Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 245: Delecto the Funky Mormon Senator

(+) Yeah! (+)

Talking to red sox is better because he's way less of a dick

---

I said argue, not talk.

Red Sox tends to unironically say things that are thematically completely inconsistent.

does Red Sox unironically say anything ?
---

red13n posted...

I'm just kind of curious what Cyclo did to himself to end up like this. Its hard to ignore him because he dominates these topics in sheer number of posts but hes not really capable of conversing like a normal user anymore.

I haven't seen this to be the case. You even have twice the number of posts he does on the first page of this topic.

And honestly on the whole Clinton-Tulsi thing, it's fucking bizarre to see people act like they know exactly how Russia operates and that anyone who disagrees is a conspiracy theorist.

"Russia in all likelihood pays people like Vlado"
---

He has me blocked so I can't see his posts.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Talking to red sox is better because he's way less of a dick

Hes a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian. He only comes to these topics or makes shitty polls to annoy people.

Say what you will about Corrik, he does have convictions (at least in his own mind), however faulty his arguments and conclusions are. If red soxs posts are to be believed, he is willing to sacrifice any shred of moral integrity to spite the other team and uses empty sophistry to seem more nuanced than he is.

However, I dont think they are to be believed. I think he is just the best baiter on the board, an old school troll that I can respect in a twisted way very few play the long con anymore but that contributes almost nothing of value.
---

why do you think his username is "red"13n
---

Russia SHOULD be paying Vlado. It's a waste of his considerable talents to shitpost for free on an ancient video game message board.

---

I've been saying for a while that Vlado was a Russian propagandist, regardless of whether or not he was paid and whether or not he's doing it on his own (if you are a somehow a true belever spreading that shit to the point where you're indistinguishable from a propagandist, guess what...) or for somebody else.

Glad to see people are coming around...!

I thought it was pretty obvious he was? I just dont think hes being paid or sponsored for it hes probably a true believer.
---

Looking at what Hillary said -- and in context --

"I'm not making any predictions, but I think they've got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate," Clinton said, speaking on a podcast with former Obama adviser David Plouffe. "She's the favorite of the Russians."

That doesn't even seem to suggest that she's actually a Russian Agent, but that Russians definitely want to push Tulsi as a 3rd party candidate. Especially when you add this:

"They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far," Clinton said.

And that's absolutely true. You see Russian bots pushing for Tulsi, much like they do for Trump. Tulsi hasn't really done herself any favors. She attacks Hillary harder than she's EVER attacked Donald Trump -- who is ACTUALLY the embodiment of corruption. She's also pushing the idea that the DNC is "RIGGED". Specifically against her this time.

I do think Hillary should've worded it a bit more carefully maybe (but she's not running for office anymore so she's just a private citizen now) but I don't think she's exactly wrong either. I don't think Tulsi Gabbard is an 'asset' in the sense that she's working witth the Russians. But the Russians would LOVE to push Tulsi into running as a 3rd party candidate. And that seems to be -- to me at least -- what Hillary is saying. Especially since she said she's not 'making any predictions'.
---

Yeah, Hillary never actually said she's a Russian asset, since the whole "I think they've got their eye on somebody" suggests Russia WANTS an asset but she isn't yet.

She called Jill Stein a Russian asset, 100%, but nothing she actually said about Tulsi is incorrect since she didn't actually say anything about Tulsi directly. She said it about Russia, that they're clearly in support of her, which they are.

But Tulsi Gabbard is Tulsi Gabbard and she absolutely ran with it, just like at the debate when she said that article and that CNN dude said things about her that they didn't say.
---

Also I never want to hear about Cyclo calling anybody a conspiracy theorist when he's Mr. "Elizabeth Warren is only running to play spoiler to Bernie."
---

If you listen to the full clip in context, it sounds like the they shes talking about initially is not even the Russians but the Trump campaign.

---

I really feel like this Hunter Biden/China thing will become the "But her Emails!" of the election if Joe BIden is the candidate. No matter how innocuous. No matter how innocent. It really doesn't matter. I feel it's going to be what Trump hammers him on. And I think it could sink him. But not before the primary, I'm afraid.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

If you listen to the full clip in context, it sounds like the they shes talking about initially is not even the Russians but the Trump campaign.

Having listened to it, you're absolutely right. They're talking about the Trump campaign and Trump wanting a third party so he can go "If you don't vote for me, fine, but don't vote for the other guy because they did *lie lie lie*"

She just says Tulsi's a favorite of the Russians.
---

There is nothing wrong with my convictions. I have an opinion that differs from your own, but it does not make anything regarding me faulty. It is conceited to think that only your opinions and way of thinking can be correct.

---

I don't think my opinions are the only correct ones, but I know yours are inherently flawed.

:)
---

Corrik7 posted...

There is nothing wrong with my convictions. I have an opinion that differs from your own, but it does not make anything regarding me faulty. It is conceited to think that only your opinions and way of thinking can be correct.

Your way of thinking can be correct so long as it perfectly matches my own
---

Panthera posted...

Your way of thinking can be correct so long as it perfectly matches my own

Basically what most people in here think.

---

Do you believe that that is a flawed way of thinking?
---

Corrik7 posted...

Panthera posted...

Your way of thinking can be correct so long as it perfectly matches my own

Basically what most people in here think.

are you suggesting that their thinking is wrong

how dare you
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

are you suggesting that their thinking is wrong

how dare you

I'm suggesting their thinking is conceited.

---

Moogle I was trying to lead him there with the Socratic Method but you jumped the gun
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Do you believe that that is a flawed way of thinking?

And yes. It is close minded. It is no different than a Christian thinking you are going to hell if you don't believe in God. Which is something yinz would surely take the time to laugh at.

---

Can I just say that I absolutely love the theory that Vlado is getting a paycheck from Russia to disseminate far right American political views on Board 8

like that's my headcanon now.
---

...wait what?

Can you truly believe in a religion if you dont believe it affects everyone else?
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Can I just say that I absolutely love the theory that Vlado is getting a paycheck from Russia to disseminate far right American political views on Board 8

like that's my headcanon now.

He better be! Otherwise hes doing it for free which is even sadder
---

I can absolutely buy that he started off getting paid to do it during the election and then just kept doing it coz he enjoyed it.
---

Also its not really far right propaganda

Its explicitly pro-Russian stuff.
---

attn: russia I will absolutely do what Vlado did for you depending on the paycheck
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

attn: russia I will absolutely do what Vlado did for you depending on the paycheck

The FBI wishes to know your location
---

red13n posted...

Tony is a conspiracy theorist. I responded to him the other day literally saying this. Its pretty much been his defining characteristic(We have plenty of people that support Bernie. But people latching onto conspiracies like Tony...nope).

Im literally not. I dont believe in any of the major conspiracies people talk about, but you keep smearing me with this instead of engaging with the content of the post, its so damn annoying.

Asking for evidence is not a conspiracy dude.

You literally just said its likely Vlado is paid by Russia!! With what proof?? Are you really so up your ass you cant believe there are people who just believe the crazy shit he says?

THIS is conspiracy, you literally think the only way people would say things Russia likes is if theyre either paid by or manipulated by Russia. Thats classic conspiracy theory ego: You think your group is the only group capable of having thoughts un-influenced by outside sources.

red13n posted...

Unlike some people, I am able to differentiate fact from speculative theory.

Cyclo (and Chris!) and Is entire point about Hillary and Tulsi isIts possible, sure, but SHOW US EVIDENCE! Without evidence it just undermines the Russian connections with actual proof

Give me a break, dude.
---

CNN has an article about a mother and the secret language of White Supremacists.

Snowflake is a white supremacist word. So is SJW. Lol

Beta, cuck, redpill. White supremacist words.

Then in like the only two that I thought weren't questionable was like some heil Hitler slogan and something that signified Hitler.

Like, what an article.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

...wait what?

Can you truly believe in a religion if you dont believe it affects everyone else?

You would have to be mighty full of yourself or brainwashed to think you are a superior entity because you pray to a certain god and that every last person who does not is a lesser or evil person. Or that great people can exist who don't believe but that your oh so benevolent God would deny the true saints of compassion because they simply weren't worshippers.

Like, that is exactly how some of you act too regarding your political ideology.

Like, I have to be heartless and lack empathy because I do not agree with you on stuff. Superior beings for believing what you believe. All else are lesser. It's literally a religion brainwashed stance of the "true believers".

---

I kinda feel like snowflake has almost successfully been ironically co-opted back by the left in mocking of the sheer hypocrisy with which the right has shown with it during the course of this administration. The rest of those words are always flying around in alt-right and adjacent circles and have for years -- even before the term came to define the groups it would come to encompass. I think trying to pidgeonhole them into just white supremacy circles is inaccurate but given the overlaps involved it wouldn't be surprising to see it there too.

Like, if someone uses them it inclines me to believe they hang around in alt-right circles because that's where those terms would be most prevalent.

Conversely, if someone is talking about intersectionality I would be inclined to believe they run in circles more on the left because that's where I'd expect that term to come up.

Obviously it's not a guarantee or anything but if you play the odds it would shake out that way I think.
---

xp1337 posted...

I kinda feel like snowflake has almost successfully been ironically co-opted back by the left in mocking of the sheer hypocrisy with which the right has shown with it during the course of this administration. The rest of those words are always flying around in alt-right and adjacent circles and have for years -- even before the term came to define the groups it would come to encompass. I think trying to pidgeonhole them into just white supremacy circles is inaccurate but given the overlaps involved it wouldn't be surprising to see it there too.

Like, if someone uses them it inclines me to believe they hang around in alt-right circles because that's where those terms would be most prevalent.

Conversely, if someone is talking about intersectionality I would be inclined to believe they run in circles more on the left because that's where I'd expect that term to come up.

Obviously it's not a guarantee or anything but if you play the odds it would shake out that way I think.

A lot of those words have nothing to do with white supremacy and are more insults used on the left in general.

---

Corrik7 posted...

xp1337 posted...

I kinda feel like snowflake has almost successfully been ironically co-opted back by the left in mocking of the sheer hypocrisy with which the right has shown with it during the course of this administration. The rest of those words are always flying around in alt-right and adjacent circles and have for years -- even before the term came to define the groups it would come to encompass. I think trying to pidgeonhole them into just white supremacy circles is inaccurate but given the overlaps involved it wouldn't be surprising to see it there too.

Like, if someone uses them it inclines me to believe they hang around in alt-right circles because that's where those terms would be most prevalent.

Conversely, if someone is talking about intersectionality I would be inclined to believe they run in circles more on the left because that's where I'd expect that term to come up.

Obviously it's not a guarantee or anything but if you play the odds it would shake out that way I think.

A lot of those words have nothing to do with white supremacy and are more insults used on the left in general.

So...white supremacy then?
---

Cuz only white supremacists have ever insulted liberals ever.

---

If you believed in your religion, and it said that anyone who eats chicken within five years of their death will go to hell

Wouldn't it be your moral duty to be out there convincing people not to eat chicken/ preventing them from eating chicken?

You're saving them from literal hell
---

Snowflake, beta, and SJW are very widely used words. Personally, I feel that snowflake is usually used by......snowflakes. Beta describes a worldview that I don't like (that everyone is either an alpha or beta, and this is an important, definitive even, characteristic), and would prefer to ignore as much as possible.

SJW I think is a good term. It condemns people who ought to be condemned - people with no moral courage who are utterly unwilling to do anything unpopular or risky and are extremely energetic in advocating for the most popular positions. An SJW is someone who imagines that they would have supported civil rights in the 50s but would have been among the loudest voices against the civil rights movement until the moment they felt the national mood had changed. They are the people who in China were happy to be Chairman Mao's red guards.

Obviously there are genuine advocates of social justice....and some of them even fight hard. But it's quite clear that the term SJW does not refer to such people.

As for the other terms, as far as I can tell they are only used by people with a persecution complex.
---

banananor posted...

If you believed in your religion, and it said that anyone who eats chicken within five years of their death will go to hell

Wouldn't it be your moral duty to be out there convincing people not to eat chicken/ preventing them from eating chicken?

You're saving them from literal hell

Again. This is how some of you act here. Look at your ridiculous example. Realize it describes some of you regarding your politics. Now laugh at yourselves if you are one of them.

---

red sox 777 posted...

As for the other terms, as far as I can tell they are only used by people with a persecution complex.

ah, like white supremacists

---

red sox 777 posted...

Snowflake, beta, and SJW are very widely used words. Personally, I feel that snowflake is usually used by......snowflakes. Beta describes a worldview that I don't like (that everyone is either an alpha or beta, and this is an important, definitive even, characteristic), and would prefer to ignore as much as possible.

SJW I think is a good term. It condemns people who ought to be condemned - people with no moral courage who are utterly unwilling to do anything unpopular or risky and are extremely energetic in advocating for the most popular positions. An SJW is someone who imagines that they would have supported civil rights in the 50s but would have been among the loudest voices against the civil rights movement until the moment they felt the national mood had changed. They are the people who in China were happy to be Chairman Mao's red guards.

Obviously there are genuine advocates of social justice....and some of them even fight hard. But it's quite clear that the term SJW does not refer to such people.

As for the other terms, as far as I can tell they are only used by people with a persecution complex.

I think cuck is more widely used than beta tbqh. I haven't heard redpilled much but I mean it obviously came from the matrix. I think.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Cuz only white supremacists have ever insulted liberals ever.

Its getting to that point. I really wish liberal opposition would be more conservative and less white nationalist identity politics. But what am you expect from an ideology supported by the kind of people who defend Steve King as totally not a racist when he claims that only the west ever positively contributed to society.
---

Corrik7 posted...

You would have to be mighty full of yourself or brainwashed to think you are a superior entity because you pray to a certain god and that every last person who does not is a lesser or evil person. Or that great people can exist who don't believe but that your oh so benevolent God would deny the true saints of compassion because they simply weren't worshippers.

But like, thats what a lot of religions actually say
---

Espeon posted...

Its getting to that point. I really wish liberal opposition would be more conservative and less white nationalist identity politics. But what am you expect from an ideology supported by the kind of people who defend Steve King as totally not a racist when he claims that only the west ever positively contributed to society.

Lmfao. White Supremacists maybe encompass a single percent of Americans. Maybe.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

But like, thats what a lot of religions actually say

And the point is that some of you would make fun of said religions for those very reasons. While doing the same exact things regarding your politics.

---

Terms and symbols can come from one place and end up absorbed by another group

Like, pepe the frog started out as a normal webcomics character, got adopted by 4chan (feels good man) and then eventually the alt-right. Even though it has other uses, it's also an alt-right symbol now

In this way there are a few uses of all the terms you were taking about.

I do enjoy internally mocking people who accuse others of being snowflakes while also being snowflakes, or mocking people who shit on SJWs while literally fighting about social norms on the internet (literally being a social justice warrior), or mocking people who chafe about political correctness while finding it politically incorrect to kneel during the national anthem
---

Corrik7 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

But like, thats what a lot of religions actually say

And the point is that some of you would make fun of said religions for those very reasons. While doing the same exact things regarding your politics.

I dunno, it sounds more like youre the one making fun of those religions
---