Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Kaleredar]

Same bs under Obama.

Biden seems to be getting ahead of this a lot better that Obama did, at least. He’s basically saying “see what these morons are focusing on instead of trying to help you?” rather than Obama’s noble, but ultimately fruitless, tactic of trying to remain aloof and above the partisanship.

[Felya]

Biden seems to be getting ahead of this a lot better that Obama did, at least. He’s basically saying “see what these morons are focusing on instead of trying to help you?” rather than Obama’s noble, but ultimately fruitless, tactic of trying to remain aloof and above the partisanship.

Here is what Biden said:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/05/polit...ion/index.html

“Look, he said that in our last administration, (with former President) Barack (Obama, that) he was going to stop everything -- and I was able to get a lot done with him," Biden told reporters in the State Dining Room, following remarks touting the administration's new restaurant revitalization fund.

"Again, look -- everything I'm proposing that be done to generate economic growth, employment, and put us in a position where we can out-compete any other country in the world with research and development, and moving ahead: I pay for it."

[Breccia]

Obama’s noble, but ultimately fruitless

Yeah. No reason for Biden to waste 4 years and Harris to waste 8 more trying to coax Republicans to do what they'd rather die in a murderous insurrection than do.

Obama held the budget hostage until 6 blue and 6 red made a budget. They chose to fail. Biden was there and he's not going to go that far. Both a shame, and a relief.

[Kellhound]

Not at all, this goes right along the time you spent pages and pages defending racism.

It has already been proven.

Still no proof provided.

[Machismo]

Still no proof provided.

Literally months and months ago.

I'll gladly refer you to the racism thread, that was gladly provided for you when you tried to deny it.

[Kellhound]

Wait.........what?

You know that the definition of majority is not "51% and up"....right?

The definition of majority is 50%+1. Or if you prefer the Webster's definition: "A number or percentage equaling more than half of a total."

- - - Updated - - -

Is the law good and just simply because it's the law?

And the even more important question, would your answer differ with a fully Republican run government with no liberal laws you disagree with?

And the most important question, did you simply say "no" to the last question because you didn't want to look hypocritical, and not because "no" is the real answer?

The rule of law has a built in ability to change said law. If you don't like the law, change it. Else, live with it.

- - - Updated - - -

Literally months and months ago.

I'll gladly refer you to the racism thread, that was gladly provided for you when you tried to deny it.

Still no proof of your accusations.

[Bodakane]

The definition of majority is 50%+1. Or if you prefer the Webster's definition: "A number or percentage equaling more than half of a total.".

It actually means the greater number. Especially in the context of elections. You are using one specific definition, that doesn't apply to the issue at hand.

[Kellhound]

It actually means the greater number. Especially in the context of elections. You are using one specific definition, that doesn't apply to the issue at hand.

It does apply to the issue at hand, because I was not discussing which candidate got the most votes, just that the winner does not always have the majority of the total vote. The word you are looking for is "plurality".

[Felya]

Guys... another way to say plurality, is Relative Majority... since that means in context of a plurality, it is a majority... can we stop this nonsense?

Edit: don’t take my word for it... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurality_(voting)

Edit 2: Here is a video about it:

[Bodakane]

It does apply to the issue at hand, because I was not discussing which candidate got the most votes, just that the winner does not always have the majority of the total vote. The word you are looking for is "plurality".

They did have the majority of the vote.

[Machismo]

The definition of majority is 50%+1. Or if you prefer the Webster's definition: "A number or percentage equaling more than half of a total."

- - - Updated - - -



The rule of law has a built in ability to change said law. If you don't like the law, change it. Else, live with it.

- - - Updated - - -



Still no proof of your accusations.

Asked and answer4ed, months ago, Theo.

I am enjoying watching Trumpsters do anything they can to try and retcon their posting history.

[Rozz]

We're running in circles here, let's continue on topic.

[Breccia]

US and Iran signal possible breakthrough on rejoining the Iran Nuclear Deal.

Iran is not a country I really care for, but, I hope they get some kind of consession for what Trump did to them. "We're cool now?" isn't enough. Biden's going to have to sweeten the deal.

[Lynarii]

US and Iran signal possible breakthrough on rejoining the Iran Nuclear Deal.

Iran is not a country I really care for, but, I hope they get some kind of consession for what Trump did to them. "We're cool now?" isn't enough. Biden's going to have to sweeten the deal.

I mean, you can't really give them much in the way of concessions, because it's kinda important that they not do what they're being asked to not do and one of the primary complaints about the Iran Nuclear Deal in the first place was that it already didn't include some of the things that people though were VERY important to include. The only real room left to make concessions onto is some form of surety that the US actually means what it says this time and isn't going to play games with it a second time... and even /that/ concession would require congress getting out of it's dysfunctional ass for the duration of a vote.

[Ripster42]

Can we end this stupid plurality versus majority discussion? The US gov is fairly clear that a majority is 50% +1. It's in our constitution that the president needs a majority of EC votes and the process that happens if no one gets a majority. The distinction between terms even leads to the names of the voting systems that have different threshold requirements: Plurality Voting System (highest vote getter), Majority Voting System (needs an actual majority), and Single Winner Ranked-Choice Voting System (ranked system + elimination until majority). It's the definitional distinction between the systems.

Arguing that majority actually means plurality is mind-blowingly stupid, when talking to a person seized by an episode of pedantic personality disorder (something I just made up, but am, myself, susceptible to). You're wrong. Just be honest. Being honest doesn't detract from the point being made. The only thing it does is lead to pages of nonsense like we've had in this thread and makes you look maliciously dishonest with an agenda instead of innocently lazy with language.

[Breccia]

Eviction ban remains in place as CDC files appeal.

[Fugus]

Please take the discussion about the majority and plurality stuff to here.

I created a thread just for that now...

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post53168467

[Cthulhu 2020]

Please take the discussion about the majority and plurality stuff to here.

I created a thread just for that now...

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post53168467

Honestly it's one of the stupidest derails I've ever seen, and there's been a fuckton of derails. Arguing over plurality vs majority "for the optics" is just mind blowingly stupid. There's no reason to even discuss it in the context of the conversation where it was happening other than to create a semantics argument TO SIMPLY IGNORE THE TOPIC AT HAND AND ONLY TALK ABOUT SEMANTICS. Fuck's sake, we know Kellhound doesn't care about majority or plurality, doesn't care about optics, doesn't care about the rule of law. We know they were a solid Trumpster who denied the rule of law when it was shown that Trump has broken numerous laws over the year, their posting history isn't invisible.

What even is the topic here any more? This is the Biden thread, and Biden got the majority votes, 51%. Alright next.

[Fugus]

Snip

I just wish people would stop feeding the pigeons like dumbasses. They know exactly what they are doing yet continue to do it.

If they want to have that debate, just open another thread like I did and take it there.

And don’t wait on the pigeon to do it, he doesn’t want to because that doesn’t derail this thread. These are the same people who spewed pro trump stuff for the last 4 years, except now, they can’t defend anything even remotely with how much is coming out. So all they can do is derail and make the threads harder for anyone else to read...

And people here keep being dumb enough to keep feeding it and helping them troll the thread.

- - - Updated - - -

Put in a feature request I think many of us could agree with.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post53168488

[Kellhound]

Asked and answer4ed, months ago, Theo.

I am enjoying watching Trumpsters do anything they can to try and retcon their posting history.

That you insist on calling me a "Trumpster" proves you are clueless about my political views.