Larry of the Lawn

6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Larry, then sincerely and without rancor… you lack imagination on this issue.  I believed the people who said in 2016 it is impossible for Trump to win.  He won.  

Trump is an existential threat to the United States.  If you don’t see that at this poiny I’m not sure how to show you.

Non sequitur much?  Trump being an existential threat is WHY you have to address this shit and let people talk and use what democratic tools they have.  

Sorry, I'm not chasing gonna start chasing bogeymen and being scared of my own shadow. 

I'm not saying he can't win.  I'm saying that voting uncommitted and criticizing Biden on Gaza do not help Trump.  These are things on people's minds and if you sweep it under the rug or try to crush it it's not going to go away.  I'm saying that crushing public discourse and the democratic process is certainly not going to help. 

5 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

No it doesn't. We're seeing more and more people say they won't vote for Biden who come from his traditional base. That's a real fucking problem. Some are even dumb enough to say they'll vote for Trump out of spite. Meanwhile we know Republicans will rally to him. 

I disagree that any statistically significant part of his traditional base is going to vote for Trump out of spite.

But okay, how about voters who voted "uncommitted"?  Some are probably going to vote for Biden.  Some might not.  How are you going to get those voters back into the fold?  Are you going to tell them they're fucking dumb? 

7 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

No, it's not, but there's a difference between being critical and full out spiking shit in protest. We're at a very dangerous moment. Idk how anyone with half a brain can't see that. And yet so many people do. If your actions only help Trump, you need only look in the mirror when things go bad and you have to own what you've done. 

And this is the unsatisfied qualifier that makes this argument fall apart.  

Edit: then again, we haven't even established what we're talking about.  Voting "uncommitted" in a primary?  Asking Biden to do more to stop genocide in Gaza?

I can't see how these things help Trump.  

17 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

I think this "from the river to the sea" folks fail to understand that most Americans really don't know much about this issue--hell, I'd argue that most of the protestors don't know, either. I remember going cross-eyed reading a summary of Israeli history, and it was then I realized that nothing about that situation is simple. But if you are of a certain mindset, you think it's all cut and dried, and you cannot understand how anyone could think otherwise. Well, lots of people do...if they think about it at all. Biden is trying to walk a tightrope here, and pretending that rope isn't there doesn't mean Biden can't fall from it.

That may all be true.  But I don't believe the dissent with Biden on this issue among Dem voters is limited to, in your words, "from the river to the sea" folks.

I think it includes a lot of people who simply don't want their tax dollars funding a genocide, and don't mind saying that.  Biden might be in a tight spot, but it's irrational to think that asking voters to decide between voting for a guy who has no problem f[u]nding a genocide or the other worse guy who has no problem f[u]nding a genocide is some kind of decision that everyone is going to make quietly and happily.  

I'd imagine people who have voted before have already made similar calculations in the past, so this conundrum is nothing new.  But for some people this might not be any easy choice.  I'm thinking beyond Palestinian and Muslim voters it certainly seems to be a dilemma of some kind for Gen Z.  I get that as young voters there isn't much incentive for Biden to pursue an unreliable vote, but I absolutely can understand people being pissed with the choices they've been given.  

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I think it reinforces the existing “two party” structure.  It creates the percolation that the only “real” candidates are those who were tested and won primaries when that isn’t the case.

Gotcha.  What's the alternative?  I'd imagine that if we didn't have publicly funded primaries we wouldn't all be able to vote in primaries, or they would be a total farce.  I'm pretty sure both parties would just rig the voting, or only allow select people to vote, or whatever makes the donors/ party higher ups happy.  

10 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I have disliked Primaries and the State paying to facilitate private organizations picking candidates for general elections for quite some time.

Is your dislike for primaries because of the state funding?  Or is it something else?  Curious because iirc you were saying recently that you think people should be able to vote in multiple primaries.

16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I have no problem with voicing dissent.  I’m saying voting in a way that demonstrates Biden is weak is much more dangerous than simply voicing discontent with Biden.

I do not agree with that at all.  The only vote that matters is the general.  He's essentially running unopposed in the primary.  These aren't votes for whatever Kennedy failson is out there. 

Why even fucking have primaries?  Why not just let the parties pick the candidate [if] you're so scared about the perception of weakness?

Eta: maybe it's not "voting in a way that demonstrates Biden is weak", maybe it's "Biden is and always has been a weak candidate but some people are blind to it and would rather scapegoat voters than hold the president to any kind of scrutiny".

1 hour ago, mormont said:

But in step with another chunk. This is the basic problem. 

Fair enough. I'd suggest that Biden's position on Gaza involves stronger support of [Israel than] where the electorate is at.  But that's not voters fault.  Expecting people to just swallow Gaza without some kind of reaction is unrealistic.  

There are limited options that people have to affect government policy.  What's driving my commenting [on] the issue is the implication that people aren't allowed to exercise their civil rights unless it's exactly how, for lack of a better phrase, Mainstream Dems see fit.  What I'm getting from Ty and Scot is that it's stupid and wrong to voice dissent with Joe Biden on anything.  

I think it's pretty foolish to try to stop fascism by demanding people stop doing the things that a participatory democracy demands.  

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Then how is weaking the only viable candidate against Trump a good idea now?

How does this weaken Biden?  These people could all well vote for him in the general.  If he's weakened it's by the fact he's out of step with with a chunk of his base.

10 minutes ago, Hmmm said:

Okay. You still used it wrong. 

He was even helpful enough to give an explicit example of what he thought, by mentioning Hamas' massacre of hundreds of Israeli youths at the Nova Music Festival (including multiple cases of rapes and torture, one might add), and saying that it was wrong to condemn that because the Israelis in question were colonisers who were taunting Hamas by having a festival near the border. 

Your tendency to explain away or, actually, muddy the waters around such statements is more troubling than my use of one liners. 

I don't think you're going to get a more courteous and earnest acceptance of a correction than you just got on the Internet.  The phrasing confused her.  It muddied the waters for her.  And then after some discussion she realized the dudes wording was more clear than she initially read it.  What more do you want?

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So… is it your position staying home in the general, voting for Republicans in the general, or voting for the anti-vaxxer candidate in the general “to send the DNC a message” is a good idea?

Yeah my position is that, something completely fucking different from everything I've ever said on this board.  

7 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Protesting to make things worse for those you're protesting to support. Galaxy brain! 

Isn't this what primaries are for?  They sent Biden a message.  Who knows whether or not they'll vote for him.  I'd never vote for Joe Biden in a primary but I'll vote for him over whatever psycho the GOP throws out there.

Biden now knows his position is a problem for [some] voters.  

DNC brain!

I mean, on some level, I suppose we should all be thankful that everyone who dies didn't go on a shooting spree.

On 2/18/2024 at 2:45 PM, DireWolfSpirit said:

The Black Crowes with new music and touring, love it, didnt think it would ever happen again.

 

I think I've seen the Crowes more than I've seen any other band, probably a couple dozen times.  Was bummed when they called it off ten years ago or so, def gonna catch them this summer . 

Favorites were:

A)2001 at the Oakdale in Wallingford CT.  This was the Brotherly Love Tour with Spacehog and Oasis.

B)2001, same tour Mansfield Mass

C) Bonnaroo 2005, Broke Down Palace cover was incredibly moving 

D) Viejas Casino, CA 2006.  Robert Randolph Band at their best opening (played the Jeopardy theme lol), Crowes killed it with covers of Cripple Creek and Most Likely You'll Go Your Way And I'll Go Mine (Nico on vocals) and chuck berry encore.  Probably Chris's best performance I've caught.  

E) 2005 Hartford, opening for Petty and the Heartbreakers, got a free ticket from a busker outside of Black Eyed Sallies. Dude was doing a bunch of Motown and soul covers.  I had just met a guy who wanted to buy a guitar I had craigslist, he didn't buy it, ended up playing a couple songs with the busker and he gave me the ticket.

5 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

The point is it didn't matter. 

 

 

It didn't matter to you.

21 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Hey, the person who lit themself on fire in 1965 really did a great job making sure the Vietnam War only last another decade. Results! 

I wonder who he voted for in '64.  The guy who wanted to nuke Vietnam, or the guy who reversed course on his campaign position of limiting the war and instead escalated it.

Maybe he voted for LBJ and then felt complicit in the expansion of the conflict.  

6 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Where did I say you can't? 

But I stand by the point that if you don't vote and just bitch about shit you're doing nothing positive. 

You said that multiple times in the last two pages of the last US politics thread that criticizing Biden on Gaza was helping Trump.  You told me it was stupid to do and to be strategic.  You said I thought I knew as much as someone with a PhD.  You told me that criticizing Biden on Gaza was helping Trump.  You're now saying if you don't vote you can't complain.

Or have you changed your mind since last week?

Quote

And when Trump does win because liberals don't vote for him? Gonna feel really smart then? Cause I think he will beat Biden if this kind of talk persists, which makes things worse here and for the people in Gaza.

Be fucking strategic. 

33 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

In the US you have two choices. Voting independent when we're talking about the presidency is utterly pointless. 

Right, pick the lesser of two evils if that's how you view it. Doing nothing is a bullshit way to act, especially if you think it gives you some false sense of moral superiority. 

I sincerely hope, even with your political comms background, that when you're trying to convince someone to vote for Biden you aren't making this case that you've been making here, where you assert that you can't criticize Biden if you vote for him, and you can't complain about him if you don't vote.  What choice is anyone left with if talking about politics is something they want to do?  If someone came at me with this rejection of public discourse I'd stop listening instantly.

This is blinkered fascist logic.  

7 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

If you don't pick a side, you don't get to complain. Full stop. 

Hilarious.  So it's either slow genocide with Biden, (which we aren't, per you, allowed to complain about), fast genocide with Trump, or don't vote and don't complain. Democracy!

16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

And the accelerationist speaks.

:head on desk:

That's absolutely NOT accelerationism.  It's just following the logic YOU used to come to the conclusion that a Trump victory in November means no more democracy.  Because if that's the case, why are the people [maga crowd] that want that to happen going to stop?  

Accelerationism would be advocating for that right now.  Which, again, no one seems to be doing here.  You might think that's the logical result of their actions [not voting for Pres], but that is NOT clear.  If someone in a non swing state doesn't vote for the President, nothing happens.  It doesn't push the needle one way or the other. 

14 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

No, I think it's a real man. I've heard lefties say they might vote for Trump because of Gaza. Now, I suspect that most of these people will change their minds as November approaches, but the fact that they're even entertaining the notion says a lot about where these people are coming from.

How many of these people are there possibly out there?  I feel like I read and listen to a pretty large amount of lefty writers and podcasters and I haven't heard this once.  I've heard plenty say they won't vote, but not once have I heard someone threaten to vote for Trump (because of Gaza or for any other reason).

Eta: And there certainly hasn't been anyone in this thread arguing that.  Maybe Scott's comment came out of left field and was simply coincidentally in the middle of this discussion.  I took at as a seriously uncharitable and inaccurate description of the position he was arguing against.  

27 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

The whole “we get everything we want or fuck you let Trump win” thing is incredibly bizarre to me.

Good thing that that characterization is a straw man at best.  It's pretty clear you are not even attempting to understand the point of view you're arguing against.  

36 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Not sure how this connects. 

 

That's a major red flag. 

It's a black flag

1 minute ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Yeah, I would. And I'm not sure what point you're even trying to make here. 

You would bully people into lending their electoral support to a genocide?

2 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Huh?  The Republicans want to cheer the IDF pushing Palestinians out of Gaza… seriously… huh?

I'm asking if it's just a trolley problem.

Vote for Dems- quiet support of genocide with arms and money

Vote for GOP - accelerate genocide

Don't vote- is it really the worse?