Serious 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

[earl]

One, you're a hypocrite. You've been acting the same way over the shit you disagree with that I brought up. You can drop the baby tantrum now, I'm just saying, don't take what you can't dish. Two, yea I do think The NY Times is fake news. The Kavanaugh shit over the weekend that has been continuing, mind you, is pretty biased and damning. I would like to say I have reason to believe the paper is not reliable. They legit made a false story about not only a new sexual assault allegation (although even I can't call it that because there's no witnesses, and the victim even doesn't remember such an event), but also an old one dismissed long ago front page news. Not the fact that the last person that was able to "corroborate" Blassy-Ford's story just stated that she was pressured by her and her allies to lie. Yes, I am naturally extremely skeptical of them because it's been evident that they're simply pushing a narrative at this point.

I think the important thing here is that he has provided sources, you haven't. Your claims are unsubstantiated while he has sources backing him, as biased and fake as they are apparently. He's calling you out for your bullshit, not your sources. Which you haven't provided in the first place. That's not hypocrisy.

Of course you can provide sources and then you guys would be able to play the "you're a hypocrite" game on an even playing field.

 

[Dece1t]

I think the important thing here is that he has provided sources, you haven't. Your claims are unsubstantiated while he has sources backing him, as biased and fake as they are apparently.

I didn't know I needed a source to something we have already discussed, let alone NY Law widely discussed and criticized as it was. and you as one of the people ardently defended. There is nothing wrong with anything I said.

 

[earl]

I didn't know I needed a source to something we have already discussed, let alone NY Law widely discussed and criticized as it was. and you as one of the people ardently defended. There is nothing wrong with anything I said.

You're claiming stuff such as the NY times reporting falsely on various stories and pushing a narrative. As far as I know this isn't common knowledge, so yes it is something you need to substantiate. I'm not talking about the whole "is banning abortion to save babies at the cost of women /// taking guns to save innocents at the cost of gun owners more authoritarian" debate

 

[GatoDelFuego]

I also find it extremely hypocritical that you're calling me authoritarian when you and others are the ones calling for single payer healthcare and the elimination of private insurance, as well as the forceful confiscation of AR-15s. T

this was...not in llamas's post, for somebody so eager to educate da libs you might want to bursh up on your fallacies list.

Two, yea I do think The NY Times is fake news.

If this is the bar that you set, then you can just fuck off back to /pol/ lmao

 

[Dece1t]

You're claiming stuff such as the NY times reporting falsely on various stories and pushing a narrative. As far as I know this isn't common knowledge, so yes it is something you need to substantiate. I'm not talking about the whole "is banning abortion to save babies at the cost of women /// taking guns to save innocents at the cost of gun owners more authoritarian" debate

Dude, it has been all over the place. If you insist though: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ny...fter-2020-dems-use-it-to-call-for-impeachment and if Fox is too biased: https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-re...ebate-about-supreme-court-justice-11568580928

Edit: Here's another from Tim Pool

this was...not in llamas's post, for somebody so eager to educate da libs you might want to bursh up on your fallacies list.

If this is the bar that you set, then you can just fuck off back to /pol/ lmao

So let me get this straight. Atomicllamas, who was former staff, calling me a dumbass which I have been understandably deleted and infracted for is fine, but me posting about the recent NY Times controversy and using that as the basis for calling it fake news, not fine. Got it.

 

[atomicllamas]

When I was staff I would have infracted my post, but it’s 2019, and facts don’t care about your feelings, dumbass.

 

[JALMONT]

Free mikedawg

 

[orch]

When I was staff I would have infracted my post, but it’s 2019, and facts don’t care about your feelings, dumbass.

Why are the liberals insulting Deceit for his source of information without examining the information itself? I do think that discussing about which sources are to be trusted is an important issue to discuss for any democratic nation.

 

[atomicllamas]

All of the above dipshit.

Conduct: We will not tolerate personal attacks. You are expected to attack the arguments, not the poster. It is also in poor form to misrepresent a poster's arguments or beliefs based on your impression of them as a person.

One, you're a hypocrite.

 

[Dece1t]

Conduct: We will not tolerate personal attacks. You are expected to attack the arguments, not the poster. It is also in poor form to misrepresent a poster's arguments or beliefs based on your impression of them as a person.

Where did I do any of that? Go right ahead. This is not productive, but if you want to go down that rabbit hole I'll happily oblige.

 

[tcr]

Free mikedawg

i take back my feud mikedawg please return i miss you

 

[Asek]

Why are the liberals insulting Deceit for his source of information without examining the information itself? I do think that discussing about which sources are to be trusted is an important issue to discuss for any democratic nation.

he hasnt given a source for his abortion claim. pretty hard to discuss it given that.

 

[Dece1t]

he hasnt given a source for his abortion claim. pretty hard to discuss it given that.

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/02/addressing-new-yorks-new-abortion-law/

Points to consider:

• New York’s new law does not explicitly define “health.” (this can include emotional health, which is highly subjective. This is the most damning part of the bill)
• The RHA removes abortion from the state’s penal code altogether; the homicide statute still defines a “person” as “a human being who has been born and is alive.” Killing a baby once born was and is still considered a homicide. (which means if not born, it won't count as a full homicide, and this change in penal code does not just exclusively apply to abortions, it could affect the rulings on what would've been double homicides)
• New York’s RHA also repealed a section of the public health law that required the following: that abortions after 12 weeks be performed in a hospital; that an additional physician be present for abortions after 20 weeks to care for “any live birth that is the result of the abortion”; and that such babies be provided “immediate legal protection under the laws of the state of New York.” (while it states further down this scenario is rare, just because it's rare doesn't mean it should be allowed. It's still pretty disgusting. If a baby lives from a botched abortion, yea I do think it deserves medical attention)

Additionally, forget the 1st trimester for a moment, being able to abort no questions asked within the 2nd trimester where theoretically a fetus is viable, is not good policy once so ever.

And, do you want to know the funny thing? I have outlined all of this before. "Hard to discuss it" my rear end, give me a break.

Or, here's an interesting perspective on 3rd Trimester Abortions: https://www.dailywire.com/news/43283/former-abortion-doctor-you-never-need-late-term-frank-camp??utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=benshapiro This is a tibit more than anything, but it does dismantle the reasonings for even considering 3rd trimester abortions when, like I said similarly above, a fetus is very viable. Let me give some credence though, let's say its unwanted. You could've aborted it in the first trimester when you found out you were pregnant?

Are we done here? Clearly I am not a dumbass.

 

[GatoDelFuego]

such babies be provided “immediate legal protection under the laws of the state of New York.” (while it states further down this scenario is rare, just because it's rare doesn't mean it should be allowed. It's still pretty disgusting. If a baby lives from a botched abortion, yea I do think it deserves medical attention)

Modern abortion techniques do not result in live birth; however, in the great unlikelihood that a baby was born alive, the medical provider and team of medical support staff would provide all necessary medical care, as they would in the case of any live birth,” he wrote in an email. “The RHA does not change standard medical practices. To reiterate, any baby born alive in New York State would be treated like any other live birth, and given appropriate medical care. This was the case before the RHA, and it remains the case now.”

So you'll be glad to hear that...nothing changed

Are we done here?

Yes, because how the fuck did we get on this topic within a matter of hours? Why are we debating fake news about abortions in the presidential candidates thread? Stop posting and let's return to normal

 

[tcr]

in the interests of combating climate change i think we should kill any and every one we can, up to and including: the elderly, white people, minorities, women, men, baby fetuses, and also adult fetuses, i say we support the new york abortion bill but i also say it doesn't go far enough

 

[Chou Toshio]

Damn man, he’s got a plan—

New “Housing for All” plan joins

Medicare for All
Green New Deal
Free Public College
Eliminate All Student Debt
Eliminate All Medical Debt
Sweeping Criminal Justice Reform
Workplace Democracy Plan

Feel the Bern

 

[Shrug]

need mike unbanned for kamala cope... for the iowa caucuses at least. has all-timer potential, esp if sanders or even biden wins... warren would mean a more tempered response from the dawg. would tulsi gabbard be at fault? would he call black surrogates for other candidates slurs? the possibility is maybe more entertaining than the race itself

 

[blank]

can we trade dece1t for mikedawg GatoDelFuego

 

[GatoDelFuego]

One soul is not equal to another

 

[THE_IRON_...KENYAN?]

How about the mods realize that nobody is here to learn and this is all theater and stop trying to make a pokemon subforum the Library Of Alexandria and just let anyone say anything no matter how dumb it is and unban all the funny people

 

[Wigglytuff]

How about the mods realize that nobody is here to learn and this is all theater and stop trying to make a pokemon subforum the Library Of Alexandria and just let anyone say anything no matter how dumb it is and unban all the funny people

idk man reading mikedawg arguments on here were pretty drab. yeah everyone thought he was stupid but fact is that he's still on the left side of the aisle, so the other liberals itt (which is literally everyone lol) can't fundamentally call him an idiot, and most mikedawg v everyone else arguments were just long paragraphs of nitpicking the smallest words in each others' posts. but dece1t is conservative, so they can call him a fundamental idiot! and it's highly amusing

I'm an ardent Yang supporter #yanggang (my tshirt is 2 days out) but unfortunately, the stars aren't really aligned for him to take this election. Having to beat out an incumbent, tons of other great candidates, people generally responding to strong and vocal leadership, which he's coming up a bit short on -- pick your poison. The fact that he's Asian-American could've also helped with easing the growing racial tensions in America, since white people can't blame black people for getting him elected like they did with Obama, and black people can't blame white people for getting him elected like they did with Trump. But I dream.

I went to a Bernie rally last week and while I might not fully agree with his policies and viewpoints, I think he's the only Democratic candidate with the right mix of charisma, experience, and not saying dumb shit/having said dumb shit in the past to have a chance against toppling Trump. So, I guess I'll buy a Bernie shirt once I pay off my 8 speeding tickets :/

 

[Shrug]

tik’s point is that the cong as a Place Of Seriousness is bullshit, no one likes it, and it’s less fun than being able to bullshit. Also that this style of moderation has lead to bans for actual good posters and also good posters to make fun of. Which I agree with. I think there should be an overall social norm that whenever someone makes a good faith effort to learn something or have a discussion you engage seriously but if it’s something like mike Matrixing vs 7 dudes it’s fine to make fun of.

 

[tcr]

How about the mods realize that nobody is here to learn and this is all theater and stop trying to make a pokemon subforum the Library Of Alexandria and just let anyone say anything no matter how dumb it is and unban all the funny people

bc what happens when u let theater be theater is the ppl try their hardest to entertain and u end up with whatever firebot is whereas if u try to masquerade it as scholarly the humor comes off as more authentic and therefore funnier bc lol at people who legitimately believe that kamala harris is a stellar candidate

 

[THE_IRON_...KENYAN?]

bc what happens when u let theater be theater is the ppl try their hardest to entertain and u end up with whatever firebot is whereas if u try to masquerade it as scholarly the humor comes off as more authentic and therefore funnier bc lol at people who legitimately believe that kamala harris is a stellar candidate

Im not saying that you dont take the thread seriously and let people goof off. Im saying is that you let retards keep seriousposting instead of banning them. You still enforce conduct as is, and its pretty easy to see who is trying to be dumb and who is actually dumb.

 

[Chou Toshio]

These are actually really awesome... guess I got to download the campaign app and join some phone parties...