Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 02-14-2020, 05:34 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...hey! I'm right here! You can debate me directly if you like. There is plenty of context missing from the snippet that DSeid chose to argue with. I added additional context in my last post. Do you think supporting climate change and gun control is enough to overlook Bloomberg's legacy of supporting a racist unconstitutional policy that terrorised and traumatized hundreds of thousands of people of colour?
Compared to Trump? God yes. A million times more.

And how do you reconcile your views with the information that the polling shows Bloomberg is 3rd among black people in the Democratic primaries (not to mention endorsements from prominent African-Americans such as Henry Louis Gates and Congresswoman Lucy McBath)?
  #252  
Old 02-14-2020, 05:41 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,788
I’ll let the black voters decide. If they feel as strongly as you do - then he won’t get their support and his campaign will tank. Then I’ll be voting for Sanders and pushing any reticent friends I might have to do the same. I’ll learn to love Sanders if he wins the primary.

But the black leaders I’ve heard interviewed, while condemning the practice, ultimately think their constituents should give him a chance. In fact, all the ones I’ve heard seemed to deliver, in different words, the same carefully crafted message.

Here’s one example

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/al-sharp...n-forgiveness/

Stop and Frisk was wrong
Bloomberg wrong
Really really really wrong
He apologized
An apology is not enough to make it right
He was really really bad
But an apology is a good first step
We should listen to him
We should give him a chance
Then some combination of
Black people care about other issues, too
Black people hate Trump
Good record on gun violence
Other candidates not so good on race either, with a few examples thrown in.

I imagine this is a message that was crafted by a team of experts and filtered through a couple of dozen focus groups. It kind of surprised me that they did not pivot to Bloomberg’s recent record in helping black communities, but they probably thought it would a) dilute the apology b) look like quid pro quo. I’m sure that team Bloomberg anticipated this and it seems that they were well-prepared.

It seems to me that the black community leaders might be a better target for your outrage than individual Bloomberg supporters. Maybe you should start a Pit thread, it might be interesting.

Last edited by Ann Hedonia; 02-14-2020 at 05:43 PM.
  #253  
Old 02-14-2020, 05:41 PM
Manwich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 411
Bloom will be better than Trump because liberals will be able to ignore his evil because he talks nicer and doesn't have weird hair
  #254  
Old 02-14-2020, 05:48 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...yet you've fail to acknowledge the extraordinary privilege you are displaying here. You can pretend that stop and frisk didn't happen. You want us to ignore the legacy, ignore the trauma, pretend that this didn't really happen.
Ummm, who the hell is "us"? New Zealanders? Lefty twitter? Because you sure as hell don't speak for black and latino Americans.

Last edited by CarnalK; 02-14-2020 at 05:49 PM.
  #255  
Old 02-14-2020, 05:50 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
Compared to Trump? God yes. A million times more.
...not compared to Trump. I've already conceded that if Bloomberg were to get the nomination everyone should vote and support him.

Compared to the other candidates. Do you think supporting climate change and gun control is enough to overlook Bloomberg's legacy of supporting a racist unconstitutional policy that terrorised and traumatized hundreds of thousands of people of colour?

Quote:
And how do you reconcile your views with the information that the polling shows Bloomberg is 3rd among black people in the Democratic primaries (not to mention endorsements from prominent African-Americans such as Henry Louis Gates and Congresswoman Lucy McBath)?
I don't need to reconcile my views. Henry Louis Gates and Lucy McBath have agency. They are adults. They can support whichever candidate they like. They do not shield you from any of the points I've made in this thread.
  #256  
Old 02-14-2020, 05:57 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Ummm, who the hell is "us"? New Zealanders? Lefty twitter? Because you sure as hell don't speak for black and latino Americans.
...I make no claims to speak on behalf of black and latino Americans. The context of "us" should be pretty crystal clear. "Us" is the collective "us", as in everyone. In context you can sub "everyone" for "us" if you like. As in You want everyone to ignore the legacy, ignore the trauma, pretend that this didn't really happen.
  #257  
Old 02-14-2020, 05:59 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...yet you've fail to acknowledge the extraordinary privilege you are displaying here. You can pretend that stop and frisk didn't happen. You want us to ignore the legacy, ignore the trauma, pretend that this didn't really happen. It's how America works. It took a television show (Watchman) to bring "Black Wall Street" to the public's consciousness. Sweeping the trauma of black people under the rug is what America does best and its doing it again here.

I'm stomping my foot on the internet about one damn issue over and over and over and over because ya'll want to elect someone who supported a racist fascist unconstitutional policy that terrorised and traumatized communities of colour for a decade. I might live in New Zealand but I share something with those communities: the colour of my skin. You are erasing Bloomberg's racist legacy while giving me a lecture me about privilege. The irony.





I'm not sure you the best person to complain that "I'm barely debating any more" considering that this was the only other post in this thread where you engaged with me. You haven't actually debated any of my positions here. You've just complained that I live on the other side of the planet.

But here's an important thing to remember: the biggest threat in my opinion to global stability is the United States of America. The next election isn't just about Americans. If Trump wins again America is fucked. FUCKED. It will slide into authoritarianism. It will destabilise regions. It will affect me. But I don't get a vote. So I have every right to participate in this debate.
Like I said, you're barely debating anymore. You're brow-beating people into...saying...or...believing...something. No one is pretending SaF didn't happen. And people are talking about the legacy, it's all over the fucking news right now. It was a terrible thing. And despite that, Bloomberg is rising in the polls, among PoC and communities all over the US. Even in places where Democratic voters are majority black, and he's not even on the ballot or campaigning. I don't know what to tell you, fella, his SaF legacy doesn't seem to be deal-breaker you think it is (or should be) among African-American voters. Apparently, you don't speak for all PoC.

But you just don't seem to give a whit what anyone says here. You're simply using this thread as your soapbox. You desperately want this to be something more than it currently is, and you keep coming back in here over and over and making vile implications about how we're doing this terrible thing or ignoring that heinous thing. But that's not debate, that's browbeating. Seems like what you may be looking for is a good Bloomberg Pit thread.

Last edited by Happy Lendervedder; 02-14-2020 at 06:01 PM.
  #258  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:00 PM
Manwich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 411
If Bloom is nominated, Sanders supporters won't vote for him, they promised.

So if you want Trump gone, vote Bernie or lose.

It's practical
  #259  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:00 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...not compared to Trump. I've already conceded that if Bloomberg were to get the nomination everyone should vote and support him.
My comments were about Trump and those who say Bloomberg is as bad as Trump. I'm a Warren supporter. I don't intend on voting for anyone else before the general election (Georgia's primary is in late March and I assume Senator Warren will still be in).

Quote:
I don't need to reconcile my views. Henry Louis Gates and Lucy McBath have agency. They are adults. They can support whichever candidate they like. They do not shield you from any of the points I've made in this thread.
I think listening to black voters and leaders on this issue is incredibly helpful. If they think that Bloomberg has atoned, then maybe it's worth asking why and listening.
  #260  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:02 PM
Manwich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 411
Because they were paid off
  #261  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:04 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manwich View Post
If Bloom is nominated, Sanders supporters won't vote for him, they promised.

So if you want Trump gone, vote Bernie or lose.

It's practical
I don't believe in negotiating with terrorists.
  #262  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:04 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
My comments were about Trump and those who say Bloomberg is as bad as Trump. I'm a Warren supporter. I don't intend on voting for anyone else before the general election (Georgia's primary is in late March and I assume Senator Warren will still be in).



I think listening to black voters and leaders on this issue is incredibly helpful. If they think that Bloomberg has atoned, then maybe it's worth asking why and listening.
Apparently the only black person whose opinion on this should matter to us is a New Zealander name Banquet Bear.
  #263  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:14 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...I make no claims to speak on behalf of black and latino Americans. The context of "us" should be pretty crystal clear. "Us" is the collective "us", as in everyone. In context you can sub "everyone" for "us" if you like. As in You want everyone to ignore the legacy, ignore the trauma, pretend that this didn't really happen.
Well, a writing note: you sound like the Lorax who speaks for the blacks.
  #264  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:16 PM
Manwich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 411
But why would anyone support an oligarch over a socialist?
  #265  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:17 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmartAleq View Post
If this country is stupid enough to vote for fascist billionaires then it deserves what it gets. I will not vote for Bloomberg or Trump or any other corporatist neoliberal centrist Third Way scumbag. I'll write in Bernie or vote Green like I did last time and y'all can enjoy the results of your equivocating and pontificating on matters you have less than no knowledge of. Same if this country is willing to hold still AGAIN while oligarchs ratfuck whatever paltry remains of our once democratic society survived 2016. I cordially invite all those who can and do say with a straight face "VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO OMG ONOZ ELEVENTY!!1!" to go squat in their living room Laz-E-Boys and wait for the general because your input is unnecessary and will only get in the way of those trying to actually make a fucking difference. This isn't a fucking game, and "defeating TEH ENEMEEE" is not what it's about and if you don't know the difference then sit down and go back to watching Fox or MSDNC or whatever brand of poison pablum you prefer.
OK, what happens with climate change if neither Warren nor Bloomberg is the nominee?

It damn sure isn't a game. But we've got plenty of candidates for the Dem nomination who will let the GOP filibuster any plan to deal with global warming, because some stupid Senate rule is more important than the fate of the Earth.

But YOU - you will sideline yourself if Bloomberg's the nominee, and let the world fry.
  #266  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:21 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manwich View Post
But why would anyone support an oligarch over a socialist?
Because the socialist doesn't know what he's doing, and even given the huge role that wealth inequality plays in this country right now, it's still at most the second most urgent and important issue we have to deal with.

But if you don't believe in global warming, or believe we can wait until the 2030s to start doing something about it, then we are starting from very different places.
  #267  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:22 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Hedonia View Post
I’ll let the black voters decide. If they feel as strongly as you do - then he won’t get their support and his campaign will tank. ...
^ This.

We are being treated, in this thread, to the straight GOP - Kremlin line* on Bloomberg. Trump and his enablers are very, very, very worried about Bloomberg. The anti-Bloomberg arguments:
  • Bloomberg is a billionaire, which means he's evil! That means he's an oligarch!---here the GOP/K line ignores the actual definition of 'oligarch,' using it as a generic snarl word. The idea that billionaire = evil is clearly childish and unintelligent. Some billionaires are evil, as are some poor people. (Bloomberg needs to make clear that he supports progressive, not regressive, tax policies.)

  • Bloomberg is a racist!---again, this is for African-American voters (and possibly other voters of color if the accusation is that Bloomberg hates all non-whites) to decide. It is not for others to decide.

  • Bloomberg is a sexist!---Any and all evidence for this assertion should be examined. It's doubtful that Bloomberg has a record that can match Trump's, but any record he does have should be looked at. Voters will have to decide which of the two of them is more likely to treat women fairly.

  • Bloomberg is a fascist!---This is the least-supported GOP - Kremlin claim. They are really going to have to put in some work on this one.

  • Bloomberg is trying to buy the election!---Every candidate is trying to buy the election; some just have less money. That said, Bloomberg would be smart to make a commitment to work against Citizens United (by making it a priority to appoint SCOTUS justices who oppose it, and by working with whatever legislation a Democratic Congress could come up with to mitigate its effects).

  • Sanders fans won't vote for Bloomberg; they'll stay home or vote write-in or 3rd-party if Bloomberg is the candidate, so you'd better vote for Sanders ---here the GOP/K is showing its hand most openly. And it's a weak one. 'We'll take our ball and go home if Sanders isn't the candidate!!!1!!!' won't convince many voters to embrace Sanders.





*I am not accusing any particular posters of working for any particular political entities. I'm just saying that in this thread, we are seeing people post the GOP - Kremlin arguments intended to make sure that Trump faces an easier-to-beat opponent in November.

Last edited by Sherrerd; 02-14-2020 at 06:23 PM.
  #268  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:38 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
Like I said, you're barely debating anymore. You're brow-beating people into...saying...or...believing...something. No one is pretending SaF didn't happen. And people are talking about the legacy, it's all over the fucking news right now. It was a terrible thing.
...but it isn't terrible enough for you to withdraw your support.

Gotcha.

And its all over the fucking news right now both because its important and because some people are trying to downplay his legacy and other people aren't going to let that happen.

Quote:
And despite that, Bloomberg is rising in the polls, among PoC and communities all over the US.
Yep.

Propaganda is a powerful thing.

Bloomberg is trying to buy the nomination and he's got enough money to give it a pretty good shot.

Quote:
Even in places where Democratic voters are majority black, and he's not even on the ballot or campaigning. I don't know what to tell you, fella, his SaF legacy doesn't be the campaign killer you think it is among African-American voters. If it does become a problem with that voting bloc, so be it. He'll lose the nom, and we'll all support someone else.
You seem to think this is about African-American voters. It isn't. The African-American people have been affected by institutional racism since America was founded. The country is currently in the grips of a white supremacist regime. They aren't at issue here. They can vote and support who they like. They are not a shield to your opinions.

This is about propaganda. This is about white voters and white people who are sweeping Bloomberg's legacy under the rug. Its white-washing history. I've talked at length in other threads how information is siloed now. That we've set up personal feed-back loops so that we all have the ability to only see and hear the information that we want to hear that makes us comfortable. You aren't going to break those feedback loops by not talking about this.

Quote:
But you just don't seem to give a whit what anyone says here.
I disagree with what people are saying here. So I'm debating them.

Quote:
You're simply using this thread as your soapbox. You desperately want this to be something more than it currently is, and you keep coming back in here over and over and making vile implications about how we're doing this terrible thing or ignoring that heinous thing.
You desperately want to make Bloomberg's support of a racist unconstitutional policy that terrorised and traumatized hundreds of thousands of people of colour something less of what it actually was.

Quote:
But that's not debate, that's browbeating. Seems like what you may be looking for is a good Bloomberg Pit thread.
Compared to the other candidates, do you think supporting climate change and gun control is enough to overlook Bloomberg's legacy of supporting a racist unconstitutional policy that terrorised and traumatized hundreds of thousands of people of colour?

Quote:
Apparently the only black person whose opinion on this should matter to us is a New Zealander name Banquet Bear.
Not at all. You can listen to historian Michael Harriot. Or Charles M Blow. Sean Perryman. Jamaal Bowman. Briahna Joy Gray. Their opinion matters. Your opinion matters. You've mentioned my country of origin yet again. The country I live in doesn't matter. I'm allowed to participate in this debate.
  #269  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:42 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
My comments were about Trump and those who say Bloomberg is as bad as Trump.
...I was taken out of context. Do you accept that?

Quote:
I think listening to black voters and leaders on this issue is incredibly helpful. If they think that Bloomberg has atoned, then maybe it's worth asking why and listening.
Do you think I'm not listening to black voters and leaders? I've cited many so far in this thread. Most of those that I've listened to don't think a brief apology and a twitter post means that Bloomberg has atoned.

But none of those people are participating in this thread so I can't debate them here. But you are here. Do you think that Bloomberg has atoned? Should he be forgiven?
  #270  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:43 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manwich View Post
But why would anyone support an oligarch over a socialist?
In my case, I feel that we need ( to quote from a link upthread) unlimited money, elite intelligence and Machiavellian ethics in order to have a chance in November.

Iím sorry, but I am incredibly cynical. I donít think the Democrats fully comprehend what they are going to be up against. I think if Sanders is the nominee heíll be ratfucked into oblivion by September. Look at what a good job they did on Biden.

This is going to be a nasty dirty big money fight. If itís Sanders or Bloomberg the Republicans will have ALL the special interest money as neither candidate will accept money from Big Oil or Big Pharma or any corporate interest ( except, in Bloombergís case - Big Mike ).

Itís just not going to be possible to counter that with small donations from individual voters. This forum is not typical of the electorate. Most voters arenít going to seek out information, you have to reach out to them. Iím early voting tomorrow or Monday and I still havenít seen one ad for Buttigieg or Klobuchar. I still maintain lots of voters barely know who they are. I think I saw my first Sanders ad yesterday.

I really dislike money in politics but thatís the game weíre playing now, and we need all the firepower we can get.
  #271  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:43 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,344
A freaking out foreigner is less useful than you might think, Banquet. It could even be actively harmful to your pet causes in the US.
  #272  
Old 02-14-2020, 07:31 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Do you think I'm not listening to black voters and leaders? I've cited many so far in this thread. Most of those that I've listened to don't think a brief apology and a twitter post means that Bloomberg has atoned.

"Most of those that [you've] listened to" support your opinion? Yeesh...
  #273  
Old 02-14-2020, 07:37 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
"Most of those that [you've] listened to" support your opinion? Yeesh...
...yes: most of those that I've listened to don't think a brief apology and a twitter post means that Bloomberg has atoned. Do most of the people you've listened think otherwise? What do you think? Do you think Bloomberg has atoned?
  #274  
Old 02-14-2020, 07:45 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmartAleq View Post
If this country is stupid enough to vote for fascist billionaires then it deserves what it gets. I will not vote for Bloomberg or Trump or any other corporatist neoliberal centrist Third Way scumbag. I'll write in Bernie or vote Green like I did last time and y'all can enjoy the results of your equivocating and pontificating on matters you have less than no knowledge of. Same if this country is willing to hold still AGAIN while oligarchs ratfuck whatever paltry remains of our once democratic society survived 2016. I cordially invite all those who can and do say with a straight face "VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO OMG ONOZ ELEVENTY!!1!" to go squat in their living room Laz-E-Boys and wait for the general because your input is unnecessary and will only get in the way of those trying to actually make a fucking difference. This isn't a fucking game, and "defeating TEH ENEMEEE" is not what it's about and if you don't know the difference then sit down and go back to watching Fox or MSDNC or whatever brand of poison pablum you prefer.
  #275  
Old 02-14-2020, 07:55 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...yes: most of those that I've listened to don't think a brief apology and a twitter post means that Bloomberg has atoned. Do most of the people you've listened think otherwise? What do you think? Do you think Bloomberg has atoned?
Disclaimer: I'm not a person of color, so take my commentary for whatever it's worth.

But my own take is that while Bloomberg has blind spots and he's biased, he generally isn't racist or bigoted. I can't claim to know all that much about Bloomberg at this point, but it seems to me that if he's guilty of anything, it might be that he sometimes treats community problems, which require a soft human touch, in the same fashion that he treats a problem he might encounter in the business world. And he uses language that might be used to describe a challenge in the marketplace to describe complex social issues, which inevitably require greater awareness and sensitivity.
  #276  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:09 PM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Because the socialist doesn't know what he's doing, and even given the huge role that wealth inequality plays in this country right now, it's still at most the second most urgent and important issue we have to deal with.

But if you don't believe in global warming, or believe we can wait until the 2030s to start doing something about it, then we are starting from very different places.
Oh please, you really think Bloomberg is going to carry out the structural changes needed to revamp the economy and resusitate the moribund American political culture? He can't do that because he's part of the problem, much like when Gorbachev tried to reform the USSR but couldn't because it was the system itself which needed to be gotten rid of. Bloomberg will just tinker around the edges and call it quits.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #277  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:10 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Bloomberg Hires Thousands Of Canvassers To Stop Black Men On Street And Force Them To Hear Campaign Pitch

The Onion, of course.
  #278  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:11 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
Oh please, you really think Bloomberg is going to carry out the structural changes needed to revamp the economy and resusitate the moribund American political culture? He can't do that because he's part of the problem, much like when Gorbachev tried to reform the USSR but couldn't because it was the system itself which needed to be gotten rid of. Bloomberg will just tinker around the edges and call it quits.
Maybe you didn't actually read what you quoted?

That's the only way I can make sense of your 'reply.'
  #279  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:25 PM
SmartAleq's Avatar
SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 5,667
Anyone who truly believes that Warren or Bloomberg are the only options if one is concerned about climate change needs to get on back to the Laz-E-Boy tout de suite. Thanks, I have a candidate who actually cares about climate change AND who has plans AND legislation on record to address that.

Last edited by SmartAleq; 02-14-2020 at 08:26 PM.
  #280  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:36 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Compared to the other candidates. Do you think supporting climate change and gun control is enough to overlook Bloomberg's legacy of supporting a racist unconstitutional policy that terrorised and traumatized hundreds of thousands of people of colour?
Not compared to Warren, but Warren's campaign is clearly sinking.

Before the Dems can do anything meaningful about global warming, they need to do three things: win the White House, win the Senate, and kill the filibuster. The Senate won't kill the filibuster without being pushed. Biden's not going to push it. Bernie's not going to either. Last I checked, Klobuchar was in favor of keeping the filibuster. And Mayo Pete will do whatever his owners tell him to.

So yeah, between the fact that Bloomberg's already clearly quite serious about addressing climate change, and the reasonable expectation that he'd regard that arcane Senate tradition as a piece of bullshit that neither he nor America should have to put up with, with the future of the world on the line - yeah, Bloomberg's way better, despite being horrible.

Because climate change will involve the whole fucking planet, for centuries to come. Not just one city or even one country.

For me, it's not a question of whether Bloomberg's apologized or atoned. It's just: what are the others (besides Warren) going to do as President when McConnell says he's got 41 votes and then some to sustain a filibuster to block climate change legislation? The answer appears to be: nothing. Oh well, we lost, too bad for the planet and everyone in it. Too bad, grandkids: Mitch filibustered, and we couldn't possibly have gotten rid of the filibuster.

I'm willing to dance with the devil, if the devil won't put up with that bullshit.
  #281  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:41 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmartAleq View Post
Anyone who truly believes that Warren or Bloomberg are the only options if one is concerned about climate change needs to get on back to the Laz-E-Boy tout de suite. Thanks, I have a candidate who actually cares about climate change AND who has plans AND legislation on record to address that.
And who might that be? And what will s/he do when Mitch filibusters? Because that's been the key question throughout this campaign.

For someone who has already said you'd sideline yourself if it's Trump v. Bloomberg and let the planet fry, you sure are self-righteous about all this.
  #282  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:45 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...yes: most of those that I've listened to don't think a brief apology and a twitter post means that Bloomberg has atoned. Do most of the people you've listened think otherwise? What do you think? Do you think Bloomberg has atoned?
I tend to read a variety of opinions, not stick with only those that validate mine. Ymmv, and apparently it does.

I already explained what I think here. You disagree. I'm done with this.
  #283  
Old 02-14-2020, 09:25 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
I tend to read a variety of opinions, not stick with only those that validate mine. Ymmv, and apparently it does.
...I read a variety of opinions as well. Hence most people hold a stance that I agree with. Many others do not.

Quote:
I already explained what I think here. You disagree. I'm done with this.
You haven't really. You've complained that "I'm not debating", then when I've thrown questions that are up to debate back at you you've ignored them. If you are done that's fine. But I don't really know if you think Bloomberg has atoned or not.
  #284  
Old 02-14-2020, 09:36 PM
SmartAleq's Avatar
SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 5,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
And who might that be? And what will s/he do when Mitch filibusters? Because that's been the key question throughout this campaign.

For someone who has already said you'd sideline yourself if it's Trump v. Bloomberg and let the planet fry, you sure are self-righteous about all this.
The fact that you have to ask tells me you need to be in your recliner right now.
  #285  
Old 02-14-2020, 10:56 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,348
Banquet Bear, since you believe I quoted you devoid of context, I'll respond to the post fully quoted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...Bloomberg supports racist fascist policies, is a misogynistic arsehole, and is unlikely to govern any differently if elected to be president of the United States. You've already got Trump. Bloomberg is a more intelligent Trump with a filter. He would obviously be better than Trump and if he is the nominee then everyone should get out to vote for him. But he deserves all the scrutiny that Kamala got for "being a cop" and that Warren got on "how to pay for her healthcare policies." Stop and frisk should be disqualifying and that it isn't says a lot about how important black lives are in America today.

The only theory I subscribe to is my personal "chaos theory." And what we have right now: with Bloomberg essentially attempting to buy the nomination, is a huge injection of chaos into an already impossibly chaotic system. When you add in what Bloomberg is doing with what the Russians are doing, propaganda from the White House, disinformation campaigns, a disinterested media, along with algorithms gone wild, nobody knows how the next election is going to go. So you should vote for the person who you think would be the next best President of the United States. Not the person you think might get the most votes or the person that you guess might push them over the edge in the states that matter.
Maybe we can stop with the calling Bloomberg a Hitler or a Trump and stick with actual discussion, to start.

Let me agree with you: he should get the same scrutiny that Harris got for "being a cop" and Warren got on "how to pay". Harris was not hurt by that (her otherwise horrible campaign destroyed her). Warren was IMHO hurt by the "how to pay" because she mishandled dealing with the scrutiny. How Bloomberg's dealing with this scrutiny is responded to by Black voters in particular will be the important thing. If they overwhelmingly reject him, then he has no path to becoming the nominee. By the time my state comes up their voices will have been expressed in the voting booths. There is no question that his record on Stop and Frisk would be weaponized at some point and seeing if the attack has legs is vitally important to find out now.

I've made my arguments as to why I think it won't.

Let me disagree with you: there is no reason to believe that he will govern as a racist or misogynistic asshole. I know you do not care about intent but intent does matter to that prediction and most believe that his intent was to reduce gun deaths and that he was, unlike many other politicians, not ignoring the harms of guns causing deaths of Blacks in poor Black neighborhoods. How he approached it was a mistake that caused harms and little goods. How he's approached it, and racial inequity issues in general since, have not been mistakes. There is good reason to believe that his more recent approaches are more predictive than the horrible mistake of Stop and Frisk is. Many American Black leaders and voters seem to think so. And some, maybe many, don't.

Let me agree with you some again: while I think considerations of who is more likely to win and who has a better chance to pull the Senate along matters, we should also be voting for who we think would be the best president. I think Sanders would be a very ineffective president (ineffective, not malignant - that is Trump). Based on the what I know at this point in time, I think Bloomberg OTOH would be a very effective one. I think our best shot at getting meaningful progress on climate change issues, on expanding much farther to universal coverage, on reasonable gun control implementation, at repair of our standing in the world, at reducing many items of racial inequities, even on reducing wealth inequality (!), and more, is having him over the other choices currently running. YMMV. And I have time to change my mind as I see him on the debate stage and as I see how Black voters respond to him in the polling booths on Super Tuesday.

SmartAleq represents the views of some non-zero number of voters who see class warfare as THE issue. Climate change, healthcare, SCOTUS nominations and all the rights that being destroyed and to be destroyed by an increasingly conservative tilted court ... they don't matter. Revolution or nothing! They are non-zero in number but they are pretty close to it and were not more than usually switch after a primary favorite loses. Most understand what is at stake for the country and the world. As a group the SmartAleqs have an amusingly inflated sense of self-importance. Their votes matter but there is no reason to think they matter more than winning the suburbs does, or increased urban turn out, or even winning over disaffected Republicans (some of whom last time voted for Clinton, some of who went third party last time, and some of whom voted Trump but would like to not do so again if they feel they have a reasonable option). They very likely matter less.
  #286  
Old 02-14-2020, 11:05 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,965
I don't know if Bloomberg has atoned for Stop and Frisk. He has sure apologized for it a bunch, but any politician's apology could always be a political ploy (of course that point of view makes politicians less willing to apologise for anything). But, I do respect Henry Louis Gates' and Bobby Rush's opinions and if they are good with Bloomberg then I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until something happens for me to believe he's been insincere.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
  #287  
Old 02-14-2020, 11:34 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,831
Quoting for truth:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
The GOP is very much wounded right now. They've dug themselves into a hole that has left everyone but the true believers shaking their heads in disbelief.

Electing Bernie now would be like giving them a standing eight count. They would regroup, catch their breath, and come out more batshit energized than ever in 2022 and 2024. Nothing would get accomplished in Bernie's first two years, and the GOP would have a boogie man far scarier than they ever painted Barack Obama. And boom, the GOP is back in business.

There's less likelihood of that happening with someone like Bloomberg, imo. Plus, Dems have a better chance of keeping the House and even taking the Senate with Bloomberg as the nominee. Vulnerable purple and red state/district Dems are extremely nervous over a Sanders nomination. They, and we, should be. They're more likely to lose reelection if Bernie's the victor.

I want massive, devastating damage to the GOP. Bernie's victory would give the GOP new energy. Bloomberg's victory, on the other hand and imo, does much more punishing damage to the party of fascist lunatics.

Is Bloomberg flawed? Hell yeah. So is Bernie. So are a lot of previous presidents (even the ones regarded as "good" or "great.") But despite his flaws, even the ones that have been condemned as racist, Blooms seems the best equipped to do some serious damage to the Cult of Trump. The African-American voters and electeds lining up with him seem to agree.

Four more years of President Trump would be far worse than even Bloomberg's worst shit he did in the past. I also believe a Sanders presidency wouldn't do enough to move the GOP into the dumpster of history, while an seasoned, pragmatic, moderate and yes, well-funded leader like Bloomberg would.

Will I still vote for Bernie if he's the nominee? With absolute relish and joy in my heart. But it's far from my ideal.
Thank you, Happy Lendervedder. There are several Dopers who need to enlarge this, print it out, tape it to their mirrors, and get some sense pounded into their heads.

I am a little worried about his electability: He's only half a year younger than Sanders, he's more Jewish, and would be the shortest President since William McKinley. (Does tallness or going to synagogue matter? American voters are not very smart.)

Am I correct that MSNBC and the liberal media are zestfully attacking Bloomberg? I'd like to hear Bernie supporters who complain about Ds attacking Ds, also disapprove of the attacks against Bloomberg. And vice versa.
  #288  
Old 02-14-2020, 11:48 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Banquet Bear, since you believe I quoted you devoid of context, I'll respond to the post fully quoted.
Maybe we can stop with the calling Bloomberg a Hitler or a Trump and stick with actual discussion, to start.
...the comparison to Hitler has been blown out of proportion. It was a mere analogy regarding motivation, I escalated to Hitler when the original analogy (regarding Duterte) was ignored. As for the comparison to Trump: I stand by that comparison. Bloomberg is a more intelligent Trump with a filter. He would obviously be better than Trump and if he is the nominee then everyone should get out to vote for him. What is there to disagree about there?

Quote:
Let me agree with you: he should get the same scrutiny that Harris got for "being a cop" and Warren got on "how to pay". Harris was not hurt by that (her otherwise horrible campaign destroyed her).
Of course Harris was hurt by that. It was one of many different factors for why she withdrew. I don't think her campaign was that horrible at all.

Quote:
Warren was IMHO hurt by the "how to pay" because she mishandled dealing with the scrutiny.
She was hurt because she was treated to a different standard. Bernie won't release how he is going to pay for medicare4all. Nobody gives a fuck. Warren got grief when she didn't release the numbers and she got grief when she did. She got grief when she did an "about turn" but Bernie did almost the very same thing and nobody gave a fuck.

This election is going to be mired by misinformation, propaganda, sloppy and lazy reporting, all of it forming a narrative that will be micro-targeted at very specific audiences. I don't accept it when people say "he or she ran a bad campaign" or this will affect this" or "this person is electable and this person isn't. There is too much going and these simplistic narratives don't tell the whole story.

Quote:
How Bloomberg's dealing with this scrutiny is responded to by Black voters in particular will be the important thing. If they overwhelmingly reject him, then he has no path to becoming the nominee. By the time my state comes up their voices will have been expressed in the voting booths. There is no question that his record on Stop and Frisk would be weaponized at some point and seeing if the attack has legs is vitally important to find out now.
I have no interest in how Bloomberg deals with the scrutiny. His record on stop and frisk absolutely should be weaponized along with every other problematic thing that he has done.

Quote:
I've made my arguments as to why I think it won't.
I've made my arguments on why we should continue to care.

Quote:
Let me disagree with you: there is no reason to believe that he will govern as a racist or misogynistic asshole. I know you do not care about intent but intent does matter to that prediction and most believe that his intent was to reduce gun deaths and that he was, unlike many other politicians, not ignoring the harms of guns causing deaths of Blacks in poor Black neighborhoods.
You don't excuse fascism because of intent. They were stopping people on the street for the colour of their skin. They were pointing guns at peoples heads, throwing them on the ground, threatening to kill them, handcuffing them, then letting them go. Almost everyone that was stopped were innocent. Hundreds of thousands of people.

You might be prepared to forgive someone who defended this right up until it became politically inconvenient to do so. I cannot.

Quote:
How he approached it was a mistake that caused harms and little goods. How he's approached it, and racial inequity issues in general since, have not been mistakes. There is good reason to believe that his more recent approaches are more predictive than the horrible mistake of Stop and Frisk is. Many American Black leaders and voters seem to think so. And some, maybe many, don't.
What are those good reasons? What do you tell the people I've cited in this thread, the many different reports on the impact that stop and frisk had on communities of colour, what good reasons are those?

And we know that Bloomberg is throwing millions of dollars at people for endorsements. We all know that he is doing his best to literally buy his way to the nomination. I'm taking all endorsements with a huge grain of salt.

Quote:
SmartAleq represents the views of some non-zero number of voters who see class warfare as THE issue. Climate change, healthcare, SCOTUS nominations and all the rights that being destroyed and to be destroyed by an increasingly conservative tilted court ... they don't matter. Revolution or nothing! They are non-zero in number but they are pretty close to it and were not more than usually switch after a primary favorite loses. Most understand what is at stake for the country and the world. As a group the SmartAleqs have an amusingly inflated sense of self-importance. Their votes matter but there is no reason to think they matter more than winning the suburbs does, or increased urban turn out, or even winning over disaffected Republicans (some of whom last time voted for Clinton, some of who went third party last time, and some of whom voted Trump but would like to not do so again if they feel they have a reasonable option). They very likely matter less.
You've got this habit of talking about someone else in the abstract as if they aren't here taking part in the discussion. You've done this to me before. If you have issues SmartAleq then take it up with them. If you want to accuse groups of people like SmartAleq of "having an amusingly inflated sense of self-importance" then talk to them about it. Don't lecture me.
  #289  
Old 02-15-2020, 12:52 AM
SmartAleq's Avatar
SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 5,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
SmartAleq represents the views of some non-zero number of voters who see class warfare as THE issue. Climate change, healthcare, SCOTUS nominations and all the rights that being destroyed and to be destroyed by an increasingly conservative tilted court ... they don't matter. Revolution or nothing! They are non-zero in number but they are pretty close to it and were not more than usually switch after a primary favorite loses. Most understand what is at stake for the country and the world. As a group the SmartAleqs have an amusingly inflated sense of self-importance. Their votes matter but there is no reason to think they matter more than winning the suburbs does, or increased urban turn out, or even winning over disaffected Republicans (some of whom last time voted for Clinton, some of who went third party last time, and some of whom voted Trump but would like to not do so again if they feel they have a reasonable option). They very likely matter less.
You don't get it, but I'm not surprised. What YOU don't get is that yes, all those things matter and matter a LOT but that class warfare and the systematic capture of every facet of our society by the 1% IS the central problem. You can go play whack-a-mole with this issue and that issue all you want but you'll be playing the game by the oligarchy's rules and you will get nowhere, as we've gotten nowhere for decades because that is how that game is rigged and nothing will get done. Strip the oligarchs and plutocrats of their ill-gotten rent money and close the loopholes that allow people to amass such a disproportionate percentage of the planetary resources and you free up enough resources to begin to address those extremely important issues AS SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS rather than trying to deal with them in the scattershot manner that the resource starved are forced into employing.

The fact that over 20% of children in this country live in chronic poverty and food insecurity means there will be generations of adults who are, by the necessities of their lives, short sighted and unaware of ways to address the systemic problems in their day to day existence. When over 50% of the people in this country do not have the resources to cope with a $400 emergency there's a big fucking problem and the problem is that too few people have too much of EVERYTHING that people need to be successful and comfortable and secure. That means an entire population that's operating from a standpoint of fear and insecurity and reaction rather than action. Fear makes people easy to control, poverty makes them easy to control, excessive debt makes them easy to control and watching those in power do everything they can possibly do to keep people afraid and poor and indebted year after year after year--well, it takes impressive powers of self delusion to convince yourself that this isn't happening and even if it is, it's not intentional. Riiiiiight.

Last edited by SmartAleq; 02-15-2020 at 12:52 AM.
  #290  
Old 02-15-2020, 01:46 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,344
That is pretty hilarious. I bet some of those influencer meme developers are pissed they didn't think of it. Bloomberg would have paid for that.
  #291  
Old 02-15-2020, 03:37 AM
Manwich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 411
Is he a rapist or just a serial molester using his power?

I'll do some googling and see.

But why go with such a racist, abusive, billionaire?
  #292  
Old 02-15-2020, 05:17 AM
Manwich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 411
After doing some research, in the words of Bloom himself:

Kill it! Kill it!
  #293  
Old 02-15-2020, 08:15 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
IOW, you've got nothing.
  #294  
Old 02-15-2020, 08:20 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmartAleq View Post
You don't get it, but I'm not surprised. What YOU don't get is that yes, all those things matter and matter a LOT but that class warfare and the systematic capture of every facet of our society by the 1% IS the central problem. You can go play whack-a-mole with this issue and that issue all you want but you'll be playing the game by the oligarchy's rules and you will get nowhere, as we've gotten nowhere for decades because that is how that game is rigged and nothing will get done. Strip the oligarchs and plutocrats of their ill-gotten rent money and close the loopholes that allow people to amass such a disproportionate percentage of the planetary resources and you free up enough resources to begin to address those extremely important issues AS SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS rather than trying to deal with them in the scattershot manner that the resource starved are forced into employing.

The fact that over 20% of children in this country live in chronic poverty and food insecurity means there will be generations of adults who are, by the necessities of their lives, short sighted and unaware of ways to address the systemic problems in their day to day existence. When over 50% of the people in this country do not have the resources to cope with a $400 emergency there's a big fucking problem and the problem is that too few people have too much of EVERYTHING that people need to be successful and comfortable and secure. That means an entire population that's operating from a standpoint of fear and insecurity and reaction rather than action. Fear makes people easy to control, poverty makes them easy to control, excessive debt makes them easy to control and watching those in power do everything they can possibly do to keep people afraid and poor and indebted year after year after year--well, it takes impressive powers of self delusion to convince yourself that this isn't happening and even if it is, it's not intentional. Riiiiiight.
Y'know, if we were able to fix all that over the course of the next decade, but didn't do jack shit about climate change, we'd just change the way the poor are screwed, only now it would be global rather than merely the U.S.
  #295  
Old 02-15-2020, 08:32 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,564
Actually, let me sum up for you:

Because you support Bernie who's got a Green New Deal plan which he won't be able to pass on account of the filibuster which his scruples tell him is even more important than saving the planet, you're justified in not voting for Bloomberg (who is equally concerned about global warming but isn't likely to share Bernie's concern about the filibuster) if it comes down to Bloomberg v. Trump.

If your guy gets the nomination, win or lose we get untrammeled global warming because however disastrous global warming would be, preserving the filibuster is apparently even more essential to the fate of humanity.

If Bloomberg gets the nomination, you'll stay on the sidelines, and do nothing to keep us from untrammeled global warming.

IOW, you oppose doing anything about global warming. Your words say one thing, but your declared choices say the opposite.
  #296  
Old 02-15-2020, 08:56 AM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,396

The Moderator Speaks


Quote:
Originally Posted by Manwich View Post
After doing some research, in the words of Bloom himself:

Kill it! Kill it!
Manwich, you are not participating in the thread in any constructive way.

Hence, you are banned from the thread for the next week. You may return to it on February 22, 2020.
  #297  
Old 02-15-2020, 10:02 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...the comparison to Hitler has been blown out of proportion. It was a mere analogy regarding motivation, I escalated to Hitler when the original analogy (regarding Duterte) was ignored. As for the comparison to Trump: I stand by that comparison. Bloomberg is a more intelligent Trump with a filter. He would obviously be better than Trump and if he is the nominee then everyone should get out to vote for him. What is there to disagree about there?



Of course Harris was hurt by that. It was one of many different factors for why she withdrew. I don't think her campaign was that horrible at all.



She was hurt because she was treated to a different standard. Bernie won't release how he is going to pay for medicare4all. Nobody gives a fuck. Warren got grief when she didn't release the numbers and she got grief when she did. She got grief when she did an "about turn" but Bernie did almost the very same thing and nobody gave a fuck.

This election is going to be mired by misinformation, propaganda, sloppy and lazy reporting, all of it forming a narrative that will be micro-targeted at very specific audiences. I don't accept it when people say "he or she ran a bad campaign" or this will affect this" or "this person is electable and this person isn't. There is too much going and these simplistic narratives don't tell the whole story.



I have no interest in how Bloomberg deals with the scrutiny. His record on stop and frisk absolutely should be weaponized along with every other problematic thing that he has done.



I've made my arguments on why we should continue to care.



You don't excuse fascism because of intent. They were stopping people on the street for the colour of their skin. They were pointing guns at peoples heads, throwing them on the ground, threatening to kill them, handcuffing them, then letting them go. Almost everyone that was stopped were innocent. Hundreds of thousands of people.

You might be prepared to forgive someone who defended this right up until it became politically inconvenient to do so. I cannot.



What are those good reasons? What do you tell the people I've cited in this thread, the many different reports on the impact that stop and frisk had on communities of colour, what good reasons are those?

And we know that Bloomberg is throwing millions of dollars at people for endorsements. We all know that he is doing his best to literally buy his way to the nomination. I'm taking all endorsements with a huge grain of salt.



You've got this habit of talking about someone else in the abstract as if they aren't here taking part in the discussion. You've done this to me before. If you have issues SmartAleq then take it up with them. If you want to accuse groups of people like SmartAleq of "having an amusingly inflated sense of self-importance" then talk to them about it. Don't lecture me.
It's a bit of a digression but the activist scrutiny of Harris and her record as a prosecutor was consistent. It did not get in the way of her rise and did not cause her drop. And we can disagree about Warren. The point we can agree on is that yes, like them, Bloomberg should be scrutinized.

Yes we've each made our arguments.

Regarding forgiveness - I am reminded of what came up in a thread in which one of our more infamous posters stated an apology to those who he had offended on this board: as I was not the target it is not up to me to accept or reject the apology. Still I noted that one of the most important parts of an effective apology is the expressed plan to make amends, and then doing it. The poster was not doing that. In regards to Bloomberg and Black and LatinX Americans, I respect their decision on forgiveness as expressed in the voting both. Clearly some "people of color" will find it disqualifying and you have quoted some of them. Some do not ... and they are not all bought off. If I was of the group I'd be offended by portraying me someone whose price was so low. This was the opinion among Black voters all along, before the apology, before he did things that can be counted as making amends -

Poll from 2012, pretty much height of Stop and Frisk controversy, clearly the plan having racial impacts, Blooomberg still fully defending it, clearly a majority of Black New Yorkers against the policy. Still 25% of Black New Yorkers approved of the policy, and a majority of Hispanics did (also a targeted population). The POV expressed as below:
Quote:
Harlem resident Jackie Rowe-Adams, who lost two sons to gun violence, told CBS News correspondent Elaine Quijano that she supports the stop and frisk strategy but acknowledges the policy is controversial. (Watch full report at left).

"See, you have to walk in my shoes to understand when I say that stop and frisk is needed," Rowe-Adams said. "Maybe if they would have stopped and frisked those kids who shot my two kids, maybe they would still be alive."

Some critics say the program is broken and abused. Rowe-Adams said that doesn't mean the policy, in theory, is ineffective.

"That program, if it's broken, it needs to be fixed by community leaders," she said. "And they need to sit at the table and help fix it. But we certainly don't need to stop it."

As to the comment about the other poster - that was addressed less to you than to other thread participants.

Yes, sometimes I will talk about a poster's position than engage with them as it is clear to me that engagement with with them will be nonproductive. I am not arguing with that poster over their position. There is no clarification needed. My comment is to discuss how the rest of us consider and respond to that sort of comment. Personally from here I can scroll past.
  #298  
Old 02-15-2020, 01:02 PM
SmartAleq's Avatar
SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 5,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Actually, let me sum up for you:

Because you support Bernie who's got a Green New Deal plan which he won't be able to pass on account of the filibuster which his scruples tell him is even more important than saving the planet, you're justified in not voting for Bloomberg (who is equally concerned about global warming but isn't likely to share Bernie's concern about the filibuster) if it comes down to Bloomberg v. Trump.

If your guy gets the nomination, win or lose we get untrammeled global warming because however disastrous global warming would be, preserving the filibuster is apparently even more essential to the fate of humanity.

If Bloomberg gets the nomination, you'll stay on the sidelines, and do nothing to keep us from untrammeled global warming.

IOW, you oppose doing anything about global warming. Your words say one thing, but your declared choices say the opposite.
Oooh, it must be so INTERESTING to be able to prognosticate the future with such accuracy! Why aren't you rich then?
  #299  
Old 02-15-2020, 04:35 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Regarding forgiveness - I am reminded of what came up in a thread in which one of our more infamous posters stated an apology to those who he had offended on this board: as I was not the target it is not up to me to accept or reject the apology. Still I noted that one of the most important parts of an effective apology is the expressed plan to make amends, and then doing it. The poster was not doing that.
...was this poster responsible for a racist fascist policy that terrorised hundreds of thousands of people of colour? I know that people criticised my Hitler analogy, but this is going way over the top of that.

Do you really think that a "lack of an apology" is the real problem here? If Bloomberg just somehow found a way to really make amends that would suddenly make him an acceptable candidate to those who find him unacceptable now?

Quote:
In regards to Bloomberg and Black and LatinX Americans, I respect their decision on forgiveness as expressed in the voting both. Clearly some "people of color" will find it disqualifying and you have quoted some of them. Some do not ... and they are not all bought off. If I was of the group I'd be offended by portraying me someone whose price was so low. This was the opinion among Black voters all along, before the apology, before he did things that can be counted as making amends -

Poll from 2012, pretty much height of Stop and Frisk controversy, clearly the plan having racial impacts, Blooomberg still fully defending it, clearly a majority of Black New Yorkers against the policy. Still 25% of Black New Yorkers approved of the policy, and a majority of Hispanics did (also a targeted population). The POV expressed as below:
President Trump currently has a 49% approval rate. Millions of people support his policies. Millions of people think indiscriminate ICE raids, separating families, banning Muslim countries, reducing immigration to a trickle (and only from white countries) and essentially closing the borders to refugees is a good thing.

So stop using black people as a shield to your own opinions. The US constitution shouldn't be up for a popularity contest. That many black people supported a racist destructive unconstitutional policy is neither surprising or relevant. Once again I'll go back to my original post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...I just don't understand how anyone could think that someone responsible for such a horrendous, racist, dehumanizing, punitive unconstitutional policy is even remotely qualified to win the nomination. Its almost as if black lives don't matter.

And then I remember that millions of people also voted for Donald Trump and things make more sense.
The policy was unconstitutional. Black and brown people were stopped on the streets, guns put to their heads, thrown against walls. If this were happening in white neighbourhoods we wouldn't even be having this discussion. If the police acted like this in the Hamptons then there would have been riots. Trevor Noah says it eloquently here.

The policy is indefensible. No matter how many people you can find who "supported it." No matter how much you want to give Bloomberg credit because "he wanted to save lives."

Quote:
As to the comment about the other poster - that was addressed less to you than to other thread participants.
If you want to talk to me then talk to me. I was reading what you wrote and wondered "why are you telling me this? What does SmartAleq's opinion have to do with anything I said? How do you expect me to respond to this? So it turns out you weren't even talking to me at all.

Quote:
Yes, sometimes I will talk about a poster's position than engage with them as it is clear to me that engagement with with them will be nonproductive. I am not arguing with that poster over their position. There is no clarification needed. My comment is to discuss how the rest of us consider and respond to that sort of comment. Personally from here I can scroll past.
Its like you are gossiping behind someone else's back but they can hear everything that you are saying. If you want to rant about someone else I would appreciate that you don't use me as a platform to do so.
  #300  
Old 02-15-2020, 04:44 PM
SmartAleq's Avatar
SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 5,667
I watched Heathers last night. Uncanny resemblances abounded.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017