Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 6 Author Share Posted March 6 13 hours ago, Centrist Simon Steele said: Lol, that's a left-wing rabbit-hole? I used to be in the military--the number of servicemembers I saw acting like sociopaths, excited to hurt and kill is only rivaled by U.S. cops. So… some members of the US Miltary being assholes excuses this guy being an asshole? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darryk Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 I have no respect for anyone who celebrates the death of US servicemen. Phylum of Alexandria 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phylum of Alexandria Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 4 minutes ago, Darryk said: I have no respect for anyone who celebrates the death of US servicemen. Or civilians attending a concert. Dude was clearly deranged. Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartIheartTesla Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Trump continues to underperform his polls, and a lot of college town/suburban GoP primary voters are iffy on supporting him in November. The 'uncommitted' Dem voters also have stronger showings than expected. Big question is how they'll break in November or it they'll (finally, this cycle) vote third party. I still think the down-ticket votes will be better for Dems than expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Did the "Uncommitted" vote really see that kind of showing? Because I wasn't seeing it that way, but then, I'm only a voter commenting on a message board dedicated to a fantasy book series, so what do I know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 hours ago, Jaxom 1974 said: Did the "Uncommitted" vote really see that kind of showing? Because I wasn't seeing it that way, but then, I'm only a voter commenting on a message board dedicated to a fantasy book series, so what do I know? Well HuffPost is reporting that the uncommitted vote exceeded Michigans 13% in some states, Minnesota had 19% for instance. From the article- Its not just Michigan Just a week after proponents of a permanent cease-fire in Gaza got more than 100,000 Michiganders to cast ballots for “uncommitted” rather than for President Joe Biden, the movement pulled off a similarly impressive feat in Minnesota. With more than 95% of ballots counted, “uncommitted” had received nearly 46,000 votes in Minnesota’s Democratic presidential primary ― more than 19% of the total votes cast ― while Biden was leading with 171,000. Since Michigan is a bigger state, “uncommitted” actually got a smaller percentage of the vote there (13%) than in Minnesota. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makk Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Trump has met Elon Musk in a one on one meeting in Florida. If Trump suddenly stumps up with a 450 million bond for his legal troubles we will know where at least some of it came from. The big worry is that in return there is effectively policy for sale likely around unions which is a pretty sickening indictment on democracy. Not sure if Musk will go for this or not. He has had troubles with Trump in the past but has been very anti Biden and endorsed Ron De Santis after being apolitical earlier. I suspect he would stump up some cash if he thought Trump had a good chance of winning. kissdbyfire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 minutes ago, Makk said: The big worry is that in return there is effectively policy for sale likely around unions which is a pretty sickening indictment on democracy. While I have little doubt Trump has policy for sale, I have no idea what you mean by "most likely around unions"? There are some problems with rank and file idiots that are deluded enough to believe Republicans have something to offer, the majority of Internationals still understand that Trump is a wolf in sheeps clothing and is not a friend to Labor. A few renegade Unions not withstanding, weve rarely had 100% uniformity, but the majority of National leadership will still be funding Democrats, were not going to bail the Orange pos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartIheartTesla Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 3 hours ago, Jaxom 1974 said: Did the "Uncommitted" vote really see that kind of showing? Because I wasn't seeing it that way, but then, I'm only a voter commenting on a message board dedicated to a fantasy book series, so what do I know? They werent small numbers, and most of the campaigns for 'uncommitted were hastily put together and had modest targets (MI was expecting 10k and got 100k) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, Makk said: Not sure if Musk will go for this or not. He has had troubles with Trump in the past but has been very anti Biden No way of knowing whether it's true or not - though I tend to think it is. But I’ve seen a couple of interviews/pods where Kara Swisher was talking about her new book Burn Book and in itshe talks about fElon’s interactions & reactions with and to both Trump and Biden. She speaks of convos she’s had with Musk when he was sort of flirting w/ the idea that “maybe he’s not that bad” (or something) and after her advice against getting closer or whatever, Musk would have told her he would be able to guide or direct him or something along those lines. And Biden… this is actually quite funny and typical Musk btw, Musk started hating him b/c there was some big do at the WH for unionised electric car makers and Musk wasn’t invited and got infinitely butt hurt about it. Of course, Tesla is not unionised, so. But if true - and I don’t see her putting that in a book unless it is true - it’s hilarious and typical Musk behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quijote Light Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said: While I have little doubt Trump has policy for sale, I have no idea what you mean by "most likely around unions"? There are some problems with rank and file idiots that are deluded enough to believe Republicans have something to offer, the majority of Internationals still understand that Trump is a wolf in sheeps clothing and is not a friend to Labor. A few renegade Unions not withstanding, weve rarely had 100% uniformity, but the majority of National leadership will still be funding Democrats, were not going to bail the Orange pos. I’m pretty sure that they mean that the policies sold would be anti-union, which would benefit Musk. DireWolfSpirit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 5 hours ago, Darryk said: I have no respect for anyone who celebrates the death of US servicemen. How about celebrating the deaths of other countries' military personnel? Also bad if it's US's friends, but fine if it's rivals? When is it OK to celebrate a person's death and when is it not? Seems like the number of situations where celebrating peoples deaths is justified should be zero or somewhere close to it. I don't think soldiers are at all special in this regard. Veneration of military personnel of one's own country beyond what should be normal due regard and respect for all people is militaristic nationalism. I think that's a particularly bad kind of nationalism. Quijote Light, AncalagonTheBlack, kissdbyfire and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makk Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said: While I have little doubt Trump has policy for sale, I have no idea what you mean by "most likely around unions"? There are some problems with rank and file idiots that are deluded enough to believe Republicans have something to offer, the majority of Internationals still understand that Trump is a wolf in sheeps clothing and is not a friend to Labor. A few renegade Unions not withstanding, weve rarely had 100% uniformity, but the majority of National leadership will still be funding Democrats, were not going to bail the Orange pos. Maybe I should have said, "possibly around unions". I must admit to not having any real sort of grasp of US labour laws and whether trump could even deliver anything here but Musk has been complaining about trade unions for some time, he has been stung by them overseas, and workers at his various companies have started to unionise and lay legal complaints in more recent times. I think he would jump at any laws helping him out here Another possibility is that he is seeking to maintain the ability to sell cars directly to consumers rather than go through a third party dealership which I understand is required by law for all other manufacturers in many states. DireWolfSpirit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkerX Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 6 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said: Trump continues to underperform his polls, and a lot of college town/suburban GoP primary voters are iffy on supporting him in November. The 'uncommitted' Dem voters also have stronger showings than expected. Big question is how they'll break in November or it they'll (finally, this cycle) vote third party. I still think the down-ticket votes will be better for Dems than expected. I suspect that many of the polls showing the popularity of Trump's policies and his lead over Biden are manipulated - 'astroturfed somehow. This suspicion stems from increasing complaints about manipulated articles from legitimate news sources posted by Trump, plus the whole underperformance thing. Kalbear 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 4 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said: They werent small numbers, and most of the campaigns for 'uncommitted were hastily put together and had modest targets (MI was expecting 10k and got 100k) That was the only state with bigger numbers. Anything with Super Tuesday seemed generally small, particularly in proportion to the percentages Biden was getting otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 Minnesota had 19% uncommitted. I also heard somewhere they’re expecting a good turnout in WA. Oh, and Dean Phillips dropped out. https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/minnesota-uncommitted-vote-beats-dean-phillips-minnesota-primary/ Joe Biden 171,299 71% W Uncommitted 45,942 19% Dean Phillips 18,994 8% Marianne Williamson 3,487 1% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 51 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: What about offering apologia for the deaths of civilians murdered by ... at a [cultural event]? [Censored for compliance with rules, assuming they still stand] Justifying civilian deaths pretty much goes hand in hand with justifying the violent conflict of which it is a part. If someone believes the wider conflict justifies the use of violence then they will (if they are being honest) say civilian casualties are justified. So if you are prepared to say that deadly violence is a necessary action under [fill in the blanks] circumstances, then you ought to be prepared to offer apologia for killing civilians. And you can't just say it's justified by the side you support, because there are normally civilian casualties on all sides, so you have to allow that civilian deaths on the side you do support are also justified. You normally justify your own civilian deaths by saying there would be more if violent action was not taken, though that justification is only really legitimate on the part of the victim, since if the aggressor took no action presumably there's be no civilian deaths anywhere. A problem arises, of course, when everyone claims to be the victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 7 Author Share Posted March 7 (edited) 10 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: [Censored for compliance with rules, assuming they still stand] Justifying civilian deaths pretty much goes hand in hand with justifying the violent conflict of which it is a part. If someone believes the wider conflict justifies the use of violence then they will (if they are being honest) say civilian casualties are justified. So if you are prepared to say that deadly violence is a necessary action under [fill in the blanks] circumstances, then you ought to be prepared to offer apologia for killing civilians. And you can't just say it's justified by the side you support, because there are normally civilian casualties on all sides, so you have to allow that civilian deaths on the side you do support are also justified. You normally justify your own civilian deaths by saying there would be more if violent action was not taken, though that justification is only really legitimate on the part of the victim, since if the aggressor took no action presumably there's be no civilian deaths anywhere. A problem arises, of course, when everyone claims to be the victim. The state entity not being discussed is absolutely wrong when it targets or takes actions that increase civilian casualties. I hold the non-state actor to the same standards when it deliberately targets civilians for murder. Claiming X has no civilians… is way the fuck beyond the pale for me. Edited March 7 by Ser Scot A Ellison Jace, Extat 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karaddin Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 (edited) 6 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: What about offering apologia for the deaths of civilians murdered [at a cultural event]? Are you actually interested in understanding a potential rationale for what he said*, or is this point scoring in an argument? I don't agree with him on that so I'm not interested in defending it, but if the goal is understanding I can take a crack. *Was it ever confirmed those comments were definitely him? Edited March 7 by Ran Added asterisk bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 7 Author Share Posted March 7 1 hour ago, karaddin said: Are you actually interested in understanding a potential rationale for what he said*, or is this point scoring in an argument? I don't agree with him on that so I'm not interested in defending it, but if the goal is understanding I can take a crack. *Was it ever confirmed those comments were definitely him? Before I abandoned twitter several months ago I ran into far too many partisans for the non-state actor making that precise argument for me to be particularly skeptical of it. The non-state actor is really bad news and that doesn’t excuse the excesses of the State actor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts