Ser Scot A Ellison

1 minute ago, Conflicting Thought said:

No, are all gazan civilians legitimate targets for violence in your opinion?

Absolutely not.  I’ve said from the Start Likud and Hamas both suck and each feeds off the violence offered by the other.

11 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Sorry, i agree with you with you here, but, why is being radicalized bad in itself?  I can think of many instanses where radicalization is good and necesary

Are all Israeli civilians legitimate targets for violence in your opinion?

22 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

Time is a flat circle.

Somebody get Rust a lone star and a nicotine patch.

8 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

No, per people's complaints that what he did accomplished nothing he should have gone out and killed a bunch of people. 

I have never said that.  While a public suicide is violent it isn’t violence against others.

Just now, Kalbear said:

Sure thing. Though apparently he should have done that, because that would have accomplished a lot more? It's very confusing. 

He should have acknowledged murder is wrong or he should have murdered people?  The latter sounds horrific.

19 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

It doesn't justify any action specifically, but hopefully you can at least understand the anger a lot of folks had. I think from his blurb there this guy was also feeling that anger. 

Thank you for acknowledging it doesn’t justify murder… or mass murder.

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

No, he stated that there are no civilians in Israel who are not participating in the illegal settlement of Palestine.

And that justifies… what?

6 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Is being against the genocide of palestinians an extreme leftwing viewpoint?

If doing so is an endorsement of indiscriminate attacks on Israeli civilians or claiming their are no Israeli civilians… then yes.

7 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I remain cautiously optimistic that they can do this, and that by November, this issue will not be the huge problem it is right now.  But thus far the WH messaging isn't working and the sooner they hear that and adjust, the better.  This helps Biden win.  Just staying silent and hoping for the best is a losing strategy. 

So… Biden changing his position on Israel (which I personally support) will not impact the majority of Democratic Voters who want him to support Israel?

14 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

I can't see how these things help Trump.  

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.  Hurting Biden… helps Trump.  If you don’t see that at this point I’m not sure how to show you.

16 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

people are rightfully pissed at their government for seemingly caring more about the welfare of a foreign country's citizens, as opposed to domestic issues. That's one of Trump's key appeals right now. He "stayed out of these endless wars and focused on good ol' America.

That’s the Lindberghish “America First” horseshit many Trumpanista’s claim to endorse… yes.  That isn’t a positive for them.

1 minute ago, Maithanet said:

working.  I am very much hoping that the Biden administration and the international community at large can convince the Israelis to agree to a ceasefire, conditions will improve in Gaza and Biden can move past this issue by November.  That seems possible, but by no means certain. 

Why would Netanyahu do anything that didn’t give aid and comfort to his fellow dictatorial aspirational buddy… Trump?

1 minute ago, kissdbyfire said:

Aspirationally faschy? Joking! 

Booooo…

1 minute ago, Kyoshi said:

I don't know if you're reading any of my posts, and I'm honestly genuinely confused by this response. I have no idea what's happening right now. So I'm just going to move on.

I’m asking you a question because I don’t know the answer to that question.  The man who immolated himself stated online that there are no civilians in Israel.  I’m asking if you agree?

6 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

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.  

Honestly… let parties pick their candidates however they want to.  Don’t lend the perception of legitimacy that comes from State run elections to private political parties…

6 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I see. Don’t you think that sounds a wee bit fashy? 

Not wanting a perception to exist and legally restraining such actions are not the same things.  The latter is absolutely “faschy”.  The former is merely aspirational.

2 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

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.

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.  If primaries are going to exist anyway… I do think registered voters should be able to vote in all primaries being run by the State.

2 minutes ago, Consigliere said:

Wasn't there also a 10-11% uncommitted vote in Michigan's primary back in 2012 with Obama on the ballot? I don't think the 13% uncommitted in Michigan in 2024 is going to seriously hurt Biden in the general - I expect that the vast majority of those who voted uncommitted will vote for Biden over Trump in the general.

I hope you are correct.

7 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

But the Michigan primary didn’t do that, did it? It showed there’s a portion of the state’s electorate that are not happy but at the same time he won “bigly” w/ 80%+ of the votes. In fact, according to msnbc he won bigger than mango won the republican primary - by ~ 69%. 

And a sizable chunk of the highly localized demographic in Michigan (Muslim American Voters)(a tight margin swing state) either sitting out or switching to Trump could flip Michigan to Trump.  It creates the perception of “electoral opportunities” for Trump.  We don’t want that perception to exist.

Further, As @mormont points out there is also an electoral cost to Biden not offering support to Israel… even though I agree he should oppose Netanyahu’s Government actions in my earnest opinion.

[eta]

It could also give perceived weight to Trump’s inevitable lies about having “won” Michigan if he loses. 

1 minute ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

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

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

2 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

What I'm getting from Ty and Scot is that it's stupid and wrong to voice dissent with Joe Biden on anything

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.

1 minute ago, Maithanet said:

I'm actually pretty happy with the uncommitted vote movement in Michigan.  It demonstrates opposition to Biden on one key stance, and is done in such a way that doesn't hand power to Trump.  If I were in Michigan, I would have voted uncommitted and I'm sure my wife would have too (and we certainly would vote for him in November).  Primaries are meant to show the differences of opinion within the party, and they managed to do that in spite of an uncompetitive race.

Doesn’t hand power to Trump… yet.

5 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

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.

Politics is perception.  Always has been.  If Biden is perceived as weak in a swing State it hurts his chances in the general.  Further Michigan is somewhat unique in its demographics compared to the rest of the US… yes?

1 minute ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

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

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

Just now, Larry of the Lawn said:

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 voters.  

DNC brain!

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?