2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
What's your point? Is it that there were some isolated cases of voter fraud discovered, or is it something else? That's a conviction for voter fraud, not for asking questions.
Use your words instead of posting context-less images of lists and court paperwork, thanks in advance.
Voter fraud and suppression happens. In past elections, it's even happened in the United States en masse (1876, 1960, etc). When someone brings up a claim about these things happening, we don't want to tar them as "election deniers" because that would facilitate and enable real fraud. Let them do it, let them go through the courts, defend their right to speak out about what they see when you have a chance, and then try and feel a little safer afterwards, because you are.
Voter fraud and suppression happens. In past elections, it's even happened in the United States en masse (1876, 1960, etc). When someone brings up a claim about these things happening, we don't want to tar them as "election deniers" because that would facilitate and enable real fraud. Let them do it, let them go through the courts, defend their right to speak out about what they see when you have a chance, and then try and feel a little safer afterwards, because you are.
Who wasn't allowed to bring legitimate claims through the courts? You said we "tarred the questioners as criminals," implying that someone was convicted for asking questions. I've asked for more information about this claim and this is now the 3rd or 4th post where you're just dancing around it and talking about something else and not answering.
Just so I understand your position, are you saying his meandering monologues with incomplete sentences continuously seguing into tangential or totally irrelevant lines are all staged? Would you agree that if not staged, this sort of speech is indicative of someone with very low cognitive function?
Staged? Not exactly. It's not like the monologues are memorized. He's really good at riffing. He probably has a rough idea of what he wants to say — maybe some key points and phrases — and improvises. If someone does that all the time, they're going to stumble here and there.
And no, I don't agree that it's indicative of someone with low cognitive function. It's more likely that he's making connections in his mind that come off as non sequiturs. I skipped over the image, but I can understand what he's getting at with the nuclear and Hannibal comments. They translate poorly in text.
You know people can choose to not smoke, right? And I say this as a 2-3 pack a day smoker. If climate change affected only those who refused to believe in it or do anything about it, I'd agree with you.
people can choose not to smoke. a significant portion of humanity probably doesn't gain with nicotine intake (women more than men) in aggregate
but for people who do smoke, or who could gain with nicotine intake (something like 20-30% of women and 60-70% of men) , having a cancer free good way to intake nicotine is massive.
nicotine is actually very significantly positive for people like you and me who smoke 2-3 packs or substitute that with vaping. massive as in if we couldn't our life would be horribly worse in aggregate. nicotine is incredibly good for people like us which have a high tolerance to it. it fixes our appetite, concentration, mental health, decreases chances of Alzheimer and Parkinson by more than 50%. it's a miracle drug with minimal side effects, exceptionally better than any human made drug and exceptionally cheaper as well (as long as fascists don't intervene).
some of current societal problems are actually caused by the drastic decrease in nicotine intake, which progressives caused (as usual they are the source, the cause, of most of our problems). the obesity and mental health epidemic is evidently linked to smoking cessation efforts.
they will never admit it as for everything else they are the cause of, of course.
but I don't expect people on the right to help them
Cont'd: Take that four paragraph response I posted. If I were try to explain that in person, I'd sound like an idiot, even though I know exactly what I think. On here I can take my time organizing those thoughts.
stay classy Dems
Who wasn't allowed to bring legitimate claims through the courts? You said we "tarred the questioners as criminals," implying that someone was convicted for asking questions. I've asked for more information about this claim and this is now the 3rd or 4th post where you're just dancing around it and talking about something else and not answering.
Courts' entire function is to ascertain the legitimacy of a claim. Election questioners were absolutely tarred as criminals and threats to democracy.
Fomenting concern about election integrity? Duh. You should be concerned, I should be concerned, everyone should be concerned. You don't just turn your brain off and trust stuff. You verify and question and then verify again, over and over again all the time.
Courts decide which claims are false.
The true test of democracy is whether or not the processes work. If fraud is rampant, there is no democracy, and for fraud to be uncovered election integrity must be questionable.
**** that. Distrust the process and uncover flaws to make it more trustworthy.
This is really basic.
Staged? Not exactly. It's not like the monologues are memorized. He's really good at riffing. He probably has a rough idea of what he wants to say — maybe some key points and phrases — and improvises. If someone does that all the time, they're going to stumble here and there.
And no, I don't agree that it's indicative of someone with low cognitive function. It's more likely that he's making connections in his mind that come off as non sequiturs. I skipped over the image, but I can understand wh
some people are fixated with the idea that all verbal communication has to be about the exchange of factual information through words.
they don't understand that verbal communication is just an enriched form of nonverbal communication with added sounds more often than not.
the specific words said aren't usually meant to convey specific informations about reality rather it's about the physical and emotional effect they generate in listeners, and so the quality of such communication can only be judged when you know the goal of the speaker and the characteristics of the listeners.
and literally all that matters is how the listeners react to that.
it's like comedy, except it works for all verbal communication except some very specific cases like 2 nerds discussing some technical stuff, or lawyers in a trial and the like.
the vast majority of the times we utter sounds from our mouth to communicate, it's not about conveying information, and even when it is, that part is minimal compared to the rest.
the main reason we talk is to elicit reactions we desire in listeners. and that's how communication should be judged.
No idea what the war on vapes was but if we make them effectively unavailable then we're removing a choice so we have to take some responsibilty for those who would have chosen it.
I think the main reason why Biden got so many dem votes was because Trump as President did a lot of things to make dems hate the living guts out of him.
It ain't just because people were bored so they voted.
Peoplw were not leaving their house and this guy was on TV spreading all sorts of misinformation and idiotic nonsense. And this was all after the highest turn out midterm ever.
No idea what the war on vapes was but if we make them effectively unavailable then we're removing a choice so we have to take some responsibilty for those who would have chosen it.
Trump admin war on vape was about making it far harder for new hardware to reach the market (basically destroying small innovators as you had to get all stuff licensed at massive costs), and he also banned some flavours.
edit: he also passed a law required 21 years to buy vaping stuff
Staged? Not exactly. It's not like the monologues are memorized. He's really good at riffing. He probably has a rough idea of what he wants to say — maybe some key points and phrases — and improvises. If someone does that all the time, they're going to stumble here and there.
And no, I don't agree that it's indicative of someone with low cognitive function. It's more likely that he's making connections in his mind that come off as non sequiturs. I skipped over the image, but I can understand wh
I guess, to me at least, if you're making connections in your mind that are or come off as non sequiturs and/or suffer from a basic inability to keep your thoughts straight in your mind or to communicate them in a comprehensible manner to your audience, that is indicative of low cognitive function. Combined with the fact that he also says a lot of objectively idiotic things demonstrating a level of understanding about science and the world around him that would be shameful for the average 10 year old, this leads me to the conclusion that he is an idiot.
Courts' entire function is to ascertain the legitimacy of a claim. Election questioners were absolutely tarred as criminals and threats to democracy.
Fomenting concern about election integrity? Duh. You should be concerned, I should be concerned, everyone should be concerned. You don't just turn your brain off and trust stuff. You verify and question and then verify again, over and over again all the time.
Courts decide which claims are false.
The true test of democracy is whether or not the
By this logic, we should listen to Playbig when he says the WTC towers were destroyed by space lasers, because he could be on to something. No, we don't have the time or resources to hear out every single conspiracy theorist about every dumb theory they have because they're paranoid or because something didn't go their way. They didn't have any real evidence, just fee fees, which is why they got rightly tarred as conspiracy nuts. The cases that did reach the merits, like the Dominion voting machine stuff, ended badly for the election fraud side.
some people are fixated with the idea that all verbal communication has to be about the exchange of factual information through words.
they don't understand that verbal communication is just an enriched form of nonverbal communication with added sounds more often than not.
the specific words said aren't usually meant to convey specific informations about reality rather it's about the physical and emotional effect they generate in listeners, and so the quality of such communication can only be judg
Hard disagree from me on all this. But yes, I guess if you're trying to get simpletons to vote for you or a girl you just met at a loud bar to go home with you, that works.
Voter fraud and suppression happens. In past elections, it's even happened in the United States en masse (1876, 1960, etc). When someone brings up a claim about these things happening, we don't want to tar them as "election deniers" because that would facilitate and enable real fraud. Let them do it, let them go through the courts, defend their right to speak out about what they see when you have a chance, and then try and feel a little safer afterwards, because you are.
The first minute of this video...
Cont'd: Take that four paragraph response I posted. If I were try to explain that in person, I'd sound like an idiot, even though I know exactly what I think. On here I can take my time organizing those thoughts.
If Trump's writing were orders of magnitude better than his speaking, I might buy this argument. But it isn't, it's about the same level.
I guess, to me at least, if you're making connections in your mind that are or come off as non sequiturs and/or suffer from a basic inability to keep your thoughts straight in your mind or to communicate them in a comprehensible manner to your audience, that is indicative of low cognitive function. Combined with the fact that he also says a lot of objectively idiotic things demonstrating a level of understanding about science and the world around him that would be shameful for the average 10 yea
As a fellow real estate investor and dumbass, I agree. Trump and I fall into the smart-dumb category. There are many in this thread that fall into the dumb-smart category. The latter is the most dangerous/annoying.
I'd say you should only be able to vote if you can see the obvious gatekeeping problem with poll testing, but that's a bit of a Catch-22.
Maybe every ballot should have a definite integral you have to evaluate, giving you the code to a drop-box where you can submit it. That should weed out the riff-raff, including Sklansky.
As a fellow real estate investor and dumbass, I agree. Trump and I fall into the smart-dumb category. There are many in this thread that fall into the dumb-smart category. The latter is the most dangerous/annoying.
Am I dumb-dumb because I don't know what those categories mean? Is this the age old "street smart" / "educated by the college of life" stuff?
Am I dumb-dumb because I don't know what those categories mean? Is this the age old "street smart" / "educated by the college of life" stuff?
I'd call it business street smart. You have to be clever enough to make deals and proficient enough to run DD without being so smart that you become risk-averse. You also have to be able to talk to lawyers and construction types on a regular basis.
I just made up the categories and thought it was funny. I'm the funniest guy I've ever met!
You are dumb-smart though. Coming to this forum puts a cap on all posters of being dumb-smart. Smart-smart and smart are too preoccupied to visit such a place.
By this logic, we should listen to Playbig when he says the WTC towers were destroyed by space lasers, because he could be on to something. No, we don't have the time or resources to hear out every single conspiracy theorist about every dumb theory they have because they're paranoid or because something didn't go their way. They didn't have any real evidence, just fee fees, which is why they got rightly tarred as conspiracy nuts. The cases that did reach the merits, like the Dominion voting mach
Strawman and category error. Election fraud is a real thing and has happened lots of times. I gave you a list of a couple dozen convictions for it in PA alone.
The greatest campaign of all time. Kamala sucked it up and spoke with millionaires on the View with a scripted setup instead of talking to 50 million middle class folk on Rogan because they were a bit too centrist when the economy was the most important topic.
Strawman and category error. Election fraud is a real thing and has happened lots of times. I gave you a list of a couple dozen convictions for it in PA alone.
Space lasers are probably a real thing, it doesn't mean that they were used to bring down WTC any more than Trump lost because of a couple of dozen isolated cases of election fraud. Nobody is saying that the number of cases of election fraud is zero, they are saying it doesn't exist anywhere near the scales that these people were claiming, certainly not on the scale to influence a presidential election, and they had no evidence to the contrary.
Stop speaking in generalities and show me someone who had a legitimate claim, for which they had evidence, suppressed.
Space lasers are probably a real thing, it doesn't mean that they were used to bring down WTC any more than Trump lost because of a couple of dozen isolated cases of election fraud. Nobody is saying that the number of cases of election fraud is zero, they are saying it doesn't exist anywhere near the scales that these people were claiming, certainly not on the scale to influence a presidential election, and they had no evidence to the contrary.
Stop speaking in generalities show me someone who ha
Look if you're going to respond to my posts at least have the decency to read them. My claim was twofold, that election questioners are/were tarred as "election deniers" and "bad for democracy" (are you debating this didn't happen?) and that no one is bad for questioning election integrity. By doing so and taking even sometimes frivolous lawsuits through the courts, they are directly strengthening both the process of elections (because sometimes they actually reveal flaws) and trust in them, which is a huge net positive for everyone.
