Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[Endus]

This is untrue, and you know it. There are examples enough of posts that get ridiculed because of the posters who posts it, not the contents. Enough examples of posts like "That's bullshit from <xxxx>, can't be bothered to read it."

No, it's precisely true.

I've seen a lot of people (maybe a lot of your prior burners?) make similar complaints as yours, and without exception, they were all right-wingers pushing absolute fucking nonsense, and whining that the rest of the forum community wouldn't swallow their bullshit propaganda unthinkingly, like good little sheep.

Even your own example; if you're citing a known propagandist or hateful source, yeah, people aren't going to give it the time of day. Because they have looked at enough content from that source to know how dishonest and abusive that content is, as is the motivation behind producing it. They aren't dismissing it because of what side it's on; they're dismissing it for its history of abusive and/or dishonest conduct.

Sure, right-wingers try and pretend this is about partisanship, but it is not. It's about facts, and truth, and reason, fundamentally. If your arguments and sources won't live up to that, they're gonna get pulled apart and mocked, because they deserve to be so treated.

[BigStones]

No, it's precisely true.

I've seen a lot of people (maybe a lot of your prior burners?) make similar complaints as yours, and without exception, they were all right-wingers pushing absolute fucking nonsense, and whining that the rest of the forum community wouldn't swallow their bullshit propaganda unthinkingly, like good little sheep.

Even your own example; if you're citing a known propagandist or hateful source, yeah, people aren't going to give it the time of day. Because they have looked at enough content from that source to know how dishonest and abusive that content is, as is the motivation behind producing it. They aren't dismissing it because of what side it's on; they're dismissing it for its history of abusive and/or dishonest conduct.

Sure, right-wingers try and pretend this is about partisanship, but it is not. It's about facts, and truth, and reason, fundamentally. If your arguments and sources won't live up to that, they're gonna get pulled apart and mocked, because they deserve to be so treated.

You are using the terms "alt right-wingers" and "propaganda", that says enough about you. You are already fixed in your ideas and people, and react exactly as I expected. No honest discussion indeed. You already know what people say, based on something before. People talking about anything Biden says or does, which is proven by print or video, get ridiculed, insulted or worse for no reason. You can't deny that.

Talking about facts, truth and reason makes it even worse. That you can even write these words without posting /s at the end.

- - - Updated - - -

Who knew that people would take issue with what you post when just a few posts into your shiny new account, you were saying shit like "Or is this another victim complex from a tranny?"

Reading comprehension? I am not talking about myself, but you just proved my point once more

[beanman12345]

Considering that poster got caught lying about his entire anti-rape narrative... there's not much more that needs to be said.

This person has an irrational hate boner for Biden. But ya know, I'm not a Biden fan myself, I don't hate him, just don't like really much of any of his proposals. I'm a Leftist, who can vote unlike them, and am taking a pragmatic view, in wanting to keep a balanced judicial, which they have a hard time comprehending, harping on neo lib this and corporate dem that. When the truth is, in their view, all the liberal justices are neo libs, fine, if you consider them that, i still rather another neo lib to replace neo lib RBG than a hardcore conservative and completely unbalance the courts for generations. Hell I'd rather 5 neo libs and them overturn citizens united. But then they wouldn't be able to complain about corporate democrats anymore. They can't have that.

[Endus]

You are using the terms "alt right-wingers" and "propaganda", that says enough about you.

I never mentioned the alt-right. You're inventing fictions.

Which sort of underscores my point, I guess.

You are already fixed in your ideas and people, and react exactly as I expected. No honest discussion indeed. You already know what people say, based on something before. People talking about anything Biden says or does, which is proven by print or video, get ridiculed, insulted or worse for no reason. You can't deny that.

Yep. I deny that. You're making that shit up.

I've said a lot of negative shit about Biden and gotten no flak. I just don't stoop to bullshit propaganda moves to slander the man.

Talking about facts, truth and reason makes it even worse. That you can even write these words without posting /s at the end.

Why would I? Are you denying those things exist?

[Machismo]

This person has an irrational hate boner for Biden. But ya know, I'm not a Biden fan myself, I don't hate him, just don't like really much of any of his proposals. I'm a Leftist, who can vote unlike them, and am taking a pragmatic view, in wanting to keep a balanced judicial, which they have a hard time comprehending, harping on neo lib this and corporate dem that. When the truth is, in their view, all the liberal justices are neo libs, fine, if you consider them that, i still rather another neo lib to replace neo lib RBG than a hardcore conservative and completely unbalance the courts for generations. Hell I'd rather 5 neo libs and them overturn citizens united. But then they wouldn't be able to complain about corporate democrats anymore. They can't have that.

There's plenty of reasons to not like Biden. Hell, I don't like the guy. But, when the very same people ramble on about how Biden is a senile old pervert, then shill for Trump... their motives are suspect. In the case of that specific poster, that is exactly what happened.

As far as policy is concerned, I don't even really think it's about progressive purity, but rather political arson. TO any progressive with half a brain, Biden is clearly a better choice (policy-wise) than Trump. It's not even fucking close. Voting for Biden means they may gain control over the SCOTUS within the next 15-20 years. If Trump wins, there's a good chance it stays "conservative" for 30 years or more.

It should also be noted that the large majority of those political arsonists are not Americans, meaning they cannot vote... or are proven Trump supporters (or both). The main exception is Jettisawn, whom I have respect for. He's taking a moral stand, and he understands the fallout that may occur due to his choice in not wanting to support Biden.

As for me, policy-wise, neither candidate is anywhere close to my stances. Seriously, it's not even in the same area code. As for who they are as people, Biden wins that one. hell, even if literally everything bad that people have said about Biden is true, he still wins the "character" contest in a fucking landslide. That doesn't mean he's a good person, it just means that Trump is that shitty of a human being.

[beanman12345]

There's plenty of reasons to not like Biden. Hell, I don't like the guy. But, when the very same people ramble on about how Biden is a senile old pervert, then shill for Trump... their motives are suspect. In the case of that specific poster, that is exactly what happened.

As far as policy is concerned, I don't even really think it's about progressive purity, but rather political arson. TO any progressive with half a brain, Biden is clearly a better choice (policy-wise) than Trump. It's not even fucking close. Voting for Biden means they may gain control over the SCOTUS within the next 15-20 years. If Trump wins, there's a good chance it stays "conservative" for 30 years or more.

It should also be noted that the large majority of those political arsonists are not Americans, meaning they cannot vote... or are proven Trump supporters (or both). The main exception is Jettisawn, whom I have respect for. He's taking a moral stand, and he understands the fallout that may occur due to his choice in not wanting to support Biden.

As for me, policy-wise, neither candidate is anywhere close to my stances. Seriously, it's not even in the same area code. As for who they are as people, Biden wins that one. hell, even if literally everything bad that people have said about Biden is true, he still wins the "character" contest in a fucking landslide. That doesn't mean he's a good person, it just means that Trump is that shitty of a human being.

Well said. Couldn't agree more.

[Machismo]

-snip-

Except, she's been caught in some rather difficult positions, like voting for Biden... twice. She was caught changing her story, rather drastically, I might add. And, if the latest allegations about her lying under oath are true, then that's a huge problem.

And yet, we have a possible middle ground. There's a real possibility that Biden did make an inappropriate pas at her, and tried to kiss her, or touch her neck. That sounds just like something Biden might do. But, that doesn't mean he digitally raped her, which is what her latest story is.

Since she has yet to testify under oath in a deposition, and hasn't been "cross examined," then scrutinizing her claims is perfectly reasonable. Scrutinizing her past actions and motivations is also fair game.

[Crudlust]

Except, she's been caught in some rather difficult positions, like voting for Biden... twice. She was caught changing her story, rather drastically, I might add.

So certain, irrelevant details or her story might have changed over decades because literally no human being can remember every detail accurately. The fact that she voted for Biden does not mean he did not rape her. People often form emotional attachment to their abusers.

Essentially, you are using tricks straight out of the playbook of lawyers paid to defend wealthy rapists. I'm guessing you got them from TV news where Weinstein's legal advisors had a heavy influence and now you are simply parroting what they say.

All you have to say if you want to defend Biden is "Innocent until proven guilty". But you keep on and on with these ugly unsubstantiated smears and you people seem to have zero self-awareness of just how bad it sounds to everyone.

I'd add Biden has been caught on numerous accusations lying through his teeth in a verifiable and transparent manner. That doesn't mean he is automatically guilty of lying about the rape allegation. Yet somehow the reverse seems to be true in your mind.

[Machismo]

-Snip-

You consider what she claimed he did to her is irrelevant? That's a rather idiotic claim.

The fact that she voted for him, twice, when nobody was watching, is also problematic.

Her voting for Biden is not unsubstantiated, she's admitted to it. her story changing is not unsubstantiated, she changed it. The evidence that she misrepresented (under oath) qualifications on abuse towards women... is relevant.

When did I say she was lying about the allegations? You seem to be projecting.

[Crudlust]

You consider what she claimed he did to her is irrelevant? That's a rather idiotic claim.

.

Yes your claim is rather idiotic. Because, as you fond of saying yourself about everything, you haven't actually provided any evidence.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact that she voted for him, twice, when nobody was watching, is also problematic.

So fifty thousand times we have had you and Biden supporters saying "I hate Biden but he's better than Trump". Now, all of a sudden it seems impossible for you to understand how any one could possibly vote for Biden even though they didn't think he was a nice guy.

[Machismo]

-snip-

That's not actually discussing what I said, what a shame.

- - - Updated - - -

-snip-

That's not what I said, you seem to be having issues.

[Dacien]

Hello guys. I don't really belong in this thread, just came to ask one question in hopes for a useful answer or two.

While doing quick research for a post in the Covid thread, I found out that, according to a recent poll, governors best at handling the pandemic were overwhelmingly Republicans. So my (ignorant foreigner) question is, will this success of Republican governors help Trump the Republican in 5 months, or not really?

I do know that DeSantis has a lot to be proud of in Florida, not just for the low numbers of deaths, but also because his state was a destination hot spot for people fleeing states that were not faring as well.

[Beefhammer]

I do know that DeSantis has a lot to be proud of in Florida, not just for the low numbers of deaths, but also because his state was a destination hot spot for people fleeing states that were not faring as well.

Low numbers because he ordered the fudging of the numbers to make FL look good. And firing the person who refused to fudge numbers. But please go on.

[Rasulis]

Low numbers because he ordered the fudging of the numbers to make FL look good. And firing the person who refused to fudge numbers. But please go on.

6 states might be manipulating COVID-19 data as they reopen, reports suggest — here's what can skew the numbers

Officials in Virginia, Texas, and Vermont reportedly combined the numbers of completed tests for two separate types: diagnostic tests that identify people currently infected, and antibody tests that can tell whether people have recovered from the virus.

Mixing the two counts can make it seem like these states have been testing more people than other states that are only counting diagnostic tests. The move to combine the totals into one also makes it difficult to identify the trends in daily case counts relative to diagnostic tests completed.

The Associated Press reported on Tuesday that officials in Vermont and Virginia have since stopped combining the figures in this way.

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam told the AP the correction caused "no difference in overall trends."

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said Monday that the state wasn't mixing together its figures, despite state health officials saying last week that they had in fact been treating the data this way, the AP reported.

Texas and Virginia are still seeing a rise in their new cases each day, while Vermont's appear to be plateauing, according to data from the COVID Tracking Project.

Rebekah Jones, who developed Florida's coronavirus-tracking dashboard, told WPES, a local CBS affiliate, that she was fired because she refused to "manually change data to drum up support for the plan to reopen."

As Florida has started reopening, some data has reportedly gone missing, and access to the raw data used to generate dashboards has become a challenge, Florida Today reported. Jones said in an email to Florida Today that the new team in charge of the dashboard may not be as committed to "the same level of accessibility and transparency."

A recent chart from Georgia's Department of Public Health falsely depicted a decline in cases in the state's hardest-hit counties because it mixed up times and locations.

Arizona's health department told a team of experts from two of the state's universities to stop their work after they predicted COVID-19 cases had not yet peaked in the state.

The modeling team, made up of at least 23 experts from Arizona State University and the University of Arizona, had estimated in late April that the peak of the outbreak might not come until May 22 or later.

[draynay]

I do know that DeSantis has a lot to be proud of in Florida, not just for the low numbers of deaths, but also because his state was a destination hot spot for people fleeing states that were not faring as well.

I often wonder why they falsify data, who could be so gullible as to believe obviously doctored numbers? Thanks Dacien, for answering that question.

[unfilteredJW]

I do know that DeSantis has a lot to be proud of in Florida, not just for the low numbers of deaths, but also because his state was a destination hot spot for people fleeing states that were not faring as well.

Yeah, we love it down here.

The kind of selfish cunt that's coming down here during a pandemic is the exact kind of person that's going to cause harm.

But at least now I know the kind of brain degeneracy needed to buy into FLs lies.

[Acidbaron]

I do know that DeSantis has a lot to be proud of in Florida, not just for the low numbers of deaths, but also because his state was a destination hot spot for people fleeing states that were not faring as well.

Probably taking pointers from Russia and North Korea on how to deal with this virus in such an effective matter!

[Sorshen]

I do know that DeSantis has a lot to be proud of in Florida, not just for the low numbers of deaths, but also because his state was a destination hot spot for people fleeing states that were not faring as well.

Yeah, he should be really proud about firing the people that won't falsify data.

[Noxx79]

I do know that DeSantis has a lot to be proud of in Florida, not just for the low numbers of deaths, but also because his state was a destination hot spot for people fleeing states that were not faring as well.

He should be really proud of firing people who won’t manipulate the data for him, but you’re a sociopath, so you don’t care about these deaths one way or another.

[Shadowferal]

He should be really proud of firing people who won’t manipulate the data for him, but you’re a sociopath, so you don’t care about these deaths one way or another.

Sociopath? That would be me.
Dacien is disrespectful of boundaries.