Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[Nurasu]

@Endus

You are a smart man and I respect your opinions on here. But when it comes to "Defund the Police" that is just a bad slogan through and through.

Just looking at it at face value, it basically says to cut police funding and doesn't go any further than that which is bad enough but you also have to look at it in the perspective of the voters. And when they hear that, they think of it in the same way the Republicans want to "Defund Obamacare".

Quite literally, reading the slogan outright sounds bad enough but when filtered through that lens it gets so much worse. It's a negative connotation in it at every point.

If they wanted to do it right, they should have had something like "Supplement the Police" or some other slogan but one that sounds bad outright without a primer of the details and worse when you look at how the words are already used in an area is one of the worst things they could have done.

And I actually support the goals of it which even I had to read up on because outright, the slogan sounded bad to me and sounded like some extremist fringe Libertarian anarchist thing.

I think trying to recoin "defund the police" is also trying to take the message away from Black people who are trying to express their utter dejection and anger. That anger costs votes because it makes white people uncomfortable.

[Underverse]

I think trying to recoin "defund the police" is also trying to take the message away from Black people who are trying to express their utter dejection and anger. That anger costs votes because it makes white people uncomfortable.

It costs votes because people think it means 'get rid of police departments'.

[Nurasu]

It costs votes because people think it means 'get rid of police departments'.

This is what I mean by hijacking their messaging. That is what they mean, if that's what it takes to stop what is perceived as a racist institution from extrajudicially killing them. Defund the Police is more politically acceptable than ACAB, the true heart of the matter.

It's fine if the Democrats don't support that position, but trying to rebrand "defund the police" into something that is more pleasing to white voters is nothing more than once again appropriating a black movement for political convenience.

[kaelleria]

Walls are closing in... Now Republican business owners are telling Trump to F off into the sunset.

[DingDongKing]

Walls are closing in... Now Republican business owners are telling Trump to F off into the sunset.

Link for this?

[kaelleria]

Link for this?

I don't believe there's an article written yet, but CNN just interviewed a Trump supporting CEO who wants the country to move on.

[Felya]

In a shocking turn of events, the Justice Department blames Acosta for Epstein getting off in 2000s... I guess a job on Trump admin was the reword...

DOJ says ex-prosecutor Acosta showed poor judgment in 2007 sweetheart deal with sex criminal Jeffey Epstein
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/jeff...rime-deal.html

[Underverse]

This is what I mean by hijacking their messaging. That is what they mean, if that's what it takes to stop what is perceived as a racist institution from extrajudicially killing them. Defund the Police is more politically acceptable than ACAB, the true heart of the matter.

It's fine if the Democrats don't support that position, but trying to rebrand "defund the police" into something that is more pleasing to white voters is nothing more than once again appropriating a black movement for political convenience.

Very few people will get behind removing police departments. I definitely wouldn't. Especially given the statistical reality that black people aren't killed more frequently by police than white people when correcting for cofounding variables - though they do experience more non-lethal police violence.

Usually you need to compromise in order to get some of what you want. You can label compromise as appropriation but that's really just a disservice to those who care more about results than extremist ideologies.

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/st...63802818826240

I guess Trump's legal team has a new strategy...it's up to Biden to "prove" he legally won?

I mean, why not turn our judicial system on its head and demand that innocence be proven rather than a given, and that those making a claim prove their own claim rather than have those making the claim prove it on their own.

[Adam Jensen]

https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/st...63802818826240

I guess Trump's legal team has a new strategy...it's up to Biden to "prove" he legally won?

I mean, why not turn our judicial system on its head and demand that innocence be proven rather than a given, and that those making a claim prove their own claim rather than have those making the claim prove it on their own.

Here's Biden's proof:

https://abcnews.go.com/Elections/202...sults-live-map

They can piss off.

[Endus]

@Endus

You are a smart man and I respect your opinions on here. But when it comes to "Defund the Police" that is just a bad slogan through and through.

Just looking at it at face value, it basically says to cut police funding and doesn't go any further than that which is bad enough but you also have to look at it in the perspective of the voters. And when they hear that, they think of it in the same way the Republicans want to "Defund Obamacare".

Quite literally, reading the slogan outright sounds bad enough but when filtered through that lens it gets so much worse. It's a negative connotation in it at every point.

If they wanted to do it right, they should have had something like "Supplement the Police" or some other slogan but one that sounds bad outright without a primer of the details and worse when you look at how the words are already used in an area is one of the worst things they could have done.

And I actually support the goals of it which even I had to read up on because outright, the slogan sounded bad to me and sounded like some extremist fringe Libertarian anarchist thing.

Slogans aren't about winning new people to your side. They aren't marketing.

They're empowerment and expression for those already in the movement.

This is why phrases like "Fight the Power" or "Black Power" or yes, "Lock Her Up" all get used. They are never intended to convert people to the cause. That's not what slogans do. And yes, those slogans are always criticized by those who disagree with them.

The big difference is if you're actually criticizing the movement itself, as it is easy to do in the case of "Lock Her Up" bullshit, or if you're using empty rhetoric or outright lies to mislead people about the movement, by misrepresenting the slogan (among other tactics). Which, in the case of "Defund the Police", means you support the current state of police brutality, since that's what the movement is aimed to redress.

If you can't be arsed to take a couple minutes to figure out what the movement's about, you never had any intent of giving the idea any real consideration in the first place and had pre-emptively made up your mind to shit on it no matter what it actually represented.

Frankly, all this "'Defund the police' is a bad slogan" just seems like "why not 'All Lives Matter'?" in response to BLM, or indeed, "what's wrong with 'White Power'?" in response to "Black Power" movements in the '60s. It's the exact same tactic, and it was bullshit then, and it remains bullshit now.

[Benggaul]

https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/st...63802818826240

I guess Trump's legal team has a new strategy...it's up to Biden to "prove" he legally won?

I mean, why not turn our judicial system on its head and demand that innocence be proven rather than a given, and that those making a claim prove their own claim rather than have those making the claim prove it on their own.

Mmhmm, where are those Trump tax returns proving he did nothing wrong there. Or the DNA sample for his rape accuser?

- - - Updated - - -

Slogans aren't about winning new people to your side. They aren't marketing.

I've had to explain what it means to people both on the left and the right and the one thing they all agree on is that it's completely misleading.

It's a shit slogan. Period. Also, probably the wrong thread still.

[Felya]

Alternately, you can't follow a conversation, but I guess ad hominem is more fun.

You don’t know what that word means. There is no conversation to follow...

You were not clear on whether you meant the first sentence of the post I originally replied to or the first post you wrote to me. There is no "bias" or "fascism" in me telling you that I did not clearly understand which post you meant. Good Lord, man. If you want to debate with me, fine. If you'd rather debate this boogeyman version of me you've created, have fun, I guess.

Then you should have asked your self, which one of is calling people liars? Asking that simple question, would have made you realize that’s the whole point of my post. Making you ask... then quadruple down at this point... further proving my point.

To review, you took issue with a post I made. I replied how my point there was a blanket accusation about Trump supporters was prejudiced nonsense. Rather than addressing that, you shifted onto "Trumpism is lying" and examples that had NOTHING to do with how the conversation started. You made reference to the "first sentence" that I replied to. I asked if you meant the post I originally replied to, whose first sentence did not support your claim, or YOUR first sentence. You dodged that with attacking me as confused. Now you're attacking me as somehow lying, fascist, and putting words in your mouth.

You literally just said I’m the one that called Trump a liar, a paragraph after still being stubborn in pretending you didn’t know which if is said it. Do I need more proof? This is pretty sufficient...

Trump supporters lie about making political donations? What?

Trump supporters repeat and act on lies... making them liars. When you repeat lies and give people money to lie, you are a liar. If donating money to Trump, to continue his lies, does not prove his supporters are liars, what does? They put their money where their lying is...

Yes, I have. I receive political donation emails/texts/robocalls from what seems like every bloody politician in the US from every party including the Greens. Soliciting campaign donations is not illegal, nor is it "stealing", and there's no way in hell Trump is personally writing and sending all those emails. You can argue that solicitation emails use sales pressure tactics and no argument there, but stick to reality in your accusations. I mean, you ARE aware of the now lampooned Bernie "once again asking for your support", right? Trying to claim Trump personally does it with the purpose of stealing money is absurd.

Okay... this will be easy for you then... post a single email from Bernie, that resembles Trump’s email. Easy proof for you to show...

And Bernie is a millionaire, yet he asked for donations too. Can I assume you'll spew this ridiculous "emperor" crap at his supporters?

Do you know the difference between a million and a billion? How many millions are in a billion? Now, post one of the many emails you received from Bernie... let’s compare... We have a place for you to prove that my emperor crap is actually crap, and not spot one. Present one of the many Bernie emails you have received that are similar to Trump’s... boy, is my face going to be red, never...

I will also require proof that Bernie isn’t spending the money from donations for the stated cause, but funneling to pay his debt.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's Biden's proof:

https://abcnews.go.com/Elections/202...sults-live-map

They can piss off.

Jo Jergison fucked Trump... I was wondering why Trump supporters were attacking libertarians all of a sudden...

[Edge-]

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5...it-against-cnn

Trump's bad week continues. His pointless and frivolous lawsuit against CNN for libel over an opinion piece has been dismissed. Trump's lawyers failed to demonstrate evidence of malice, which is like, the what you have to do in a libel case.

[s_bushido]

Here's Biden's proof:

https://abcnews.go.com/Elections/202...sults-live-map

They can piss off.

No kidding. They want proof, how about the millions of votes that were counted? These people are fucking pathetic, and it's going to be so nice when we can finally see the back of them.

[Edge-]

There is something seriously deficient about these people. This isn't even about the fact they're just full of shit, but the fact they're so damn incompetent, too.

Being the chief clown of a clown show may make you the best clown there, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're good at anything beyond being a clown.

[Fugus]

Slogans aren't about winning new people to your side. They aren't marketing.

They're empowerment and expression for those already in the movement.

This is why phrases like "Fight the Power" or "Black Power" or yes, "Lock Her Up" all get used. They are never intended to convert people to the cause. That's not what slogans do. And yes, those slogans are always criticized by those who disagree with them.

The big difference is if you're actually criticizing the movement itself, as it is easy to do in the case of "Lock Her Up" bullshit, or if you're using empty rhetoric or outright lies to mislead people about the movement, by misrepresenting the slogan (among other tactics). Which, in the case of "Defund the Police", means you support the current state of police brutality, since that's what the movement is aimed to redress.

If you can't be arsed to take a couple minutes to figure out what the movement's about, you never had any intent of giving the idea any real consideration in the first place and had pre-emptively made up your mind to shit on it no matter what it actually represented.

Frankly, all this "'Defund the police' is a bad slogan" just seems like "why not 'All Lives Matter'?" in response to BLM, or indeed, "what's wrong with 'White Power'?" in response to "Black Power" movements in the '60s. It's the exact same tactic, and it was bullshit then, and it remains bullshit now.

It's both empowerment and marketing though, not just one.

Take the examples you just gave, they are all both empowering AND good marketing slogans when you look at them and what they are trying for and they don't really mislead in any way what they are talking about. And whether the person who came up with those terms intended them for marketing or not, they stumbled onto really good marketing slogans for their cause. And that is why they worked and are remembered, they are good marketing, empowering and say exactly what they mean.

"Defund the Police" falls flat on its face when it comes to marketing and it doesn't really say what it means when you look at it, it just means "Cut Police Funding" and how good of a phrase is that? Even if I support the intent of what the phrase is SUPPOSED to mean, it would not support what the phrase actually says, especially when you look at how the word "Defund" has been abused in the past by Republicans and what it has come to mean in the political arena where this term is actually used.

A phrase like "Police Accountability" or "Stop using the police to address every problem" or something like those actually are more direct and straight forward about what they are doing.

With "Black Lives Matter" that is still a good slogan and empowering and pretty much requires you to go out of your way to interpret it wrong as you have seen on here before, "Defund the Police" actually requires you to read up and research it just to make sure it isn't some anarchist crap.

Sorry man, but it was the dumbest phrase they could have came up with and even with the intent behind it, it cost them power and it cost them votes because of the message it actually conveyed instead of the one it intended to due to the bad wording of it.

[TigTone]

There is something seriously deficient about these people. This isn't even about the fact they're just full of shit, but the fact they're so damn incompetent, too.

Which is a blessing and a curse. They did so much damage being incompetent.

Aslo as a result it showed the competent evil shits of USA that it is vulnerable. It has shown them what is possible and what can be broken if done right.

2024 election is the true fight for this county and the next senate/house elections.

The good people off US can not slack off, no one can.

[Zaydin]

So apparently the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit with a court that doesn't even have jurisdiction over what they are suing about. I don't pretend to understand the legalese but were his lawyers shitfaced when they drafted this lawsuit or is this just sheer desperation to keep their client happy?

[beanman12345]

Is anyone able to use some sound and video skills to edit this video? Change Democrats to Republicans and Trump to Biden during the 'roll tape' part?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pSmwq_13uE

I love that him and don lemon, maybe others, are instead of calling it fox news, they're calling it what it is "state tv"