The BlueSwan Basement of Absurd & Ignorant Posts VIII

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

https://twitter.com/DKElections/status/1143548662083194880?s=19

EMILY's Li$t follows the money, chooses the more corporate woman again.

I cannot wait until this blight on the progressive movement is dismantled.

My favorite part is how they're picking and choosing in this primary between two women, but haven't endorsed Maggie Toulouse Oliver in NM over noted grifter, establishment candidate, and male Ben Ray Lujan.

Just call these scumbags a front group for the establishment already.

Dude you really have a hate boner over Emily's list.  Guess someone doesn't like that their fav women don't get picked and have to dunk on a womens organization to feel better.

Also strange you want to call the hispanic man a grifter when the white woman you support does the same things he does.  Hmm I wonder why bro.

I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of an ostensibly "pro-women's organization" deciding to pick and choose which woman is the most qualified, but not supporting a pro-choice Democratic woman who's actually running against a man. Considering this and their non-endorsement of Kara Eastman in NE-2, I think I've justified my issues with them.

I'm also fairly sure Maggie Toulouse Oliver didn't throw Ilhan Omar under the bus, and she certainly didn't come out in "support" of her hours after ripping her on national TV like Lujan did.

Fake allies like you are the reason why racism and sexism aren't taken seriously. You don't care about stopping racism and sexism in politics. You are the white male savior personified: your accusations are to protect politicians you agree with. You've taken up the mantle of fighting for women, even if some of the women on Greater Atlas agree with me. Your "crusade" is self-serving, paternalistic, and in bad faith.

Then again, considering all that, it's no wonder why you support these bull**** artists.

Ask Lucy Flores, Jess King, or AOC if I'm wrong.

But of course, why rebut a post made with clear, strong examples you don't agree with when you can post it in the Deluge instead?

(also shoutout to backing a guy calling me a virulent racist/misogynist, I thought we were friends enough to where you wouldn't do that but apparently not)

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

1) The problem is the question on whether Ilhan Omar was right or not is a red herring. We can debate and derail this thread until we're blue in the face and none of our points will change. That doesn't change the fact that Lujan jumped on the #IStandWithIlhan wagon because of pressure from the rest of the leadership, and his personal gut instinct was to condemn her remarks.

2) Even acknowledging that, Lujan being a grifter is ultimately irrelevant. I could have just said "They aren't backing Toulouse Oliver against Lujan but they're backing Gideon against an equally qualified Democratic woman" and gotten the same point across. His stances towards Ilhan Omar's comments are ultimately a distraction from his gender.

3) If someone's going to call me a racist or sexist in bad faith, I'm going to come at them with the same energy they came at me with. If I or one of the other leftists responded to your beliefs wrt Omar the same way Jerry did, I'd expect you to do the same.

4) Thank you. That's all I needed to hear.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1151129281919102976?s=19

Shoutouts to Democratic leadership for making all this possible

The poll Trump cited (which is fifty shades of problematic in and of itself) was literally commissioned by House Democrats lol

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

We have a double feature:

2020 could be the 1st Fraud vs Fraud election. Everyone knows Warren is a stone cold liar & fraud. She lied about her Native American heritage for years. She lied about how she got fired.

She earlier lied about how her parents fled away to get married. She is pretending to be this non-corrupt person when she has agreed to pake SuperPAC money for the General Election.

2020 could be an election of the most corrupt & pathological liar President vs a Dem Nominee who is also a liar.

I mean, I have very little interest in defending Elizabeth Warren, lol.  I've been watching the Sanders crowd dishonestly attack my candidates for four years.  Now that it's Warren's turn in the barrel y'all can enjoy this lovely experience on your own.

I just think it's hilarious for Shadows to attack Warren for being a fraud on campaign finance reform when his candidate is far and away the #1 fraud on campaign finance reform.  And that includes Trump.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

Context:

I think we'd be having a much more productive conversation here if the red avs toned down their hyperbole from an 11 to at least a 10.

When I'm told that someone is a "rape apologist," I'm reminded of a guy I knew in high school. This guy was a greasy-haired, acne-ridden ogre who absolutely hated women (the feeling was mutual) and brown people. He believed that women were less intelligent than men, that they lacked the capacity for introspection, and that a wife should basically be a husband's property. He thought that all rape should be legal on private property, and that marital rape should be legal in any context whatsoever. I eventually went to my guidance counselor about it, but he never really faced any disciplinary action and ended up going to Chico State. He remains one of the worst people I've ever met.

You may not like what Mortimer said. I agree that it's unbecoming of an Atlas poster, and that it lacks nuance. But he's clearly trying to draw a distinction between cases of violent rape and stuff like mattress girl. That's not "rape apology." That's a delineation that is worth discussing.

Why is it worth discussing, you ask? Because in cases of violent rape, or someone being molested as a child, the victim has very little power over the situation and has no course of action that will help her. Women are physically weaker than men, and children are often not in a position to seek help if they're being abused by a caregiver. But cases where a girl gets drunk at a frat party, goes upstairs with a guy, and wakes up the next morning regretting it are inherently more preventable than those other two situations. Telling women that they're victims and that they have no power over whether or not they get raped is not a positive message. It puts their well-being entirely in the hands of men, which I thought was antithetical to feminism.

This isn't "victim-blaming." Yes, women should have the right to dress and behave and drink however they want at a party without the fear of being raped. And I should have the right to walk down a street in Tijuana without being mugged. And Syrians should have the right to go about their business without worrying about a bomb dropping on their homes. We can spend all day talking about the rights we "should" have, but that's not going to change the reality that their are certain dangers out there, and people should be educated on how to avoid putting themselves in dangerous situations.

To take this position-- which, in my mind, is perfectly worthy of reasonable discussion-- and say that it amounts to "rape apology" is to compare it to that ogre from my high school. I don't think it's a fair equivalency to draw. And again, I don't like a lot of the things that Mortimer said... but some of them sound awfully similar to things my own mother has said about the #MeToo movement, and she calls herself a feminist, a Democrat, and all the other nice labels that Atlas likes.

-----

The same applies to the trans argument. Has anyone here said that transgender people don't exist? Has anyone argued that they should be killed, or that they should be second-class citizens? Not that I've seen. Yes, there are people who think that gender is the same as biological sex, and that biological sex can't be changed-- but I don't understand why that's a bannable offense, or why that's equivalent to saying that transgender people should be slaughtered en masse.

Remember when #Resistance Atlas applauded this guy because he disagreed with my post about how the term Bernie Bro was racist? **** was jokes.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden (R-DE) endorses President Donald J. Trump (R-FL):

Good to see Joe endorsing his fellow Republican

The context here being that Joe told people protesting him for Obama-era deportations and asking him to not take from corporations, he responded condescendingly and told them to "Vote for Trump"

Even if he should have responded differently, doesn't change the fact it's ridiculous to claim he's a Republican, as people on the left have done multiple times.

You literally supported Trump at the beginning of his campaign because of the deficit.  You are the only person who can say they were that stupid to support Donald J. Trump because of... the deficit.

I never supported Trump unironically, but you Berniebros deserve Trump if you can't support another Democratic nominee than Saint Bernard.

Ah yes, the guy who went by *ahem* Warren Peace is a #BernieOrBuster who can't support other candidates. Casual sexism and racism aside, your argument is wrong.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

What does that have to do with racism or sexism? I just can't stand the my way or the highway mentality. If you don't like Joe Biden that's fine, but if you don't vote for him in a general, don't be surprised if Trump wins again tears down all the rest that's left.

There are ways to express that disdain without marginalizing the women/supporters of color on Bernie's campaign.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

I did not specify any indivual demographics of Bernie's supporters and never intended. All I'm saying is that anyone who wants Trump gone needs to back whoever the Democratic nominee will be.

I got you, we're square. You've shown a hell of a lot more understanding of the term than some of the other users here have.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

All I'm saying is that anyone who wants Trump gone needs to back whoever the Democratic nominee will be.

A lot of us on the "left" agree with you here. I hate to be Mr. "Both Sides", but there are certainly moderates who only want party unity as long as Biden is the nominee, but are happy to let Trump have four more years if Sanders or Warren is the nominee. Sanders himself said that he'll back the eventual nominee, as he's done in every recent election, but Manchin claimed that he would not support Sanders if he won the nomination. It gets annoying when it seems like we're always the only ones who need to "compromise", and yet there are plenty of moderates who also have a "my way or the highway" attitude.

Now, to your credit, you haven't done that, to my knowledge. I believe you've said that you would support Sanders or Warren over Trump despite your differences with them, and your support for Biden seems primarily about how much you like him. That's fine, and it's good that you don't take every opportunity to dunk on Sanders or Warren like some posters. I just hope that you understand that many of us on the left do compromise quite a bit, we have for a while, and we just want those who support Biden to be willing to do some compromising of their own if a candidate further from the center wins the nomination.

Not to mention the deafening silence from the "Bernie's not a Democrat" crowd when Bloomberg announced his run.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

Am I wrong? Is what Warren did not a gutter trash move?

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

James Monroe goes full Alternative Facts, rejects reality and substitutes it with his own:

Bernie Sanders was a proponent of neoliberal policies in 1996. Here's a video of him calling for privatizing social security. If the frontrunner for the nomination, Joe Biden, is fair game then so is the socialist senator from Vermont.

https://twitter.com/jeneps/status/1220107221272535041

You could also check the "adjustments" he proposed to figure out that they weren't cuts, but go off.

It's very clear from the article that Bernie wanted to make adjustments to social security which would involve cutting the program for millions of senior Americans. Bernie surrogates have been attacking Biden for dishonest attacks when he has been defending the program against conservative rhetoric since being elected to congress. What does AOC have to say about this recent discovery?

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

NO

NO

NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaa

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

The more you stare into the abyss, the worse it gets:

I knew I would get flack for that post and that is OK. But let me clarify for those who are eager to read malintent into what I wrote.

1) I am not a misogynist. I am a lifelong feminist and proponent of womens rights. I have voted for women in the vast majority of elections I have participated in. I have two daughters who I wish will grow up in a world that actually treats women and men as equals.

...

3) I am married with three kids and I am not "sexually frustrated". I used to be as a young man, sure. But I am probably amongst a minority of men who can 100% say that they never engaged in any sort of sexually aggressive behaviour or sexually inappropriate action.

4) I am a psychologist (high school teacher by current profession) and as such trained to understand human behaviour. This is basically what I am doing here. Patterns of human behaviour exist for a reason and that reason is generally that this pattern has resulted in succes of some sort for those who exhibit it. The PUA's mentioned in this thread do what they do because it works for them.

5) A LOT of this type of sexually aggressive behaviour pre-MeToo, stems from either a misguided idea of what women want or simply from miscommunication. Men are pretty bad at reading women's signals in general and given that the cultural norm is that the man should be the initiator of sexual contact, that will lead to things that shouldn't have taken place. Some men will be succesful being highly sexually aggressive while others will be regarded as dangerous creeps for the very same behaviours. This is confusing to young men in particular.

6) Largely because of point 5, I generally do not see sexually aggressive behaviour as disqualifying and especially not if said behaviour was undertaken whilst young and stupid (and often intoxicated). I STRONGLY dislike Brett Kavanaugh and see a multitude of reasons why he should never have been allowed to serve in the highest court of the land, but that reason is not something he did as a college kid.

7) And just to clear it up, I am obviously NOT talking about actual rape here. Neither am I talking about clearly malicious sexual actions of any sort. I am talking about inappropriate touching. I am talking about lewd comments. That kind of stuff.

This is a slightly more nuanced view than what you said earlier about women straight up rewarding men for aggressive sexual behavior, but it doesn't change the fact that "success" and "sexual aggression" do not belong in the same sentence. Regarding misunderstanding or confusion, this might mitigate our judgement of, or even excuse (provided there is remorse and personal growth) some inappropriate behavior from young men, but certainly not from someone of middle to advanced age in a position of power.

Please note that “sexually aggressive” does not mean the same as physically aggressive. And the point about women often rewarding sexually aggressive behaviour is absolutely true. I don’t like that fact anymore than you do. I most certainly wish that women rewarded nice polite behaviour by men, but particularly when it comes to younger women, that just is not true. Generally speaking of course. There are plenty of women out there who do want nice men, so that’s not what I am saying in the very likely case that someone misconstrues this because they insist on a very black or white view of the world.

Major Elliott Rodger energy here, folks.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

I would 100% cosign MacArthurs post. Nothing absurd about it whatsoever.

The suggestion that the only solution to police brutality is to vote to re-elect the same Democratic mayors who have proven themselves at best feckless and at worst actively complicit in the brutal treatment of protesters is... questionable.

Or the same Democratic DAs who let these corrupt pigs off the hook. Or the "Democrats" who endorse the Republican DA candidates for being "tough on crime".

Or the people who unironically lift one of those Democratic mayors up as the future of the party. With all this happening, I'd probably be on your side of the #BernieOrBust debate if he won.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

Bernie Leftist loons will claim Rand Paul is being persecuted by Hillary and Obama.

They are quite illogical, and are mental defects.

Whyte privilege must be nice. 

Between this and verbally fellating Chauvin, I think we need to rename the thread.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

I would 100% cosign MacArthurs post. Nothing absurd about it whatsoever.

The suggestion that the only solution to police brutality is to vote to re-elect the same Democratic mayors who have proven themselves at best feckless and at worst actively complicit in the brutal treatment of protesters is... questionable.

Or the same Democratic DAs who let these corrupt pigs off the hook. Or the "Democrats" who endorse the Republican DA candidates for being "tough on crime".

Or the people who unironically lift one of those Democratic mayors up as the future of the party. With all this happening, I'd probably be on your side of the #BernieOrBust debate if he won.

I don’t think anyone is holding Bloomberg up as the future of the Democratic Party.

The other Dem mayor.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

I would 100% cosign MacArthurs post. Nothing absurd about it whatsoever.

The suggestion that the only solution to police brutality is to vote to re-elect the same Democratic mayors who have proven themselves at best feckless and at worst actively complicit in the brutal treatment of protesters is... questionable.

Or the same Democratic DAs who let these corrupt pigs off the hook. Or the "Democrats" who endorse the Republican DA candidates for being "tough on crime".

Or the people who unironically lift one of those Democratic mayors up as the future of the party. With all this happening, I'd probably be on your side of the #BernieOrBust debate if he won.

His post is focusing I believe mostly on the necessity of removing Trump from the White House and neutering Republican power at the federal level. Don't forget the how the Minneapolis Police Union cheap spoke at a trump rally a couple years ago extolling how he got the holder / Lynch regime at the Attorney General's office off their backs and unhandcuffed the cops. You can draw a direct line to that level of laser Fair Pro police brutality supervision at the federal level to Trump being president.

Frankly, find me a single Republican in the country who replacing a Democratic mayor with would improve the situation of police brutality in any community in this country. The fact that there are bona fide better choices how to make in primary elections to get rid of ineffectual suck-ups like de Blasio - - God, what a disappointment - - doesn't make his post wrong in the slightest.

Can we please not ignore how conservatives and Republicans with all too rare exception have stood by the " well, what happened to George Floyd was bad, but LAW AND ORDER AGAINST ANTIFA" tack cracking down on protesters?

No, his point that voting green or some other third party Canada, I'm not voting at all to get Trump out of office because your butt sore over some crime Bill he voted for in the f****** 90s makes you pretty goddamn useless in doing anything worth a damn about the issue police brutality Beyond useless virtue signaling.

For the federal level, I would agree. I actually trust Biden to handle police brutality. If he wins, he'll pick an AG who will hold bad cops accountable. I'm not concerned with his stances from when I was a baby. I'm concerned with what he'll do for me now. There's a difference between "he wrote a bad bill 25 years ago" and "we didn't care about police brutality until we started running for president".

At the local level, I can't unsee what I've seen. Police unions have the power, sure, but if there's massive rot, maybe it's best if we fire them too. In fact, one of the "random examples" MacArthur accused me of cherry-picking disproves his point - some of the Democratic local officials in Sacramento endorsed the Republican who let Stephon Clark's murderers off the hook anyway! There needs to be a massive shift at the local level away from tough-on-crime politics and into holding accountabilities.

The de Blasios and Garcettis of the world should be shunned, not embraced! We don't need a cuck and a terrorist as our mayors, we need strong progressives with a backbone to stand up and fight to hold police accountable. My friend said it best. If 90% of surgeons and pilots were incompetent, they'd be fired.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

People: Maybe we shouldn't embrace the #KHive when one of its most vocal voices wishes COVID on Warren.

Confused normies: This controversy is dumb and doesn't matter.

Landslide Lyndon and some other guy: WHAT ABOUT THE BERNIE BROS?!?!?!?!? AT LEAST WE AREN'T AS TOXIC AS THEM!

It's really pathetic when I'm coming up with better defenses of Kamala than her own supporters are. I tend to sympathize with the normies, but these threads really show the hypocrisy of the anti-Bernie cabal.