Reny of Storms End Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 Katie Halper seems like a pretty shitty person based off of this. https://mobile.twitter.com/Lappos/status/1256798326554537984 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said: Why would anyone leak her Social Security Number? How would they get it? That she got death threats is no big surprise. A vegan who announced she had decided to eat some meat again got death threats. People who think you should be vaccinated get death threats. Government officials who contradict Trump get death threats. It's as American as apple pie. You're right, it is not at all surprising. Without wanting to put words in his mouth, I think what larry is getting at here with the term "Biden bros" is that a great deal was made of Bernie supporters supposedly being particularly aggressive online and especially likely to cross lines with things like doxxing, without any evidence supplied beyond anecdotes. The retort then was that every group has bad eggs, but only in the case of Bernie supporters were these incidents being used to slur a much a larger group. Now we have incidents of Biden supporters aggressively going after Tara Reade- as you say, unsurprisingly, and we can safely assume the same would be happening no matter who the accused candidate was- but no one seems eager to draw conclusions about Biden supporters as a group based off this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 57 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said: Biden Bros. Try harder. Quit being salty that the Jace Girls have all been rounded up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 46 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said: You're right, it is not at all surprising. Without wanting to put words in his mouth, I think what larry is getting at here with the term "Biden bros" is that a great deal was made of Bernie supporters supposedly being particularly aggressive online and especially likely to cross lines with things like doxxing, without any evidence supplied beyond anecdotes. The retort then was that every group has bad eggs, but only in the case of Bernie supporters were these incidents being used to slur a much a larger group. Now we have incidents of Biden supporters aggressively going after Tara Reade- as you say, unsurprisingly, and we can safely assume the same would be happening no matter who the accused candidate was- but no one seems eager to draw conclusions about Biden supporters as a group based off this. Yeah, 'cause we have a vested interest in defending Biden now... what, exactly, is the big reveal here? Are they still feeling bad for getting tarred and feathered? That tends to happen when you make yourself a direct opponent of an actual political organization in which people have accrued dependence. See, I'm a Democrat. I already have a label and it carries inherent meaning. So silly little nicknames are just silly little nicknames, and I ROFL at them. As one should react to silly little nicknames. However, I supposed if you don't have an actual unifying identity around which to standard yourselves, besides a short-sighted cult of personality figure, then mocking names for that figure and its devotees might strike a nerve... I wouldn't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 50 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said: You're right, it is not at all surprising. Without wanting to put words in his mouth, I think what larry is getting at here with the term "Biden bros" is that a great deal was made of Bernie supporters supposedly being particularly aggressive online and especially likely to cross lines with things like doxxing, without any evidence supplied beyond anecdotes. The retort then was that every group has bad eggs, but only in the case of Bernie supporters were these incidents being used to slur a much a larger group. Now we have incidents of Biden supporters aggressively going after Tara Reade- as you say, unsurprisingly, and we can safely assume the same would be happening no matter who the accusI still want to know about this social i candidate was- but no one seems eager to draw conclusions about Biden supporters as a group based off this. So you are saying that a reporterfor the Rolling Stone is therefore justified in posting what she did on twitter without providing any evidence? We're not talking about people in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 And just to comment on how lunatic the nation of the United States is, there’s a woman who attended the Military World Games in Wuhan in October who the US right wing dingbats have identified as ‘patient zero’ and the person the United States should collectively hate as THE person who brought Covid-19 to America. The military reservist competed in cycling. She has never tested positive for the virus but the conspiracy set insist that she has. You want to talk about hate and death threats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 50 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: So you are saying that a reporterfor the Rolling Stone is therefore justified in posting what she did on twitter without providing any evidence? We're not talking about people in this thread. She's likely going to be referenced again with regard to the Reade story because she's the one who interviewed Reade on her podcast last month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 53 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: So you are saying that a reporterfor the Rolling Stone is therefore justified in posting what she did on twitter without providing any evidence? We're not talking about people in this thread. I was only responding to your comment on how unsurprising the death threats are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 US Politics is a unique kind of blood sport. Politics is a blood sport everywhere, but the variety in the US, well, it’s own creature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 3 hours ago, Reny of Storms End said: Katie Halper seems like a pretty shitty person based off of this. https://mobile.t 3 hours ago, Reny of Storms End said: Katie Halper seems like a pretty shitty person based off of this. https://mobile.twitter.com/Lappos/status/1256798326554537984 witter.com/Lappos/status/1256798326554537984 Looks like this person made some criticisms and was then swamped with a bunch of attacks. This happens in this forum and on Twitter pretty much anytime you take a hard line on a divisive issue. I'm not sure what Halper did that was so wrong here? Engaging? The same thing happens if Soledad O'Brien responds to someone on Twitter, an army of people who support the big account respond. Did I miss something in the link you provided that shows Halper doing something wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 20 hours ago, mcbigski said: I kind of feel like if the left is going to abandon liberal as a title, I should reclaim it. Fits me better anyway. Well their are people on both the left and the right that largely reject liberalism. Can I ask, is your way, the only way do to liberalism. I consider myself largely influenced by the classic liberal tradition, but obviously I reject some of its suppositions, among them, obviously, some of its economic theorizing. Adam Smith, along with classical liberals, might have believed the free market or individuals acting in their own self interest will always lead to socially optimal outcomes, but they have really no robust model that makes that assertion remotely plausible. The one model they have makes so many heroic assumptions, that it isn't plausible in the real world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said: Adam Smith, along with classical liberals, might have believed the free market or individuals acting in their own self interest will always lead to socially optimal outcomes, Smith did not believe that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, Rippounet said: Smith did not believe that. Should have said, "People that invoke Smith's name". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 "Arguing with Zombies review: Paul Krugman trumps the Republicans The Nobel-winning economist and New York Times columnist is at the top of his game in eviscerating those who have dragged America down" https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/03/arguing-with-zombies-review-paul-krugman-trump-republicans Quote [....] Krugman also writes that “even asking the right questions like ‘what is happening to income inequality’” will spur quite a few conservatives to “denounce you as un-American”. And it’s worse for climate scientists, who face persecution for speaking the truth about our continued dependence on fossil fuels, or social scientists studying the causes of gun violence: “From 1996 to 2017 the Centers for Disease Control were literally forbidden to fund research into firearm injuries and deaths.” The history of the last half-century is mostly about how the unbridled greed of the top 1% has perverted American democracy so successfully, it has become almost impossible to implement rational policies that benefit a majority of Americans. To Krugman, an “interlocking network of media organizations and think tanks that serves the interests of rightwing billionaires” has “effectively taken over the GOP” and “movement ‘conservatism’ is what keeps zombie ideas, like belief in the magic of tax cuts, alive. “It’s not just that Trump has assembled an administration of the worst and the dimmest. The truth is that the modern GOP doesn’t want to hear from serious economists, whatever their politics. It prefers charlatans and cranks, who are its kind of people.” [....] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said: US Politics is a unique kind of blood sport. Politics is a blood sport everywhere, but the variety in the US, well, it’s own creature. Keep talking like this and Jace is going to run out of the crowd and frog splash you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centrist Simon Steele Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 6 hours ago, Martell Spy said: Congress Will Extend Unemployment Boost ‘Over Our Dead Bodies,’ Vows Lindsey Graham More than 30 million Americans have applied for unemployment since the coronavirus pandemic started. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lindsey-graham-dead-bodies-unemployment-benefits_n_5eadf270c5b659c79250384e I hear Graham's having some issues in polling suggesting he doesn't have nearly the strong base of support he had in 2014. I'm hoping this could be true for McConnell too, though I suppose that's less likely. I imagine, despite his consistent moves to hurt working people (if not destroy them), he is viewed as a hero of the right for the big news stories surrounding him such as Merrick Garland. Either way, at some point people have to see that these assholes are only hurting them and aren't even trying to hide it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reny of Storms End Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 1 hour ago, larrytheimp said: Looks like this person made some criticisms and was then swamped with a bunch of attacks. This happens in this forum and on Twitter pretty much anytime you take a hard line on a divisive issue. I'm not sure what Halper did that was so wrong here? Engaging? The same thing happens if Soledad O'Brien responds to someone on Twitter, an army of people who support the big account respond. Did I miss something in the link you provided that shows Halper doing something wrong? I guess this could just be a matter of opinion, but I'm assuming Katie Halper would know the proper etiquette for tweeting and responding to tweets. From what I linked this appears to be the problem, and what has driven the negative response towards the person. In their own words "Instead of tweeting directly to me, she targeted me. She posted a second Tweet to me without tagging me as if I were unresponsive" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 3 minutes ago, Reny of Storms End said: I guess this could just be a matter of opinion, but I'm assuming Katie Halper would know the proper etiquette for tweeting and responding to tweets. From what I linked this appears to be the problem, and what has driven the negative response towards the person. In their own words "Instead of tweeting directly to me, she targeted me. She posted a second Tweet to me without tagging me as if I were unresponsive" Yeah that's why I'm confused? She (Halper) didn't tag her, if she tagged her she would have had a notification for any response to the main tweet. As far as I know that's exactly what a big account is supposed to do in response to a smaller one if they're being critical, don't @ the person. How can you target someone without directly tweeting (@ing) them? Eta:not tagging is the same as not targeting? No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 17 minutes ago, Simon Steele said: I hear Graham's having some issues in polling suggesting he doesn't have nearly the strong base of support he had in 2014. I'm hoping this could be true for McConnell too, though I suppose that's less likely. For the moment I'd put McConnell's seat significantly more poachable than Graham's. Both have fairly strong Dem challengers - Amy McGrath for McConnell and Jaime Harrison for Graham. As for losing support from the base, neither appears to have attracted a quality primary challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reny of Storms End Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 36 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: Yeah that's why I'm confused? She (Halper) didn't tag her, if she tagged her she would have had a notification for any response to the main tweet. As far as I know that's exactly what a big account is supposed to do in response to a smaller one if they're being critical, don't @ the person. How can you target someone without directly tweeting (@ing) them? Eta:not tagging is the same as not targeting? No? By quote tweeting instead of @ing the original tweeter she (Halper) magnified her initial tweets spread by making it show up on her tweets page, which is viewed by more people than someone's replies, which show up under tweets and replies. So had Halper wanted to actually discuss anything the appropriate move would have been a direct reply to the original tweet, which again would be seen by less people. ETA: If I'm wrong in this then I apologize, but that's my understanding of how one should respond to tweets. ETA2: Sorry for focusing on twitter etiquette as opposed to US politics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.