2020 Election Commentary

[Ghostmaker]

I wish people would stop painting with such a broad brush. All you're really doing here is creating a caricature of everyone to the left of you, as if they (we) are all Marxists, all hate conservatives, all think the same. In other words, you're being an instant of your own complaint.

Certainly, this type of viewpoint exists and is promulgated by much of the media, as well as in sub-cultural pockets like TBP, but it isn't shared by all.

So if you want people to stop calling you a fascist, maybe do the same.

Awww, did someone's precious fee-fees get hurt? Get fucked, buddy. This is the future you chose.

Nice gaslighting attempt though. What's your encore gonna be?

Master of Projection! My feelings aren't hurt - sorry, but your opinion doesn't really hold any weight to me.

But please address what I said. You're whining about something you're actually doing. That isn't gaslighting - it is pointing out your hypocrisy and projection.

Oh please. Since you have the memory of a goldfish, let's review:

Bitch was tossing around the 'fascist' label/
I remarked on how he (and his fellow demagogues) had been using that label to target anyone who wasn't a proper proggie, and voiced my contempt for him over it.
You came riding to the rescue with a pathetic 'NO U DO IT TOO' defense.

You know, you really have to be denser than Christmas gravy to try and gaslight me with a 'oh those nasty lefties don't exist'. Have we not discussed the words and actions of public persons on this very subforum? Do you know who Keith Olbermann is? Robert Reich? That's just two of many. Shall we discuss the (publicly defunct, for now) Trump Accountability Project? Shall we discuss this column, published in Time Magazine?

*snort* 'abstract other that only really exists in their head' my entire ass.

[jhkim]

There is no "extensive voter fraud" and what little has been uncovered has mostly been MAGA morons trying to cheat at the polls. The fact that the white supremacist Oompa-Loompa's personal attorney* has made all kinds of ridiculous claims doesn't make them true.

Determining that is the job of the courts, not GSA administrators or highly partisan internet posters who think movie clips are evidence.

And it would be a strange world where a "white supremacist" does so well among black and hispanic voters, wouldn't it?

I agree that it's the job of the courts. It's fine to discuss it on the Internet - we discuss everything else, after all. But I think the huge problem is that people have largely made up their minds already long before the legal process. They aren't willing to discuss evidence, and if the courts rule against their preconceptions, I predict that most will simply reject the courts as illegitimate.


I would agree that Trump is not a white supremacist, though. Also, on an off-topic note on Venezuela, I think that Maduro is indeed a dictator - but Chavez was not. You claimed that Hitler rose to power by legitimate election, but he lost the 1932 election gaining only 36% of the vote - and was appointed chancellor largely to prevent more Nazi violence. The 1933 elections after the Reichstag fire weren't even close to legitimate. By contrast, Chavez was elected with 56% and a wide margin in 1998 in a system controlled by his opponents, and retained popularity through his death in 2013. I'll buy that he started a slide towards authoritarianism with his second-term constitutional reforms, but it was Maduro who turned Venezuela into a dictatorship.

[HappyDaze]

Well if Rudy says it, it must be true!

Anyhow, who do you think is coming to get you in a Biden presidency? And how does a Biden presidency help the defunct administration of a dead Venezuelan politician?

As your friend Nikolai Lenin, ...you know it is not patriotic to ask that question of me, comrade.

At first glance, I thought that picture was Mirror Universe Picard. At second glance, I'm almost sure it is...

[Pat]

You know, you really have to be denser than Christmas gravy to try and gaslight me with a 'oh those nasty lefties don't exist'. Have we not discussed the words and actions of public persons on this very subforum? Do you know who Keith Olbermann is? Robert Reich? That's just two of many. Shall we discuss the (publicly defunct, for now) Trump Accountability Project? Shall we discuss this column, published in Time Magazine?

I don't think you quoted the post you meant to quote.

Have either of them posted in this thread? No? Has anyone defended those specific issues? No? Then you're not addressing the arguments made by anyone in the thread, you're attacking a fictional Other that you've compiled from an assortment of sources.

It's fine to comment on movements and tendencies, but when you start equating them with individuals, that's a conversation ender.

[HappyDaze]

It's fine to comment on movements and tendencies, but when you start equating them with individuals, that's a conversation ender.

If that were true, there would be no conversations left in this place.

[Shasarak]

So if you want people to stop calling you a fascist, maybe do the same.

How can we be fascist when our name literally is anti-fascist?

[Mercurius]

I wish people would stop painting with such a broad brush. All you're really doing here is creating a caricature of everyone to the left of you, as if they (we) are all Marxists, all hate conservatives, all think the same. In other words, you're being an instant of your own complaint.

Certainly, this type of viewpoint exists and is promulgated by much of the media, as well as in sub-cultural pockets like TBP, but it isn't shared by all.

So if you want people to stop calling you a fascist, maybe do the same.

Awww, did someone's precious fee-fees get hurt? Get fucked, buddy. This is the future you chose.

Nice gaslighting attempt though. What's your encore gonna be?

Master of Projection! My feelings aren't hurt - sorry, but your opinion doesn't really hold any weight to me.

But please address what I said. You're whining about something you're actually doing. That isn't gaslighting - it is pointing out your hypocrisy and projection.

Oh please. Since you have the memory of a goldfish, let's review:

Bitch was tossing around the 'fascist' label/
I remarked on how he (and his fellow demagogues) had been using that label to target anyone who wasn't a proper proggie, and voiced my contempt for him over it.
You came riding to the rescue with a pathetic 'NO U DO IT TOO' defense.

You know, you really have to be denser than Christmas gravy to try and gaslight me with a 'oh those nasty lefties don't exist'. Have we not discussed the words and actions of public persons on this very subforum? Do you know who Keith Olbermann is? Robert Reich? That's just two of many. Shall we discuss the (publicly defunct, for now) Trump Accountability Project? Shall we discuss this column, published in Time Magazine?

*snort* 'abstract other that only really exists in their head' my entire ass.

You seem to have reading comprehension issues. I enver said "those nasty lefties don't exist" - I clearly said they do. I said you are doing the same thing you're accusing them of, and not grokking that not all on the left hate Trump voters.

p.s. Biden isn't a "lefty" is center-right at best.

[Ghostmaker]

You know, you really have to be denser than Christmas gravy to try and gaslight me with a 'oh those nasty lefties don't exist'. Have we not discussed the words and actions of public persons on this very subforum? Do you know who Keith Olbermann is? Robert Reich? That's just two of many. Shall we discuss the (publicly defunct, for now) Trump Accountability Project? Shall we discuss this column, published in Time Magazine?

I don't think you quoted the post you meant to quote.

Have either of them posted in this thread? No? Has anyone defended those specific issues? No? Then you're not addressing the arguments made by anyone in the thread, you're attacking a fictional Other that you've compiled from an assortment of sources.

It's fine to comment on movements and tendencies, but when you start equating them with individuals, that's a conversation ender.

The point is that Mercurius is being deliberately untruthful by attempting to bullshit me with 'oh those nasty, evil leftists don't exist except in your head'. And then whining that I'm 'painting with a broad brush' when I point out that the major arc of leftism these days sure as hell looks like 'let's now punish anyone involved with those evil Trumpists or Republikkkans!'.

[Pat]

It's fine to comment on movements and tendencies, but when you start equating them with individuals, that's a conversation ender.

If that were true, there would be no conversations left in this place.

I sometimes think that's an accurate statement.

[Pat]

I agree that it's the job of the courts. It's fine to discuss it on the Internet - we discuss everything else, after all. But I think the huge problem is that people have largely made up their minds already long before the legal process. They aren't willing to discuss evidence, and if the courts rule against their preconceptions, I predict that most will simply reject the courts as illegitimate.

The media hasn't helped. If they simply said "projected president elect", "purported president elect", or something similar, then it might not be this bad. Instead, they're acting as if the Associated Press is the official arbiter, which is simply not true.

Also, on an off-topic note on Venezuela, I think that Maduro is indeed a dictator - but Chavez was not. You claimed that Hitler rose to power by legitimate election, but he lost the 1932 election gaining only 36% of the vote - and was appointed chancellor largely to prevent more Nazi violence. The 1933 elections after the Reichstag fire weren't even close to legitimate. By contrast, Chavez was elected with 56% and a wide margin in 1998 in a system controlled by his opponents, and retained popularity through his death in 2013. I'll buy that he started a slide towards authoritarianism with his second-term constitutional reforms, but it was Maduro who turned Venezuela into a dictatorship.

I said that Chavez was borderline authoritarian, while Maduro was over the edge, so it doesn't sound like we're disagreeing to any significant degree.

And Hitler became Chancellor legitimately, as the result of an election. The percentage doesn't affect that. More generally, I'd argue that many modern authoritarians have come to see democracy as a means to power.

[Ghostmaker]

You seem to have reading comprehension issues. I enver said "those nasty lefties don't exist" - I clearly said they do. I said you are doing the same thing you're accusing them of, and not grokking that not all on the left hate Trump voters.

p.s. Biden isn't a "lefty" is center-right at best.

Tell the truth: you're not really a person, you're an AI with a malfunctioning script of responses, right? Biden as center-right? Sure

Biden as center right. Uh huh. Voted yes on gun control, voted no on tax cuts. Sure, buddy.

And since you have a weak memory, let me reiterate a remark you made:

Agreed. Though it applies to both sides. I wish people would go back to addressing what someone says, instead of using their comments as a launchpad to make an attack an some abstract Other that only really exists in their head.

My goodness. I roll out some examples to show 'this isn't just in my head' and you just don't even notice, do you?

And yes, I am spreading the love around shotgun style. Four years of being told I was a fascist, because I didn't think some grifting political slattern from Arkansas wasn't the best pick for the Presidency.

Tough shit. Deal with it.

[HappyDaze]

Four years of being told I was a fascist, because I didn't think

Come on now, concede nothing! There's no reason to think you wont's be told that for (at least) another four years!

[Pat]

And since you have a weak memory, let me reiterate a remark you made:

No, the "abstract Other" was my post, not Mercurius'. I was objecting to your "you and yours", because you were explicitly conflating a person with everything you associated with a side, instead of addressing what they said.

Though looking back, this whole chain of replies is a complete mess. You've been primarily replying to Mercurius, but the initial "you and yours" post wasn't a reply to Mercurius, it was a reply to Elfdart. Whose post was ridiculously inflammatory, calling a broad swath of people (you probably included) fascists. But that was Elfdart, not any of the people you've been replying to lately.

[Ghostmaker]

No, the "abstract Other" was my post, not Mercurius'. I was objecting to your "you and yours", because you were explicitly conflating a person with everything you associated with a side, instead of addressing what they said.

Though looking back, this whole chain of replies is a complete mess. You've been primarily replying to Mercurius, but the initial "you and yours" post wasn't a reply to Mercurius, it was a reply to Elfdart. Whose post was ridiculously inflammatory, calling a broad swath of people (you probably included) fascists. But that was Elfdart, not any of the people you've been replying to lately.

Pat, let me make it simpler for you: I don't care what you think in this situation.

Right now I can pull another dozen names -- and these aren't just Twatter nobodies, these are public figures with blue checkmarks who in some cases hold or have held public office -- who happily discuss how much they want to punish anyone who didn't want to vote for Joe Biden or for that matter, Hillary Clinton. This is the state of politics today in the U.S.

STOP FUCKING TELLING ME I'M IMAGINING IT.

Stop stanning for Mercurius, too. He decided to jump in to defend Elfdart. It's on him.

[EOTB]

The reason it's gaslighting is because what "principled liberals" here react to, is someone to their right making a hyperbolic statement - but not someone to their left.

Jhkim and Mercurius will ask those to the right of them to moderate and to please not become overly partisan.  If hard leftists post similarly from farther to their left, that is directly replied to to a much lesser degree.  It is essentially accepted as a sunk outcome while they focus on convincing those right of them to always note all leftists aren't like that, and to not become likewise

This is gaslighting, because the root cause (those to their left) is not addressed.  It also is passive, refusing to ever define ahead of time the line beyond when those to their left have gone so far an immoderate approach is warranted. 

This is how scissors works.  It can't effect those left of them, and so concentrates on preventing those right of them from changing mindset with appeals to principles that are only effective when upheld by all, but which become Neville-variety appeasement (at best) when held unilaterally.

It's really, really important though that those to their right never respond to rock without stopping to spontaneously acknowledge how scissors is different than rock