Politics & Current Events

[Sammy Sofa]

OK, but that's clearly not what you said, so whatever.

But you're never one to engage in semantic arguments

And you're never one to say something hilariously off the mark, and then immediately turn around and act like people can't just read what you said in the first place when you get called out for it. There's no nuance to quibble over in your rampaging hot takes, sweetie.

[Derwood]

OK, but that's clearly not what you said, so whatever.

But you're never one to engage in semantic arguments

And you're never one to say something hilariously off the mark, and then immediately turn around and act like people can't just read what you said in the first place when you get called out for it. There's no nuance to quibble over in your rampaging hot takes, sweetie.

Thank god you’re here to set me straight

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

She’s running to make money, not to win.

I want to beat a dead horse here. This has recent precedent.

Right, you're vastly over-simplifying it. It's not accurate to effectively say, "well, Trump happened, so ANYTHING can happen!" That's simply not the case. The most obvious reason why should be comparing the standards/expectations held by Democratic voters vs. Republican voters.

I missed this earlier. I think the statement "Trump happened so ANYTHING can happen" is entirely valid, if not very useful. Its a question of how likely an otherwise unlikely-seeming thing is to occur, and what mechanisms we observed with Trump's victories. All I'm saying is that in large fields, the candiates that someone would naturally dismiss as unelectable become more likely to win than you would assume, especially in this environment where authoritarian figures are winning elections across the globe. Yes, the Democrats are less likely to support one than Republicans, but lets also not pretend that there aren't a substancial number of Dem voters who are completely out of their minds. Gabbard has a "D" next to her name, and that will be enough for a lot of horrible people who happen to vote Dem just because its what they do. Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party. Yeah, it isn't a likely scenario, but the larger the Dem field is, the stronger her chances of winning become (which is the inverse of any other Dem candidate.)

[Bluescale]

All I'm saying is that in large fields, the candiates that someone would naturally dismiss as unelectable become more likely to win than you would assume, especially in this environment where authoritarian figures are winning elections across the globe. Yes, the Democrats are less likely to support one than Republicans, but lets also not pretend that there aren't a substancial number of Dem voters who are completely out of their minds. Gabbard has a "D" next to her name, and that will be enough for a lot of horrible people who happen to vote Dem just because its what they do. Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party. Yeah, it isn't a likely scenario, but the larger the Dem field is, the stronger her chances of winning become (which is the inverse of any other Dem candidate.)

Anecdotally what I've seen on FB is a bunch of people (myself included), being, "Wow, that's really cool. She's super liberal!" And then, after reading about her over the course of a few days realizing she's an extremest who was raised by extremists, and is willing to change her position 180 degrees as a matter of convenience.

Granted, anecdotal evidence is just that, and people who are paying attention right now are highly involved/interested in politics, so it's hard to say how she does when less informed voters get involved, but primary voters tend to be pretty involved.

[Sammy Sofa]

All I'm saying is that in large fields, the candiates that someone would naturally dismiss as unelectable become more likely to win than you would assume, especially in this environment where authoritarian figures are winning elections across the globe. Yes, the Democrats are less likely to support one than Republicans, but lets also not pretend that there aren't a substancial number of Dem voters who are completely out of their minds. Gabbard has a "D" next to her name, and that will be enough for a lot of horrible people who happen to vote Dem just because its what they do. Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party. Yeah, it isn't a likely scenario, but the larger the Dem field is, the stronger her chances of winning become (which is the inverse of any other Dem candidate.)

Anecdotally what I've seen on FB is a bunch of people (myself included), being, "Wow, that's really cool. She's super liberal!" And then, after reading about her over the course of a few days realizing she's an extremest who was raised by extremists, and is willing to change her position 180 degrees as a matter of convenience.

Granted, anecdotal evidence is just that, and people who are paying attention right now are highly involved/interested in politics, so it's hard to say how she does when less informed voters get involved, but primary voters tend to be pretty involved.

Yeah, what she benefits mostly from right now are the optics of who she is, her vocal support of Sanders, and how relatively is known about her on the national scale beyond those things.

I've also been seeing a ton of blog posts and Tweets about her announcement that very quickly end up with people pointing out the REALLY shady stuff she has lurking, and the general sentiment seems to turn pretty quickly, fortunately. She doesn't have the dedicated fanbase someone like Sanders have, nor does she have an established public persona like Trump had; when Trump declared he was running again, it's not like he surprised anyone with how terrible he is. Gabbard's deep, deep flaws, by contrast, run DEEPLY contrary to who/what she's perceived as. Judas' scenarios run too hard on the necessity of Democratic voters behaving like Republican voters, and they just don't (at least not to the numbers she'd need to beat the other Democratic challengers). Her best bet would be if Sanders backed her, but I'd bet damn good money he's going to be running again himself.

[Derwood]

Sadly, not satire

[CyHawk_Cub]

[CyHawk_Cub]

[Banedon]

That's a hard pass.

[javy knows my name]

That's a hard pass.

Same, I'm glad it's there for me to look at after he's long gone, but I'm not doing that to myself right now

[sneakypower]

Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party.

um, zero?

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party.

um, zero?

Well, I disagree? For instance, in my state, we have open primaries. You can choose to participate in either the Dem or Repub primary, but not both. If Trump runs for reelection and doesn't have a valid alternative running against him (which I don't think will be the case, but whatever), the MAGA crowd would join the Dem primary, and I know whom a lot of them would be throwing support behind.

[Sammy Sofa]

Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party.

um, zero?

What, the idea of MAGA chuds glomming on to a PoC woman raised in a Krishna cult running as a Democrat DOESN'T make sense to you?

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party.

um, zero?

What, the idea of MAGA chuds glomming on to a PoC woman raised in a Krishna cult running as a Democrat DOESN'T make sense to you?

Pretending MAGA voters make rational decisions ain't rational.

[CyHawk_Cub]

[Derwood]

I'm on a Title IX hearing board, and that is literally the exact opposite of Title IX policy

[big ball chunky time]

um, zero?

What, the idea of MAGA chuds glomming on to a PoC woman raised in a Krishna cult running as a Democrat DOESN'T make sense to you?

Pretending MAGA voters make rational decisions ain't rational.

jesus christ this website is the worst

[big ball chunky time]

Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party.

um, zero?

Well, I disagree? For instance, in my state, we have open primaries. You can choose to participate in either the Dem or Repub primary, but not both. If Trump runs for reelection and doesn't have a valid alternative running against him (which I don't think will be the case, but whatever), the MAGA crowd would join the Dem primary, and I know whom a lot of them would be throwing support behind.

this guy's posts always remind me of the month roast got interested in politics

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

um, zero?

Well, I disagree? For instance, in my state, we have open primaries. You can choose to participate in either the Dem or Repub primary, but not both. If Trump runs for reelection and doesn't have a valid alternative running against him (which I don't think will be the case, but whatever), the MAGA crowd would join the Dem primary, and I know whom a lot of them would be throwing support behind.

this guy's posts always remind me of the month roast got interested in politics

And every time you butt heads with me, I remember when I started getting active on this site in 2016. You were freaking out like a lunatic every time the Cubs were tied or losing in a playoff game and I was ribbing you over it. You basically respond with a "this guy doesn't know who I am!" I cringed for you as I read it. If this website is the worst, you're the self-appointed king of it, I suppose?

But whatever, tear into me because I'm aware of the fact that there are a fairly large number of lunatics out there that voted for both Trump and Obama.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

Not the Onion: Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul is going to Canada for hernia surgery

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/14/rand-paul-neighbor-attack-canada-surgery/2569965002/

[Banedon]

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

[sneakypower]

Also, imagine how many Islamaphobe and queer-bashing voters the Dems might pick up if Trump gets impeached and convicted, and the MAGA crowd wants an authoritarian to support in a non-Republican party.

um, zero?

Well, I disagree? For instance, in my state, we have open primaries. You can choose to participate in either the Dem or Repub primary, but not both. If Trump runs for reelection and doesn't have a valid alternative running against him (which I don't think will be the case, but whatever), the MAGA crowd would join the Dem primary, and I know whom a lot of them would be throwing support behind.

'islamaphobe & queer bashing voters' love Trump, specifically because his policies and rhetoric hurt those groups; if he gets impeached they'll become angrier and pushed further extreme

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

um, zero?

Well, I disagree? For instance, in my state, we have open primaries. You can choose to participate in either the Dem or Repub primary, but not both. If Trump runs for reelection and doesn't have a valid alternative running against him (which I don't think will be the case, but whatever), the MAGA crowd would join the Dem primary, and I know whom a lot of them would be throwing support behind.

'islamaphobe & queer bashing voters' love Trump, specifically because his policies and rhetoric hurt those groups; if he gets impeached they'll become angrier and pushed further extreme

If he gets impeached they will get angry, yes. And I think some of them would blame Republicans for it and look for alternatives to that party.

[sneakypower]

the democrats are going to be the ones impeaching him..

the far more likely scenario is some of them maybe staying home after that, but nobody in that cohort is going to be flipping parties