• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 08:41
CEST 14:41
KST 21:41
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL20] Ro24 Preview Pt1: Runway122v2 & SC: Evo Complete: Weekend Double Feature3Team Liquid Map Contest #21 - Presented by Monster Energy9uThermal's 2v2 Tour: $15,000 Main Event18Serral wins EWC 202549
Community News
Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris10Weekly Cups (Aug 11-17): MaxPax triples again!13Weekly Cups (Aug 4-10): MaxPax wins a triple6SC2's Safe House 2 - October 18 & 195Weekly Cups (Jul 28-Aug 3): herO doubles up6
StarCraft 2
General
How does local culture impact paid ad success? What makes a paid advertising agency in Lucknow ef Geoff 'iNcontroL' Robinson has passed away RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Weekly Cups (Aug 11-17): MaxPax triples again!
Tourneys
Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 487 Think Fast Mutation # 486 Watch the Skies Mutation # 485 Death from Below Mutation # 484 Magnetic Pull
Brood War
General
How do the new Battle.net ranks translate? Victoria gamers Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL New season has just come in ladder BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[ASL20] Ro24 Group C [ASL20] Ro24 Group A [Megathread] Daily Proleagues Cosmonarchy Pro Showmatches
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Mineral Boosting Muta micro map competition
Other Games
General Games
Dawn of War IV General RTS Discussion Thread Path of Exile Beyond All Reason Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 Formula 1 Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
High temperatures on bridge(s) Gtx660 graphics card replacement Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment"
TL Community
The Automated Ban List TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale
Blogs
Breaking the Meta: Non-Stand…
TrAiDoS
INDEPENDIENTE LA CTM
XenOsky
[Girl blog} My fema…
artosisisthebest
Sharpening the Filtration…
frozenclaw
ASL S20 English Commentary…
namkraft
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 3861 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7059

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 7057 7058 7059 7060 7061 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
March 06 2017 21:58 GMT
#141161
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
March 06 2017 21:58 GMT
#141162
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15690 Posts
March 06 2017 22:00 GMT
#141163
On March 07 2017 06:56 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 06:45 Mohdoo wrote:
On March 07 2017 05:06 kwizach wrote:
On March 07 2017 05:01 Mohdoo wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:58 LightSpectra wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:54 zlefin wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:51 LightSpectra wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:39 zlefin wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:37 LightSpectra wrote:
I agree with LL, nobody in their right mind thinks the Democratic primary was even and fair. The media coverage of Clinton versus Sanders was preposterously one-sided.

preposterously? do you have any citations for that? and one-sided in who's favor?


In favor of Clinton of course.

I'm not vetting every single word of the following articles, but some (generally) reputable news sources that have argued that there was a bias against Sanders:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/cnn-accused-of-media-bias-against-bernie-sanders-after-focusing-too-much-on-super-delegates-a7067446.html

https://www.salon.com/2016/03/16/new_york_times_busted_for_anti_bernie_bias_the_iconic_clinton_endorsing_newspaper_slyly_edits_article_to_smear_sanders/

https://theintercept.com/2015/12/17/wheres-bernie-media-ignores-sanders-though-hes-more-popular-than-trump/

I'm amazed that there are people who are still in denial about it. I remember in early/mid-2016 whenever I turned on the news (primarily I mean CNN but also some Fox and NBC) it was either Trump outrage or some fawning/criticism over Clinton's guaranteed ascension to her golden throne. Sanders was never treated as anything more than an also-ran.

did you read the shorenstein report that Kwiz linked and is also in my sig?
there's a big difference between some imperfections and a grossly unfair process. The question depends alot on what exact claim is being made. and there's also a big difference between issues with how media reports on things, and any impropriety in the electing process itself.


Tell me which part you have a problem with:

1. The DNC strongly favored Clinton and did some things that were biased in her favor.
2. Nevertheless there is no evidence that the DNC were actively rigging the primary in her favor.
3. The mainstream media coverage was overwhelmingly better for Clinton, even though a greater percentage of it was negative in tone.


The problem is that Kwiz etc are arguing a matter of technicality regarding rules and regulations. But it is a fruitless effort because no one cares about that.

No, I'm arguing a matter of factual reality. If you have facts that make the statement "Sanders got screwed by his own party so Hillary Clinton could keep running for president" true, feel free to bring them up. Otherwise, I don't see the point of starting this discussion again.


Doesn't this not consider things like a wave of superdelegates making other senior party members less likely to back Sanders? There are a lot of ways to apply pressure without actually violating anything. Clinton was chosen ahead of time. The party organized itself well to get the primary over with early. You aren't accounting for all the planning and posturing. There are a lot of less-than-direct ways for this to have been impacted that have nothing to do with votes.

Is it that you are saying none of the democratic primary was planned out in advance? There weren't early efforts to consolidate and solidify support ahead of time?

There was an enormous amount of momentum behind Clinton the day she announced. And not just because she was so fantastic. She was the chosen one in a variety of ways.

Isn't this exactly the kind of thing that the Super Delegate system is for? I can understand not liking it, but it feels weird to have a system that allows the party greater influence and final say, and then not like that the party has greater influence.


Yes, superdelegates exist exactly to prevent things like Trump from happening. I think this is my point though. Someone like Kwiz can point to all the reasons nothing was wrong and everything was ethical. But what if the argument is that the *entire* framework is, in itself, unethical? That's kind of my point here. You can tell everyone "no, this is totally legal", but the person you are saying that to believes the entire system should be illegal. There are quite a few people who believe the entire idea of super delegates is fundamentally unethical.

Pulling this back a bit further: Ellison is someone I would have expected to get rid of super delegates. Do any posters here think Perez will abolish super delegates?
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
March 06 2017 22:01 GMT
#141164
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?

Not sure if I'm on the left but probably more so than not.

I'd say biased yes, but the right also bullshits more often, making it difficult to say if it really isn't justified. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
TheDwf
Profile Joined November 2011
France19747 Posts
March 06 2017 22:01 GMT
#141165
On March 07 2017 06:54 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Show nested quote +
WASHINGTON ― Ben Carson made his debut as secretary of Housing and Urban Development Monday by telling agency employees about the virtues of the “can-do” American society. Carson said this value system was best exemplified by slaves, whom he characterized as immigrants who came to the United States with very little and worked very hard.

“That’s what America is about,” Carson said. “A land of dreams and opportunity. There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great grandsons, great granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

One HUD employee who was in the room for Carson’s speech said there was no audible reaction to Carson’s slave ship remark, although she was shocked by it and immediately recognized that it’d be a problem. She added that overall, people at the agency are excited about their new boss.

The Senate approved Carson, a neurosurgeon with no experience in housing policy, to the job last week.

In 2013, Carson said Obamacare was “the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery.”

“And it is in a way, it is slavery in a way, because it is making all of us subservient to the government, and it was never about health care,” he added. “It was about control.”

Carson also spent part of his speech to agency employees Monday talking about the human brain.

“[E]very human being, regardless of their ethnicities, or their background, they have a brain, the human brain,” he said, later adding, “You can’t overload [the brain]. Have you ever heard people say, ‘Don’t do that or you’ll overload your brain’? You can’t overload the human brain. ... So we need to concentrate a little less on what we can’t do and a little more on what we can do.”


Source

Is this real? It just sounds like theonion material...
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
March 06 2017 22:01 GMT
#141166
On March 07 2017 07:01 TheDwf wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 06:54 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
WASHINGTON ― Ben Carson made his debut as secretary of Housing and Urban Development Monday by telling agency employees about the virtues of the “can-do” American society. Carson said this value system was best exemplified by slaves, whom he characterized as immigrants who came to the United States with very little and worked very hard.

“That’s what America is about,” Carson said. “A land of dreams and opportunity. There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great grandsons, great granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

One HUD employee who was in the room for Carson’s speech said there was no audible reaction to Carson’s slave ship remark, although she was shocked by it and immediately recognized that it’d be a problem. She added that overall, people at the agency are excited about their new boss.

The Senate approved Carson, a neurosurgeon with no experience in housing policy, to the job last week.

In 2013, Carson said Obamacare was “the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery.”

“And it is in a way, it is slavery in a way, because it is making all of us subservient to the government, and it was never about health care,” he added. “It was about control.”

Carson also spent part of his speech to agency employees Monday talking about the human brain.

“[E]very human being, regardless of their ethnicities, or their background, they have a brain, the human brain,” he said, later adding, “You can’t overload [the brain]. Have you ever heard people say, ‘Don’t do that or you’ll overload your brain’? You can’t overload the human brain. ... So we need to concentrate a little less on what we can’t do and a little more on what we can do.”


Source

Is this real? It just sounds like theonion material...

Carson has said stupider in the past. None of us are surprised.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Nevuk
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
United States16280 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-03-06 22:04:18
March 06 2017 22:03 GMT
#141167
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?

It is, but I think the degree to which it is is overstated by conservative media.It was very obvious from the moderators during the presidential debates. For the most part I think it's not really intentional on the part of news organizations, it's just unconscious bias leaking through due to most journalists being more liberal.

NPR was more Clinton-biased during the primary than I found acceptable, but overall they're normally the least biased, I would say (they'll usually present a conflicting/opposing view even if it's one they likely disagree with).


I will say, for all that CNN was called the Clinton News Network by conservatives, they practically gave Trump free air time by airing rallies unedited during the GOP primary.
Karis Vas Ryaar
Profile Blog Joined July 2011
United States4396 Posts
March 06 2017 22:05 GMT
#141168
Carson was probably listening to that Randy Newman song and not realizing it was satire.
"I'm not agreeing with a lot of Virus's decisions but they are working" Tasteless. Ipl4 Losers Bracket Virus 2-1 Maru
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23250 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-03-06 22:22:09
March 06 2017 22:05 GMT
#141169
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?


Yes, but so is reality. But the question is problematic for the same reason as that poll on trust was earlier. Do I think Fox News is unfair to Republicans, of course not, but is MSNBC unfair to Republicans, obviously.

But, we got kwiz over here saying that putting a known cheater for Hillary in charge of the DNC doesn't indicate that it wasn't a fair primary, so the line between fair and unfair is clearly being blurred.

Since Carson has come up, I think it's a good time to remind people why "the resistance" from the Democrat establishment was DOA.

+ Show Spoiler +
https://twitter.com/shawneebadger/status/837431065723592704


Oops, meant this one:



EDIT: Plansix, still think it will be hard to get 60 votes for a SCOTUS appointment? Democrats just gave Trump 62 for Carson, who himself said he wasn't qualified to be running shit.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15690 Posts
March 06 2017 22:06 GMT
#141170
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?


I think certain institutions naturally lend themselves well to science and cultural advancement. Things like climate change make it extremely difficult to be impartial. When there is not a single source of reputable refutation to man mad climate change, how is a journalist supposed to publish something? Climate science is just a huge amount of data and modeling.

Entertainment is an industry that always focuses on the newest trends in culture. It also has a hefty minority and gay population. Entertainment is never going to be on the side of social conservatism so long as it is against gay rights. Think about marijuana. The entertainment industry accepted and perpetuated the idea that marijuana is ethical years ago. The country is still catching up.

How about I'll word it this way: In 50 years, do you think issues like abortion, gay rights, or any other religiously-inspired republican issue will still be in contention? Entertainment is always ahead of policy.
Biff The Understudy
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
France7890 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-03-06 22:08:39
March 06 2017 22:06 GMT
#141171
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?

Who is the media? Breitbart, The NYT, Fox, CNN, Infowar?

Precise and I'll be very happy to answer. You really will need to narrow it down for your question to make any sense at all.
The fellow who is out to burn things up is the counterpart of the fool who thinks he can save the world. The world needs neither to be burned up nor to be saved. The world is, we are. Transients, if we buck it; here to stay if we accept it. ~H.Miller
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
March 06 2017 22:11 GMT
#141172
On March 07 2017 07:00 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 06:56 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On March 07 2017 06:45 Mohdoo wrote:
On March 07 2017 05:06 kwizach wrote:
On March 07 2017 05:01 Mohdoo wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:58 LightSpectra wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:54 zlefin wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:51 LightSpectra wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:39 zlefin wrote:
On March 07 2017 04:37 LightSpectra wrote:
I agree with LL, nobody in their right mind thinks the Democratic primary was even and fair. The media coverage of Clinton versus Sanders was preposterously one-sided.

preposterously? do you have any citations for that? and one-sided in who's favor?


In favor of Clinton of course.

I'm not vetting every single word of the following articles, but some (generally) reputable news sources that have argued that there was a bias against Sanders:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/cnn-accused-of-media-bias-against-bernie-sanders-after-focusing-too-much-on-super-delegates-a7067446.html

https://www.salon.com/2016/03/16/new_york_times_busted_for_anti_bernie_bias_the_iconic_clinton_endorsing_newspaper_slyly_edits_article_to_smear_sanders/

https://theintercept.com/2015/12/17/wheres-bernie-media-ignores-sanders-though-hes-more-popular-than-trump/

I'm amazed that there are people who are still in denial about it. I remember in early/mid-2016 whenever I turned on the news (primarily I mean CNN but also some Fox and NBC) it was either Trump outrage or some fawning/criticism over Clinton's guaranteed ascension to her golden throne. Sanders was never treated as anything more than an also-ran.

did you read the shorenstein report that Kwiz linked and is also in my sig?
there's a big difference between some imperfections and a grossly unfair process. The question depends alot on what exact claim is being made. and there's also a big difference between issues with how media reports on things, and any impropriety in the electing process itself.


Tell me which part you have a problem with:

1. The DNC strongly favored Clinton and did some things that were biased in her favor.
2. Nevertheless there is no evidence that the DNC were actively rigging the primary in her favor.
3. The mainstream media coverage was overwhelmingly better for Clinton, even though a greater percentage of it was negative in tone.


The problem is that Kwiz etc are arguing a matter of technicality regarding rules and regulations. But it is a fruitless effort because no one cares about that.

No, I'm arguing a matter of factual reality. If you have facts that make the statement "Sanders got screwed by his own party so Hillary Clinton could keep running for president" true, feel free to bring them up. Otherwise, I don't see the point of starting this discussion again.


Doesn't this not consider things like a wave of superdelegates making other senior party members less likely to back Sanders? There are a lot of ways to apply pressure without actually violating anything. Clinton was chosen ahead of time. The party organized itself well to get the primary over with early. You aren't accounting for all the planning and posturing. There are a lot of less-than-direct ways for this to have been impacted that have nothing to do with votes.

Is it that you are saying none of the democratic primary was planned out in advance? There weren't early efforts to consolidate and solidify support ahead of time?

There was an enormous amount of momentum behind Clinton the day she announced. And not just because she was so fantastic. She was the chosen one in a variety of ways.

Isn't this exactly the kind of thing that the Super Delegate system is for? I can understand not liking it, but it feels weird to have a system that allows the party greater influence and final say, and then not like that the party has greater influence.


Yes, superdelegates exist exactly to prevent things like Trump from happening. I think this is my point though. Someone like Kwiz can point to all the reasons nothing was wrong and everything was ethical. But what if the argument is that the *entire* framework is, in itself, unethical? That's kind of my point here. You can tell everyone "no, this is totally legal", but the person you are saying that to believes the entire system should be illegal. There are quite a few people who believe the entire idea of super delegates is fundamentally unethical.

Pulling this back a bit further: Ellison is someone I would have expected to get rid of super delegates. Do any posters here think Perez will abolish super delegates?

that's going to get into a larger and trickier questions of meta-ethics; and most people, as usual, base their opinions on whether it favors their side rather than an actual thorough understanding of the underlying ethical and practical questions.
The idea of super delegates has its issues, and its merits. Do you want to go over them more fully?
that quite a few people believe something doesn't mean all that much to me, because most people are idiots and thoroughly untrained in the subject matter. of course it matters to them.

alot of people believe somethings or some other thing is unfair; and sometimes those conflict. there is no universally agreed upon sense of fairness, so some people will always believe they were treated unfairly regardless.
if people were interested in talking abotu the process and whether superdelegates should exist, that's fine, and people would be happy to consider that.
hmm, this post feels like it's probably useless, I'll just stop here.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
kwizach
Profile Joined June 2011
3658 Posts
March 06 2017 22:21 GMT
#141173
On March 07 2017 07:05 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?

But, we got kwiz over here saying that putting a known cheater for Hillary in charge of the DNC doesn't indicate that it wasn't a fair primary, so the line between fair and unfair is clearly being blurred.

"kwiz over here" is saying that your usual obfuscation and outrage won't help you evade the fact that you haven't been able to produce a single piece of evidence to indicate that the DNC actively undermined the Sanders campaign. With regards to Donna Brazile becoming interim chair of the DNC after the primary was already over, I'll let Tad Devine, the chief strategist of the Sanders campaign, comment on that: "If Bernie Sanders had been the nominee of the party and the Russians hacked my emails instead of John [Podesta]’s, we'd be reading all these notes between Donna and I and they'd say Donna was cozying up to the Bernie campaign. This is taken out of context. I found her to be a fair arbiter, I think she did a good and honest job."
I'm sure we'll be back to square one in less than a month though. I guess it's an easier escape than accepting that more people simply preferred Clinton.
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions." -- Stephen Colbert
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23250 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-03-06 22:28:13
March 06 2017 22:26 GMT
#141174
On March 07 2017 07:21 kwizach wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 07:05 GreenHorizons wrote:
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?

But, we got kwiz over here saying that putting a known cheater for Hillary in charge of the DNC doesn't indicate that it wasn't a fair primary, so the line between fair and unfair is clearly being blurred.

"kwiz over here" is saying that your usual obfuscation and outrage won't help you evade the fact that you haven't been able to produce a single piece of evidence to indicate that the DNC actively undermined the Sanders campaign. With regards to Donna Brazile becoming interim chair of the DNC after the primary was already over, I'll let Tad Devine, the chief strategist of the Sanders campaign, comment on that: "If Bernie Sanders had been the nominee of the party and the Russians hacked my emails instead of John [Podesta]’s, we'd be reading all these notes between Donna and I and they'd say Donna was cozying up to the Bernie campaign. This is taken out of context. I found her to be a fair arbiter, I think she did a good and honest job."
I'm sure we'll be back to square one in less than a month though. I guess it's an easier escape than accepting that more people simply preferred Clinton.


Bruh... If there was an email of Donna cheating for Bernie it would have been released. She didn't cheat for Bernie, she cheated for Hillary, got booted off CNN for it and the DNC said "let's reward her cheating by putting her in charge".

But yeah, clearly nothing to see there. I mean it was after the primary, so it's not like she was on CNN lying about being neutral the whole time.

Tad is a terrible person to point to btw.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
kwizach
Profile Joined June 2011
3658 Posts
March 06 2017 22:31 GMT
#141175
On March 07 2017 07:26 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 07:21 kwizach wrote:
On March 07 2017 07:05 GreenHorizons wrote:
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?

But, we got kwiz over here saying that putting a known cheater for Hillary in charge of the DNC doesn't indicate that it wasn't a fair primary, so the line between fair and unfair is clearly being blurred.

"kwiz over here" is saying that your usual obfuscation and outrage won't help you evade the fact that you haven't been able to produce a single piece of evidence to indicate that the DNC actively undermined the Sanders campaign. With regards to Donna Brazile becoming interim chair of the DNC after the primary was already over, I'll let Tad Devine, the chief strategist of the Sanders campaign, comment on that: "If Bernie Sanders had been the nominee of the party and the Russians hacked my emails instead of John [Podesta]’s, we'd be reading all these notes between Donna and I and they'd say Donna was cozying up to the Bernie campaign. This is taken out of context. I found her to be a fair arbiter, I think she did a good and honest job."
I'm sure we'll be back to square one in less than a month though. I guess it's an easier escape than accepting that more people simply preferred Clinton.

Bruh... If there was an email of Donna cheating for Bernie it would have been released. She didn't cheat for Bernie, she cheated for Hillary, got booted off CNN for it and the DNC said "let's reward her cheating by putting her in charge".

But yeah, clearly nothing to see there. I mean it was after the primary, so it's not like she was on CNN lying about being neutral the whole time.

Tad is a terrible person to point to btw.

Except Devine said the exact opposite of what you're claiming with zero factual basis or inside knowledge, and since his e-mails were not hacked I guess we'll have to go by what he said, which is that Brazile was "a fair arbiter". That settles that.
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions." -- Stephen Colbert
Ayaz2810
Profile Joined September 2011
United States2763 Posts
March 06 2017 22:32 GMT
#141176
On March 07 2017 06:07 On_Slaught wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 06:04 zlefin wrote:
we can't get to impeachment until he does something impeachable and his numbers get lower. similar for declaring him unfit.


Obviously but I'm just saying I want that to happen sooner than later to end the suffering.

I think that one thing every single person in this thread would agree to is that the drama is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Over the next year he will be going to war with his own party on a daily basis on numerous things. He will begin to feel more more isolated and the drama in Washington will subsequently get worse.



I'm slightly worried that this could devolve into violence rather than just drama. Some of the comments I've been reading over at Breitbart make me wonder if that could be a possibility. There are a number of crazy people out there who will be with Trump no matter what happens.
Vrtra Vanquisher/Tiamat Trouncer/World Serpent Slayer
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23250 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-03-06 22:38:37
March 06 2017 22:34 GMT
#141177
On March 07 2017 07:31 kwizach wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 07:26 GreenHorizons wrote:
On March 07 2017 07:21 kwizach wrote:
On March 07 2017 07:05 GreenHorizons wrote:
On March 07 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how many of you on the left who think that the media screwed over Bernie during the primary also think that the media is biased against republicans?

But, we got kwiz over here saying that putting a known cheater for Hillary in charge of the DNC doesn't indicate that it wasn't a fair primary, so the line between fair and unfair is clearly being blurred.

"kwiz over here" is saying that your usual obfuscation and outrage won't help you evade the fact that you haven't been able to produce a single piece of evidence to indicate that the DNC actively undermined the Sanders campaign. With regards to Donna Brazile becoming interim chair of the DNC after the primary was already over, I'll let Tad Devine, the chief strategist of the Sanders campaign, comment on that: "If Bernie Sanders had been the nominee of the party and the Russians hacked my emails instead of John [Podesta]’s, we'd be reading all these notes between Donna and I and they'd say Donna was cozying up to the Bernie campaign. This is taken out of context. I found her to be a fair arbiter, I think she did a good and honest job."
I'm sure we'll be back to square one in less than a month though. I guess it's an easier escape than accepting that more people simply preferred Clinton.

Bruh... If there was an email of Donna cheating for Bernie it would have been released. She didn't cheat for Bernie, she cheated for Hillary, got booted off CNN for it and the DNC said "let's reward her cheating by putting her in charge".

But yeah, clearly nothing to see there. I mean it was after the primary, so it's not like she was on CNN lying about being neutral the whole time.

Tad is a terrible person to point to btw.

Except Devine said the exact opposite of what you're claiming with zero factual basis or inside knowledge, and since his e-mails were not hacked I guess we'll have to go by what he said, which is that Brazile was "a fair arbiter". That settles that.


No, we don't have to take the word of a Democratic party PR guy. That's a choice you're making because it fits your interpretation. Cheating isn't fair, even if they get someone desperate to work for them to say that it was (with no evidence of his claim).

We have factual evidence that Donna cheated for Hillary btw or are you that far gone that you think we don't?
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
March 06 2017 22:34 GMT
#141178
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
March 06 2017 22:34 GMT
#141179
On March 07 2017 07:32 Ayaz2810 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 07 2017 06:07 On_Slaught wrote:
On March 07 2017 06:04 zlefin wrote:
we can't get to impeachment until he does something impeachable and his numbers get lower. similar for declaring him unfit.


Obviously but I'm just saying I want that to happen sooner than later to end the suffering.

I think that one thing every single person in this thread would agree to is that the drama is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Over the next year he will be going to war with his own party on a daily basis on numerous things. He will begin to feel more more isolated and the drama in Washington will subsequently get worse.



I'm slightly worried that this could devolve into violence rather than just drama. Some of the comments I've been reading over at Breitbart make me wonder if that could be a possibility. There are a number of crazy people out there who will be with Trump no matter what happens.

while it is a possibliity; don't read too much into comments from breitbart, or any news site really. comment sections are the worst of cesspools on the internet, and are terribly unrepresentative of actual numbers and beliefs.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
March 06 2017 22:37 GMT
#141180
I'll give the following example for how I interpret left-wing bias against right-wing folk: political correctness.

I think I've established that I give few fucks about PC. One example more unique to me could be my use of "the Ukraine" to mock a genuinely stupid nationalistic idiocy. I think the same can be said for most of the more mainstream PC complaints.

But damn. The way conservatives turn PC into a deep, systemic issue that is destroying America because no one can talk about anything and the media is killing discourse... well sorry, but I'm simply not on board. It's not nearly that bad.

And same goes for right-wing accusations of biased, unfair media. I see it's true but the issue is overblown for political convenience.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Prev 1 7057 7058 7059 7060 7061 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
WardiTV Summer Champion…
11:00
Group Stage 2 - Group C
Zoun vs Bunny
herO vs Solar
WardiTV743
Harstem278
Rex114
Liquipedia
The PondCast
10:00
Episode 59
CranKy Ducklings6
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Lowko291
Harstem 278
Rex 112
IndyStarCraft 93
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 33734
Calm 8266
actioN 1847
Bisu 1348
Jaedong 942
Flash 941
Shuttle 896
BeSt 832
firebathero 736
EffOrt 587
[ Show more ]
hero 413
ggaemo 396
Mini 311
Soulkey 297
ZerO 289
Last 182
Light 167
Snow 166
Hyuk 141
Barracks 105
Hyun 104
JYJ96
Nal_rA 91
Killer 85
Soma 80
ToSsGirL 64
Liquid`Ret 59
Mind 55
Rush 55
Sacsri 53
Free 47
Sea.KH 46
Sharp 44
Backho 33
sorry 30
[sc1f]eonzerg 22
Aegong 21
scan(afreeca) 19
JulyZerg 18
HiyA 16
ajuk12(nOOB) 14
Terrorterran 11
NaDa 8
Noble 7
SilentControl 7
Icarus 4
ivOry 3
Zeus 0
Dota 2
Gorgc6043
XcaliburYe261
BananaSlamJamma251
Fuzer 174
League of Legends
Dendi802
Counter-Strike
olofmeister2201
x6flipin577
zeus217
edward153
byalli136
oskar77
markeloff53
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King46
Other Games
singsing2148
B2W.Neo1652
crisheroes409
hiko351
DeMusliM308
XaKoH 182
ArmadaUGS44
Trikslyr23
rGuardiaN19
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
Kim Chul Min (afreeca) 1188
UltimateBattle 546
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta12
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Nemesis1454
• Jankos1060
Other Games
• WagamamaTV195
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
11h 19m
LiuLi Cup
22h 19m
BSL Team Wars
1d 6h
Team Hawk vs Team Dewalt
Korean StarCraft League
1d 14h
CranKy Ducklings
1d 21h
SC Evo League
1d 23h
WardiTV Summer Champion…
2 days
Classic vs Percival
Spirit vs NightMare
CSO Cup
2 days
[BSL 2025] Weekly
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
[ Show More ]
SC Evo League
2 days
BSL Team Wars
3 days
Team Bonyth vs Team Sziky
Afreeca Starleague
3 days
Queen vs HyuN
EffOrt vs Calm
Wardi Open
3 days
RotterdaM Event
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Afreeca Starleague
4 days
Rush vs TBD
Jaedong vs Mong
Afreeca Starleague
5 days
herO vs TBD
Royal vs Barracks
The PondCast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Jiahua Invitational
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
HCC Europe

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Qualifiers
ASL Season 20
CSL Season 18: Qualifier 1
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025

Upcoming

CSLAN 3
CSL Season 18: Qualifier 2
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
LASL Season 20
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
Chzzk MurlocKing SC1 vs SC2 Cup #2
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
EC S1
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
Roobet Cup 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.