|
|
Post by Hordini on Nov 7, 2024 13:56:26 GMT -5
You can certainly make the argument that it's mainstream, but that doesn't make it acceptable. I absolutely agree that it shouldn't be acceptable, but according to US voters, it is now.
There are still a lot of US voters who don't consider it acceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by herzlos on Nov 7, 2024 13:57:34 GMT -5
Here's Harris's concession speech: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/06/harris-concession-speech-transcriptWith this poignant bit: "The important thing is, don’t ever give up. Don’t ever give up. Don’t ever stop trying to make the world a better place. You have power. You have power. And don’t you ever listen when anyone tells you something is impossible because it has never been done before. You have the capacity to do extraordinary good in the world." "And so to everyone who is watching, do not despair. This is not a time to throw up our hands. This is a time to roll up our sleeves." Still so much more of a leader than Trump will ever be. It's such a shame. It reminds me about a couple of discworld quotes I'm struggling to piece together. Something about hope picking herself off the ground, spitting out a tooth and preparing for another round. And how you can harness anger to do good. I think from Tiffany and Weatherwax, but google is failing me. |
|
|
|
Post by herzlos on Nov 7, 2024 13:58:39 GMT -5
I absolutely agree that it shouldn't be acceptable, but according to US voters, it is now.
There are still a lot of US voters who don't consider it acceptable. But seemingly more who do. It's a binary system even if the result is 51/49. You're a nation of bigots now  |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Nov 7, 2024 13:59:38 GMT -5
Oh, the neighborhood pedo comes back. , why is he even still here? Based on how he's been treated over the years, I really don't know. Maybe we all need some thicker skin. |
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Nov 7, 2024 14:11:16 GMT -5
Since my previous request seems to have gotten lost in the charming discourse:
if Trump's border policy was what held down immigrant crossings at the border:
a) why were Trump's numbers on the same level as Obama's during the last part of the latter administration? Shouldn't there have been a visible difference between the two rather than just a continuation of the same trend if Trump's policies made such a difference?
b) why did the skyrocketing trend start in 2018, two years before Biden was even elected, if Trump's policies were "working"? Why should we attribute the continuing increase that began in 2018, with a dip in 2019 before continuing the sharp increase in 2020, to changes in policy rather than external factors?
|
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Nov 7, 2024 14:16:39 GMT -5
Hordini, why is he even still here? Based on how he's been treated over the years, I really don't know. Maybe we all need some thicker skin. Whembly is treated the way he is because of literal years of just ignoring and spurning any attempts to engage with him on a level of reality. His constant regurgitation of the exact same arguments, presented without any evidence or support, that had been examined and debunked, with evidence and support, ad nauseum. At a certain point you realise it is pointless. He doesn't want to understand or discuss policy, he only wants to share sound bites and try and dunk on the other team. For example, look at his response about how he voted for Trump after Biden ended the Trump border policies. Nowhere did he actually say what border policies were ended, or how those border policies would supposedly actually have any impact on the issue he claims to care about, that being drug smuggling. Trump's two biggest border policies were the wall, and child separation. Neither of these policies would have any impact on the smuggling of drugs, as they are not targeted at drug smugglers. In fact, the child separation policy negatively impacted the ability for border police to tackle drug smuggling (and human trafficking) because all their resources were now tied up in arresting families and taking children away. US Attorneys said this, US judges said this, HHS and ORR staff said this. Under oath, in front of Congress, when the shit show hit the fan and was investigated. |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Nov 7, 2024 14:17:49 GMT -5
There are still a lot of US voters who don't consider it acceptable. But seemingly more who do. It's a binary system even if the result is 51/49. You're a nation of bigots now It's not a binary system and we're not a nation of bigots now, just as we weren't a nation of tolerant open-minded thinkers prior to Tuesday. It's much more complex than that, we have elements all across the spectrum, and we have to find a way to deal with that and improve the current state of affairs. It hasn't even been a week. Cynicism is a form of cowardice - let's not allow it to overwhelm us. |
|
skyth
OT Cowboy
Posts: 487
|
Post by skyth on Nov 7, 2024 14:23:27 GMT -5
Based on how he's been treated over the years, I really don't know. Maybe we all need some thicker skin. Whembly is treated the way he is because of literal years of just ignoring and spurning any attempts to engage with him on a level of reality. His constant regurgitation of the exact same arguments, presented without any evidence or support, that had been examined and debunked, with evidence and support, ad nauseum. At a certain point you realise it is pointless. He doesn't want to understand or discuss policy, he only wants to share sound bites and try and dunk on the other team. For example, look at his response about how he voted for Trump after Biden ended the Trump border policies. Nowhere did he actually say what border policies were ended, or how those border policies would supposedly actually have any impact on the issue he claims to care about, that being drug smuggling. Trump's two biggest border policies were the wall, and child separation. Neither of these policies would have any impact on the smuggling of drugs, as they are not targeted at drug smugglers. In fact, the child separation policy negatively impacted the ability for border police to tackle drug smuggling (and human trafficking) because all their resources were now tied up in arresting families and taking children away. US Attorneys said this, US judges said this, HHS and ORR staff said this. Under oath, in front of Congress, when the shit show hit the fan and was investigated. Thank you for putting what I was going to say in a much better way than I would have been able to. |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Nov 7, 2024 14:25:06 GMT -5
Based on how he's been treated over the years, I really don't know. Maybe we all need some thicker skin. Whembly is treated the way he is because of literal years of just ignoring and spurning any attempts to engage with him on a level of reality. His constant regurgitation of the exact same arguments, presented without any evidence or support, that had been examined and debunked, with evidence and support, ad nauseum. At a certain point you realise it is pointless. He doesn't want to understand or discuss policy, he only wants to share sound bites and try and dunk on the other team. For example, look at his response about how he voted for Trump after Biden ended the Trump border policies. Nowhere did he actually say what border policies were ended, or how those border policies would supposedly actually have any impact on the issue he claims to care about, that being drug smuggling. Trump's two biggest border policies were the wall, and child separation. Neither of these policies would have any impact on the smuggling of drugs, as they are not targeted at drug smugglers. In fact, the child separation policy negatively impacted the ability for border police to tackle drug smuggling (and human trafficking) because all their resources were now tied up in arresting families and taking children away. US Attorneys said this, US judges said this, HHS and ORR staff said this. Under oath, in front of Congress, when the shit show hit the fan and was investigated. Okay. I understand all that. Now what? Are you saying he's been treated that way because he deserves it? Do you want me to ban him because he's not good enough at arguing? |
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Nov 7, 2024 14:36:37 GMT -5
Okay. I understand all that. Now what? Are you saying he's been treated that way because he deserves it? Do you want me to ban him because he's not good enough at arguing? It's not a case of him not being good enough, I have no idea how good he is because I haven't ever seen him try. We've seen him post a page of links that debunked his own argument and pretend that they supported it. Many people spent real time and effort researching their responses to Whembly. People like Sebster who was always respectful and polite in those politics threads on Dakka back in the day. In return, that effort was just ignored and Whembly would repeat the exact same soundbite a page later, with no response to the arguments presented against it the first time. |
|
skyth
OT Cowboy
Posts: 487
|
Post by skyth on Nov 7, 2024 14:39:49 GMT -5
There's a difference between 'not good enough at arguing' and 'intentionally arguing in bad faith with the intent to derail the conversation'. At a certain point, in order to have a discussion you have to have all parties discussing things in good faith. Whembly has constantly demonstrated that he is unwilling to do that.
Not to mention the constant posts that are nothing but personal attacks that derail the existing conversation. It's like having a screaming toddler inside a nice restaurant...
|
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Nov 7, 2024 14:43:19 GMT -5
Okay. I understand all that. Now what? Are you saying he's been treated that way because he deserves it? Do you want me to ban him because he's not good enough at arguing? It's not a case of him not being good enough, I have no idea how good he is because I haven't ever seen him try. We've seen him post a page of links that debunked his own argument and pretend that they supported it. Many people spent real time and effort researching their responses to Whembly. People like Sebster who was always respectful and polite in those politics threads on Dakka back in the day. In return, that effort was just ignored and Whembly would repeat the exact same soundbite a page later, with no response to the arguments presented against it the first time. I've seen the threads as well and I understand and am sympathetic to the frustration. That being the case, why continue to engage with him? Why the dogpiling? Does that approach seem to have been effective after all these years? And what now? |
|
skyth
OT Cowboy
Posts: 487
|
Post by skyth on Nov 7, 2024 14:48:10 GMT -5
I do generally ignore and just hit the report button when I think it's warranted. However, the issue with ignoring the bad faith arguments is that the objective isn't to convince the person you're arguing against, but rather the other people reading the arguments. Letting the bad-faith arguments stand uncontested lends validity to them. But it's exhausting to constantly refute them...thus the Gish-gallop style of debating and why bad-faith actors use it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Nov 7, 2024 14:48:17 GMT -5
There's a difference between 'not good enough at arguing' and 'intentionally arguing in bad faith with the intent to derail the conversation'. At a certain point, in order to have a discussion you have to have all parties discussing things in good faith. Whembly has constantly demonstrated that he is unwilling to do that. Not to mention the constant posts that are nothing but personal attacks that derail the existing conversation. It's like having a screaming toddler inside a nice restaurant... I agree, but "bad faith" gets tossed around a lot here to dismiss arguments that some dislike or have an issue with. And I agree that the personal attacks derail the conversation, but this years-long cycle didn't start that way, and whembly is far from the only one to engage in personal attacks on a regular basis. |
|
|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 14:52:09 GMT -5
There are still a lot of US voters who don't consider it acceptable. But seemingly more who do. It's a binary system even if the result is 51/49. You're a nation of bigots now Trump got record number of non-white voters. Strange to presume their votes are based on bigot principles.... |
|
