tweets where Trump refers to immigration as "an invasion," it's because they've mysteriously been deleted. There is plenty of reporting on it, though.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Hey Corrik, is Black Lives Matter also a terrorist organization because someone on its extreme fringes killed some cops at one of their protests?
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

It's really telling that the go-to incident used to display violent Antifa attacks was actually a lone dude deliberately attempting to destroy equipment and structures without harming actual people.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Gabbard feels incredibly corporate and has some very concerning foreign policy standpoints. And the way conservative media was fawning over her, that's enough red flags.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-millennials-dont-complain-change-it_n_5d45cc9de4b0acb57fcd5486

Very compelling argument for your vote Joe, very cool!

democrats: millennials should get involved in politics and change things themselves
AOC: ok I'm here now and I have some progressive ideas
democrats: wait no not like that
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Yeah if the white supremacists just met up in person I'm sure they'd be more reasonable and not violent at all
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

I feel like Biden won't be able to take Trump at all in a debate because to me he was shaky at best when attacked here. I'm surprised people thought he did well.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

LordoftheMorons posted...

Oh yeah, he also sent the US's fucking envoy for hostage affairs to Sweden because its government wouldn't politically interfere with their justice system on A$AP Rocky's behalf:

https://www.vox.com/2019/7/31/20748443/asap-rocky-trial-sweden-hostage-envoy-trump

Note that there are actual American hostages in countries like Syria and Iran that this guy could be working to save

uhh do these other hostages spit hot fire? No? I didnt think so
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

I mean Trump's rhetoric on Venezuela about considering use of military force were interventionist (until he got bored). So is him imposing sanctions on Iran. Tarrifs are inherently interventionist.

At best he's selectively interventionist, definitely not anti-interventionist.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Sony-style cinematic action game except all the characters talk in Animal Crossing speech
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there systems in other countries similar to public option? Private insurance still exists but is incredibly niche. And these systems are still MILES better than what we have. I don't see why it's automatically a non-starter. The only issue is that I don't really trust most of the candidates to deliver a good one.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

Beto is just fucking terrible in this format. It isn't his thing. Though honestly I dont think the format does anyone much favors except literal joke candidates like Delaney and Williamson.

But Beto's performance here convinced me that he's running mainly to get Texans (and maybe other red states) to even pay attention to Democrats, and at least TRY to convince people Texas is in play, which I don't know if it'll work but I respect.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

pyresword posted...

Stepping back from the hypothetical for a minute, it is is obviously possible on an intellectual level to distinguish between "one who believes some races are superior to others" and "one who treats some races better than others". My claim is that the word "racist" applies to both of these hypothetical cases. If what you're saying is that using such a definition dilutes or muddies the meaning of the word "racist", then that's actually something I agree with. I've thought for some time now that there is a need for society to adopt more precise terminology when discussing this issue.

We have different words for this but you still need to be able to use "racist" as a catch-all because it is a part of an interconnected phenomenon. It's a word that has both nuance and weight. I'd also argue that you'd downplay and confuse the issue by avoiding the term. You can look at the media doing just this by using terms like "racially charged" or "racially biased" when "racist" would suffice.
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

red sox 777 posted...

I think you guys are thinking too two-dimensionally. I think Trump is performing racism to rile up Democrats so they are never able to focus on substantive policies. Remember, we are playing 4D chess. You need to think a few moves ahead.

So you support reparations but also dont think discussion of racism is a substantive policy issue?
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.

red sox 777 posted...

To change that, you need to change things at a societal level. And that starts by correctly identifying the problem where it is. And you know, we did do something about that in the 1960s - the Civil Rights Act.

So you support reparations, right?
---

DPOblivion was far more determined than me.