Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 344: Transitional Defense

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/COVID19Tracking/status/1327400656328507392

Jesus

---

yeah we're on our way to 300k infections a day by christmas. whee.

---

It's almost like it didn't disappear after the election. Amazing.

---

This is where you are supposed to hit the panic button and initiate lockdowns, but aside a couple select areas that isn't happening.

Hospital numbers already debunk the idea that this is explainable by an increase in testing.

And we know people are going to gather on Thanksgiving.

Wanglicious posted...

quick glance... some of those i've no idea wtf they and a number are out of place, but government made disease is a thing, depending on what's meant. spreading it to citizens, absolutely: navy sprayed the Bay Area back in the 1950s and had different experiments through the 70s that we know of; Tuskegee which is in the "things that really happened" at the bottom and that's government explicitly giving black people syphilis from the 1930s to 1960s. if it means governments making diseases in labs uh, yeah. that's not even a conspiracy. so i'm not sure what that's referring to. is it stuff like AIDS was government made? then yeah i'd put it there, though cautiously because a big reason why that sort of conspiracy happened is because of things like Tuskegee.

It comes across to me as clearly talking about bioengineering modern diseases which is pretty bunk just based on the timeline of the technology. Like I have no doubt governments are looking into it but even generously assuming their tech is a decade ahead that's suspect, and honestly we have pretty reasonable explanations for diseases in this timeframe. Even COVID-19 just isn't too much of a genetic leap.

No one's doubting the smallpox infested blanket strategy

---

Some people in my extended family were still pushing for it, but thankfully they're not anymore. My cousins who normally host are talking about taking orders and delivering meals to everyone's doorsteps if they're within an hour drive time, which is pretty damn cool.

I get the feeling most families won't be willing to forget about getting together though.

---

Wanglicious posted...

i know, i explicitly said this here and in other places. brought it up to say hey, this actually was fishy. it was also an error. those two go hand in hand - if you can't tell apart an error that's 10x wrong from its legitimate numbers, you've got blinders on and should fix that because you're seeing only what you want to see at that point, which is the same accusation to those who find conspiracies in everything.

"Hey there was any update where Biden got 128k votes and nobody else got any" and "they didn't allow observers" and "the voting machines changed all the votes" are the same, Wang. They are the same.

They are all lies.
They are being shared by the same people.
None of them have any supporting evidence and all of them have ample opposition evidence.

They are the same and they need to be treated the same like the fabricated bullshit that they are.

A stance of "this idea is disputed" gives any one of them far more credibility than they deserve.

---

There are very likely a literal handful of isolated cases of voter fraud (afaik we know of exactly one in this election: a guy filling out his dead mom's ballot... for Trump). There is absolutely zero credible evidence of any coordinated voter fraud effort in this election, and even if it hypothetically were to exist it would be completely coincidental with respect to Trump's current fishing expedition. When you have people like Texas's Lt. Gov offering a million bucks for evidence of voter fraud, it's not happening because they already have anything.

---

I cant wait for the argument to be made openly about people that voted early and then died of COVID either before election day or before their vote was counted.

---

boy what with all these new infections and deaths sure seems like we should have done universal mail-in voting this election

yet another case of fuck the GOP

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

"Hey there was any update where Biden got 128k votes and nobody else got any" and "they didn't allow observers" and "the voting machines changed all the votes" are the same, Wang. They are the same.

They are all lies.
They are being shared by the same people.
None of them have any supporting evidence and all of them have ample opposition evidence.

They are the same and they need to be treated the same like the fabricated bullshit that they are.

A stance of "this idea is disputed" gives any one of them far more credibility than they deserve.

your lies are rather specific there. the last one's the most notable: no, a machine has not "flipped all the votes." but yes, two results have been flipped as a result of human and machine errors. see the difference? now i don't know if we're talking about different things here but i guarantee any vote flipping stuff is tied to those two cases because they actually did happen. that is the evidence that gets used - two clear incidents that factually occurred, both against republicans, and from there it's extrapolated to meaning more are possible. it's a lie to say that results haven't been flipped or that elections weren't affected by this - thanks to the second instance where a county had its votes counted twice, the house rep flipped.

the 138k one is also a case of specific meaning. the incident did happen. it was also a mistake and immediately corrected. there's a big difference between lying about something not happening and lying/not being aware of the full story behind it. and i'm not sure you're getting what i'm using this as an example of.

the observer situation is a mess because i don't know where you're going with it. specific observers being requested, the distance of observers, the claims of counting happening without observers around? there's a mix of info here with some true stuff (the last thing), some court stuff (the distance), and a fuck if i know wtf is being asked for (specific observers). this one's the most messy of the 3.

finally, for issues of credibility i go to the side of 'figure out why they're saying what they're saying and break it down from there.' once you understand where people are coming from you can actually work them through the logic. simply dismissing it out of hand or calling it a lie outright will only do the opposite of what you're asking for. the goal is to discredit the claim, not to discredit the person or, just as importantly, yourself. oh yeah: the idea that the election is still disputed is just a fact. it's in the process of getting done but is not done yet, and if you know all that, then saying so would be a lie.

---

Ugh

---

The observer stuff is stupid and pointless because even if it had merit the proper remedy would be, at most, to recount the ballots in question rather than to throw them out like Trump is absurdly suggesting

---

Wanglicious posted...

oh yeah: the idea that the election is still disputed is just a fact.

I dispute this, so you should probably say it's disputed, not a fact.

---

You all are literally just arguing semantics.

Wang is saying the election is disputed in the sense that there are ongoing court cases affecting the results. Red and others are taking the approach of no, Trump manufactured the dispute because he knows he already lost and wants to steal it.

I'll forgive Wang for this one because he's just using a very liberal definition of the word "dispute," probably specifically because results are being "disputed" in courts, and who cares.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The observer stuff is stupid and pointless because even if it had merit the proper remedy would be, at most, to recount the ballots in question rather than to throw them out like Trump is absurdly suggesting

yeah, pretty much. like this one has an easy remedy to it. the more extreme versions i've heard on this go 'oh but they've already put the fraudulent votes in!' but to that just audit then, fine. like this one has actual remedies and frankly is the least offensive one because it can be easily fixed if it's even relevant, which probably isn't the case for most counties here.

---

StartTheMachine posted...

You all are literally just arguing semantics.

Wang is saying the election is disputed in the sense that there are ongoing court cases affecting the results. Red and others are taking the approach of no, Trump manufactured the dispute because he knows he already lost and wants to steal it.

I'll forgive Wang for this one because he's just using a very liberal definition of the word "dispute," probably specifically because results are being "disputed" in courts, and who cares.

mostly correct there for me, yeah. ongoing court cases, recounts, audits, all that stuff is still in the way. in a month though the electoral votes get certified and it won't be in dispute then, it's exactly a month from now. winner has yet to be determined, even though it's clear who the winner is. i'd say it's a rather conservative usage of the word though - i'm not using it in some broad scope as it's a very limited viewpoints of is it being challenged legally or not, has the process been completed or not.

---

Good point. Yeah, replace very liberal with very specific there. I probably just needed a defining adjective there and jumped to that one.

---

Wanglicious posted...

the 138k one is also a case of specific meaning. the incident did happen. it was also a mistake and immediately corrected. there's a big difference between lying about something not happening and lying/not being aware of the full story behind it. and i'm not sure you're getting what i'm using this as an example of.

It
Was
A
Lie

yes there was a mistake in a single website so in that sense it was a thing that occurred. But WHAT occurred is that as part of a vote update (in which votes were added for everyone) there was a mistake where their website added too many Biden votes.

And then they corrected the error by reducing Bidens vote total with an update to only his votes.

And so the before/after screenshots were posted in reverse. If they were posted in order you would think that democrats might say "Hey why did they take away Biden's Votes???" Because in chronological order that's how it would have appeared. But instead their order was deliberately flipped to paint a false narrative.

I know what your were trying to do by using that example as a "thing that actually occurred and was later resolved by follow up information" but even in the context of it "occurring" it was predicated on lies.

And that is why I feel comfortable including it with the other lies, because it was not a "real discrepancy that got resolved".

---

The 138k vote thing was an issue with one website's reporting, not the votes themselves. But Trumpers are lying saying it was an issue with votes. So you're both kinda right, though I'd argue FD moreso since it was never an issue that actually had anything to do with the actual votes themselves.

---

AND because the screenshots were flipped out of order. The entire framing was deliberately false.

---

StartTheMachine posted...

Wang is saying the election is disputed in the sense that there are ongoing court cases affecting the results. Red and others are taking the approach of no, Trump manufactured the dispute because he knows he already lost and wants to steal it.

Huh? No. I know what hes arguing. I specified this exact thing in another post.

Hes basically saying the idea that the earth is round is a disputed fact because some people are arguing that it is flat.

---

StartTheMachine posted...

You all are literally just arguing semantics.

Also no, he at one point literally said I wanted them to stop the process and be done with it. Obviously, that was a lie.

---

https://youtu.be/SgrZAPUvKyA

Bill Maher continues to be the best.

---

I don't want to watch this but Bill Maher is not a good person.

---

red13n posted...

I don't want to watch this but Bill Maher is not a good person.

Cuz he doesn't say what you want him to say. Of course. I understand your mentality well. It doesn't change that he says a lot of what you need to hear though.

---

Sometimes hes right, but hes one of the original "play both sides for ratings" guys. He doesn't have beliefs, he throws them out the window the moment he thinks he can sucker in more viewers with something controversial.

---

Ok I started watching. He brings up QAnon then says Democrats have to own everything on the left as if this is something the right does but the left doesn't. Most of the right literally pretends QAnon doesn't exist.

Again, hes a hypocritical fuck detached from reality to try to fake looking intelligent.

---

Ok lets get to the end for his biggest hypocritical crock of shit.

Hes upset that Biden lost some percentage of minority vote(Again, incomplete picture, skewed by weird exit polling this year, probably some truth but more likely caused by gender split in some form), but he closes out by saying Democrats should...pretend race doesn't exist? While the population of minorities you know, grows by % every year. While at the same time black voters probably won Georgia for Biden.

Fuck him. The dude only claims hes a Democrat because he knows he couldn't make it as a host if he claimed he were a Republican(Or an independent).

And I'm the guy usually here saying we need "these people". We don't need fucking Bill Maher. He should be trashed at every opportunity.

---

The fact remains a blue wave didn't happen. Trump pulled in more votes than any presidential candidate besides Biden in all of history. House legislatures did not flip. The Senate was not taken. The House lost seats. You may not like the reason, but the reason isn't just handwaving away everything like Chris does and saying but the racists!

And, yet, you can't handle that maher brings up good points regarding it.

---

Not surprised to see a piece of shit like Maher defend a piece of shit like Mitchell Miller. "Are we really going after people for what they did in middle school?" Acting like this piece of shit bully was just your average bully and not some psychopath who made a disabled kid lick a piece of candy that he rubbed in a urinal in addition to the assault, and called the boy racial slurs and NEVER showed an ounce of remorse for what he did. He apologized to the NHL teams, but never to the boy who he abused. Let's not act like Miller was a bully in middle school, and then turned his life around and took steps to make restitution beyond what was required of him. Redemption and second chances are earned, and it's about time we stopped pretending they should be so freely given.

Also it's patently ridiculous that we're 'chasing people off' because of Cancel Culture. Guess who's the king of cancel culture? Donald fucking Trump. People LOVE cancel culture, as long as its canceling something they disagree with.

---

Hey, I know the reason is the mainly democrats suck on economic issues. I said 5% not 45% are racists. I don't hand wave shit.

---

Wanglicious posted...

winner has yet to be determined, even though it's clear who the winner is.

So basically you would say this about any Presidential election a week after it was called
---

Bill Maher is in my trinity of most hated liberals along with Michael Moore and Jon Stewart (Though to be fair to Stewart he is definitely a step below and gets there more on his following than him)

I cant stand anti-intellectual democrats. I think its peak hypocrisy to declare how much more intelligent you are than republicans and still be an anti science asshole

---

Jakyl25 posted...

So basically you would say this about any Presidential election a week after it was called

If there is no concession and the results are not certified, then it is disputed. And, yes, you can pull your concession.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

And so the before/after screenshots were posted in reverse. If they were posted in order you would think that democrats might say "Hey why did they take away Biden's Votes???" Because in chronological order that's how it would have appeared. But instead their order was deliberately flipped to paint a false narrative.

I know what your were trying to do by using that example as a "thing that actually occurred and was later resolved by follow up information" but even in the context of it "occurring" it was predicated on lies.

aware of the rest of info but wasn't of the screenshots being in reverse. that's dirty as fuck and definitely get where you're coming from with that tidbit as manipulation of data is definitely something to hit harder on. and the before/after is a couple checks rolled in one: it puts a situation that we know is an error now (and that it was manipulated to make it worse) and puts a check on the reader. if you believe it out of hand, stop, you're not being critical. if you reject it out of hand, stop, you're not being critical. was using it for both the 'before info/after info' and that.

Jakyl25 posted...

So basically you would say this about any Presidential election a week after it was called

it's usually not in dispute a week out as one party's usually conceded by then and that's where i'd put the line since it means you're not fighting or arguing with the results, so the process will continue as is. if you're not then it ends when the process completes, either or. would apply that to other races too, not just presidential.

and yeah concession doesn't necessarily mean it's over yet either - Al Gore did before taking it back, a race just last week got flipped after a concession was delivered - but those are fairly unique circumstances that defy the set parameters.

---

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/11/14/pa-2020-election-recounts-recanvasses/

---

yeah, saw that yesterday. biden is getting just out of that margin and republicans are livid. naturally that decision will be fought in courts too; i think there's a citizen's one now too, though i don't know the specifics. i get that PA officials wanna go 'no, fuck it, it's done' but man.


---

Wanglicious posted...

it's usually not in dispute a week out as one party's usually conceded by then and that's where i'd put the line since it means you're not fighting or arguing with the results, so the process will continue as is. if you're not then it ends when the process completes, either or. would apply that to other races too, not just presidential.

What if the process completes and the loser still refuses to accept it? I mean technically thats still disputed
---

Jakyl25 posted...

What if the process completes and the loser still refuses to accept it? I mean technically thats still disputed

then that's just him refusing to accept it, with no authority or say on anything. once certified, it's done, case complete. you can disagree with a judge's ruling but that's all it is, disagreement, especially when there's nowhere to appeal to. at that point you're not disputing the election anymore, you're talking about a coup separate from it. and really, if you're gonna do a coup then you do it with the electoral votes.

---

Corrik7 posted...

https://youtu.be/SgrZAPUvKyA

Bill Maher continues to be the best.

i still like Maher, even if i disagree with him sometimes because he's prone to being too much smug asshole. he does appear to wear a lot of his actual opinions on his sleeve, so there's definite props i'll give to that. also, firm free speech guy, which is always a good thing.

in agreement with most of what he said here, ultimately he's boiling things down to "it's the culture war." Yang said similar things but in much, much nicer ways and not as specific.

---

This is freaking pathetic. Republicans make fun of Democrats when Trump wins the election and then proceed to act even worse when they lose.

Honestly, for someone who was touted as being "real" compared to other politicians, Trump has basically become the fakest politician ever.

---

how is this argument still going

---

Corrik are any of your Trump acquaintances talking about Parler yet?
---

Parler already has celebrity endorsement in the form of Gina Carano~

Seriously though uh, they're gonna run into similar issues as Gab. Don't even dream about making money, it's gonna get bled.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik are any of your Trump acquaintances talking about Parler yet?

I saw one or two people mention it on facebook. And something about a 11/13 boycott of facebook to "show them what they are missing by alienating conservatives".

I doubt anyone is serious with that shit. Conservatives don't boycott. Conservatives don't protest.

---

Corrik7 posted...

I doubt anyone is serious with that shit. Conservatives don't boycott. Conservatives don't protest.

Lmfao nope, they just create conservative safe spaces so they can keep living in their alternate reality where Trump won.

Once again Parler has been talked about by like every conservative on my Facebook feed so I don't buy it.

---

It's serious enough that there's elected officials on it.

I mean I'd love competition but that thing is gonna get payment processors pulled the second it gains traction. From there who knows.

And the boycott idea is so laughable I'd have to confirm that's not a Poe.

---

Corrik7 posted...

And, yet, you can't handle that maher brings up good points regarding it.

Huh?

He probably has some valid points on his video.

But he also has some dumb points and typical Bill Maher hypocritical shit. Having good points mixed in with a bunch of shit doesn't mean I have to like him. Nor does it mean he's even a Democrat at this point. Bill Maher is still scum.

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1327352052809412608?s=19

Lol

---