2024 Election Discussion General

[What Am I]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

What would it look like to meet them where they are? 

Also, were things really moving too quickly? The right-wing propaganda machine makes people think kids are getting sex changes in the basement of schools, but that's not happening, even if daddy Trump says so. It's just not true. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of verifiable falsehoods that come out of the right, just this election cycle and they all go on believing it even when the record is set straight. Joe Rogan said there was a school who put a kitty litter box out for a girl who identified as a cat to take a shit in but the school said that most certainly did not happen. I just saw a popular spiritual guru who fell victim to the propaganda, telling a huge audience that liberals in California and Michigan made it so you can't arrest people for shoplifting anything under $1,000.  Do you know how many people believe all this false shit that is intentionally designed to mislead them into hating the left so they'll vote right? 

How in the fuck can that be met where it is?

I wonder if there's kernels of truth in each of those examples.

Sex changes for children may not be as prevalent as they're portrayed, and they're probably not happening in basements. But could it be the case that they were universally promoted an excessive amount, and the desire to display the behavior became a social contagion of sorts? It's my understanding that Europe is beginning to acknowledge the overshoot and roll back some of their policies.

Joe Rogan did mention the kitty litter thing, and it's my understanding that's not strictly true. But my niece and nephew tell me about their experience in school, and it would be accurate to say things have drastically changed since you and I were there. Many kids have strange idiosyncracies that would have been considered aberrant behavior in the past. Maybe not so far as pooping in kitty litter, but strange nonetheless. This is my weakest example, so you can ignore it if anecdote isn't valued, which would be fair.

In California, it's my understanding that what was previously a felony (stealing $950+ in total value) was dropped to a misdemeanor in 2014. I suppose if we're purely fact-checking the claim that it's now legal to steal that amount, then the claim would fail. But I think we'd have a difficult time arguing that theft in general hasn't taken an unfortunate turn, with some stores in California keeping much of their wares behind locked enclosures, and others closing down entirely, citing large increases in theft as the reason.

So I guess meeting people where they are would be to acknowledge those kernels of truth instead of calling their observances ridiculous. Their claims may sometimes be hyperbolic and imprecise, but they're not always based on pure fantasy.

Edited Monday at 02:36 AM by What Am I

[Jodistrict]

56 minutes ago, Joshe said:

What would it look like to meet them where they are? 

Also, were things really moving too quickly? The right-wing propaganda machine makes people think kids are getting sex changes in the basement of schools, but that's not happening, even if daddy Trump says so. It's just not true. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of verifiable falsehoods that come out of the right, just this election cycle and they all go on believing it even when the record is set straight. Joe Rogan said there was a school who put a kitty litter box out for a girl who identified as a cat to take a shit in but the school said that most certainly did not happen. I just saw a popular spiritual guru who fell victim to the propaganda, telling a huge audience that liberals in California and Michigan made it so you can't arrest people for shoplifting anything under $1,000.  Do you know how many people believe all this false shit that is intentionally designed to mislead them into hating the left so they'll vote right? 

How in the fuck can that be met where it is? 

 

Vons in California.   Please ask for assistance if you would like to purchase a 2lb cheese chunk.  Thank you management.

 

[What Am I]

This is more the kind of thing I had in mind for the California example.

[Buck Edwards]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

What would it look like to meet them where they are? 

Also, were things really moving too quickly? The right-wing propaganda machine makes people think kids are getting sex changes in the basement of schools, but that's not happening, even if daddy Trump says so. It's just not true. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of verifiable falsehoods that come out of the right, just this election cycle and they all go on believing it even when the record is set straight. Joe Rogan said there was a school who put a kitty litter box out for a girl who identified as a cat to take a shit in but the school said that most certainly did not happen. I just saw a popular spiritual guru who fell victim to the propaganda, telling a huge audience that liberals in California and Michigan made it so you can't arrest people for shoplifting anything under $1,000.  Do you know how many people believe all this false shit that is intentionally designed to mislead them into hating the left so they'll vote right? 

How in the fuck can that be met where it is? 

 

True. 

 

[lostingenosmaze]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

What would it look like to meet them where they are? 

Also, were things really moving too quickly? The right-wing propaganda machine makes people think kids are getting sex changes in the basement of schools, but that's not happening, even if daddy Trump says so. It's just not true. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of verifiable falsehoods that come out of the right, just this election cycle and they all go on believing it even when the record is set straight. Joe Rogan said there was a school who put a kitty litter box out for a girl who identified as a cat to take a shit in but the school said that most certainly did not happen. I just saw a popular spiritual guru who fell victim to the propaganda, telling a huge audience that liberals in California and Michigan made it so you can't arrest people for shoplifting anything under $1,000.  Do you know how many people believe all this false shit that is intentionally designed to mislead them into hating the left so they'll vote right? 

How in the fuck can that be met where it is? 

Huh...

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, What Am I said:

I wonder if there's kernels of truth in each of those examples.

Sex changes for children may not be as prevalent as they're portrayed, and they're probably not happening in basements. But could it be the case that they were universally promoted an excessive amount, and the desire to display the behavior became a social contagion of sorts? It's my understanding that Europe is beginning to acknowledge the overshoot and roll back some of their policies.

Joe Rogan did mention the kitty litter thing, and it's my understanding that's not strictly true. But my niece and nephew tell me about their experience in school, and it would be accurate to say things have drastically changed since you and I were there. Many kids have strange idiosyncracies that would have been considered aberrant behavior in the past. Maybe not so far as pooping in kitty litter, but strange nonetheless.

In California, it's my understanding that what was previously a felony (stealing $950+ in total value) was dropped to a misdemeanor in 2014. I suppose if we're purely fact-checking the claim that it's now legal to steal that amount, then the claim would fail. But I think we'd have a difficult time arguing that theft in general hasn't taken an unfortunate turn, with some stores in California keeping all their wares behind locked enclosures, and others closing down entirely, citing large increases in theft as the reason.

So I guess meeting people where they are would be to acknowledge those kernels of truth instead of calling their observances ridiculous. Their claims may sometimes be hyperbolic and imprecise, but they're not always based on pure fantasy.

They're not talking about "kernels of truth". They're calling things that are absolutely false, true, and vice versa, and it's not just here and there, it's all the time. The main issue is not with conservatism or their values. It's the population believing falsehoods, which are intentionally put out so they'll vote red. That's the problem. If the right would come in good-faith without lies and deceptive propaganda, only then can we have productive conversations and meet people where they are. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, there will be no compromise or meeting people where they are if where they are is a place that calls true false and false true. 

It's interesting how you sweep all their devilry right under the rug. Do you understand propaganda? You understand that the way it works is via kernels of truth, right? 

Edited Monday at 02:45 AM by Joshe

[Joshe]

15 minutes ago, lostingenosmaze said:

Huh...

I'll try to write better next time. Thanks for the feedback. 

[lostingenosmaze]

@Joshe That was more me being peeved at quoting entire posts only to let people know you read it with one word replies and cheekily mimicking it to raise their self-awareness, don't mind me

[What Am I]

10 minutes ago, Joshe said:

They're not talking about "kernels of truth". They're calling things that are absolutely false, true, and vice versa, and it's not just here and there, it's all the time. The main issue is not with conservatism or their values. It's the population believing falsehoods, which are intentionally put out so they'll vote red. That's the problem. If the right would come in good-faith without lies and deceptive propaganda, only then can we have productive conversations and meet people where they are. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, there will be no compromise or meeting people where they are if where they are is a place that calls true false and false true. 

It's interesting how you sweep all their devilry right under the rug. Do you understand propaganda? You understand that the way it works is via kernels of truth, right? 

I'm guessing we're talking about the propagandists' devilry? Or is the blame being put on the people themselves?

I think it'd be an accurate read to say there's moderate issues that are being blown up and exaggerated into major issues by propagandists. We can be upset at the propagandists for making a bigger deal than is deserved, but there's still an underlying reality of issues that ends up going unaddressed, and the peoples' concerns become denied outright.

It's those kernels of truth where I think the left can find legitimate areas to improve. If the propagandists have no ammo, it'd be much more difficult for them to spin their tales.

But I can't serve as some kind of moderator for both sides forever, lol. It's fair if you have no desire to give that kind of ground, especially when you feel it's not reciprocated. A lot of bad blood has been building up for a while now.

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, What Am I said:

I'm guessing we're talking about the propagandists' devilry? Or is the blame being put on the people themselves?

To solve a problem you have to know what causes it. That’s the purpose of identifying it. Not to assign blame. The deception will continue until the people wise up to it. If they can’t discern truth from falsehood, they’ll continue being deceived. 

Again, I’m not on the left. What I meant was I’m not gonna cater to people who reject verifiable facts and cling to falsehood. It’s their responsibility to drop their delusions, not mine.

Of all our problems, many on the right think men in women’s sports is at the top of the list. Sure, that’s messed up, but it’s not widespread and it’s not at the top of the problem list, but they think it’s more important than healthcare. There’s no meeting foolishness where it is. It wouldn’t listen even if you did. 

Edited Monday at 04:24 AM by Joshe

[What Am I]

10 minutes ago, Joshe said:

To solve a problem you have to know what causes it. That’s the purpose of identifying it. Not to assign blame. The deception will continue until the people wise up to it. If they can’t discern truth from falsehood, they’ll continue being deceived. 

Again, I’m not on the left. What I meant was I’m not gonna cater to people who reject verifiable facts and cling to falsehood. It’s their responsibility to drop their delusions, not mine.

Of all our problems, many on the right think men in women’s sports is at the top of the list. Sure, that’s messed up, but it’s not widespread and it’s not at the top of the problem list, but they think it’s more important than healthcare. There’s no meeting foolishness where it is. It wouldn’t listen even if you did. 

You probably have a point in terms of susceptibility to foolishness. I think a large number of people operate from that impulse-driven, predictable state that we discussed earlier. Focused exercises in consciousness would expand their awareness enough for it to rise above the conditioning. If only it was widely known that such a thing is possible.

[Joshe]

18 minutes ago, What Am I said:

You probably have a point in terms of susceptibility to foolishness. I think a large number of people operate from that impulse-driven, predictable state that we discussed earlier. Focused exercises in consciousness would expand their awareness enough for it to rise above the conditioning. If only it was widely known that such a thing is possible.

Haha, yeah, in our dreams. 😆 

[zurew]

9 hours ago, zazen said:

I shared more in depth posts I’ve made regarding the macro phenomenon of this election - you can engage with that if you want as it’s more interesting than the details - but you haven’t.

Good dodge - do you have any response to the things I brought up, or your sole purpose on this forum not to deliver substance , but to just create suspicion and then right after that run away, because you don't like being pressed on things?

This is sounds like a dodge, where you dont want to get into any specifics, because its easier to make vague generalizations about problems and ideological narratives, but when you need to ground them in facts, you suddenly have an issue.

I have read some of your posts about the election and most of them seem to show again that you are either unaware of some facts or you are making arguments that you cant substantiate, but they surely feel good for you. For example, with respect to the I/P conflict -  if you would have read any article about Trump and not just twitter posts from people, you would have realized that Trump is a more hardcore Israel supporter than Harris . 

Your posts about liberal rhetoric being the cause for the assisination attempt is also a good one, but you have 0 way to susbtantiate it, it  just feels good for you. You are completely clueless about the rhetoric on the right and you are probably completely clueless about Trump's cases and about what was the issue on jan6. Again just to be clear - your position is that you vote for a President who tried to overthrow the government on jan 6 and for one who after all 60+ lawsuits still believes that the 2020 election was stolen from him (even after 4 years). Just on that fact, going with the assumption that you give a single fuck about democracy you shouldn't have voted for Trump. But again, its not a surprise for me that you don't hold democracy as valuable in principle, which is a position you can take, but then say it with your chest and start with "I dont care about democracy".

What is the argument that Trump is going to be better at handling the wars?

What is the argument that Trump is going to be better for the economy?

Give me a single argument thats grounded in facts that establish for a particular issue why Trump is better.

[Nemra]

 

[zazen]

11 hours ago, zurew said:

Don't pretend that you need to create a courtcase. What I said was, I would expect more from people here than simple shit-sirring. A literal kid can do that , anyone can generate suspicion, its much harder to actually present a case where there is something tangible there and then after that its even harder to present a solution.

And To be clear, you are not just bringing up news to discuss, you are bringing heavily loaded tweets and accusations - those things are not the same.

Lets see some specific cases of that.

I hope you won't rely on RFK jr-s claims, becuase his claims (the ones that I  checked) , they were completely unfounded and RFK jr was unable to properly compherend the paper he was reading. That dude is the last person I would rely on when it comes to health claims.

I wont even grant this, so I want you to bring evidence for that claim, but even after you bringing evidence lets make it clear , that from conflict of interest doesn't follow that there will necessary  be corruption and then even after you can make a case for corruption - from corruption doesn't follow that everything goes. 

There is a underlying implication there about there being 0 checks and balances - which if you want to claim, I would expect you to make a case for it.

Your speaking in a hostile tone and wonder why I don't prioritise responding to you. I responded to Hundreth on the previous page because me and him have had good discussions, even heated ones before but in good faith. We were never rude to each other - claiming the other made stupid points, or accusing the other of shit stirring or comparing the other to a kid.  You on the other hand are coming at me in a condescending way making assumptions of intent - I mirror back what I get so if I'm being snappy back that's on you.

It's a general discussion thread as the title suggests, I don't have to bring breaking news. The topic is a loaded one, if people are triggered that's not my problem - all I suggested was people look at various media platforms to see opposing views to not be blindsided by a media machine that has a specific narrative it disseminates. It doesn't mean being totally anti-establishment, but establishment wary. People are in full panic mode and breaking down over the election, so its important to maybe see the other sides viewpoints as to avoid the hysteria which seems to be affecting you also.

Your saying lets not pretend we need a courtcase to discuss the topic, then demand I bring forward evidence as if I'm in one lol  ''I want you to bring evidence for that claim''. Geeking out over details to the point we derail the thread. If your implying that pointing out conflicts of interest is somehow dishonest or manipulative maybe your the one dodging. I'm not here to spoon feed  every stat and citation because the basic premise is clear - that conflict of interest is a concern as it can influence things for the worse. Of course it doesn't always mean corruption, but that doesn't mean dismissing being wary of it and calling some one a shit poster for sharing information on it. https://www.oal-law.com/blog/5-largest-pharmaceutical-lawsuits/#:~:text=GlaxoSmithKline%2C LLC pled guilty for,%24956.8 million for criminal fines.

 

[zurew]

3 minutes ago, zazen said:

 Of course it doesn't always mean corruption, but that doesn't mean dismissing being wary of it and calling some one a shit poster for sharing information on it.

So to be clear, there was no underlying implication in that tweet and in your post that there is corruption the only thing you wanted to say is that there is an issue with conflict of interest and nothing more, right?

This is why I call you dishonest.

Edited Monday at 12:17 PM by zurew

[zazen]

4 hours ago, zurew said:

Good dodge - do you have any response to the things I brought up, or your sole purpose on this forum not to deliver substance , but to just create suspicion and then right after that run away, because you don't like being pressed on things?

This is sounds like a dodge, where you dont want to get into any specifics, because its easier to make vague generalizations about problems and ideological narratives, but when you need to ground them in facts, you suddenly have an issue.

I have read some of your posts about the election and most of them seem to show again that you are either unaware of some facts or you are making arguments that you cant substantiate, but they surely feel good for you. For example, with respect to the I/P conflict -  if you would have read any article about Trump and not just twitter posts from people, you would have realized that Trump is a more hardcore Israel supporter than Harris . 

Your posts about liberal rhetoric being the cause for the assisination attempt is also a good one, but you have 0 way to susbtantiate it, it  just feels good for you. You are completely clueless about the rhetoric on the right and you are probably completely clueless about Trump's cases and about what was the issue on jan6. Again just to be clear - your position is that you vote for a President who tried to overthrow the government on jan 6 and for one who after all 60+ lawsuits still believes that the 2020 election was stolen from him (even after 4 years). Just on that fact, going with the assumption that you give a single fuck about democracy you shouldn't have voted for Trump. But again, its not a surprise for me that you don't hold democracy as valuable in principle, which is a position you can take, but then say it with your chest and start with "I dont care about democracy".

What is the argument that Trump is going to be better at handling the wars?

What is the argument that Trump is going to be better for the economy?

Give me a single argument thats grounded in facts that establish for a particular issue why Trump is better.

You seem to think because someone is showing preference for one party over another, that they must then take on all of that parties positions (ie on Israel) including approval of the actions taken by its leader. Things aren't that black and white. I've criticized Trump and know he's flawed, like most of all politicians, and no single party can tick all the boxes unless your ideological and tribal. 

Language plays a powerful role in shaping public sentiment, and that's not exclusive to one side of the political spectrum. You’d agree that words matter when discussing right-wing rhetoric, so why dismiss the influence of inflammatory language on the left? When people are told someone is Hitler and tap into historic anxieties of some of the worst crimes what can we expect. 

I posted on 4th of November which I shared with you two pages back where you can see me being critical and not blindly supporting Trump. Some parts of it:

''We have to look very clearly and not get lost in personalities and popcorn politics that each sides fringes inflame. It's about which mental framework (of each party) is more conducive to a productive society, and which stifles it. Trump printed a lot of money in his term, and made plenty of mistakes - this time around I believe he has wiser minds around him who want to change a status quo that simply isn't working for enough people who are betting on change, even if it means they invite a chance of some chaos.''

''Trumps politics isn't a blueprint for the long term, he's more of a antibiotic to the current swinging of America into a state of unhealthiness. He can't be the lifestyle, neither can the extremist MAGA supporters be the base for the longevity of America. But imo, its a much needed correction to get back on course - the danger is in over-correction. If the Democrats could auto-correct themselves, things would have been fine, but the ideological capture of leftism prevents that - and it has seeped into the institutions which require deep work. This is the enemy within.''

''People are responding to conditions that transcend national boundaries, because bipartisan neoliberalism transcends boundaries to serve a transnational elite class of vultures - it hasn't worked well enough, for enough people. Young people are locked out of a housing market they're parents easily entered, student debt and health care costs are high, stagnant wages, the 2008 housing crash followed by bank bail outs, lies about war after war, poll after poll showing trust in institutions were already in the basement before Trump ever came https://news.gallup.com/poll/1597/confidence-institutions.aspx

Trump didn't create a crises of legitimacy. Western institutions have long nuked their credibility before his cheeky grin rode down that gold escalator in Trump tower, and their burying the remains of it in the rubble of Gaza. Demagogues don't create the conditions they exploit.''

And from Hundreth on the previous page:

''He isn’t easily controllable, nor is he wise - but he has street smarts to deal with nonsense. If he has a council of wiser people around him to direct and rein him in, he’s the perfect vessel to spearhead change. He’s good at leadership, but not a good leader. Read that again, it’s key. This is why this time around with who he has around, ex-Dems and independents who are politically homeless are re-aligning and aligning with what they see as a chance on change, though not a guarantee.

In general, the Dems are the institutional elite whilst the Republicans are made up of individual elites. Different factions of the elite, what Chris Hedges calls the civil war of the elites. Now if the status quo isn’t working, and hasn’t been for long enough causing populism to rise across much of the world - is change more likely to come through institutions and a establishment representing a neoliberal world order - held back by inertia, weighed down by a sprawling bureaucracy and maintained through ideological capture. Or individuals who have the will, charisma and now the perceived competence to make changes. It’s the machine vs the mavericks and misfits.

A lot of Trumpers have excessively high expectations for what will happen, they may be disappointed but we’ll see. There are much larger cycles of economics and geopolitics that no candidate or party can undo - we move through cycles like waves - but that doesn’t mean we can’t tweak how that wave is surfed upon for the better or the worse.''

[zurew]

18 minutes ago, zazen said:

 https://www.oal-law.com/blog/5-largest-pharmaceutical-lawsuits/#:~:text=GlaxoSmithKline%2C LLC pled guilty for,%24956.8 million for criminal fines.

Some of these don't even take issue with the FDA in fact some of them says they werent FDA approved. It seems that you havent even read your own link that your probably randomly grabbed from google. I will read into the details of some of these cases, since you don't want to waste time with engaging with and reading up on "useless" details , details that determine the severity of these cases and details that outline what was the underlying issue.

Do you think any of those cases that is listed there would have been dodged if there would have not been any conflict of interest , the one that RFK jr tries to solve right now? If thats the case, then make the connection how each of those cases were directly related to that issue.

[zurew]

3 minutes ago, zazen said:

You seem to think because someone is showing preference for one party over another, that they must then take on all of that parties positions (ie on Israel) including approval of the actions taken by its leader. Things aren't that black and white. I've criticized Trump and know he's flawed, like most of all politicians, and no single party can tick all the boxes unless your ideological and tribal.

I know your position on the I/P conflict and I know you have a lot of issues with Israel thats why it was weird to see that you were trying to argue in favor of Trump in the context of the I/P issue. I know that you don't necessarily need to approve of all the things Trump plans to do, but again you specifically tried to make a case for Trump being better for the I/P issue, which doesn't make any sense to me if you have issues with Israel.

Whats your response to the fact that he tried to overthrow the government on jan6 and that he still denies the results of the 2020 election. How much weight those two things have for you?

[zazen]

26 minutes ago, zurew said:

So to be clear, there was no underlying implication in that tweet and in your post that there is corruption the only thing you wanted to say is that there is an issue with conflict of interest and nothing more, right?

This is why I call you dishonest.

Does someone have to spell things out every time they share something? I didn't realize there was a revolving door between the FDA and pharma to that degree - which is why I said it's a good idea to be on X where you can come across that kind of information which we wouldn't get from the mainstream. With your lofty high standards of requiring a case to be made with substantial evidence and explanations for the intent of sharing things we could accuse anyone of being dishonest and causing suspicion. Its just a forum, let’s keep it lighthearted.

Edited Monday at 12:44 PM by zazen