I assumed it was this:
Do you support his idea that going to ATMB to ask how I might ignore a mod is “doubling down” on my argument? Because I think that would be a necessary premise to support that position.
I’ve got no dog in this fight. Just noting where I think the pitting came from.
Huh?
You made a claim “-and no one agrees with you.” I responded that other than you, no poster in this thread has actually said they disagree with me.
You are the one seeking validation here, not me.
Also, you just said
Which is it? Do I ‘desperately need validation from the audience’? Or does ‘no one’s opinion matter to me’?
It’s not that Senorbeef even won the debate. There hasn’t been a debate, because neither of you have uttered any real critique of his position. You’ve failed at addressing his points so completely that I’m not even sure if you understand his position.
For what it’s worth I disagree with you.
All right, at least two people have in fact stated that they disagree with me.
That just leaves every other poster in this thread before SenorBeef’s claim is proven.
I understand the concern. But I want to point out that representation – that celebrating that we had a person who has traditionally been excluded from a certain position finally achieve it – is separate from the actual policies they might implement and how they might impact the lives of the average minority. As an example of this above, imagine the republicans ran a woman like Nikki Haley and she was firmly within the MAGA camp and planned to make lives worse for minorities, including women. Would allowing her to come to power be a win for the rights of women and other minorities? Being the first woman president is a big step, but if what she does with that power is to keep everyone else down, is that a win for progress and justice?
The reality is that decades worth of progress for minorities is being rolled back under Trump. Anything that would’ve kept him from power would be a win for minorities. Excluding them from the presidency for the immediate future is an injustice, but a far lesser injustice with far less impact than trying to push a candidate who has a lesser chance to beat Trump. There is no doubt that a generic white guy democrat win in 2016 would put minorities in a better position today, and that a generic white guy democrat win in 2024 would put minorities in a better position tomorrow.
I hate that we’re in this position, especially after decades of advancing humanism and justice, but MAGA is so incredibly damaging in so many ways that we can’t afford to fuck around with this. We need to stop the fire before we give the house a nice fresh shiny coat of paint.
I would like to point out the irony here. Progressives want actual leftist candidates. What happens every election is that we get enthusiastic about someone who is actually a little bit progressive, and immediately an army of people comes down to say “Look, defeating Trump is the only important thing. Would it be nice if we ran someone that might actually push things to the left a little bit? Sure, but we can’t, because the American public won’t vote for someone like that. You know how important defeating Trump is, it’s more important than any other factor, so give up on your idea of running your preferred candidate and fall in line behind the one we choose for you”
But when it comes to a similar argument - that the American people hesitate to vote for a woman, LGBTQ, and/or a person of color, suddenly compromising on what you really want because it’s necessary to beat Trump is no longer important, and purity of purpose is suddenly all that matters.
I’m not going to call out the specific people that hold both of these hypocritical positions because I don’t want to put in that kind of effort figuring out who is who, but there are definitely people that push both narratives. I’m also not conceding that the “we can’t run anyone even a little left!” narrative is correct. I believe that the American public is more energized by actual progressives than they are by minority representation in candidates, so the tradeoff is different.
You have an annoying habit of insisting on reading everything someone else wrote hyper-literally and in the worst possible light, while not applying the same standards to your own posts. It’s borderline trolling behavior. So let’s apply the same standards to your own original post:
Please explain what the Streissand effect (sp) has to do with this thread. Your disclaimers notwithstanding, your inclusion of the term in the OP is confusing.
Please explain, with citations and your definition of racist and misogynist, what about Senorbeefs position is racist and misogynist. While doing so, please address the two hypotheticals that Senorbeef has posted (that you have conveniently avoided) that he feels demonstrate that his position is not racist or misogynist. ETA: and his above post, for that matter.
Please cite where Miller substantively addressed Senorbeefs position, beyond simply accusing him of being racist and misogynist.
My dude, this getting sad. I feel like I’m beating up on a crazy person.
Here’s what I said in context:
It is completely clear that I was saying that no one agrees with you about the reason you say you pitted me. You made it quite clear that you did not pit me for my argument, but rather how I doubled down by going to ATMB to ask if it’s possible to ignore a mod, and people are not taking your side on that one.
You quoted me as saying “-and no one agrees with you.” But why did you remove the first part of that sentence? Because you’re trying to lie by omission. You’re trying to mislead people to think that I said that no one agrees with any part of what you said, when I was only specifically saying that no one agrees with your justification for pitting. You are clearly and deliberately misrepresenting my words. The mid-sentence chop is pretty conclusive.
It’s funny – all the shit you said about doubling down and not admitting your mistakes and all that apply to your behavior in this thread more than mine in either thread. And at this point this thread has clearly backfired on you. I even invited people to support the reason you claim to have made this pitting.
In any case, I think you’ve sufficiently humiliated yourself and I’m going to dial back my participation in this thread because it is, indeed, tedious. I’ll still post here and there but I’m confident I’ve made my point and at this point you’re just being obsessed and sad.
You have cites proving this pattern of behavior?
Hey, prove this pattern of behavior exists. Then, we can pass value judgements on it.
Additionally, if you feel it is borderline trolling behavior- report it to the mods or start a Pit thread on it.
I already conceded that point at least once in this thread. It is confusing. I wanted to get the OP complete and posted before work got busy. IIRC I already posted that explanation of the title in this thread.
I didn’t conveniently avoid them. I deliberately avoided them for a very simple and very good reason. We can debate the merits of any poster’s position and whether that position is bigotted in any way, in Great Debates. It has been quite the day, and I haven’t gotten back to the original GD thread. I intend to, and to continue the debate of issues and positions there.
This is the Pit. I did not want this thread to just turn into another debate that could have stayed in the original thread. It is a Pitting. Let’s stay focused on that and not lose sight of why we are here.
First, in the GD thread Miller never called SenorBeef a racist or a misogynist. He called SenorBeef’s position racist and misogynist. Some may argue this is a fine distinction. I would point out that calling a position racist is allowed in GD. Calling a poster racist is allowed only in the Pit.
So in the above quote you are either not saying what you meant to say, claiming Miller violated board rules, or simply showing your own bias against Miller
Second, again that belongs in GD. This is the Pit.
Your post makes it clear that you are uninterested in any real discussion in this thread, and simply want to continue your nonsensical pedantry. It also supports my assertion that you refuse to hold yourself to the same standard that you want to hold Senorbeef too. Which is fine - this is the pit, you can do whatever you want. But I’ll be bowing out.
I don’t feel you addressed my concerns at all. Your idea of “representation” which reads to me like you see it as tokenism, isn’t the same as being in actual positions of power. I don’t think Black people want leadership positions solely for tokenism, they want to be able to affect policies and be in a position where they have actual power.
If you deliberately exclude certain classes of people from positions of power, based solely on their membership within that group, I don’t think they should trust that you have their best interests.
Again, we have you and one other poster disagreeing with me. Nobody else has weighed in.
Telepathy again?
Note that my quote began with an indication that it was just a partial quote. Further, it was immediately preceded by the full quote
Here is my full post
How am I lying by omission? Misleading people? Misrepresenting your words?
You have a cite or any kind of evidence proving that?
Other than fixating on the word Streissand, you have failed to answer almost all the questions I have asked and the points I have raised.
I say for the third time- I called your position racist and misogynist. I never called you as a poster those things. I also never called you “-every other ist you can think of”
I have twice asked you to quote where I accuse you of being sexist and racist and every other ist you can think of. I ask again.
He did more than that:
He’s skirting the rules in GD by calling me a sexist by implication, and also calling me a liar by implication. This was actually the moment I decided I was done with his shit. It’s one thing to disagree with me, it’s another thing to say that I’m lying about my intentions and clearly harbor racist and sexist feelings. What he did there was actually worse than anything you’ve done in your whole misguided obsession today. It crossed the line for me into “someone who doesn’t deserve to be debated” territory.
We’re not going to get rid of racism and sexism in forty years. We’re not likely to get rid of it in four hundred. The problem with SenorBeef’s position is that, if we can never risk running someone who’s not a white male as long as that causes them to lose any votes, then we can never run anyone who’s not a white male, ever.
There’s no way to call, “Never nominate anyone who is female or non-white,” as anything other than racist and sexist. It might be justifiably racist and sexist, but it’s still definitionally both of those things.
I think SenorBeef has entirely failed to make a persuasive argument that this position is justified in the current climate, for reasons I’ve laid out previously. The effect this idea would have on Democratic support from minority communities, alone, makes it an obvious non-starter.
I actually fully appreciate that irony. It’s at least part of why I think you’re so absolutely wrong on this issue. It’s a dumb, losing strategy when we do it to politicians pushing popular progressive policies, and its an even dumber strategy to do it to politicians based purely on their race and gender. Especially after an election where the Democratic stronghold among minority voters is starting to fall apart. We need to assure Black and Latino voters, in particular, that the Democrats actually have their back, and aren’t just making empty promises, and there’s nothing that would be more poisonous to that then, “We can’t allow you to have a leadership position with us.”
I should certainly hope it is clear that I am not interested in any real discussion in this thread . I am not engaged in nonsensical pedantry. SenorBeef has still not answered most of my questions or addressed most of my points. He seems to cherry pick one thing in each post and either genuinely not understand it or deliberately misrepresent it. He then completely ignores the rest of the post.
I am genuinely not seeing that.
I’d prefer you’d capitalize Pit. But if you want to depart, you are certainly free to do so.
If he is, those quotes certainly don’t prove it. They are vaguely hostile and insulting, I’ll admit. But that is all they are. Perhaps they imply you are sexist and a liar in context. But if so, that context is missing.
You know, fair enough. That was a cheap shot, and I apologize for it. In my head it felt like a subtler jab than it actually was, and you’re justified with being upset with me over it. I shouldn’t have posted it - I almost didn’t, and I regret not listening to my better instincts.
This, obviously, is not being posted by me as a moderator, but since I suspect you’re using the blocking technique suggested by Reply in the ATMB thread, I’m putting the mod colors on it so that you can see it.
Okay then. I guess I was wrong about that point.
This leaves, of course, all my other points.