Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Wed Nov 25 22:27:59 PST 2020

Utopia Talk / Politics / Biden Might Get +80M Votes
Y2A
Member
Wed Nov 18 22:03:09
Total vote count now: 79,377,147
New York: 84% Reported
New York 2016: 4,556,124
New York 2020 now: 3,919,335

obaminated
Member
Wed Nov 18 22:36:50
Yah kinda weird with the huge voter turnout, the lack of Biden rallies and the unanimous Biden votes. Almost seems like a scam.
Habebe
Member
Wed Nov 18 22:41:26
The real scam is its going on the third week after the election and NY still hasn't finished counting? No wonder everyone is fleeing that shithole.
obaminated
Member
Wed Nov 18 22:44:32
Biden says his campaign built the biggest voter fraud campaign ever. At first we all assumed he was just a senile old man talking out of turn. Now it seems he might have been a senile old man speaking truth by accident. Media wont care tho.
Habebe
Member
Wed Nov 18 22:53:17
Like I get Alaska taking longer, it's in the Arctic, rural etc. I feel like most things run slower but NYC isnthe city that doesn't sleep nd we still.dont have full vote counts weeks later, wtf?
Y2A
Member
Wed Nov 18 23:02:28
shortage of staff, significant numbers of mail-in and the fact that they can take their sweet ass time because everyone knows NY goes Dem all play into it.
jergul
large member
Thu Nov 19 01:27:57
It turns out that people vote when they have to opportunity to vote.

Funny how that works.
habebe
Member
Thu Nov 19 01:32:35
Does Jergul copy and paste his posts? I feel like that atleast the 3rd time Ive seen said post.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 19 01:50:49
"kinda weird with the huge voter turnout"

i don't find it weird at all... it was known Trump driving turnout on both sides

why is this concept hard to grasp? Trump is -hated- by anyone not brainwashed (as he is absurdly unfit for office, as he proves hourly)
earthpig
GTFO HOer
Thu Nov 19 02:31:45
Obaminated, it's time to change your handle to Bidet. After the epic bet that resulted in you having to be "Obaminated" to begin with, and still today being a blind Trump cultist completely divorced from reality, you don't rate the extra letters of "Bidenated," so you just get "Bidet."
patom
Member
Thu Nov 19 04:47:54
LOL ^
werewolf dictator
Member
Thu Nov 19 04:55:08
either trump presides over the greatest participation in american democracy ever..

or lots of these votes are fraudulent from people who think they are ensuring the defeat of orange hitler..
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Nov 19 12:57:13
Trump inspired a historic turnout to get rid of him now just like he inspired a historic turnout in 2018 of Ds over Rs

he's very inspiring
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Nov 19 13:26:42
Bidet
Douched member
habebe
Member
Thu Nov 19 13:31:31
TW, Republicans netted seats in the Senate (2) and also got milluons more votes than Obama did who was supposed to be inspiring.

I would also point out that nost people who " hate" Trump do so for skeptical reasons. It's usually over style and not policies which leads me to think a great deal of it is from.narratice driven media/news etc.
Dakyron
Member
Thu Nov 19 14:29:28
"I would also point out that nost people who " hate" Trump do so for skeptical reasons. It's usually over style and not policies which leads me to think a great deal of it is from.narratice driven media/news etc"

Here we go again... Habebe says something stupid. Trump has been a disaster as president. His divisiveness is well documented (from "very fine people" to "stand back and stand by"). His handling of COVID-19 crisis is well documented(and ongoing).

His assault on US healthcare, his tax cuts for the wealthy, his use of law enforcement to gas people for publicity. I could go on and on.

People hate every part of him.

obaminated
Member
Thu Nov 19 14:40:09
That was a very inspired insult. EP. Kudos.
obaminated
Member
Thu Nov 19 14:41:03
People hate him.... which is why he got the 2nd most votes for a presidential candidate in history.
Dakyron
Member
Thu Nov 19 14:50:22
"People hate him.... which is why he got the 2nd most votes for a presidential candidate in history. "

A) People hate him for these reasons...

B) All people everywhere hate him all the time.

Which idea was being presented in my last post?

Anyway, as for the 2nd most votes comment...

"the highest voter turnout rate for a presidential race was in 1876, when 82.6 percent of eligible voters (white and Black men) cast ballots in the race between Republican Rutherford Hayes and Democrat Samuel Tilden"

In 2020, it was 66%. So roughly 16 percentage points lower than Rutherford B Hayes' victory in 1876. It would also rank as the 17th highest voter turnout, percentage wise, in US history.


Rugian
Member
Thu Nov 19 14:59:11
"white and Black"

Ugh. Even our capitalization has become politically correct.
obaminated
Member
Thu Nov 19 14:59:13
Moving the goalpost.
Hrothgar
Member
Thu Nov 19 15:16:05
I love how the extreme patriots who supposedly love the USA are the one's attempting (and cheering on) the effort to drive a stake through the heart of the USA's government stability and function.

Hmmm no legal basis large enough to over turn votes? Time for plan B, start attempting to overthrow the voting laws that have been confirmed legit and create rogue elector college votes.
habebe
Member
Thu Nov 19 15:55:40
http://youtu.be/0z0iuWh3sek

Hrothgar, Rogue electors?thats terrible.

Changing voting rules.late in the campaign? how terrible.
Dakyron
Member
Thu Nov 19 15:59:47
"I love how the extreme patriots who supposedly love the USA are the one's attempting (and cheering on) the effort to drive a stake through the heart of the USA's government stability and function. "

Those are not extreme patriots, they are fucktards. The fact that they wave US flags is more a product of the left hating the establishment than of their own love of the country.
Rugian
Member
Thu Nov 19 16:02:14
Hrothgar

Extreme patriots do not allow for the country to be taken over by socialists under any circumstances.

Sometimes you need a Pinochet to take out an Allende.
Habebe
Member
Thu Nov 19 16:32:46
Fucking love Pinochet. Why can't he get statue? He is colored.
Rugian
Member
Thu Nov 19 16:47:45
Pinochet is indeed a gentleman and a hero.

I can only imagine what he would say about being called Latinx.
Habebe
Member
Thu Nov 19 17:08:09
I have a bunch of PR friends from PA who disregard the term. It's guulty white people getting offended for someone else...
Y2A
Member
Thu Nov 19 18:28:21
the vast majority of latinos dislike the "latinx" bs.
Y2A
Member
Thu Nov 19 19:49:08
79,604,525
Y2A
Member
Thu Nov 19 19:54:17
for all the talk about Philly, the margin shifted 3.5% from the '16 election.
Y2A
Member
Thu Nov 19 20:00:19
to the clown i mean.
earthpig
GTFO HOer
Fri Nov 20 01:18:44
"That was a very inspired insult. EP. Kudos."

I nod my head appreciatively to you, sir.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Nov 21 01:07:30
[Habebe]: "leads me to think a great deal of it is from.narratice driven media/news etc."
[Dakyron]: "His divisiveness is well documented (from "very fine people" to "stand back and stand by")"

A fun thing to note: in contradicting Habebe's point that lots of division was created by media narratives, Dakyron disagrees and cites as evidence two media narratives which bent reality to create division. :D
("Very fine people on both sides" was a video editing manipulation (Trump condemned the white supremacists in the very same speech), and "stand back and stand by" was willful misinterpretation of Trump's response to the question "stand down?")

The other items (COVID response, health care, tax cuts, and the photo op) could be individually debated.
• The photo op is still a grey area. The "peaceful protest" media narrative was false (pepper spray was used on a violent attacker), but it was also shown that pepper balls and smoke canisters were used. The big gap in information still remains whether or not Trump was aware that force would be necessary to clear a path. I think he probably did, but we'll have to wait for tell-alls from his soon-to-be-fired staffers.
• On COVID, I agree that a more authoritarian president (Clinton, perhaps) would have been more effective in getting COVID cases down, although, this late in the game it would cause a lot of damage (some health estimates claim that a U.S. lockdown at this point could cause hundreds of thousands to die in economically dependent countries. With luck, vaccines will be more of an option by the time Biden steps in); Trump left it up to states, but interstate issues hurt the responses of more responsible states.
• In health care and taxes, Trump at least got rid of the ACA's individual mandate, which helped a lot of poor people (a particularly flawed part of the ACA was that if you were too poor to get coverage, you'd have to pay monthly fines for lapsed coverage, which could end up costing about $1000 at the end of the year — not an easy sum to pay out of pocket when you can't even pay for health care in the first place).
• Tax cuts did not just help the rich; they were positive for the middle class also (65% of Americans received a tax cut). However, the big negative of Trump's tax plan was the deficit, though World War III should take care of that ( http://www...mps-tax-reform-plan-explained/ ) ;)

..
@The OP

I think a big part of the high participation was simply COVID and mail-in ballots. It was made easier to vote, and lots more people than usual had time to vote. If mail-in ballots become standard in future state elections (post-pandemic), these sorts of numbers may also become standard.
kargen
Member
Sat Nov 21 01:08:14
I tend to think this shows the laziness of Americans. They can't be bothered to go stand in line and vote but if they can check a few boxes from their couch.

jergul
large member
Sat Nov 21 01:09:20
"I think a big part of the high participation was simply COVID and mail-in ballots. It was made easier to vote, and lots more people than usual had time to vote. If mail-in ballots become standard in future state elections (post-pandemic), these sorts of numbers may also become standard."

Yepp. It turns out people vote when it is practical to vote.
Dukhat
Member
Sat Nov 21 01:43:38


“The "peaceful protest" media narrative”

One dude being pepper sprayed doesn’t make the whole protest violent.


“On COVID, I agree that a more authoritarian president”



No, you don’t need a more authoritarian president. Just look at Germany vs the US. Easily available mass-testing, high compliance with social distancing and mask-wearing, and a public health response led by scientists.

None of these policies are particularly authoritarian.

Trump was literally calling the whole thing a nothing burger while it raging in blue states because he didn’t care about people that didn’t vote for him. He crippled our public health response by spreading the falsehood that it was nothing. He called the Coronavirus, “their new hoax” implicating the Democrats as scaremongering.

This is an important issue because you argued before that the media is lying when they said Trump called it a hoax. But the context of the speech made it clear, he considered the Coronavirus just another flu that would disappear and that any serious response to it was political by the democrats to harm him.



So it was just as bad if not worse because it continued to cripple our public health response because Trumpers still think mask-wearing is somehow hurting their freedoms. And still Trump has not used the money to make mass-testing available because he wanted to keep downplaying the Coronavirus.



• “In health care and taxes, Trump at least got rid of the ACA's individual mandate, which helped a lot of poor people”

Poor people can get healthcare through medicaid expansion in non-retarded states. Self-employed people were the ones most targeted by the mandate but then again, they are freeloaders given the uninsured wait until it’s too late and then crowd our hospitals. There are many issues with the ACA still but not a single damn thing Trump pushed helped improve healthcare in America; it was all just political posturing.


“Tax cuts did not just help the rich”
It mostly helped the super rich. And it also had hidden tax hikes coming in 2021 and anther wave coming a few years later for the middle class so it will end up almost entirely helping the rich (reconciliation requires any legislation be revenue-neutral).

These tax cuts were even worse from a policy-perspective than the Bush Tax cus which cut taxes across the board. The corporate tax rate predominantly affects the super-rich who can afford to cash out of gains in the stock market. The rest of us mostly hold stocks in illiquid pools such as our IRA’s or 401ks.

****

“I think a big part of the high participation was simply COVID and mail-in ballots.”

Turnout was high in 2018 too. People really feel strongly about Trump either way. Though to attribute turnout solely to Covid and mail-in ballots looks demonstrably false.
kargen
Member
Sat Nov 21 03:00:19
"Yepp. It turns out people vote when it is practical to vote"

It has always been practical to vote. Sometimes it isn't convenient but then again if you can't be bothered to stand in line for a bit I'm guessing your not making an informed vote anyway. A good portion of people in the US simply do not think there is much priority to voting.
Forwyn
Member
Sat Nov 21 03:30:46
"Yepp. It turns out people vote when it is practical to vote"

Reminder that our forefathers managed to vote with only one public voting locale per county

http://uto...hread=87108&time=1605934707607
Dukhat
Member
Sat Nov 21 05:07:16
Reminder that Kanye won more votes than any candidate in the first 3 elections because only white, land-owning males could vote.

Trump isn't going to be president soon. I think racists are going to be surprised at how much saying the quiet part loudly won't work as well anymore ...
Rugian
Member
Sat Nov 21 05:51:58
"because only white"

Incorrect. 10 out of the 13 original states allowed black men who met the property requirement to vote in the first elections.
Average Ameriacn
Member
Sat Nov 21 07:55:30
If only 10% of his votes are wrong then Trump has won.

10% isn't that much, we have 13% Blacks in the USA.
obaminated
Member
Sat Nov 21 10:24:23
New way for trump to win the election. If biden dies before he gets sworn in the candidate with the next most votes becomes president.

Gonna be a long 60 days.
Average Ameriacn
Member
Sat Nov 21 10:44:31
Biden would never survive Corona like Trump did.
hood
Member
Sat Nov 21 11:48:04
""Very fine people on both sides" was a video editing manipulation (Trump condemned the white supremacists in the very same speech)"

Trump contradicting himself within the same sentence isn't uncommon, so a contradiction within the same speech shouldn't be surprising or any evidence to negate his "very fine people" comment. Yes, we all know that Trump spits up verbal diarrhea so that anyone who wants to hear anything CAN hear those anythings. It doesn't change the fact that he did, in fact, support the "very fine people."
Rugian
Member
Sat Nov 21 11:59:35
"Trump contradicting himself within the same sentence isn't uncommon, so a contradiction within the same speech shouldn't be surprising or any evidence to negate his "very fine people" comment."

I swear, the mental gymnastics at work here...

The Unite the Right rally attacted a wide range of groups. Trump speficially condemned the neo-Nazis and white supremacists and said that some other participants were fine people.

Establishment media's ability to gaslight is impressive, I give them that.
Paramount
Member
Sat Nov 21 12:08:03
” Trump speficially condemned the neo-Nazis and white supremacists”


I think he condemned the Left and said that some other participants were fine people.
Paramount
Member
Sat Nov 21 12:09:43
He certainly did not SPECIFICALLY condemn the neo-nazis and the white supremacists.
Rugian
Member
Sat Nov 21 12:19:45
Paramount, as usual you are wrong.

"REPORTER: Do you think what you call the alt left is the same as neo-Nazis?

TRUMP: Those people – all of those people, excuse me – I've condemned neo-Nazis. I've condemned many different groups, but not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch.

...

REPORTER: I just didn’t understand what you were saying. You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly?

TRUMP: No, no. There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before. If you look, they were people protesting very quietly, the taking down the statue of Robert E. Lee. I’m sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day, it looked like they had some rough, bad people, neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call ‘em. But you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest and very legally protest, because you know, I don't know if you know, but they had a permit. The other group didn't have a permit. So I only tell you this: there are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment. But there are two sides to the country. Does anybody have a final – does anybody have a final question? You have an infrastructure question."

http://www...sts-alt-left-transcript-241662
hood
Member
Sat Nov 21 13:24:57
Yes, the transcript clearly shows Trump initially defending neo-nazis and then back tracking and contradicting himself. Multiple times.
obaminated
Member
Sat Nov 21 13:40:10
Not really, hood. He makes it clear he is trying to explain his position and goes back multiple times to be more clear. Because he was going against the leftist position that everyone in that crowd were racist neo nazis.
habebe
Member
Sat Nov 21 13:54:03
"He certainly did not SPECIFICALLY condemn the neo-nazis and the white supremacists."

I am of the opinion that in context of the entire segment " stand back" clearly means stand down.

However the media was waiting in him to say something They could twist.

Meanwhile Biden says we have created the greatest voter fraud organization in the world and if anyone points it out its " he misspoke"

But if your waiting in someone to say something you can construe as x you will like hear x no matter what.

And people can call my beleif that the media is in bed with the DNC a crazy conspiracy theory, but the fact is we have clear evidence of that.

It was a crazy conspiracy theory that the NSA under Obama was spying illegally on everyday citizens.[But it fucking happened]

Again we have the evidence. I hope on his way out Trump pardons Snowden and Arrange. They deserve presidential medals of freedom.
habebe
Member
Sat Nov 21 13:54:04
"He certainly did not SPECIFICALLY condemn the neo-nazis and the white supremacists."

I am of the opinion that in context of the entire segment " stand back" clearly means stand down.

However the media was waiting in him to say something They could twist.

Meanwhile Biden says we have created the greatest voter fraud organization in the world and if anyone points it out its " he misspoke"

But if your waiting in someone to say something you can construe as x you will like hear x no matter what.

And people can call my beleif that the media is in bed with the DNC a crazy conspiracy theory, but the fact is we have clear evidence of that.

It was a crazy conspiracy theory that the NSA under Obama was spying illegally on everyday citizens.[But it fucking happened]

Again we have the evidence. I hope on his way out Trump pardons Snowden and Arrange. They deserve presidential medals of freedom.
Forwyn
Member
Sat Nov 21 20:17:13
"Yes, the transcript clearly shows Trump initially defending neo-nazis and then back tracking and contradicting himself."

Lol. Faggots in the media conflate him with white supremacists at every opportunity.

Because he isn't smart enough to clearly enunciate his positions consistently, he fucks up occasionally, enough so that faggots can point to it as proof that their initial assertions were anything other than Chicken Little faggotry.

Dude is a New York liberal who has spent decades making inroads to racial and sexual minorities.
Y2A
Member
Sat Nov 21 21:53:35
79,787,724 votes (51.0%)
Y2A
Member
Sat Nov 21 21:57:48
if you can't see that the clown is an obvious racist that has use racialized narratives (obama birtherism) since day one to make it to the top of the republican socialist american workers party then there really is no discussion to have. a discussion with a lunatic ranting homeless man in the subway would be more productive.
Habebe
Member
Sat Nov 21 22:18:27
Trump is clearly not racist.

1. Birtherism s a tactic he pulled on Ted Cruz as well.Was that racism?

Trump even gotnthe most diverse voter demographic of any Republican.

Especially against Biden. Biden is clearly racist, but in an old time sort of way. Like my grandma.
Y2A
Member
Sat Nov 21 22:38:59
"1. Birtherism s a tactic he pulled on Ted Cruz as well.Was that racism?"

Yes. Also, what difference does it make if it is a tactic? I don't care about whether the clown "really" believes the racist drivel he's put out there for 4 years non-stop. I care about the impact that that drivel has had on day-to-day society.

"Trump even gotnthe most diverse voter demographic of any Republican."

That doesn't seem right to me at all. Bush got something like 40% of the hispanic vote. Pretty sure that Reagan and Nixon also got larger portions of the black vote than the clown.

Regardless, having support from a relatively small portion of minorities doesn't disprove the assertion. Using that same logic Nazi Germany was not antisemetic because well then how do you explain Chaim Rumkowski or Stella Goldschlag?

"Especially against Biden. Biden is clearly racist, but in an old time sort of way. Like my grandma."

Possible, to be clear, i don't hold ppl to impossible standards of having to be hardcore anti-racists 24/7.
habebe
Member
Sun Nov 22 03:12:41
I point out thatbits a tactic to draw attention to what it really was a non racist tactic. Questioning someone's identity is not inherently racist.

Side fact. Phil Berg was my personal criminal defense attorney. He was the lawyer who sued Obama formhis Birth Certificate and he sued GWB for war crimes.

Nixon may have gotten more, not sure. But in recent times Trump garnered a very diverse group of supporters.Who else could get both the Israeli and Talaban endorsements?

And that is completely different from a hand full of tokens. Millions, and the first Republican in my lifetime to make noticeable gains into the blacks voters, or even tried.

Biden if you look at his history clearly has racist tendencies. I dont think he thinks so , it the guys like 80.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Nov 23 02:18:47
[Dukhat]: "One dude being pepper sprayed doesn’t make the whole protest violent."

Oh, so then you agree that only one person was pepper-sprayed? In that case, the rest of the media narrative was false — i.e., there was not some kind of horrible executive-led effort to gas everyone for a photo op. That's a strange position to take and not at all the one that CNN fed you, but okay.

The realistic narrative: that the "peaceful protesters" were once again easily incited to violence when given a target, causing skirmishes. Those skirmishes were met with one incident of pepper spray usage, some non-irritant smoke canisters (I've read 1–3), and pepper balls. So we see a small contingent of violent protesters met with dispersal techniques. Kind of a non-event, but the Zeitgeist must be maintained.

..
[Dukhat]: "

No, you don’t need a more authoritarian president. Just look at Germany vs the US. Easily available mass-testing, high compliance with social distancing and mask-wearing, and a public health response led by scientists.

None of these policies are particularly authoritarian. [/] Trump was literally calling the whole thing a nothing burger ... he considered the Coronavirus just another flu"

Interesting for you to use Germany as an example when they're currently rated the 13th worst country for COVID versus being the 19th most populated country (i.e., they're doing worse for their population size than they should be). They've also been experiencing their worst surge in cases (record-setting daily cases; this surge starting in October), which has meant that they're running out of ICU beds. They've also been seeing anti-lockdown protests wherein people complain about the over-strictness of the government's lockdown measures and mandates, with Germans there saying that "it's like a flu or can be compared to a regular flu" (CNN; November 21st, 2020; http://www...icu-beds-covid-intl/index.html ). But maybe you meant that Germans today get their news from Trump's speeches back in March?

Interesting also that you dismiss the effects of an authoritarian leader while also heavily blaming Trump. You say he called it a "nothing burger" and dismissed it, which is pretty low on the authoritarian scale, but you think that authoritarian measures such as dictating a response to the "blue states" would have been effective. So which is it? Do you think that an authoritarian response wherein the entire country commits to certain measures such as cooperating with science and restricting crowd sizes would work.. or not? Biden has a very authoritarian plan brewing, so plan ahead if you want to maintain partisanship in your response.

..
[Dukhat]: "He crippled our public health response by spreading the falsehood that it was nothing. He called the Coronavirus, “their new hoax” implicating the Democrats as scaremongering.

This is an important issue because you argued before that the media is lying when they said Trump called it a hoax. But the context of the speech made it clear, he considered the Coronavirus just another flu that would disappear and that any serious response to it was political by the democrats to harm him.

"

It might help to carefully parse the "hoax" language.
The media said that Trump called the virus itself a hoax (i.e., they said that he thought that COVID-19 was not even a real thing). *That* was the media lie, and the useful idiots on social media still repeat that lie (CNN, ironically, even fact-checked Biden's Twitter for propagating that lie in September http://www.cnn.com/2020/09/17/politics/joe-biden-campaign-ad-trump-coronavirus-hoax-fact-check/index.html ). You even parse the actual "hoax" meaning in your own paragraph: he "considered the Coronavirus just another flu". I.e., by your own admission Trump *did*/*does* think it's real, he's just down-playing it. See the difference?

That said, Trump said that with "hoax" he was "referring to the action that [the Democrats] take to try and pin [COVID] on somebody." And in that respect he was correct. Even now you can find people on social media fallaciously blaming every single U.S. COVID death on Trump — this is insane logic and the logic will quickly fall apart when Biden assumes the presidency. People may give Biden a few months, but when Americans continue to die of COVID by, say, next May.. is that still Trump's fault? Not really, but that's obviously the "inherited problem" logic that will be used to shield that cognitive dissonance.

In reality, it is difficult to say what percentage of COVID deaths can be attributed to executive action in a respective country. The U.S. has had 256,782 deaths as of today. Were 100% Trump's fault? Realistically: no. 0%? Also no. How do we get that "executive responsibility" number? We know that the U.S. is the third most populated nation, and it sits in 8th place in terms of deaths by population, so it's doing above average in general terms. Did those 7 other countries have presidents who downplayed the virus even *more*? No. Did France, which is 22nd most populated but is directly behind the U.S. in deaths/population deny the science as a political platform? No. Is it a matter of which country best enabled their health care professionals? Apparently no. France ranks top in the world for public health care but they have the 9th highest COVID mortality rate. So, again, what percentage of death does the presidency claim? Could it be that cultural norms such as personal hygiene and social responsibility play more of a part that any president could?

..
[Dukhat]: "Poor people can get healthcare through medicaid expansion in non-retarded states."

So poor people are fine.. except where they are not?

At the least you would have to recognize that states which do not help people avoid the high costs of the individual mandate (e.g., via Medicaid) should not have had the mandate forced on its people. I think a middle ground might have been forcing state governments to pay the individual mandates. That would incentivize state governments to have more effective roll-outs (getting people to buy insurance) and it would shield their citizens. Without that, that cost becomes a surprise expense when it's time to file taxes. Poor people don't exactly have $1000 lying around, so that ends up being forced debt for a service that they didn't want, couldn't afford, or didn't even know about.

..
[Dukhat]: "Self-employed people were the ones most targeted by the mandate but then again, they are freeloaders given the uninsured wait until it’s too late and then crowd our hospitals. There are many issues with the ACA still but not a single damn thing Trump pushed helped improve healthcare in America; it was all just political posturing."

As I said, removing the individual mandate was indeed a single thing that Trump did to improve the situation for poor Americans. That mandate was a huge flaw in the ACA. It didn't just affect self-employed people. Consider college students working multiple entry-level jobs to pay off student loans — their income is now considered too large for Medicaid, they can't afford health insurance, and so they have to pay the mandate on top of paying their loans. Consider poor people who could not navigate their state's marketplace or did not register early enough — they now have to pay out-of-pocket for every month they went without insurance and they may not have been notified of lapsed months until tax forms were sent out. Consider restaurant and retail workers who already work on razor-thin margins. Consider all the employers at razor-thin margin businesses who suddenly became the only ones in a position to inform their employees of health care options and who had a vested interest in getting employees to waive that insurance so the business could save on costs. This wasn't just something that affected a few freeloaders who use the emergency room for health care. The mandate put pressure directly on the poor and working class.

..
[Dukhat]: "Though to attribute turnout solely to Covid and mail-in ballots looks demonstrably false."

Good thing I didn't. I *did* say that it's "a big part" of turnout, though.

..
[hood]: "Trump contradicting himself within the same sentence isn't uncommon, so a contradiction within the same speech shouldn't be surprising or any evidence to negate his "very fine people" comment. Yes, we all know that Trump spits up verbal diarrhea so that anyone who wants to hear anything CAN hear those anythings. It doesn't change the fact that he did, in fact, support the "very fine people.""

You seem to be propagating the hoax. His "very fine people" were definitively *not* the white supremacists. These were his actual words: "I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay?"

People arguing that he was calling white supremacists "very fine people" bought the hoax. Fighting the cognitive dissonance of finding out that he was *not* referring to white supremacists as "very fine people" then produces further logical errors, such as pretending that Trump's own words cannot be trusted, pretending that evidence is not evidence, pretending that he never condemned white supremacists (although he had on that day and on days before), or saying that he's still probably racist anyways. It's an entire discourse of a failing logic stream desperate at the cost of truth to get that valuable "Racist!" win (The “Fine People” Hoax Funnel, Scott Adams; April 30th, 2019; http://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/04/30/the-fine-people-hoax-funnel/ ).

..
[Rugian]: "Establishment media's ability to gaslight is impressive, I give them that."

It's seriously impressive. The bottom line is that media relies on people to not research their narratives, and most people do not, so media still wins by sheer numbers. And if you've done the research, social media is still formatted in such a way that correcting the narrative becomes abysmal, like "gathering the garbage washed up on the beach". Major media has the loudest microphone, so they only need to say the lie once. Correcting that lie takes much more work; it's asymmetric in their favor.

..
[habebe]: "And people can call my beleif that the media is in bed with the DNC a crazy conspiracy theory, but the fact is we have clear evidence of that."

I'm still surprised when I hear people defending DNC media as unbiased. When people back up into the "false equivalency" argument (saying, "Well, Fox is still worse"), that at least goes into the realm of opinion and people can have their opinions, but simply pretending that the DNC does not have sponsorship via CNN, MSNBC, CBS, Twitter, Google, etc.? It's absurd.

..
[Y2A]: "if you can't see that the clown is an obvious racist that has use racialized narratives (obama birtherism) since day one to make it to the top of the republican socialist american workers party then there really is no discussion to have. a discussion with a lunatic ranting homeless man in the subway would be more productive."

The "no discussion to have" non-argument has been a good way for echo chambers to self-propagate. It seems that entrance into the echo discourse requires that everyone agree that Trump, the GOP, and all supporters must all be racist. On Twitter, Imgur, and DNC sub-Reddits, this is enforced with mutes, bans, downvotes, and dogpiling, but rarely with any sort of coherent argument.

What I'd ask is: what kind of racist is he?
We have gradations for a lot of things, but "racist" has stood as a catch-all for a little too much on a big spectrum. A skinhead who throws the Nazi salute while holding a German Reich flag gets the same "racist" title as someone crossing the street because an aggressive-looking unstable person who happens to be a minority is staring them down while approaching. And for Trump, it seems to be closer to this second, inferred type. For example, he wanted the death penalty brought back for the Central Park Five. Was it because they were black or because he wanted the people responsible for a vicious and severe rape and assault prosecuted? To get "racist", you have to infer his reasoning. You have to ignore that the attack really was savage.

And if you go through the long lists of examples people have assembled to "prove" Trump's racism (e.g., The Atlantic's 7000-word article on the subject http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/trump-racism-comments/588067/ ), it's a lot of these "Is *that* racism?" examples. I'd say at best there's a small case for covert racism. Not overt though; Trump hasn't exactly been pushing for legislation that gives special treatment to white supremacists, and I'm not familiar with any executive orders that give neo-Nazis special protections. And if we're talking about the vague effects of general policies (e.g., black communities suffering more during COVID), then we similarly (and probably even more convincingly) implicate the DNC's racialist policies (e.g., identity politics, their wish for re-segregation, de-fund movement, affirmative action). So if we're aware of "racism" on a spectrum, the "false equivalency" argument makes Trump look like the better one here — the less racist one.

..
[Y2A]: "Yes. Also, what difference does it make if it is a tactic? I don't care about whether the clown "really" believes the racist drivel he's put out there for 4 years non-stop. I care about the impact that that drivel has had on day-to-day society."

Chomsky said something similarly problematic (New Yorker; October 30th, 2020; https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/noam-chomsky-believes-trump-is-the-worst-criminal-in-human-history ). His view would basically be that it doesn't matter if Trump intends to be an actual racist, it's just that because people think that Trump might be racist that they're affected in a way that actual racism might affect them (e.g., fear, paranoia). So basically Chomsky is not concerned with the truth of the matter, only the optics or only the way that people *interpret*.

The problem is that it's not *Trump* who's stoking racial issues, it's the media and its DNC handlers. The media has been doing the interpreting for their viewers, pre-chewing that food into something that no reasonable person should consume. Trump could say anything, and the Cardinal Richelieu of the media would be there to make it criminal.
Dukhat
Member
Mon Nov 23 03:24:07
Lots of doubling down and misrepresentations to. I will address later because it's more a wall of text.
Y2A
Member
Tue Nov 24 19:34:04
Done!

80,011,351 votes (51.0%)

And NY is still at 84%.
habebe
Member
Tue Nov 24 19:54:56
NY is a failed state, NYC is worse.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share