Joe Biden is now officially the 46th President of the United States of America

[Lacius]

I am in no way compelled to answer questions when your own answers are vague and non-committal. I can always pull the Lacius special - "well, I don't know, I'd have to know more details", the same trick you pulled earlier. Again, if using systems you find anti-democratic to be deplorable, you yourself are deplorable by your own admission. Wiggle all you like.

Considering your positions, I don't blame you for not wanting to answer my questions (reminder: my question was just asking if I was wrong about how I characterized your position, so to refuse to answer my yes/no question can't be seen much else other than intentionally trying to obfuscate your position). As far as I can tell, I've answered every question asked of me to the best of my ability and as honestly as possible. I'm not going make absolutist statements with the kind of hubris that would be required for me not to acknowledge a possible failure of imagination on my part. If we pretend for a second that I would totally use the filibuster every other day as a Senator in the minority party, that also would change nothing about whether or not it's undemocratic and should be abolished.

I never called the use of the filibuster deplorable. I said advocating for anti-democratic systems because they benefit one's team is deplorable. Please don't put words in my mouth. It's desperate.

I'm fundamentally against undemocratic systems like the filibuster, unrepresentative Senate, Electoral College, and gerrymandering, and I've consistently said they should be abolished, regardless of who is in power at the time. Not only are you on record as being in favor of some or all of these anti-democratic systems, but you're also on record saying you pretty much don't care how your team wins or how your policies are enacted as long as it's legal, whether or not it's anti-democratic. If I am misrepresenting your position, please let me know. That's all I asked before you started getting unnecessarily catty about it.

 

[tabzer]

"It's not my own side....." = Lie
"I haven't made claims about...." = Lie
"You used the claim that...." = Lie
"You are pretending to be against blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah....." = Lie

You can call me a liar. But all one has to do is look at the referenced quote to see if it is an accurate description. I have noticed, only a couple of times, where people deflected from accusations of this atrocity using this same technique as yours. To me, that communicates that you don't have a position against such acts themselves, but that they are acceptible as long as you can allege that someone else is worse.

Here's an example. If someone called you a pervert, and you somehow knew that they were far worse--saying so doesn't make you not a pervert. It makes you both perverts.

Now, defending someone by saying "what about that guy" is, in my opinion, worse. Because it adds even more deceit into the equation of already nasty.

Also, I will note that I've only seen this happen a couple times by a select few people on this site. One of them even apologized to me about it... though it is apparent that their attitude is the same.

If Biden and Trump are these monsters that people allege, I hope trust that they get justice.

 

[Foxi4]

Considering your positions, I don't blame you for not wanting to answer my questions (reminder: my question was just asking if I was wrong about how I characterized your position, so to refuse to answer my yes/no question can't be seen much else other than intentionally trying to obfuscate your position). As far as I can tell, I've answered every question asked of me to the best of my ability and as honestly as possible. I'm not going make absolutist statements with the kind of hubris that would be required for me not to acknowledge a possible failure of imagination on my part. If we pretend for a second that I would totally use the filibuster every other day as a Senator in the minority party, that also would change nothing about whether or not it's undemocratic and should be abolished.

I never called the use of the filibuster deplorable. I said advocating for anti-democratic systems because they benefit one's team is deplorable. Please don't put words in my mouth. It's desperate.

I'm fundamentally against undemocratic systems like the filibuster, unrepresentative Senate, Electoral College, and gerrymandering, and I've consistently said they should be abolished, regardless of who is in power at the time. Not only are you on record as being in favor of some or all of these anti-democratic systems, but you're also on record saying you pretty much don't care how your team wins or how your policies are enacted as long as it's legal, whether or not it's anti-democratic. If I am misrepresenting your position, please let me know. That's all I asked before you started getting unnecessarily catty about it.

I'm just waiting for a yes or no on whether it's permissible to use systems you don't like, meaning temporarily suspend following "principles" in service of what you consider to be the greater good, which is where the conversation started. Since neither one of us is a supervillain, it's fair to assume we believe our policies are positive for the country at large - we'll call that the "greater good", even though I hate the term. If the answer is yes then we are in agreement on pretty much everything else, if it is no then there's an internal inconsistency here that you'll have to tackle yourself, in your own time.

 

[D34DL1N3R]

You can call me a liar. But all one has to do is look at the referenced quote to see if it is an accurate description. I have noticed, only a couple of times, where people deflected from accusations of this atrocity using this same technique as yours. To me, that communicates that you don't have a position against such acts themselves, but that they are acceptible as long as you can allege that someone else is worse.

Here's an example. If someone called you a pervert, and you somehow knew that they were far worse--saying so doesn't make you not a pervert. It makes you both perverts.

Now, defending someone by saying "what about that guy" is, in my opinion, worse. Because it adds even more deceit into the equation of already nasty.

Also, I will note that I've only seen this happen a couple times by a select few people on this site. One of them even apologized to me about it... though it is apparent that their attitude is the same.

Again, have I ever told you you're a hypocrite? Pretty certain I have. And I've provided proof of it on several occasions. Your entire above comment is another.

You will receive zero apology from me. I've done nothing wrong towards you.

 

[tabzer]

Again, have I ever told you you're a hypocrite? Pretty certain I have. And I've provided proof of it on several occasions. Your entire above comment is another.

You will receive zero apology from me. I've done nothing wrong towards you.

Yeah, calling me a hypocrite is far from absolving yourself as one, and specifically lacks context on this subject. I get that you are mad at me, but it doesn't invalidate my point.

 

[D34DL1N3R]

Yeah, calling me a hypocrite is far from absolving yourself as one, and specifically lacks context on this subject. I get that you are mad at me, but it doesn't invalidate my point.

Mad at you? In your dreams. All you can ever do is repeat back what was told to you by others. Have any original criticisms about me, or just the usual copy/paste?

 

[Acid_Snake]

Is it coincidence that there was supposed mail voter fraud in the 2020 American election after there was voter fraud in Spain in 2019?? Hmm just wondering


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.eu...into-allegations-of-voter-registry-fraud/amp/

Or what about the voter fraud in the 2016 Spanish election

https://www.google.com/amp/s/archiv...llegations-of-vote-fraud-emerge-in-spain/amp/

Initeresting that it's always a radical left party behind it isn't it?

" heavily funded by Venezuela and Cuba?"
Thank God I read the last sentence before I read the whole thing.. because I would of Gotten mad if I went thru all that to End as Sydney Powell's "Hugo Chavez Zombie defense"

Your point being? It's pretty much proven beyond any doubt that BLM and Antifa are marxist organizations with fundings and ties to those communist regimes.

I know you're gonna say this picture is fake news and that "real communism hasn't been tried" and bla bla bla.
It doesn't change the fact that american culture, politics, media and institutions have been infiltrated by communists, and by the time you will want to act on it there won't be much more you can do.
For now I will continue to laugh at you when you say "lets give more tax money and power to the government, nothing can go wrong!".

 

[tabzer]

Mad at you? In your dreams. All you can ever do is repeat back what was told to you by others. Have any original criticisms about me, or just the usual copy/paste?

Source please. It only looks like you are intentionally deviating from the points that I have made instead of confronting them.

 

[D34DL1N3R]

Source please. It only looks like you are intentionally deviating from the points that I have made instead of confronting them.

Source = this thread. All anyone has to do is look to see that when you're confronted with something, most of the time all you do is repeat back to the person the same things they said about you. If you wish to continue this feel free to PM me, as soon these posts will be lost in the realm of needless banter.

 

[Foxi4]

If you wish to continue this feel free to PM me, as soon these posts will be lost in the realm of needless banter.

I would also suggest this unless you two are planning on arguing about specific policies, ideally somewhat connected to the recent going ons. Personal disputes can stay in the personal messaging system, or ideally off the site.

 

[tabzer]

Source = this thread. All anyone has to do is look to see that when you're confronted with something, most of the time all you do is repeat back to the person the same things they said about you. If you wish to continue this feel free to PM me, as soon these posts will be lost in the realm of needless banter.

This thread will show that every time you talk to me you end up throwing a fit. I'm not sure if anything I have said has been repeated anywhere else, verbatim--that is unless you are cross referencing 2-3 word patterns. For example "Source = this thread" gets over 500,000 hits in Google.

 

[djpannda]

Initeresting that it's always a radical left party behind it isn't it?


Your point being? It's pretty much proven beyond any doubt that BLM and Antifa are marxist organizations with fundings and ties to those communist regimes.

I know you're gonna say this picture is fake news and that "real communism hasn't been tried" and bla bla bla.
It doesn't change the fact that american culture, politics, media and institutions have been infiltrated by communists, and by the time you will want to act on it there won't be much more you can do.
For now I will continue to laugh at you when you say "lets give more tax money and power to the government, nothing can go wrong!".

... oh Nice, Hugo in a photo app with two African woman... I Guess? I don't know what that have to do with Voter Fraud.... Love the Conspiracy tactic of you do " random meme or photo and just just say whatever you want to fit the narrative and hope no-one questions you. " seem like you are used to people believing any Radom picture....
HEY I know Here some pictures for you

I have Proof the EX-President Trump Being a CHINESE Communist spy
I have PICUTRES of Trump having a Secret Meeting with his BOSS !!!!! CCP and North Korean,
America has been played by CHINA as Trump was a secret agent

 

[Lacius]

I'm just waiting for a yes or no on whether it's permissible to use systems you don't like, meaning temporarily suspend following "principles" in service of what you consider to be the greater good, which is where the conversation started. Since neither one of us is a supervillain, it's fair to assume we believe our policies are positive for the country at large - we'll call that the "greater good", even though I hate the term. If the answer is yes then we are in agreement on pretty much everything else, if it is no then there's an internal inconsistency here that you'll have to tackle yourself, in your own time.

Using your own example, I can imagine a situation (albeit an unrealistic one, given political attitudes and the Thirteenth Amendment) where the filibuster is the only thing that stands in the way of slavery being reimplemented, and in that situation, using the filibuster to block slavery would be a morally justified use of the filibuster.

That being said, the filibuster should not exist, nor should the other undemocratic systems I've mentioned. That's not a contradictory position.

 

[tabzer]

That being said, the filibuster should not exist, nor should the other undemocratic systems I've mentioned.

Supposedly %33 of Americans voted for Biden. Would you argue that it is a Democratic system or just Democratic enough?

 

[djpannda]

Initeresting that it's always a radical left party behind it isn't it?


Your point being? It's pretty much proven beyond any doubt that BLM and Antifa are marxist organizations with fundings and ties to those communist regimes.

ALSO FIND RIDICULOUSLY hilarious that While you spewing whatever nonsense you claim..
WE found out that CCP was Trying to Damage American Government by Funding the Proud Boys $86,000 to attack the Capitol.... Ouch that has to sting
Proud Boys saw wave of contributions from China before Capitol attack

 

[Lacius]

Supposedly %33 of Americans voted for Biden. Would you argue that it is a Democratic system or just Democratic enough?

Ignoring legislation that reduces access to voting, and ignoring the Electoral College, the 2020 election was a fair and democratic election. Joe Biden won with 51.3% of the vote. The right to vote includes the right not to vote, so the 34% number is irrelevant as long as 100% of eligible voters had the ability to vote if they wanted to.

Edit: We could have a conversation about how a ranked choice voting system is or isn't more fair, but we don't have to go down that road.

 

[djpannda]

Ignoring legislation that reduces access to voting, and ignoring the Electoral College, the 2020 election was a fair and democratic election. Joe Biden won with 51.3% of the vote. The right to vote includes the right not to vote, so the 34% number is irrelevant as long as 100% eligible voters had the ability to vote if they wanted to.

Edit: We could have a conversation about how a ranked choice voting system is or isn't more fair, but we don't have to go down that road.

Plus the Fact Voter Suppression Bills has been popping up like Crazy is going to drive that 34% down ...just Like Repubs want

 

[tabzer]

Ignoring legislation that reduces access to voting, and ignoring the Electoral College, the 2020 election was a fair and democratic election. Joe Biden won with 51.3% of the vote. The right to vote includes the right not to vote, so the 34% number is irrelevant as long as 100% of eligible voters had the ability to vote if they wanted to.

Edit: We could have a conversation about how a ranked choice voting system is or isn't more fair, but we don't have to go down that road.

I see your position. My point is "do you think it is democratic for a minority vote-holder to represent everyone who is not interested?"

 

[Lacius]

I see your position. My point is "do you think it is democratic for a minority vote-holder to represent everyone who is not interested?"

Yes, because a person who chooses not to vote is effectively saying they're fine with either outcome. That means if Biden earned 34% of the vote (of all voters, not all votes), and 33.8% of eligible voters didn't vote, then 67.8% of eligible voters either want Biden or are okay with Biden (for the former president, it's 31 + 33.8 = 64.8% want or would have been okay with him). You can't force someone to vote.

We can't talk about Biden as a minority vote holder, since he earned a majority of votes. The better question is if someone who wins a plurality but not a majority should be president.

 

[tabzer]

Yes, because a person who chooses not to vote is effectively saying they're fine with either outcome. That means if Biden earned 34% of the vote (of all voters, not all votes), and 33.8% of eligible voters didn't vote, then 67.8% of eligible voters either want Biden or are okay with Biden (for the former president, it's 31 + 33.8 = 64.8% want or would have been okay with him). You can't force someone to vote.

That's an interpretation, but I don't agree with that. Is a pacifist region of people "effectively" saying that they are fine with being dominated by an imperialistic legion?