Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Endus]

Yes yes, I'm not flatly making my case when I talked about the differences between the GOP/trump and biden or harper and biden. Maybe instead of just handwaving BS, you can actually come up with things where they are similar, w/out going into "capitalism bad" mode because, again, market socialism doesn't exist in mainstream discourse.

You get that specific differences don't disprove broad similarities, right? If I point at two trees and say "those are both conifers", saying "hey, one's a Spruce and the other's a Fir" doesn't actually disprove anything.

Also, you're literally the one who brought up my socialist views, not me. For no real reason, I might add.

Edit: The only thing close to a personal accusation I've made is the claim of libel, which was true, or the claim that market socialism isn't inside mainstream discourse, which isn't even a personal accusation.

1> "Libel" is illegal. You're accusing me of literally breaking the law in some meaningful sense, where I could face legal consequences for my posts, here. No, you've never had a basis for that claim.

2> Let's check post history, shall we? I'll trim for space but leave some relevant context, bolding the direct personal accusation/insult;

Oh please. You don't like biden. You'd blame him no matter what.

Despite me regularly, in the past, giving him due credit. Which you didn't care about, in your rush to imply I was making stuff up solely out of personal animus.

Weird then, that I had links actually talking about what he's doing wrt tariffs, and all you had was was crying about him not removing tariffs (which he's been addressing) and assigning motives that explain some nonsense that doesn't reflect reality. I have no belief that you'd praise him if you think he actually did something laudable, especially when I see you living in your own reality where he hasn't been addressing trump's tariffs.

Both accusing me of "crying" and claiming I'm mentally ill.

Biden is so middle of the road, and you're so far outside even canada's left, that your framing is preposterous. It's weird seeing the dichotomy of your rhetoric on this forum.

Claims that I'm some kind of extremist.

It's weird you think you're knowledgeable about this stuff.

Should be obvious why I consider that an insult.

I've seen your past comments where you complain that no one in canada's gov't shares your views so you have to vote strategically. How there's no market-socialist candidates with a chance. Revisionist BS isn't a great look.

Given that I've always supported strategic voting, vehemently, claiming there was any "revisionist BS" was false. And I'd already explained how you were wrong on this by that point.

Oh man! It's almost like I can still see your past comments to see the hypocrisy:

Calling me a hypocrite is an insult.

You're smearing the person the strategic vote is currently centered around based on something made up. Talk all you want about voting strategically, when you're talking out the other side of your mouth like this it doesn't mean a damn thing.

That's an accusation of dishonesty.

Again, this is your skewed BS because you're so far outside the mainstream you can't see the differences in mainstream discourse.

Again, insulting.

I'll keep that all in its own quotebox so it's nicely encapsulated and doesn't otherwise get re-quoted unnecessarily. But the idea that the only way you've been directly insulting to me was the accusation of law-breaking libellous statements is just, obviously, false on its face.

The reality is I have an opinion, and you don't like my opinion. And? I wasn't that unclear and you've consistently misrepresented me throughout.

[Ripster42]

You need to learn what libel is, because Endus didn’t commit it. Don’t get mad I’m calling you out on this.

Really? Written defamation conveyed to a 3rd party? Pretty sure that's what it is. There might not be a tort because there no economic harm, but it's absolutely libel. Don't get mad I'm saying you're full of shit.

You get that specific differences don't disprove broad similarities, right? If I point at two trees and say "those are both conifers", saying "hey, one's a Spruce and the other's a Fir" doesn't actually disprove anything.

Also, you're literally the one who brought up my socialist views, not me. For no real reason, I might add.

If you don't understand why your perspective is important when talking about not being able to see the differences in political stances, then the point probably wasn't for you anyway.

1> "Libel" is illegal. You're accusing me of literally breaking the law in some meaningful sense, where I could face legal consequences for my posts, here. No, you've never had a basis for that claim.

No, it's not. Even when you sue someone for libel, it's not because you broke the law, it's because you harmed them with your lies. You can't be incarcerated for libel in the US. I have no idea about canada, but I'd be surprised if you could there either.

2> Let's check post history, shall we? I'll trim for space but leave some relevant context, bolding the direct personal accusation/insult;

I'll just say the boxes are labelled 1-N and go from there, but I'll start with this: an accurate description isn't an insult.

1 You set up a situation where he's a nationalist and a neolib, where no matter what action he takes, in the realm we're talking about, is going to fall into one of those two categories in some way. Nationalists are, in the economic sphere, protectionist, neolibs, in the economic sphere, are free trade oriented. It's one or the other there (remember, in that labeling, we're talking about tariffs), and you're going to blame him either way. So: an accurate description isn't an insult.

2 Subjective and objective realities, and the acknowledgement of the difference between people's subjective realities isn't an insistence that you're mentally ill. In this case, your subjective reality equates trump/the GOP/harper and biden. I'll quote that later. Crying is directed at the weakness of your arguments, which so far have just been pronouncements with no backing (please believe, I'm talking about your biden insults, this digression into my 'insults' towards you, you've at least cited something).

3 Market socialism is outside even canada's left. I'm getting that from earlier statements you've made in other threads where you talked about strategic voting, not my own personal knowledge. An accurate description isn't an insult.

4 Not obvious. You compared two people with disparate positions on economics and then claimed they were the same. Calling you out on your insistence in the face of the stances provided so far in this thread isn't an insult, it's a goad to get you to actually back up your rhetoric with substance.

5 The revisionist BS is this:

My own views aren't really outside of Canada's left wing.

when I can remember your old posts claiming the opposite being the reason you're such a proponent of strategic voting.

6 Accurately describing a situation isn't an insult. When I point out hypocritical statements, and call those statements hypocrisy, that's not an insult.

7 It's not an accusation of dishonesty. It's saying that your position on strategic voting doesn't mesh with your insults towards the candidate the strategic vote is currently centered around.

8 Acknowledging that market socialism is outside even canada's left, and drawing the line between your position there, and your fallacious comparisons to biden isn't insulting. Accurate descriptions aren't insults.

I'll keep that all in its own quotebox so it's nicely encapsulated and doesn't otherwise get re-quoted unnecessarily. But the idea that the only way you've been directly insulting to me was the accusation of law-breaking libellous statements is just, obviously, false on its face.

The reality is I have an opinion, and you don't like my opinion. And? I wasn't that unclear and you've consistently misrepresented me throughout.

I've certainly been misrepresenting you less than you've been misrepresenting either biden or me. I've been highlighting the problems with your rhetoric, what little of it there's been. In this thread you've insisted biden is like harper and the GOP and cited zero policy similarities between the two and compared me to trump supporters for trying to get you to actually focus on the topic. Why can't you focus on the topic, instead dragging this thread here? Where's the support for your claim that biden is like harper or the republicans

My point was that Biden's not actually that distant on economic factors from where Trump and Republicans stand.
Biden's center-right, and I wouldn't frame him as "middle of the road". He'd be considered akin to Stephen Harper, up here, who was by no means a moderate.

the bit that's actually on topic that I asked for? Again, without dropping into "capitalism bad" mode, because that's still outside either of our nations' mainstream discourse. Since you're a supporter of strategic voting, I'm just going to assume you don't have a problem with that. Especially in a thread centered on US politics, specifically about the person you're denigrating.

Also, keeping it in a quote box like that just makes it a pain in the ass to respond to, nested quotes are already elided on this forum.

[Endus]

No, it's not. Even when you sue someone for libel, it's not because you broke the law, it's because you harmed them with your lies. You can't be incarcerated for libel in the US. I have no idea about canada, but I'd be surprised if you could there either.

You can't sue for defamation just because there was harm; it's because it specifically violates the law that allows that harm to be pursued under the court system. There's all kinds of objectively harmful statements that aren't defamatory and don't break the law.

You're also confusing criminal and civil law-breaking. Breaking the terms of a contract is against the law, but it's not a crime. It's grounds for a lawsuit, to have the terms enforced by the courts or penalties assigned for the action.

Regardless, you've also brought up that libel fundamentally requires harm, and frankly, if you think my comments harmed Biden, you're assigning way more credence to my apparently awesome power than I would. So, by your own implicit admission, it couldn't fall under libel, because my comments can't harm Biden.

Again, this all boils down to you disagreeing with an opinion I hold, and choosing to make repeated direct and indirect insults towards me as a result of that. I'm not falling for the bait any more, and your attempts to derail the thread into some kind of symposium about the iniquities of Endus, MMO-C Poster and apparent Boogeyman of Biden. I won't be responding to this derail any further.

[Ripster42]

Again, this all boils down to you disagreeing with an opinion I hold, and choosing to make repeated direct and indirect insults towards me as a result of that. I'm not falling for the bait any more, and your attempts to derail the thread into some kind of symposium about the iniquities of Endus, MMO-C Poster and apparent Boogeyman of Biden. I won't be responding to this derail any further.

Way to not back up your opinion with any actual evidence of similarities between biden and harper/GOP/trump. You could have just not responded instead of responding to say you're not going to respond anymore. This is the same thing you did last time you couldn't sustain your position with facts, although at least that time you didn't try to play the victim.

BTW, it's criminal law breaking and civil tort. Different things. Civil tort isn't illegal, it's tortious. If you're going to be that pedantic, get it right.

[Snuke]

@Ripster42 his posts don’t rise to that level, nor would they meet the necessary level required in a court of law. I get you really need this win, but you’re wrong.

[Ripster42]

@Ripster42 his posts don’t rise to that level, nor would they meet the necessary level required in a court of law. I get you really need this win, but you’re wrong.

As I said, there's no tort because it didn't cause damages. That's not required for it to be libel. A tort is only required to win damages at trial, not for something to be defamatory.

[Rozz]

Stay civil and don't get personal. It's unnecessary and distracting from the otherwise fine discussion.

Additionally, cease bickering about your personal voting preferences. You can create a thread about the importance of voting or argue about why you wouldn't/would support someone, but this obsessive derail in this forum needs to stop. It has never been posted in the appropriate thread and it is always framed in a way to re-ignite years-old arguments between feuding posters. You can continue conversations with someone without involving everyone else via PMs.

The second half of this warning has been added to the OP.

[UnifiedDivide]

Cute that your little group calls people cultists all the time in this forum and yet fails to see the same behavior within yourselves.

Oh, please, inform me on what my "little group" actually is, I'm really curious now.

Meanwhile, she remains correct. Even in this post you show you're simply not going to vote at all unless you can vote for a "satisfactory third-party candidate." You literally made yourself irrelevant to US politics.

Edit: I see the mod post now, so I'll leave it there. If you wanna get the magical last word in, he my guest.

[Beefhammer]

Oh, please, inform me on what my "little group" actually is, I'm really curious now.

Rational, intelligent, critically thinking people.

[fwc577]

This shit is just crazy and I wanted to share:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/one-small...114112181.html

This is a town in New Hampshire called Croydon. It's a small town with a population under 800 people.

In March, their was a budgetary meeting and someone proposed an amendment to the town budget to cut the education budget from 1.6 million down to $800k.

This meant that the neighboring schools that children went to, people would get, essentially, $10k per child so they could attend school. The problem is, the public schools in the area require people not in the town, $18,000 to attend.

So if parents of the 80 children in Croydon wanted their children to attend public school, they were going to need to come up with an extra $8000 in order for their children to attend.

The budgetary amendment passed with a 20-14 margin in a town of 800 people.

Parents have scrambled to figure out how to undo this and their only recourse was to hold a special session that would require half the towns population to show up and cast ballots to overturn the amendment.

They were able to successfully overturn it with a 379-2 ballot vote.

Where did the other 12 people go who supported the amendment?

Well, you see, in order for it to be repealed, half the towns population had to show up and vote. So while all those parents were out there convincing people to show up and vote, all of the people in favor of the amendment were convincing people to just not show up.

Democracy doesn't die in the darkness, like WAPO claims. Democracy dies when people are indifferent to democracy.

There is a quote from this article that really stuck with me that I feel like could be a caption on hundreds of photos from the last 12 years.

"The moment revealed a democracy mired in indifference."

[Shadowferal]

This shit is just crazy and I wanted to share:

Free staters...libertarians. They just found out that part of their ideology is idiocy when they actually practice it.

[fwc577]

Free staters...libertarians. They just found out that part of their ideology is idiocy when they actually practice it.

Yeah, in general though, this idea of "I don't care until it affects me" is so fucking blatant throughout all of American politics right now. The situation we're currently in is because we didn't have the turnout in 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016. Then in 2018 we finally decided that, oh shit, this stuff matters, and we've been working to correct it ever since but I am for sure, afraid of a backslide in 2022 who think that ousting Trump was enough.

I'm sorry to say, the Republicans made huge gains in 4 election cycles. Democrats are just beginning by winning 2 election cycles. We cannot continue this trade off of letting Republicans win 4+ election cycles and then Democrats winning a couple of election cycles and expect us not to slide backwards as a Democracy.

All the gerrymandering has put Republicans into a spot where if we had 100% turnout for all elections in 2022, I'm certain Democrats would end up with nearly 300 Democratic House seats and 6, maybe even more, gained Senate seats. Republicans rely on indifference and poor turnout.

What NEEDS to happen for Democrats, is voter turnout that exceeds 50% in these midterms. I would prefer that the anger of overturning some of our rights by the Supreme Court results in 60% turnout, but that's wishful thinking in my opinion.

[PC2]

Dang I just realized my favorite person in the country is Joe Biden's press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. Most people in the country are constantly being pessimistic and negative, meanwhile the press secretary is always spreading positivity and optimism in regards to the country. Press secretaries rock, imo.

[fwc577]

Want to shoutout with a "Thanks Brandon" to Joe Biden.

With the Jobs report released in the last week:

372,000 jobs were added demolishing expectations

155,000 people filed for first-time unemployment in April which is the LOWEST number in 50 years

Gas prices have had some of the biggest, single-day drops since 2008

While Gas prices are still recovering in the US, Europe is not seeing gas prices recover like the US

The GDP has grown over the last half year by 5.3%

Core inflation has dropped 3 months in a row now, which suggests that the current inflation issues are due to supply and not actual inflation.

Trump and the GOP have been crying recession, recession, recession over and over but they forgot that the GOP isn't currently in power and passing legislation to bring our economy into recession. Stop voting for the people killing our Country. Stop voting for the GOP.

[Edge-]

Remember how Trump promised "MEXICO WILL PAY FOR THE WALL"?

Why am I posting this question in the Biden thread? Well -

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/abc-...ry?id=86672772

Mexico on Tuesday agreed to contribute $1.5 billion to a joint initiative with the U.S. to improve infrastructure along the U.S.-Mexico border, according to a person familiar with the commitment.

Granted it's not going to pay for "THE WALL", but I don't recall if Trump was able to get Mexico to pay for...well...anything relating to the border during his four years? Meanwhile, in year two Biden secured over $1B in funding that would help border security and improve processing as a benefit for both nations.

[Paranoid Android]

BREAKING: Sen. Joe Manchin has told Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer he will oppose an economic measure if it includes climate or energy provisions or boosts taxes on the rich or corporations, according to a Democrat briefed on the conversations.

Sen. Joe Manchin has said he’ll oppose an economic measure he’s been negotiating with Democratic leaders if it includes climate or energy provisions or higher taxes on the rich and corporations, a Democrat briefed on the conversations said late Thursday, delivering a stunning blow to one of the party’s top election-year priorities.

Just a pure piece of feces. I hate him so much.

Not only killing any climate action, which to be fair the corporate Dems usually help by nerfing this anyways. Manchin does more to hinder any Dem substantial legislation than any other he has to go.

I know, I know. I will get the people who have always told me he helps electing some frikin federal judge somewhere. But enough is enough. The difference between him and say a Collins, Murkowski is they are on the team. Never fall for the Collins "this concerns me" or " I didn't think he would do that" bs. They are the TEAM! They fall in line and know that voting Republican agenda moves forward conservatism for them. The Dems and well Manchin don't get that Republicans will NEVER vote for their laws or even compromise. So yeah you need 100% of Dem voters on board, especially with slim margins.

Manchin is the worst in that him alone is killing every Dem movement nationwide. Which is why I don't get the Dem leadership. Realizing that by him killing everything he is bleeding votes nationwide from other Dem races, especially the federal election. "As we say, why should I harder, when some dipshit Dem is going to kill the bill".

[Endus]

BREAKING: Sen. Joe Manchin has told Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer he will oppose an economic measure if it includes climate or energy provisions or boosts taxes on the rich or corporations, according to a Democrat briefed on the conversations.



Just a pure piece of feces. I hate him so much.

Not only killing any climate action, which to be fair the corporate Dems usually help by nerfing this anyways. Manchin does more to hinder any Dem substantial legislation than any other he has to go.

I know, I know. I will get the people who have always told me he helps electing some frikin federal judge somewhere. But enough is enough. The difference between him and say a Collins, Murkowski is they are on the team. Never fall for the Collins "this concerns me" or " I didn't think he would do that" bs. They are the TEAM! They fall in line and know that voting Republican agenda moves forward conservatism for them. The Dems and well Manchin don't get that Republicans will NEVER vote for their laws or even compromise. So yeah you need 100% of Dem voters on board, especially with slim margins.

Manchin is the worst in that him alone is killing every Dem movement nationwide. Which is why I don't get the Dem leadership. Realizing that by him killing everything he is bleeding votes nationwide from other Dem races, especially the federal election. "As we say, why should I harder, when some dipshit Dem is going to kill the bill".

Also, let's be clear; this is open and naked class war. If you're opposing higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations, you're empowering the already-empowered at the expense of the working class. If you're earning less than a half mil a year or so, people like Manchin are your enemies. They are engaged in a class war aimed at directly and indirectly harming you and everyone like you. That's their stated intent; he's saying that, right out loud, right here.

You folks need to start realizing you're not just in a class war, you're losing the class war, and the only people you're listening to are the victors who're telling you that you deserved to lose.

[Paranoid Android]

Also, let's be clear; this is open and naked class war. If you're opposing higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations, you're empowering the already-empowered at the expense of the working class. If you're earning less than a half mil a year or so, people like Manchin are your enemies. They are engaged in a class war aimed at directly and indirectly harming you and everyone like you. That's their stated intent; he's saying that, right out loud, right here.

You folks need to start realizing you're not just in a class war, you're losing the class war, and the only people you're listening to are the victors who're telling you that you deserved to lose.

So likely goes in "Roe v Wade" thread but...


BREAKING: 20 major corporations have donated and RSVP’d to the Republican Attorney General Association's luxurious 5-star resort retreat this weekend.

They’re contributing up to $250,000 to “help combat the Democrats’ pro-abortion agenda.”

Alright this has to do with Roe but it's fairly easy that wealthy and corporations are funding fascism, aka the Republicans. The Dems on the other hand are not innocent bystanders or non-willing participants. They seem to take the money and just block things or idly stand band while rights get taken away.

My tie in here is Home Depot, based in Georgia has donated $1 million to Herschel Walker campaign. So lets boycott Home Depot and shop at Lowes. Well, from above Lowe's is a sponsor, donator to this retreat. The article or nobody goes on record to state that abortion will be discussed and yes, likely this about "how can we deregulate to make more money" retreat. But this is funding the fascism that will lead to rights being taken away.

All in all, corporations and the wealthy seem to be fine with a fascism if you make more money. You watched as some backed away on Jan 6th but as predicted it took barely 6 months and they were back donating to the Republican party.

[Endus]

So likely goes in "Roe v Wade" thread but...


BREAKING: 20 major corporations have donated and RSVP’d to the Republican Attorney General Association's luxurious 5-star resort retreat this weekend.

They’re contributing up to $250,000 to “help combat the Democrats’ pro-abortion agenda.”

Alright this has to do with Roe but it's fairly easy that wealthy and corporations are funding fascism, aka the Republicans. The Dems on the other hand are not innocent bystanders or non-willing participants. They seem to take the money and just block things or idly stand band while rights get taken away.

My tie in here is Home Depot, based in Georgia has donated $1 million to Herschel Walker campaign. So lets boycott Home Depot and shop at Lowes. Well, from above Lowe's is a sponsor, donator to this retreat. The article or nobody goes on record to state that abortion will be discussed and yes, likely this about "how can we deregulate to make more money" retreat. But this is funding the fascism that will lead to rights being taken away.

All in all, corporations and the wealthy seem to be fine with a fascism if you make more money. You watched as some backed away on Jan 6th but as predicted it took barely 6 months and they were back donating to the Republican party.

Honestly, I think you're underestimating capitalist manipulation. Take a look into Vanguard and Blackrock sometime. You get major asset holders like that who're major voting shares on the boards of, say, both Coke and Pepsi, because the "competition" is nonexistent in practice because capitalists realized it was way more profitable to just control all sides of the competition and profit either way.

Same for politics. Hence why companies will donate to both Democrats and Republicans.

[uuuhname]

fascism has two wings: the right wing authoritarian's and the corporate backers.