What will you do when Biden is President?

[oskar]

Oskar...come on.

Wuf, I honestly can't pin it down to any one thing he's done or said. It's the whole con job really. He doesn't know anything, but insists he knows more than the experts, and tries to run the country as if that were true.

Glory glory haleluyah, Jesus the Christ was born!
Or something like that.
They all go to heaven! Everybody wins.

Everybody
wins.

[oskar]

The fact that democrats have a choice between this:



and this:
https://youtu.be/HXvXauw9jf8?t=273

and they choose the latter, is just tragic.

[Poopadoop]

The fact that democrats have a choice between this:

Yeah I saw that video. Telling it like it is!

[oskar]

I'll be mourning over the bands:



Modern gospel music rocks!

[wufwugy]

Youtube appears to be censoring the hell out of pro-Bernie anti-Biden channels.

I'm waiting to see if the censoring vanishes after Biden gets the nomination. Right now I don't know if the censoring is a standard part of Youtube algo's disfavoring "divisive" political content.

[oskar]

For example?

The way MSM is covering the race is straight up criminal. When Warren accused Bernie of disagreeing that a woman could be president... whatever that means, they ran that story for weeks. Now that a woman comes forward with credible sexual assault allegations against Biden, they stay silent. This is beyond malpractice. There is no way this is not a coordinated effort.

[wufwugy]

For example?

TYT is almost never in my recommendations even when I go through a decent amount of their videos.

But CNN channel shows up even though I never watch them. And if I watch one thing on any one other topic, I get easy recommendations for other videos like them or from the channel.

[boost]

TYT is almost never in my recommendations even when I go through a decent amount of their videos.

But CNN channel shows up even though I never watch them. And if I watch one thing on any one other topic, I get easy recommendations for other videos like them or from the channel.

My guess is that they're trying to put the genie back in the bottle. It's hard to argue that there weren't societal benefits to a narrower band of media. Despite all the mess we've seen from a decentralized and distributed media. I still think it's preferable, but regardless of what I think, I don't think you can put the genie back in the bottle. Fox news started to break the mold back in the 90's, and the dam really broke with widespread broadband in the early 00's.

[oskar]

I think it has gotten better. For a while every time I watched a Secular Talk or Jimmy Dore video, YT put a CNN or msnbc video in my playlist, but never the other way around... even though progressive channels actually get more views on YT.
This has gotten better... I just clicked on one to check, and I got JRE. I'll take it.

[wufwugy]

On TYT, I like that they've toned down their Bolshevik violent language, but it's still tough to get through a video. I go through them to get a better understanding of that "side".

In related news: the branding is on point. "Progressive", "Justice Democrats". Expert branding. You can't even reference them without them winning the frame merely by being referenced.

[wufwugy]

It's crazy how the press that get their talking points from Contemporary Nazis (also known as the Government of China) pop up everywhere on my feed: Bloomberg, CNN, WaPo. I never click them, but they keep coming up.

[oskar]

I like Chenk and Ana better when they're separated.
Mehdi Hassan, Kyle Kulinski and Michael Brooks are my top guys for political commentary.
After that The Hill, Damage Report... and Emma Vigland and Progressive Talk for honorary mentions.

I have warm feelings for TYT - I remember seeing them when they were the original clickbait channel and Anna looked like a fetus. But they're too yelly as a couple.



good old times

[Poopadoop]

I can't really watch TYT. There's just something about how smug they are that gets on my nerves.

Sam Seder or w/e his name is is ok. But mostly I just try to watch comedians comment on things cause otherwise I want to punch myself in the balls every time Trump is in the news, which he somehow manages to make every day.

Maybe that's his secret - you just see his face so much you start to like him, like how Stalin used to have his picture everywhere.

[wufwugy]

I can't really watch TYT. There's just something about how smug they are that gets on my nerves.

Yup.

Undeserved smugness too. One of the main people on the show is technically clueless on many things he/she discusses. But his/her self-righteousness may be unmatched.

Related: it was funny when I saw them bitch about others taking Bernie out of context to make him look bad, and then the very next segment they took Biden out of context to make him look bad.

There's something to be said for the idea that people tend to live inside their own worlds.

[Poopadoop]

Yeah, I mean it's rare for people I mainly agree with in principle to get on my nerves, but TYT somehow manages to do it.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Yeah, I mean it's rare for people I mainly agree with in principle to get on my nerves, but TYT somehow manages to do it.

Same, but I haven't given them a fair watch in years.

[boost]

Also, Sam Seder is a hack just as bad as TYT.

[wufwugy]

Would Bernie be winning the nomination if at one point during the last debate he said, "Joe Biden sniffs children."?

[boost]

Would Bernie be winning the nomination if at one point during the last debate he said, "Joe Biden sniffs children."?

Lol.

Yes.

But I don think it would be good for the country.

[wufwugy]

Lol.

Yes.

But I don think it would be good for the country.

I'm curious, what damage do you think it would cause?

[boost]

I'm curious, what damage do you think it would cause?

I'm not one who thinks we can just reset and go back to pre-Trump-normal-- but I also don't think the way the 2016 republican debates and the HRC/DJT debates were bizarro world reality tv shows is good for the country.

the children sniffing line is a sick burn, and the airwaves would have been clogged with all the montages. But I think the country is better served by politics having a veneer of respectability if it's at all possible to get that back.

[oskar]

the children sniffing line is a sick burn, and the airwaves would have been clogged with all the montages. But I think the country is better served by politics having a veneer of respectability if it's at all possible to get that back.

Civility is all great and that, but it will only last until literally hours after Biden becomes the nominee. Right now right wing media is smartly laying low on Biden, because Biden becoming the nominee would be a gift beyond comprehension for the republican party. The second he becomes the nominee, all the things you only see on twitter right now will run in rotation... on every network. At the end of the day who MSM is beholden to, more than anyone, are viewing rates and ad impressions.

[oskar]

https://youtu.be/h01KCbGyjSE?t=42
This was before Super Tuesday. I was being an idiot thinking anything would turn voters away from Biden if this didn't. This is the famous "make sure the kids hear words" speech, but his answer leading up to that is just as baffling.
Listening to Biden is like following Scarlett Johansson into the black void. You're not quite sure if he's not making any sense or if your brain is slowly running out of oxygen while you float into a dark abyss until you eventually implode with a faint popping sound and leave only a floating husk of your dead skin.

[Poopadoop]

I predict the three Trump-Biden debates will be the most-watched debates in the history of everything - not because of the level of intellectual discourse, obviously.

[wufwugy]

I predict the three Trump-Biden debates will be the most-watched debates in the history of everything - not because of the level of intellectual discourse, obviously.

I'm gonna watch it toughly, and with great compassion.

[CoccoBill]

https://www.npr.org/2020/03/27/82204...ffect-is-small

[Poopadoop]

Overwhelming numbers of Republicans approve

https://twitter.com/MooTheNerd/statu...15408121434119

[wufwugy]

What's the concrete benefit of respectable presentation between dueling politicians?

[boost]

What's the concrete benefit of respectable presentation between dueling politicians?

You know, I honestly am having trouble articulating what I mean here. I guess it's all artifice, and maybe 4K streams of live events, widespread commentary from outside the traditionally narrow channels for commentary, and who knows what else, has pulled back the curtain-- maybe JFK vs Nixon, and the disparities between reactions from radio listeners and TV viewers was the first inkling of this. Maybe the cat is out of the bag and I'm hoping to go back to something that never was-- there was always a cat, and I'll always know there's a cat in the bag even if it's put back. Maybe I just haven't revised my memories of the bag with my knowledge of the cat, so these memories seem appealing.

Honestly, idk, but nothing in politics feels genuine anymore. It all feels like reality TV. It's far worse than dramatic productions, because there is an inherent lie: you're not being asked to suspend disbelief, they're telling you there's nothing to suspend, yet on it's face you know that's not true, you know it's a put on. And inherent in the model, it's much easier to show the negative, the nasty, the petty, and near impossible to convincingly convey the role model, the heroic, the aspirational, the selfless.

Just look back to the "trash"of yesterday's entertainment. It was all about heroes, duty, rising to the occasion. It was cheesy and ham fisted, but it was filled with ideals that should be strived for. Now what are we left with?

[wufwugy]

You know, I honestly am having trouble articulating what I mean here. I guess it's all artifice, and maybe 4K streams of live events, widespread commentary from outside the traditionally narrow channels for commentary, and who knows what else, has pulled back the curtain-- maybe JFK vs Nixon, and the disparities between reactions from radio listeners and TV viewers was the first inkling of this. Maybe the cat is out of the bag and I'm hoping to go back to something that never was-- there was always a cat, and I'll always know there's a cat in the bag even if it's put back. Maybe I just haven't revised my memories of the bag with my knowledge of the cat, so these memories seem appealing.

Honestly, idk, but nothing in politics feels genuine anymore. It all feels like reality TV. It's far worse than dramatic productions, because there is an inherent lie: you're not being asked to suspend disbelief, they're telling you there's nothing to suspend, yet on it's face you know that's not true, you know it's a put on. And inherent in the model, it's much easier to show the negative, the nasty, the petty, and near impossible to convincingly convey the role model, the heroic, the aspirational, the selfless.

Just look back to the "trash"of yesterday's entertainment. It was all about heroes, duty, rising to the occasion. It was cheesy and ham fisted, but it was filled with ideals that should be strived for. Now what are we left with?

I'm sympathetic to this. Just because one may not know how to put his finger on it, doesn't mean it's not real.

Interesting to note: what you're saying is a big reason I personally want Kanye to run. I think he has been changing his tone and messaging these last couple years so much that he could be the Hopeful leader we need for the foreseeable future.

[boost]

I'm sympathetic to this. Just because one may not know how to put his finger on it, doesn't mean it's not real.

Yeah, I'm trying to be more open in this way, instead of shoehorning in a post hoc justification.

Interesting to note: what you're saying is a big reason I personally want Kanye to run. I think he has been changing his tone and messaging these last couple years so much that he could be the Hopeful leader we need for the foreseeable future.

I absolutely don't get this. This feels like people in December '16 saying Michelle or Oprah should run in 2020. But worse.

[wufwugy]

I absolutely don't get this. This feels like people in December '16 saying Michelle or Oprah should run in 2020. But worse.

Is it that you think there is no way he will run?

[CoccoBill]

Time to watch Century Of Self again.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I'm not sure bragging about not sending aid to NY because NY's governor isn't kissing his royal ass is good leadership.
More like terrorism, IMO.

"Say I'm the greatest. Say it. Say it, or I let your people die."

"Mr. President, we're talking about the healthcare of American citizens."

"No we're not. We're talking about your bad attitude."

[oskar]

https://twitter.com/TDucklo/status/1...651418112?s=20

These people straight up escaped a Black Mirror episode. The man runs on nothing.

[boost]

Biden is the nominee if he doesn't croak it seems, so he's got my vote, but god damn, he's slurring his words in a highly produced ad. If they can't make him sound like he's not in the early stages of dementia...

Anyways, I'm anxiously awaiting the announcement of his VP pick.

[wufwugy]

Would be surprising if the VP pick isn't Harris -- also known as the person the press decided to make the nominee over a year ago. But nobody saw her campaigning skills and management being as bad as they were.

[boost]

Would be surprising if the VP pick isn't Harris -- also known as the person the press decided to make the nominee over a year ago. But nobody saw her campaigning skills and management being as bad as they were.

Picking Harris is a self checkmate.

[wufwugy]

How so?

[wufwugy]

Holy shit is this an effective ad

[oskar]

How so?

Kamaala supporters are already behind Biden. He gains no new ground with her as VP.

[boost]

Kamaala supporters are already behind Biden. He gains no new ground with her as VP.

I don't even think it's that good-- I think she is a liability, it's not that she adds nothing, she actually loses votes imo. Harris might solidify Biden's center, but I think she loses him support on both his left and right flanks. On the left, as a former tough on crime prosecutor, she come's across as disingenuous in her pivot to the left. On the right, it just looks like the better candidates were passed up for the one that checked the boxes that (seem) to pander to two core demographics: black people and women.

Biden is already strong with black voters. His center is going to show up and dutifully vote anyways.

Further, this is much different from a typical VP pick. Everyone knows that a vote for Biden is almost surely a vote for his VP to be president. We all watched the primary-- no one was much interested in a Harris presidency.

[boost]

Warren is where it's at.

I was ambivalent on her candidacy, but she could patch things up with Bernie, get him enthusiastic on the trail, and she would slaughter Pence in the debates. She's got fire. It's not my flavor of fire, but god damn is she a force to be reckoned with.

[oskar]

It's also not quite true. Turns out it mostly came from Europe to the US and a less xenophobic and more scientific travel restriction would have been much more effective...

I agree it's effective. Joe Biden is the gift that keeps on giving when you're an attack ad editor.

[CoccoBill]

^Solid arguments.

[boost]

Also, Biden croaks, Warren is sworn in, Warren plucks Tio Bernie out of Vermont to be her VP. Bernie would be a sick VP.

[oskar]

Warren came in 4th in her home state. She did everything she could to piss off Bernie supporters, and she's ideologically incompatible with Biden...
Biden's VP will almost certainly be president before his term is up. They wouldn't have gone through all the trouble of dragging Biden to the nomination if the plan was to then practically give the office away to a progressive. This whole act was to stop the progressive movement from gaining too much ground, and whether or not they'll beat Trump was always secondary.

[boost]

Yeah, probably.

Doesn't make Harris any better of a pick with regards to the general.

[Poopadoop]

Yeah I'm with Oskar on this one. The donors don't want a progressive POTUS, plain and simple. Sadly, Biden was their 'best' choice among the moderates. He'll probably get even more senile between now and Nov., while Trump keeps running his reality pandemic show for 3 hours a night, getting all kinds of mug time. Meanwhile Biden sits in his study and occasionally comes out to say a few words with a 50/50 chance of it being incoherent babbling. He needs to start snorting the adderall like there's no tomorrow.

Overall, I'm not loving Bidens' chances at the moment. He seems to be trying to use Hillary's playbook of letting Trump beat himself, and that's not a solid strategy.

[Poopadoop]

If 40% of America can watch this night after night for a month and still think 'That's my guy', well...

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1248698754556923904

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1248698754556923904

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1248703372116611073

[wufwugy]

100% right.

Let's hope the identity-love (racism) in one of our two major political parties crashes and burns.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Let's hope the identity-love (racism) in one of our two major political parties crashes and burns.

What inane shit.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I thought I'd found someone intelligent who leans toward the R side of the political aisle, but you go and say inane shit like that half the time.

[wufwugy]

Please address what I say instead of me personally.

[oskar]

Wuf, if you have a point, then actually make that point instead of hiding behind gross generalisations that really don't mean anything.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Wuf, if you have a point, then actually make that point instead of hiding behind gross generalisations that really don't mean anything.

Better said than I.

Wuf goes back and forth between thinking critically to shitposting in a way that isn't nearly as easy to deal with as ong does, I guess.

*sigh*

quarantine blues

[wufwugy]

Wuf, if you have a point, then actually make that point instead of hiding behind gross generalisations that really don't mean anything.

Thank you for pointing that out.

I believe bigotry is the biggest chronic problem in the US -- and the Democratic Party is a major purveyor of it.

[CoccoBill]

Color me cynical but I think the appearing to think critically part is part of the persuasion tactics.

[MadMojoMonkey]

E.g. why do the legal penalties for crack exceed the legal penalties for cocaine? They're literally the same chemical.

Reason: crack gets politicized as more deadly.

Fun fact: crack is more widely used in poor black communities, whereas cocaine is more widely used in rich white communities.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Both sides avoid discussing real issues by playing the "your side is racist" game.

It's not progressing anything.
Neither side is openly racist.
Individuals who are racist are bad for the PR of the greater party in both cases.

Any racism happening is veiled behind so many layers of subterfuge that it's lost in all the hand-waving appeals to other arguments.


Playing the racism game is just ducking out of any serious conversation to focus on the hand-waving.


Besides,
"I'm not racist" -David Duke

Literally no one thinks they're racist.

[wufwugy]

Literally no one thinks they're racist.

You are so, so, so right.

I was astounded when one of the most prominent leaders in the world announced that he would nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court.

[oskar]

I believe bigotry is the biggest chronic problem in the US -- and the Democratic Party is a major purveyor of it.

https://youtu.be/Ze_d5X1QmNY?t=60

You are so, so, so right.

I was astounded when one of the most prominent leaders in the world announced that he would nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court.

I think where that comes from is that Joe Biden doesn't actually believe there is any structural racism in the US, so any observed inequalities cannot be fixed by addressing structural racism because it doesn't exist... but he does know he needs the black vote, so the best he can do is say: ok, we'll get a darkie up here and she'll fix your shit.

This is not optimal, but ít's better than nothing.
What he's really saying is: he'll nominate Kamala Harris. I don't think he can legally promise positions as the nominee.

[wufwugy]

I think where that comes from is that Joe Biden doesn't actually believe there is any structural racism in the US, so any observed inequalities cannot be fixed by addressing structural racism because it doesn't exist... but he does know he needs the black vote, so the best he can do is say: ok, we'll get a darkie up here and she'll fix your shit.

I'd say you're right. The reason he said that is probably to pander to voters who hold some racist (and sexist) ideals.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I was astounded when one of the most prominent leaders in the world announced that he would nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court.

Because you bought in to the distraction (that either side is racist)?

Do you still believe it?

[wufwugy]

Because you bought in to the distraction (that either side is racist)?

Do you still believe it?

I'm trying to figure out what's going on in the mainstream entertainment-PC culture (for a lack of a better term). Racism appears to be standard and accepted there.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I'm trying to figure out what's going on in the mainstream entertainment-PC culture (for a lack of a better term). Racism appears to be standard and accepted there.

It's hard to distinguish racism from economic classism, IMO.

I see rampant economic classism in both Rep and Dem.


EDIT: which they play off by convincing vast swaths of the lower class that they're middle class, then talk about buoying the middle class while the stadium full of lower (economic) class people cheer, in the mistaken belief that they are middle class.

[oskar]

[MadMojoMonkey]

Lol

"He told me 'I think the worst part of the whole [Cosby] thing was the hypocrisy,' and I disagree."
"You disagree with that?"
"Yeah. I thought it was the raping."

[oskar]

Would you say that when 40% of the population is non-white that this:





...happens when public officials are selected democratically to represent that population?

Or do you think there's at all a possibility that these groups still don't have the same opportunity of access to positions of power than whites and that there is some merit to proactively working on equality of outcome in the short term until the underlying problems like gerrymandering, a class based education system and a two-tier justice system can be remedied?

[wufwugy]

Or do you think there's at all a possibility that these groups still don't have the same opportunity of access to positions of power than whites and that there is some merit to proactively working on equality of outcome in the short term until the underlying problems like gerrymandering, a class based education system and a two-tier justice system can be remedied?

I totally agree with this.

What I don't think we should do is treat people differently based on their race or gender.

[wufwugy]

Let me clarify a little on that.

The government should never treat people differently based on race or gender or other types of identity. The government should always have the same laws for everybody.

The people should *mostly* not treat people differently based on race or gender or other types of identity. This is *mostly* because sometimes it is warranted. Like if you're running a bikini barista, everybody is fine with hiring a specific type of person (attractive young straight biological female).

What we don't want is situations like Affirmative Action, where people are wrongly rewarded or punished because of their identity. Which, in the ironic twist, often harms those it tries to reward, but we could get into the details for why that is some other time.

[MadMojoMonkey]

The government should never treat people differently based on race or gender or other types of identity. The government should always have the same laws for everybody.

The thing is, we've always said that, but never done that.

The people should *mostly* not treat people differently based on race or gender or other types of identity. This is *mostly* because sometimes it is warranted. Like if you're running a bikini barista, everybody is fine with hiring a specific type of person (attractive young straight biological female).

If you're implying that it "should" be acceptable to not hire someone based exclusively on their appearance, then I'd say that's against the spirit, if not the letter of the law when it comes to anti-discrimination.

Ugly people need jobs, too.

If that employer is only hiring female employees for certain positions, then that's against the letter of the law for sexual discrimination.

What we don't want is situations like Affirmative Action, where people are wrongly rewarded or punished because of their identity. Which, in the ironic twist, often harms those it tries to reward, but we could get into the details for why that is some other time.

In the long term, you're right, but what about oskar's point? It's been many decades since the civil rights movements following WWII and we still have a smattering of minorities represented in our national gov't.

I.e. all the BS we've been fed as a solution is laid bare for what it is. BS.

I'm not saying Affirmative Action is the best way forward, but it's clear that institutional racism is still rampant, and not being addressed.

[OngBonga]

If you're implying that it "should" be acceptable to not hire someone based exclusively on their appearance, then I'd say that's against the spirit, if not the letter of the law when it comes to anti-discrimination.

Ugly people need jobs, too.

If that employer is only hiring female employees for certain positions, then that's against the letter of the law for sexual discrimination.

Ok, so if I hire a Japanese hooker, am I being racist and sexist by choosing my hooker based on her race and gender? Should I hire an ugly hooker? Or a white one? Maybe black? How about a male hooker? Should I at least consider hiring these demographics? Should I hire a different hooker each time?

If I decide not to shave, am I being treated unfairly if I get overlooked for a job where I am expected to take pride in my appearance?

Should I be considered for a job at an Islamic girls school? How about an air hostess? What if I want to wear a dress?

Appearance is extremely important in many jobs. I don't think I'd make a great lap dancer.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Ok, so if I hire a Japanese hooker, am I being racist and sexist by choosing my hooker based on her race and gender? Should I hire an ugly hooker? Or a white one? Maybe black? How about a male hooker? Should I at least consider hiring these demographics? Should I hire a different hooker each time?

All of those are private transactions, not public.

If you were running a public brothel and you were hiring only Japanese women, then yeah. That seems like a problem to me.

However, if all the women are independent contractors, and not directly employed by you, and the fact that non-Japanese, non-women can't make any money there, because the clientele don't choose them, then that's different.

If I decide not to shave, am I being treated unfairly if I get overlooked for a job where I am expected to take pride in my appearance?

IDK. I think you might have a case.
The mere presence of a beard shouldn't be considered a sign of someone who doesn't take pride in their appearance.
This could be used as religious discrimination, as e.g. Orthodox Jews have long beards.

Should I be considered for a job at an Islamic girls school? How about an air hostess? What if I want to wear a dress?

The girl's school sounds like a private school, and so no. Private institutions do not have to follow rules that prevent discrimination in public spaces.

I see no reason you couldn't be a flight attendant. I see no reason you couldn't do that in whatever gender-projecting uniform you choose.
Yes, I think if the airline refused to hire you based all or in part because you are transvestite - that is and should be illegal.

Appearance is extremely important in many jobs. I don't think I'd make a great lap dancer.

Aww. Don't be so hard on yourself. You give great lap dances.


Models, Hollywood, etc. there are cases when hiring can be based on appearance. In those cases, as I understand it, special wages are given for that scrutiny.

[oskar]

How does a party end up with an ethnically homogenous house and senate when all ethnicities have equal opportunity? I'd say it doesn't. There is racial inequality.

Do you agree with that? If you don't, please explain why the GOP is so white.