What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Status
Not open for further replies.
dxmnkd316 said:
That’s an incredibly lame argument.
Click to expand...

That is because he has no real argument. He wants it to be true so badly he ignores facts, math and even logic. Bernie couldn't have lost legitimately because that would go against everything he says all the time. (especially about the "center")

He is basically just playing the Trump game only we think unlike GOPers so we can see fact from fantasy. That is why only Trix and the Left version of Flaggy buy it :D
 
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Uncomfortable and inconveniently, They were able to rig it against Bernie in over fifty separate races across a broad demo but They were powerless against an inept and almost criminally understaffed Trump.

Right...
 
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Handyman said:
That is because he has no real argument. He wants it to be true so badly he ignores facts, math and even logic. Bernie couldn't have lost legitimately because that would go against everything he says all the time. (especially about the "center")
Click to expand...

Again, this is not what I am saying. What I am saying ought to be completely uncontroversial, maybe not to Rover who I think is deliberately misunderstanding to win a point since that's what he does, or to Handy who I think genuinely doesn't understand what I'm saying, but certainly to dx who I wish I was capable of explaining better to.

This is my argument and then I will stop.

1. Institutions are not neutral because they are staffed by people and people are not neutral, political people 100x so.

2. In some roles, pure neutrality is the essential character of the job, and in those cases we expect and often actually get neutrality. Judge is the big one, also referee, and we used to think LEO but that's not looking too good these days.

3. In politics, especially in party politics, neutrality may be claimed but that is bunk. Everybody has agendas. Some are personal and some are ideological. Parties never treat their candidates equally. It's an ugly business and the best we can hope for is the dagger thrusts aren't so lethal that enmity persists beyond the convention. This has always been true, in every political context, since Solon thunk it up.

4. When not neutral, parties can exert all sorts of indirect influence over candidates. They can mess around with schedules, funding, rules, and also manipulate endorsements and cajole or threaten minor political actors and resources to weaken or strengthen candidates. This happens all the time.

5. Just because a candidate wins or loses does not demonstrate there has not been influence. An institutional favorite can fail anyway (Hillary, 2008; Jeb! 2016). A disliked candidate can fight the headwind and win (McGovern 1972, Dump 2016). A result cannot be a point of comparison -- there is no objective comparison because there is no way to construct an objective "baseline" free of influence.

That's all. My bet is Rover will say something nasty because he needs to win no matter the cost and Handy will say something disparaging because he can't follow it. Frankly, neither matters. But dx or uno or others I hope I have conveyed my meaning to. You can certainly disagree at any point along the logic chain but the logic is sound and it has nothing to do with the demeaning nonsense people kick up when they are mainlining their own suppositions rather than listening to somebody else fairly.

-- END TRANSMISSION --
 
Last edited:
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Kepler said:
5. Just because a candidate wins or loses does not demonstrate there has not been influence. An institutional favorite can fail anyway (Hillary, 2008; Jeb! 2016). A disliked candidate can fight the headwind and win (McGovern 1972, Dump 2016). A result cannot be a point of comparison -- there is no objective comparison because there is no way to construct an objective "baseline" free of influence.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I mean, the Republican establishment was digging up everything they could to stop Dump, until it was too late and they finally had to get on their knees and blow him.
 
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

This is why Bernie and Liz are right.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">When I worked in the insurance industry, we were instructed to talk about “choice,” based on focus groups and people like Frank Luntz (who wrote the book on how the GOP should communicate with Americans). I used it all the time as an industry flack. But there was a problem. 2/11</p>— Wendell Potter (@wendellpotter) <a href="https://twitter.com/wendellpotter/status/1206623261875941376?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 16, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">As industry insiders, we also knew most Americans have very little choice of their plan. Your company chooses an insurance provider and you get to pick from a few different plans offered by that one insurer, usually either a high deductible plan or a higher deductible plan 4/11</p>— Wendell Potter (@wendellpotter) <a href="https://twitter.com/wendellpotter/status/1206623264216272896?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 16, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Knowing we were losing the "choice" argument, my pals in the insurance industry spent millions on lobbying, ads and spin doctors -- all designed to gaslight Americans into thinking that reforming the status quo would somehow give them “less choice.” 6/11</p>— Wendell Potter (@wendellpotter) <a href="https://twitter.com/wendellpotter/status/1206623266783129610?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 16, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
solovsfett said:
Don’t know the source...Just throwing it out there.
Click to expand...

This encompasses 99% of the problems with social media. Take the 2 minutes to investigate the source before passing it on, and the bullshiat trollbait/foreign interference stops.
 
unofan said:
This encompasses 99% of the problems with social media. Take the 2 minutes to investigate the source before passing it on, and the bullshiat trollbait/foreign interference stops.
Click to expand...

Generally yes, I agree. However with regard to the DNC rigging for Hillary over Bernie, my poor choice of site/source below notwithstanding, it’s been established. Former Representative Tim Canova has discussed this ad nauseum and it’s been widely reported although the DNC fraud lawsuit itself has gotten almost zero coverage.
 
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

solovsfett said:
Generally yes, I agree. However with regard to the DNC rigging for Hillary over Bernie, my poor choice of site/source below notwithstanding, it’s been established. Former Representative Tim Canova has discussed this ad nauseum and it’s been widely reported although the DNC fraud lawsuit itself has gotten almost zero coverage.
Click to expand...

Soooo, every time you post something like this you get an all expenses paid vacation to Siberia courtesy of Uncle Vlady? :D I hear its pretty cold there this time of year.

Kep the reason why you're getting blasted is simple. You're using "preference" and "rigged" interchangeably. Rigged implies corruption and stealing, while a preference is a lot more benign. Obviously the RNC's preference was for Jebbers! or Kasich instead of Chump, but they didn't try to screw the guy out of votes. Likewise if the DNC preferred Hillary so be it, but if you have any proof of corruption you need to put up or shut up as you've repeatedly been asked to do. Otherwise you're just doing the Putin/Chump ticket's bidding.
 
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Rover said:
Kep the reason why you're getting blasted is simple. You're using "preference" and "rigged" interchangeably. Rigged implies corruption and stealing, while a preference is a lot more benign.
Click to expand...

I corrected the terminology. "Rigged" is too decisive. However, "prefer" is too soft. A middle term -- cheating, sharp practice, trickery -- is most apt. "Thumb on the scale" is the best non-provocative term to shut both sides up.
 
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Kepler said:
A middle term -- cheating, sharp practice, trickery -- is most apt.
Click to expand...

again put up or shut up. What was the cheating/trickery? Are you saying Bernie got outsmarted by Debbie Wasserman Schultz? :eek:
 
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Go home, Rover, You're drunk.
 
Rover said:
Soooo, every time you post something like this you get an all expenses paid vacation to Siberia courtesy of Uncle Vlady? :D I hear its pretty cold there this time of year.

Kep the reason why you're getting blasted is simple. You're using "preference" and "rigged" interchangeably. Rigged implies corruption and stealing, while a preference is a lot more benign. Obviously the RNC's preference was for Jebbers! or Kasich instead of Chump, but they didn't try to screw the guy out of votes. Likewise if the DNC preferred Hillary so be it, but if you have any proof of corruption you need to put up or shut up as you've repeatedly been asked to do. Otherwise you're just doing the Putin/Chump ticket's bidding.
Click to expand...

Uhm: https://youtu.be/N0IWe11RWOM

Edit: if this link doesn’t Work it’s Obama re Russia “the 80’s called, they want their foreign policy back”.

Not everything ties back to Vlady. Sometimes people here in good ole America actually do commit crimes and, gasp, rig primaries.

Look at what Attorney Jared Beck has found thusfar re: 2016.
 
Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Here’s Attorney Elizabeth Beck explaining a bit of what their lawsuit has uncovered: https://youtu.be/YLHvM-j9Xjk

If you don’t want to read About it or listen to either Elizabeth or Jared Beck here is a gem from the lawyer representing the DNC: they have the right to pick the candidate, in a back room, over cigars and wine whatever, regardless of voting, they choose who will be their ultimate candidate to face off vs gop. There’s more to it than that but basically the 99% and their votes are not part of the equation. Pretty stunning that they reveal this process in court.
 
solovsfett said:
Here’s Attorney Elizabeth Beck explaining a bit of what their lawsuit has uncovered: https://youtu.be/YLHvM-j9Xjk

If you don’t want to read About it or listen to either Elizabeth or Jared Beck here is a gem from the lawyer representing the DNC: they have the right to pick the candidate, in a back room, over cigars and wine whatever, regardless of voting, they choose who will be their ultimate candidate to face off vs gop. There’s more to it than that but basically the 99% and their votes are not part of the equation. Pretty stunning that they reveal this process in court.
Click to expand...

The right to do something doesn't mean it happened.

States have the right to pick their electoral college electors out of a hat, if they wanted to. It doesn't mean it happens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top