Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[tehdang]

Holy Shit!!! Check this out.



https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/s...zCwit8kTtoWGVw

Hillary Clinton and she got a reply.

There is a tiny possibility there might be more to this story than meets the eye

This is Elon Musk people and he attached a story from get this: smobserved.com. Titled "Awful Truth: Paul Pelosi was Drunk Again"

A story about him visiting a gay bar I think.

So you clink on his link and the server is down. This whatever website he just grabbed this story from. The effin owner/CEO of Twitter!

Some reason I can't link Elon's tweet. I actually reported it.

https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/st...zCwit8kTtoWGVw

Here is a link to story and you can go to Elon's account and look for yourself.

To his credit, he deleted the tweet when the problems about the source were pointed out to him.

He's now owner of a media company that's seeking advertisers and revenue growth. People are discounting any possible impact of a virtuous circle for Musk and his ownership. Or, shall I say, there is a tiny possibility that there might be more to Musk being owner and forced to retract tweets like this.

[Endus]

To his credit, he deleted the tweet when the problems about the source were pointed out to him.

No "credit" accrues for achieving less than the bare minimum we accept from reasonable, decent human beings.

This is like saying "to his credit, he took the knife out once he realized he'd stabbed her."

[Edge-]

To his credit, he deleted the tweet when the problems about the source were pointed out to him.

He gets literally no credit for that, actually. That's basic media literacy shit, and if one of the richest people in the world, who also owns a social media platform, doesn't have literal bare-minimum media literacy that's genuinely a danger.

[tehdang]

He gets literally no credit for that, actually. That's basic media literacy shit, and if one of the richest people in the world, who also owns a social media platform, doesn't have literal bare-minimum media literacy that's genuinely a danger.

I don't buy into the idea that the richest people in the world cannot be credited at correcting a mistake after making a mistake. It's a self-defeating maxim that demands they double-down on mistakes, because they have nothing to gain in doing the right thing.

Reminder to all the lefties out there that you can still be mad at him for committing the mistake in the first place, while still giving him some credit for taking corrective action afterwards. That should be "literal bare-minimum" social competency in my view.

[Edge-]

I don't buy into the idea that the richest people in the world cannot be credited at correcting a mistake after making a mistake.

His mistake was buying Twitter, everything after has been absolutely intentional and I'm not about to pretend that it's not.

Reminder to all the lefties out there that you can still be mad at him for committing the mistake in the first place, while still giving him some credit for taking corrective action afterwards. That should be "literal bare-minimum" social competency in my view.

Or, we can take everything else about him - his words and actions over the years - and use that context to understand this action and not treat it like it's something that happened in insolation with no connection to anything at all. Not to his shitposting on the feeds of alt-right influencers on Twitter weeks ago who often spread this kind of misinformation, nope, can't take that into account at all.

So no, he still gets no credit because this is a continuing part of a larger pattern of intentional behavior. You may want to treat everything in isolation and as if reality and broader context doesn't exist, you seem to do it regularly, but it does for the rest of us.

[Dontrike]

To his credit, he deleted the tweet when the problems about the source were pointed out to him.

So what you're saying he's a dumbass that believes in obvious conspiracy theories and is willing to throw that info around like an idiot. You know you don't have to white knight for every GQP moron, right? You can actually condemn them and have some self respect.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't buy into the idea that the richest people in the world cannot be credited at correcting a mistake after making a mistake. It's a self-defeating maxim that demands they double-down on mistakes, because they have nothing to gain in doing the right thing.

Reminder to all the lefties out there that you can still be mad at him for committing the mistake in the first place, while still giving him some credit for taking corrective action afterwards. That should be "literal bare-minimum" social competency in my view.

No, because any person with an IQ above a kitchen sponge would see what he linked was obviously wrong, lying, and a conspiracy. This only shows Musk is a fucking idiot, why you're willing to simp for him is a question, though not surprising considering who else you simp for.

And before you go "he corrected it" again, people still clicked on it, believed it because he likes the same Nazis as they, and you, do. He didn't go "woops, don't believe this, this is bullshit, my bad" he just hoped no one would notice.

[tehdang]

His mistake was buying Twitter, everything after has been absolutely intentional and I'm not about to pretend that it's not.

Mistake? Yeah it was probably a bum investment and he won't see much gain compared to other opportunities.

Or, we can take everything else about him - his words and actions over the years - and use that context to understand this action and not treat it like it's something that happened in insolation with no connection to anything at all. Not to his shitposting on the feeds of alt-right influencers on Twitter weeks ago who often spread this kind of misinformation, nope, can't take that into account at all.

So no, he still gets no credit because this is a continuing part of a larger pattern of intentional behavior. You may want to treat everything in isolation and as if reality and broader context doesn't exist, you seem to do it regularly, but it does for the rest of us.

Whatever you have to say to justify attacking good actions, I guess. He did the right thing, but he's too much of an asshole to lefties on Twitter, or he trolls for the wrong side, so we can't say he did the right thing.

- - - Updated - - -

So what you're saying he's a dumbass that believes in obvious conspiracy theories and is willing to throw that info around like an idiot. You know you don't have to white knight for every GQP moron, right? You can actually condemn them and have some self respect.

Acted like a dumbass in this instance, doesn't mean you can't give him credit for corrective action. You do know taking down the post isn't the same thing as GQP white knighting? Right?

No, because any person with an IQ above a kitchen sponge would see what he linked was obviously wrong, lying, and a conspiracy. This only shows Musk is a fucking idiot, why you're willing to simp for him is a question, though not surprising considering who else you simp for.

And before you go "he corrected it" again, people still clicked on it, believed it because he likes the same Nazis as they, and you, do. He didn't go "woops, don't believe this, this is bullshit, my bad" he just hoped no one would notice.

I don't really think the kind of person that throws around IQs of kitchen sponge and Nazis is exactly a good judge on what constitutes simping or good response/bad response. This is almost a generic "this person is bad, and any qualification on that is simping." In the same way you might say "I'm surrounded by idiots, Nazis, fascists, and their simps, and also my toast was burnt this morning and traffic added a half hour to my commute."

[Kaleredar]

Mistake? Yeah it was probably a bum investment and he won't see much gain compared to other opportunities.

Whatever you have to say to justify attacking good actions, I guess. He did the right thing, but he's too much of an asshole to lefties on Twitter, or he trolls for the wrong side, so we can't say he did the right thing.

"I callously spread misinformation, then when I was told it was malicious nonsense I deleted it and pretended it never happened."

That is not "good."

The "good deed" would have been seeing the article, looking into it oneself, seeing it was fake, and posting something akin to "hey there's this article circling around, it's bullshit, don't believe it."

The "neutral deed" would have been... just not posting the article. Which is what most people would do, unless they had a distinct interest in attempting to slander a victim of violent assault at the outset.

The "one step above the worst thing you could do" is what Musk did, which is posting the article and then quietly redacting it, ensuring only that he doesn't personally propagate it to others... that hadn't already seen him post it.

The worst thing he could do would be the decidedly Trumpian/Republican go-to of "posting the fake news, being told it's fake, and then doubling down on it anyway." Which... I guess Musk didn't do.


"One step better than what Republicans would have done" is not anything someone should shoot for. That bar is set far too low.

[tehdang]

"I callously spread misinformation, then when I was told it was malicious nonsense I deleted it and pretended it never happened."

That is not "good."

Giving him some credit for taking it down is not the same as calling it good for the fact that he posted it in the first place. What are you on about?

[Cinnamilk]

Giving him some credit for taking it down is not the same as calling it good for the fact that he posted it in the first place. What are you on about?

I'll give him two cents of credit for redacting it silently. Still did 100 fake dollars of damage, so what does it matter?
There's not a lot of credit to give when the net result as compared to the default still caused damage.
It's honestly not even worth it, he done fucked up.

If he wants more "credit" for "cleaning up" his fuckup, he could've done the decent thing and apologized for linking a fake ass source and telling people not to read it.

[Dontrike]

Acted like a dumbass in this instance, doesn't mean you can't give him credit for corrective action.

He didn't "correct" a damn thing, he just tried to make himself not look like an idiot. Again, he didn't go "this is false, I was wrong," he just stopped it being on his post history. That's it.

You do know taking down the post isn't the same thing as GQP white knighting? Right?

It is when you go up to bat for every single thing a GQP member does and says.

I don't really think

Hey, we agree, look at that.

the kind of person that throws around IQs of kitchen sponge and Nazis is exactly a good judge on what constitutes simping or good response/bad response. This is almost a generic "this person is bad, and any qualification on that is simping." In the same way you might say "I'm surrounded by idiots, Nazis, fascists, and their simps, and also my toast was burnt this morning and traffic added a half hour to my commute."

What?! The person that has a clear bias towards that side doesn't think they're simping for them? No way!

- - - Updated - - -

Giving him some credit for taking it down is not the same as calling it good for the fact that he posted it in the first place. What are you on about?

By giving him credit you are in fact trying to say he did a good thing. That's literally all it is.

[Breccia]

you can still be mad at him for committing the mistake in the first place, while still giving him some credit for taking corrective action afterwards.

Deleting the tweet isn't admission he made a mistake. Deleting the tweet is hiding evidence he made the mistake. When he apologizes, let me know. Until then, you're demanding that I give credit to a thief for having the decency to flee the scene of the crime.

By the way, Trump supporter, you haven't commented on the Pelosi hammer attack yet. I already blamed you for the attack, but unless you've specifically and directly renounced it, that means you admitted it's your fault. And no, it's too late to back out now. The attack was days ago. The time to denounce it wasn't "wait until my golf game is over" like your man Trump.

[Mekh]

By the way, Trump supporter, you haven't commented on the Pelosi hammer attack yet. I already blamed you for the attack, but unless you've specifically and directly renounced it, that means you admitted it's your fault. And no, it's too late to back out now. The attack was days ago. The time to denounce it wasn't "wait until my golf game is over" like your man Trump.

He thinks the assaulter was a lefty, because he blogged negatively about "The Elites".

[tehdang]

I'll give him two cents of credit for redacting it silently. Still did 100 fake dollars of damage, so what does it matter?
There's not a lot of credit to give when the net result as compared to the default still caused damage.

There you go.

If he wants more "credit" for "cleaning up" his fuckup, he could've done the decent thing and apologized for linking a fake ass source and telling people not to read it.

This would be better and maybe next time he does this. Who knows? I can't control his actions, but at least I can control mine. That involves not partaking in some absurd denial of anything positive from removing poorly advised posts.

I already blamed you for the attack, but unless you've specifically and directly renounced it, that means you admitted it's your fault.

Assigning blame to me for an attack on a Congresswoman's husband, and imputing guilt by silence? Are you trying to get yourself dismissed as a extremist, or just play-acting one on the internet?

[Breccia]

Assigning blame to me for--

Wow. Your first response wasn't "I condemn this savage attack?" That's just deplorable.

[Tyris Flare]

https://www.theonion.com/joe-biden-d...t-b-1849630712

The Onion in top form for the first time in a while

[Edge-]

https://www.theonion.com/joe-biden-d...t-b-1849630712

The Onion in top form for the first time in a while

Jesus christ that legit brought me to tears I was laughing so hard. Seriously, Onion remain the top satirists around.

[Paranoid Android]

Ahh guess I'll post here.

McCarthy indicates that Republicans will indeed use the debt ceiling as leverage for significant cuts in government spending

Sure this is a wait and we will see. Yet, this is standard operating procedure to hold it hostage. Do we need to explain again, why this is pointless, besides sabotaging our credit rating.

If I remember surprisingly under Trump and Republicans raised debt three times?.

Commentary here of how the Republican party is always bent on making shit worse and then people bitch about it being worse and vote for the people who make it worse. My translation; The Republicans intent is to eff up the government so people get mad the government doesn't work for them. Then these people vote for the Republicans.

[Fugus]

Ahh guess I'll post here.

McCarthy indicates that Republicans will indeed use the debt ceiling as leverage for significant cuts in government spending

Sure this is a wait and we will see. Yet, this is standard operating procedure to hold it hostage. Do we need to explain again, why this is pointless, besides sabotaging our credit rating.

If I remember surprisingly under Trump and Republicans raised debt three times?.

Commentary here of how the Republican party is always bent on making shit worse and then people bitch about it being worse and vote for the people who make it worse. My translation; The Republicans intent is to eff up the government so people get mad the government doesn't work for them. Then these people vote for the Republicans.

If I remember correctly, they raised the debt ceiling twice and then 2 other times they completely suspended it.

[Paranoid Android]

Ha! Listening to a cast and how many times Biden will be impeached?

Over/Under has to be 3.

Republicans have to feed Trump about being impeached twice. So Trump logic is 3 > 2