The Race For 2024

[Loren Pechtel]

Or go into a Bergdorf Goodman.

So I'm intact because I wasn't after a loaf of bread when I crossed the street? Is that what keeps us safe? (It's been years since there has been any bread in the house.)

 

[Politesse]

When I read arguments like yours, I see "sure my candidate is a pedo, but he's raped fewer children than the other candidate". It's like when laughing dog pointed out that Hitler killed fewer people than did Stalin.

My position, that politicians should be held accountable for their actions and policies regardless of whether they are the "lesser of two evils", is like excusing pedophilia....

Sure.

You've really gone off the deep end.

For the record, I think everyone who sexually abuses a child should go to jail. And that includes at least two of our living ex-presidents, if Jeffrey Epstein's address book is any indicator. This is exactly what the "lesser of two evils" mentality gets you, rapists on the Court and pedophiles in the White House.

Let me know when you vote for someone good instead of the lesser evil.

If I find one, I'll let you know.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

With this speech and her other public pronouncements, Harris may not be outlining any pokicies, but she is signalling her intentions very, very clearly. Hers will be an executive branch defined by rigorous defense of the status quo. In short, a conservative government, as that term used to be defined. This may indeed keep fascism at bay for four more years, but it will do nothing to combat the rising tide, any more than some waffly words about caring for the environmemt will combat the actual rising tide.

Maybe long ago "Conservative" meant the status quo but for a long time it's meant the status quo ante of any current issues of conflict.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For the record, I think everyone who sexually abuses a child should go to jail. And that includes at least two of our living ex-presidents, if Jeffrey Epstein's address book is any indicator. This is exactly what the "lesser of two evils" mentality gets you, rapists on the Court and pedophiles in the White House.

I don't think the address book is enough to convict.

Did Epstein try to get two presidents? Almost certainly. Did he succeed? One, I think likely. One, I see no evidence suggesting any success.

 

[Copernicus]

Do you people really not see how meaningless the phrase "nobody's perfect" is as a response to fair and legitimate critique?

First of all, I thought that you yourself were not demanding perfection, yet you seem critical of others who fail to demand perfection. I don't see your position on perfection as a consistent one. Either you demand it, or you don't. So, if you don't see "nobody's perfect" as a reasonable defense, why are you leaving that option open for yourself?

It's like a fucking parody. If you do something evil, observing that you were imperfect at the time is stating something everyone already knows. It is not a meaningful defense of your actions, only the most transparent of deflections.

It seems to me that you are either quibbling over the degree of evil that you will tolerate, or you are intolerant of any degree of evil. So why are you voting for Harris? Are you willing to tolerate the degree of evil that you perceive in her? Or are you flexible on what you consider the threshold between evil and just "not perfect" to be?

We're not voting on student class president. The White House wields ever more power over the country and the world, and it matters who occupies it and how. It might be Trump in a month. If it isn't, it will be him or someone very much like him in four years or, at a maximum, eight. This is not the time for inaction and avoidance of risk.

What action are you asking for that the rest of us are unwilling to take, but you are willing to take? Are you going to lead, or just be a voice shouting from the back of the crowd?

 

[Politesse]

First of all, I thought that you yourself were not demanding perfection, yet you seem critical of others who fail to demand perfection. I don't see your position on perfection as a consistent one. Either you demand it, or you don't. So, if you don't see "nobody's perfect" as a reasonable defense, why are you leaving that option open for yourself?

Because "I demand perfection" is a strawman argument. Why would I defend an idea that isn't mine? I criticize trends and behaviors like rampant militarization, lack of executive accountability, and state sponsorship of genocide because I find them morally reprehensible and deeply dangerous to the ongoing stability of our nation-state. Not because I think they "lack perfection". They do, but that's quite beside the point. I never said a damned thing about perfection, nor would. I honestly can't think of any philosophical question less relevant to the question of who to endorse for the presidency. Only fools and cultists think their candidate is perfect.

It seems to me that you are either quibbling over the degree of evil that you will tolerate, or you are intolerant of any degree of evil. So why are you voting for Harris? Are you willing to tolerate the degree of evil that you perceive in her? Or are you flexible on what you consider the threshold between evil and just "not perfect" to be?

Of course I'm "quibbling over the degree of evil that I will tolerate". It's called having a conscience, dude. And yes, the vast majority of human actions fall somewhere between "perfect", whatever that might be, and... well, I suppose most actions are evil to some degree. One man's gain being another's loss. But I think we can minimize evil conduct if we try, and should try. Shooting a Palestinian kid in the head because you hate their parents is a choice, and it is definitely a worse choice than giving them a sandwich. Not because child murder "isn't perfect", but because it is wrong to take an innocent life before they have the opportunity to choose their own convictions. I don't understand how you made it as far through life without forming any sort of nuance in considering moral actions. Where did you get this dumbass idea that there is a "perfect" to begin with? Did Jesus tell you to be perfect? Well, I know he did, but did you believe him? Because I didn't.

What action are you asking for that the rest of us are unwilling to take, but you are willing to take? Are you going to lead, or just be a voice shouting from the back of the crowd?

With any and all available power that I have, yes. I may be many things, but I am certainly not lazy. You are, if you're asking me to tell you what your community needs from you. Go find out, and do it.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

When I read arguments like yours, I see "sure my candidate is a pedo, but he's raped fewer children than the other candidate". It's like when laughing dog pointed out that Hitler killed fewer people than did Stalin.

My position, that politicians should be held accountable for their actions and policies regardless of whether they are the "lesser of two evils", is like excusing pedophilia....

Sure.

You've really gone off the deep end.

For the record, I think everyone who sexually abuses a child should go to jail. And that includes at least two of our living ex-presidents, if Jeffrey Epstein's address book is any indicator. This is exactly what the "lesser of two evils" mentality gets you, rapists on the Court and pedophiles in the White House.

Let me know when you vote for someone good instead of the lesser evil.

If I find one, I'll let you know.

Stop confining your search to the two party duopoly.

 

[Politesse]

When I read arguments like yours, I see "sure my candidate is a pedo, but he's raped fewer children than the other candidate". It's like when laughing dog pointed out that Hitler killed fewer people than did Stalin.

My position, that politicians should be held accountable for their actions and policies regardless of whether they are the "lesser of two evils", is like excusing pedophilia....

Sure.

You've really gone off the deep end.

For the record, I think everyone who sexually abuses a child should go to jail. And that includes at least two of our living ex-presidents, if Jeffrey Epstein's address book is any indicator. This is exactly what the "lesser of two evils" mentality gets you, rapists on the Court and pedophiles in the White House.

Let me know when you vote for someone good instead of the lesser evil.

If I find one, I'll let you know.

Stop confining your search to the two party duopoly.

People were literally ripping to shreds in another thread for doing exactly that, just last week. Yes, I have voted for third party candidates in the past, though not because I believed any of them were "perfect". I'm not sure I believe that "perfect" exists, or would last very long if it did.

 

[thebeave]

For the record, I think everyone who sexually abuses a child should go to jail. And that includes at least two of our living ex-presidents, if Jeffrey Epstein's address book is any indicator. This is exactly what the "lesser of two evils" mentality gets you, rapists on the Court and pedophiles in the White House.

I don't think the address book is enough to convict.

Did Epstein try to get two presidents? Almost certainly. Did he succeed? One, I think likely. One, I see no evidence suggesting any success.

Yeah, as I recall, Stephen Hawking was in JE's address book. Epstein was, at heart, kind of a celebrity hound dog. Its a big leap to say anyone in his address book is linked to child sex abuse.

 

[pood]

New poll released today shows Harris up 7 points nationally over The Orange Freak.

 

[Shadowy Man]

New poll released today shows Harris up 7 points nationally over The Orange Freak.

Too bad we don’t elect presidents by national vote.

 

[Politesse]

The turnaround of the Democratic campaign really is remarkable. I wonder if we'll ever see such a dramatic upset midway through election year again? One candidate becomes a felon. Another drops out. The replacement kills it. Who could have really predicted how 2024 was going to go?

 

[pood]

New poll released today shows Harris up 7 points nationally over The Orange Freak.

Too bad we don’t elect presidents by national vote.

A seven-point national lead for Harris means a lock on the Electoral College. The popular and electoral vote have never been anywhere near that out of sync.

 

[pood]

Biden won by four percentage points which translates to a 7 million vote margin in the popular vote. So if Harris were to win by seven points, her popular vote margin would be about 13 million. While it may technically be possible for someone to win the pop vote by 13 million and still lose the college, it’s practically impossible.

 

[Shadowy Man]

New poll released today shows Harris up 7 points nationally over The Orange Freak.

Too bad we don’t elect presidents by national vote.

A seven-point national lead for Harris means a lock on the Electoral College. The popular and electoral vote have never been anywhere near that out of sync.

2016? I don’t remember the polls for that year. But I believe that it was less than 100,000 votes across three states that made the difference.

 

[pood]

New poll released today shows Harris up 7 points nationally over The Orange Freak.

Too bad we don’t elect presidents by national vote.

A seven-point national lead for Harris means a lock on the Electoral College. The popular and electoral vote have never been anywhere near that out of sync.

2016? I don’t remember the polls for that year. But I believe that it was less than 100,000 votes across three states that made the difference.

Yes, but Clinton won the popular vote by just 3 million, which is the record for the pop vote being out of sync with the electoral vote.

 

[bilby]

Clinton won the popular vote by just 3 million, which is the record for the pop vote being out of sync with the electoral vote.

So, a pop record, then?

 

[Politesse]

And how about Hamas who murdered >1000 and took hundreds hostage, including kids on 10/7? Why does your Ilk never have anything bad to say about them?

Did I stutter? I feel that mass infanticide is unforgivably evil, that applies to Hamas as well.

 

[Derec]

Yes, but Clinton won the popular vote by just 3 million, which is the record for the pop vote being out of sync with the electoral vote.

Neither of the Clintons really "won" the popular vote - they all got <50%. In a system like France's where president is directly elected by popular vote, there'd have been a runoff in each case.

Not that popular vote matters at all in our system. It's not different than the aggregate runs in the World Series or the aggregate score in the NBA Finals. A curiosity for buffs, yes, but otherwise not meaningful.

Note that campaigns are run with the Electoral College in mind. Both campaigns would have been very different if US had national popular vote rather than a state-by-state election. And there'd be more votes for lesser candidates as well, as there'd be no fear of the spoiler effect.
In France, Emmanuel Macron only got 28.5% in the first round because of this. In the runoff between him and Marine Le Pen he got 58%.

 

[Derec]

For the record, I think everyone who sexually abuses a child should go to jail. And that includes at least two of our living ex-presidents, if Jeffrey Epstein's address book is any indicator.

What exactly do you think an address book proves?

This is exactly what the "lesser of two evils" mentality gets you, rapists on the Court and pedophiles in the White House.

Rapists on the court? I hope you do not mean the discredited accusations by CBF.