Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[kaid]

I can't say I have ever met a shy trump supporter. Maybe in 2016 but they have had 3+ years and they are out and they are proud now.

[Endus]

How is the line "constantly shifting"? What have left-leaning people supposedly tried to cancel? I can think of three categories: racists (including blackface)/misogynists and serial harassers (including comedians who masturbate unprovoked in front of female colleagues)/homophobic and transphobic assholes.

Let's be clear.

The claim that there is a "cancel culture" argues, essentially, that public outcry against (mostly) public figures (the "culture"), for the messages they espouse or endorse, has caused negative impacts on the careers of those public figures (the "cancelling").

There are multiple issues with this argument;

1> The public outcry has no capacity to effect real change. A lot of people calling you a racist on Twitter doesn't mean anything, in and of itself. Looking at the outcry is a deliberate distraction. The real cause of the impacts are those who control your revenue stream; your employer, or Youtube, or whatever. They think you're racist, or at least bad business, and thus choose to not do business with you any longer.

2> You're not "cancelled" or "silenced", in a broad sense. Your ties with some particular employer or platform have been severed because you broke their terms of service. You can still say whatever you want on any platform that'll have you. If you've made yourself persona non grata because you behave badly, well, that's your fucking fault. Not that of those who pointed it out.

3> It argues that there either should not be such a public outcry, or that your employers/partners should not react to your conduct. This is inherently an argument against either freedom of speech, or freedom of association; you either want such outcry to be silenced before it begins and be banned wholesale from public discourse, or you want businesses to be forced to do business with you against their will. Presenting this as an argument for freedom is just . . . deliberate dishonesty.

To be extra clear; you didn't say these things, I'm using your post to bounce off of and make this point.

The "line" is shifting. Because a lot of abusive conduct that used to be overlooked is no longer being overlooked. And yeah; we're looking backwards at past abuses. "But I could get away with being an abusive dickweed, back then" isn't really a defense that you weren't abusive.

The whole outcry against "cancel culture" is just people who've never had to face consequences before, because of societal privilege or advantage, suddenly having to face those consequences, and they don't like it. I don't care if they don't like it. I care if they deserve it, if their actions warrant negative consequences.

And for the most part, they have.

[Thekri]

Let's be clear.

The claim that there is a "cancel culture" argues, essentially, that public outcry against (mostly) public figures (the "culture"), for the messages they espouse or endorse, has caused negative impacts on the careers of those public figures (the "cancelling").

There are multiple issues with this argument;

1> The public outcry has no capacity to effect real change. A lot of people calling you a racist on Twitter doesn't mean anything, in and of itself. Looking at the outcry is a deliberate distraction. The real cause of the impacts are those who control your revenue stream; your employer, or Youtube, or whatever. They think you're racist, or at least bad business, and thus choose to not do business with you any longer.

2> You're not "cancelled" or "silenced", in a broad sense. Your ties with some particular employer or platform have been severed because you broke their terms of service. You can still say whatever you want on any platform that'll have you. If you've made yourself persona non grata because you behave badly, well, that's your fucking fault. Not that of those who pointed it out.

3> It argues that there either should not be such a public outcry, or that your employers/partners should not react to your conduct. This is inherently an argument against either freedom of speech, or freedom of association; you either want such outcry to be silenced before it begins and be banned wholesale from public discourse, or you want businesses to be forced to do business with you against their will. Presenting this as an argument for freedom is just . . . deliberate dishonesty.

To be extra clear; you didn't say these things, I'm using your post to bounce off of and make this point.

The "line" is shifting. Because a lot of abusive conduct that used to be overlooked is no longer being overlooked. And yeah; we're looking backwards at past abuses. "But I could get away with being an abusive dickweed, back then" isn't really a defense that you weren't abusive.

The whole outcry against "cancel culture" is just people who've never had to face consequences before, because of societal privilege or advantage, suddenly having to face those consequences, and they don't like it. I don't care if they don't like it. I care if they deserve it, if their actions warrant negative consequences.

And for the most part, they have.

It is also absolutely nothing new in any of those categories, much like Voter Fraud, Media bias, and all the other things that people believe magically sprang into existence in 2015.

Let's take one of the most well known historical examples of "Cancel Culture". A book called Uncle Tom's Cabin. It is famous for a bunch of reasons, with the relevant 3 being, 1) It was the best selling book of the 19th century if you don't count the Bible, 2) It explosively upended the Southern narrative of "Benevolent Slavery" and 3) It was the most banned book in US History.

Essentially, the publication of Uncle Tom's Cabin pissed off a lot of people. Booksellers that sold it were threatened, attacked, and often run out of town. Stowe herself was even sent an ear that was cut off a Slave as an example (How this was supposed to show slavery was a more benevolent institution then the book portrayed I am not sure, seems to just be proving her point to me). After the civil war, Uncle Tom's Cabin continued to be offensive to the south, as its existence conflicted with the new narrative of the noble South they were building. Uncle Tom's Cabin continued to be nearly constantly banned by local school boards for a wide variety of reasons, including its language, its religious content, and more recently, its constant use of the N-word (A perfect example of applying 21st century morals to the book).

This is an example of the real "Cancel culture" that is harmful. It is extremely different then advertisers pulling away from Tucker Carlson's show. It is is a prolonged, society wide assault on a narrative that goes contrary to their preferred view of history or politics. It has as much in common with the "Cancel Culture" the right likes to complain about as a mouse has with a tiger.

[Flower Milk]

First time I have heard of this event. Interesting and also ironic at the same time.....

.....

- - - Updated - - -



That is not what the poster indicated or said. He/she truthfully stated the Democrat authorities in Portland have did a shitty, terrible job in handling the violent and destructive protesting, thus empowering them.

No I didn't, I said Democrats have done a shitty job of handling the white supremacist police force bashing our skulls in on a nightly basis.

I have a more pessimistic perspective... It’s not a paradox... They simply agree with Trump and are trying to help.

Yes clearly I agree with the man who sent feds to kidnap us and bash our skulls in every night. You got me, I thought I was getting beat up by fascists and skinheads for decades trying to defend the people of color within my community from getting beat up or killed by them because the police here refuse to do anything about them because they are also Proud Boys, but really I was mistaken and I've totally been on their side this whole time. Who knew?

[Thepersona]

Also, do not talk RCP polling averages too seriously. RCP has been including Rasmussen, gravis, and Trafalgar polls.
Then they are baking in a whooping 6% bonus for Trump. In their words "to account for shy Trump supporters", not opening acknowledging their support for Trump.

Shy Trump supporters ... really explains a lot of MMO-C.

Really? they're doing that?

[cubby]

Axios is predicting Election Chaos, with Trump seeming to win in a landslide on election night, and Biden winning overall, after mail-in ballots are tallied.

Might take a week or more to tally the ballots. With Trump tweeting every five minutes or so. I can't think of a worse course of events.

[Edge-]

Axios is predicting Election Chaos, with Trump seeming to win in a landslide on election night, and Biden winning overall, after mail-in ballots are tallied.

Might take a week or more to tally the ballots.

The Chads has better stay the fuck outta this election, this time.

[Thekri]

Axios is predicting Election Chaos, with Trump seeming to win in a landslide on election night, and Biden winning overall, after mail-in ballots are tallied.

Might take a week or more to tally the ballots. With Trump tweeting every five minutes or so. I can't think of a worse course of events.

That is disturbing, and potentially accurate. I could easily see battleground states going Trump, even fairly strongly, during in person voting, then going Biden with mail-in voting. Which will be absolutely catastrophic for election confidence.

I really recommend in person voting if you can manage it at all. Not because I don't believe in mail in voting, but just to head off bullshit like that. Yes, I know Covid will still be a risk, but some personal risk is acceptable to make sure your vote gets counted, and gets counted early.

[TigTone]

That is disturbing, and potentially accurate. I could easily see battleground states going Trump, even fairly strongly, during in person voting, then going Biden with mail-in voting. Which will be absolutely catastrophic for election confidence.

I really recommend in person voting if you can manage it at all. Not because I don't believe in mail in voting, but just to head off bullshit like that. Yes, I know Covid will still be a risk, but some personal risk is acceptable to make sure your vote gets counted, and gets counted early.

Assuming they are not scared off by Armed “poll watchers”

[Thepersona]

It's a common effect in electoral statistics across the world. Many people even in an anonymous phone call will be shy to admit their preference for an unpopular party.

Then dont vote for said party?

[Thekri]

Assuming they are not scared off by Armed “poll watchers”

Wear a fucking MAGA hat to the polls to go vote for Biden then. They don't get to come into the booth with you.

[TigTone]

Wear a fucking MAGA hat to the polls to go vote for Biden then. They don't get to come into the booth with you.

At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if they tried. I want to say I’m being cynical but damn this year has been a wild one.

[Edge-]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/31/polit...ifa/index.html

President Donald Trump retweeted on Sunday a tweet that falsely blamed "Black Lives Matter/Antifa" for a random 2019 crime in which a Black man shoved a White woman into a New York City subway train.

The assault, captured in a video embedded in the tweet, had nothing to do with either the Black Lives Matter movement for racial justice or with Antifa, a loose collection of anti-fascist activists. The man shown in the video has a long history of offenses on New York City's transit system; he was arrested again last year over this incident.

The tweet Trump retweeted was from a Spanish-language pro-Trump account. The actual video used in the tweet, though, had been posted by a White nationalist user who goes by the handle "I'm With Groyper"; "groyper" is an identifier often used by the racist "alt-right" and others on the far right.

The user posted the subway video as part of a thread of dozens of videos depicting Black people assaulting White people. Contacted by CNN, the user identified himself as an advocate of White people creating their own "nations" for supposed "protection" from racial minorities.

The user noted that he did not himself "say the attack had anything to do with BLM and Antifa, like the post the president retweeted suggested."

What's goin on? Not much, just Trump sharing content from white supremacists, filtered through his own orgs, who advocate for a white nation to "protect" themselves against racial minorities.

Trump is a white supremacist, y'all. That or he's even dumber than white supremacists and is getting cucked into sharing their content. Neither option is good.

[cubby]

The Chads has better stay the fuck outta this election, this time.

Lol, man, I remember that shit show. And that was before social media.

- - - Updated - - -

I understand the unique difficulties of voting in the US but damn is that absolutely a weird way to have elections.

It really is. The Democrats have tried to pass election reform for decades, and in some places have been successful (on the state level), but the GOP prevents any kind of updating or modernizing our election system.

[starlord]

Always thought he is more of a casual racist and his support for white supremacism is a faction of his narcissism; they like him so he likes them back.

considering his family history of being involved with the KKK, i think its more of a deeply nurtured belief he feels more comfortable sharing in public.

[cubby]

That is disturbing, and potentially accurate. I could easily see battleground states going Trump, even fairly strongly, during in person voting, then going Biden with mail-in voting. Which will be absolutely catastrophic for election confidence.

I really recommend in person voting if you can manage it at all. Not because I don't believe in mail in voting, but just to head off bullshit like that. Yes, I know Covid will still be a risk, but some personal risk is acceptable to make sure your vote gets counted, and gets counted early.

Agreed. I think part of us knew it could/would go down like this, but to have Axios "confirm" it just makes the concern that much more palpable.

And Trump will be at a new level of Tweet-storm insanity during those post-election weeks.

[Edge-]

Always thought he is more of a casual racist and his support for white supremacism is a faction of his narcissism; they like him so he likes them back.

I think he started out as a casual malignant racist, but he's seen how much purchase he has with the extreme right and white supremacist crowd so has stopped dog whistling for them and just started outright calling on them by name.

This is why there's usually a bit of a chain of reviews on materials sent out on behalf of someone like POTUS or a big CEO through official channels (again, Trump's Twitter is an official government channel, he decided to make it so). It's to vet content like this and make sure that they're not "accidentally" sharing content sourced to Stormfront or some shit.

Trump, being Trump, just acts emotionally from his "gut", which means uncritically sharing anything he thinks will make him look good. Even if that means appealing to white supremacists, which he has repeatedly done.

[cubby]

Assuming they are not scared off by Armed “poll watchers”

I still can't believe that will happen, even though I myself have posted articles showing the MAGAhats are planning just that very thing. What's worse, is that if it does happen, and the police are called in, it might/will turn violent, which will scare more voters away, which in the end is the win Trumpsters were originally looking for by showing up as armed poll watchers.

[eschatological]

Wear a fucking MAGA hat to the polls to go vote for Biden then. They don't get to come into the booth with you.

You're not allowed to wear campaign materials anywhere within 100 feet of a polling place.

[nonameelf]

As I allude to above, it is clearly not really boycotting either as Jon Ronson described or Ben Burgis is describing. So again I refer to my earlier post.

It's literally boycotting. Just because you gave it a different name doesn't mean it's something different.