The BlueSwan Basement of Absurd & Ignorant Posts VIII

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

This whole thread goes into absurdity when computer and another  RINO pretend like white southern Democrats in the 1900’s were lefties and Vermont Republicans in power were normal conservatives like today

 https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=368864.0

bruh, what? do you seriously not realize that Vermont of 2020 is very, very different from where it was in 1920?
Don't tell me you believe in the 'PARTIES SWITCHED PLATFORMS' myth.

I believe that people changed their parties en mass, not their views, BRO

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mortality

Yes, I’m not retarded, thanks. Obviously generational turnover played a role. But go ahead pretending that these people’s descendants’ views differed hugely from their views if you want to play revisionism

Trying not to be triggered rn. Please refrain from such language.

also, p sure it's "en masse".

[Kleine Scheiße]

You said it doesn’t get your family very far. That’s very different from what people’s perception of that kind of wealth is.

By "very far" all I mean is that we aren't in that upper level of society that people associate with wealth.

You are so, so close to getting the point. I'm gonna go out on a pretty secure limb and say you could afford pretty much any one of those symbols you keep rattling off in some version with a fairly straightforward shift in liquidity -- maybe not all of them, maybe not the highest-quality version in every instance, maybe not three or four of them at once, but you can not tell me that you absolutely could never find room for designer clothing if you ever tried and that every penny of yours is going to the bare essentials. You keep talking about, like, luxurious vacations; do you realize that for the wide majority of the human population, the idea of a vacation is itself a serious luxury?

Not only that, but nobody cares what symbols "people associate" with some ritzy-ass 1980s fever dream of "wealth" that only exists to put some psychological guilt-distance between yourself and the actual bad guys at the top. It's a distance that's real, don't get me wrong, but these "symbols of money," "engrained into the American consciousness" though they may be, exist solely because people make stupid decisions with their money and others think it's cool. Being rich is not about having a lot of fancy things, and it's not about being part of high society.

I'm from Baltimore. I spend a good deal of time in DC and NoVA, and I also can use Google, so I can tell you that I just looked it up and $350k in NoVA is worth about $260k in Baltimore, which is just such an incomprehensibly big difference that none of us could have possibly imagined. NoVA is an expensive place and the reason you are able to live there is because you are richer than you think. $250k/year is still a lot of money, anywhere. In fifteen years or so that may change.

I mean, I do want to be clear that I'm not trying to call you or anyone else a bad person for having a comfortable standard of living and I'm not trying to say that you're, like, stupid or even naive or anything, just that your point is coming off as very defensive and almost willfully self-centering.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

White religious nones in the south are going to be voting GOP and are going to be the voters that swung the greatest to Trump.

Wrong

[Boobs]

Yet, this so-called ‘dictatorship’ continues to enjoy more popular support than most other Western governments do.

[RINO Tom]

This whole thread goes into absurdity when computer and another  RINO pretend like white southern Democrats in the 1900’s were lefties and Vermont Republicans in power were normal conservatives like today

 https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=368864.0

bruh, what? do you seriously not realize that Vermont of 2020 is very, very different from where it was in 1920?
Don't tell me you believe in the 'PARTIES SWITCHED PLATFORMS' myth.

I believe that people changed their parties en mass, not their views, BRO

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mortality

Yes, I’m not retarded, thanks. Obviously generational turnover played a role. But go ahead pretending that these people’s descendants’ views differed hugely from their views if you want to play revisionism

Trying not to be triggered rn. Please refrain from such language.

also, p sure it's "en masse".

It's kind of hilarious that people don't bat an eye at Millennials in the exact same area as Boomers having different political views ... but they simply cannot comprehend that a state can change its (plurality) political philosophy, haha.  *White Southerner* is not a static political term, even if certain values have been maintained.

(Not to mention the fact that literally nobody has said the simplified, strawman arguments like "White Southern Democrats were like liberals today" that have been assigned to those of us who point out flaws in a political narrative of the mid-Twentieth Century South's political transformation that is frankly unworthy of a junior high history class.)

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

You said it doesn’t get your family very far. That’s very different from what people’s perception of that kind of wealth is.

By "very far" all I mean is that we aren't in that upper level of society that people associate with wealth.

You are so, so close to getting the point. I'm gonna go out on a pretty secure limb and say you could afford pretty much any one of those symbols you keep rattling off in some version with a fairly straightforward shift in liquidity -- maybe not all of them, maybe not the highest-quality version in every instance, maybe not three or four of them at once, but you can not tell me that you absolutely could never find room for designer clothing if you ever tried and that every penny of yours is going to the bare essentials. You keep talking about, like, luxurious vacations; do you realize that for the wide majority of the human population, the idea of a vacation is itself a serious luxury?

Not only that, but nobody cares what symbols "people associate" with some ritzy-ass 1980s fever dream of "wealth" that only exists to put some psychological guilt-distance between yourself and the actual bad guys at the top. It's a distance that's real, don't get me wrong, but these "symbols of money," "engrained into the American consciousness" though they may be, exist solely because people make stupid decisions with their money and others think it's cool. Being rich is not about having a lot of fancy things, and it's not about being part of high society.

I'm from Baltimore. I spend a good deal of time in DC and NoVA, and I also can use Google, so I can tell you that I just looked it up and $350k in NoVA is worth about $260k in Baltimore, which is just such an incomprehensibly big difference that none of us could have possibly imagined. NoVA is an expensive place and the reason you are able to live there is because you are richer than you think. $250k/year is still a lot of money, anywhere. In fifteen years or so that may change.

You know LimoLoser is a Republican troll, right?

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

It doesn't matter if PA makes up another point of the states pop when Republicans are carrying Luzerne and Erie by 10 points and winning rural PA by 40-50. It simply doesn't at some point. If we lived in a vacuumm, what you are saying might make sense. But we aren't.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

She hurt the #MeToo movement worse.

That's a good thing.  #MeToo is an example of Good Intentions Paving the Road to Hell.  It's a movement that seeks to substitute vengeance for justice.  It is a threat to the liberties of all citizens, and people will see this once they take a breath and consider what the ramifications of what they actually call for are.

[Coastal Elitist]

scary stuff

I'm in favor of terrorism charges from this point on for anybody who violates the stay at home orders. These cancers on humanity are going to end up killing people who don't actually have the option of staying home.

[Pericles]

scary stuff

I'm in favor of terrorism charges from this point on for anybody who violates the stay at home orders. These cancers on humanity are going to end up killing people who don't actually have the option of staying home.

People get wound up too much about what the exact punishment should be, but the second sentence is absolutely correct.

[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.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Yikes!

[BlueSwan]

I'd challenge anybody to an honest intellectual debate about these things. The only responses I have gotten are people resorting to balling me a misogynist, or an incel or defending rapists. All of those claims are ridiculous. I am a lifelong feminist. I find the "incel community" abhorrent and just plain wrong in their worldviews. And I of course would never defend rapists.

[BlueSwan]

Also, as for the header of this thread. Somebody please show me where my posts were either absurd or ignorant.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I'd challenge anybody to an honest intellectual debate about these things. The only responses I have gotten are people resorting to balling me a misogynist, or an incel or defending rapists. All of those claims are ridiculous. I am a lifelong feminist. I find the "incel community" abhorrent and just plain wrong in their worldviews. And I of course would never defend rapists.

This is irrelevant breeder sh!t to me, but "I just wish that women noticed me for my good behavior!!!" is textbook incel sh!t, Jack.

[BlueSwan]

I'd challenge anybody to an honest intellectual debate about these things. The only responses I have gotten are people resorting to balling me a misogynist, or an incel or defending rapists. All of those claims are ridiculous. I am a lifelong feminist. I find the "incel community" abhorrent and just plain wrong in their worldviews. And I of course would never defend rapists.

This is irrelevant breeder sh!t to me, but "I just wish that women noticed me for my good behavior!!!" is textbook incel sh!t, Jack.

Except I didn't write that. I am happily married with three kids. I don't care very much about women noticing me.

The "Incel community" believes all sorts of ridiculous stuff, like the whole "black pill" philosophy, which is just plain wrong and defeatist. Also, many of them have abhorrent misogynist views. I am a lifelong feminist.

Basically, I am getting flack for some basic claims rooted in pretty established evolutionary psychology, which I also happen to teach. I have never been of the opinion that facts should just be wished away. Furthermore, I see no discrepancy between being a feminist and also believing in the existence of fairly deep-rooted human instincts that results in some often pretty unfortunate human behaviour patterns.

[John Dule]

I'd challenge anybody to an honest intellectual debate about these things. The only responses I have gotten are people resorting to balling me a misogynist, or an incel or defending rapists. All of those claims are ridiculous. I am a lifelong feminist. I find the "incel community" abhorrent and just plain wrong in their worldviews. And I of course would never defend rapists.

This is irrelevant breeder sh!t to me, but "I just wish that women noticed me for my good behavior!!!" is textbook incel sh!t, Jack.

Except I didn't write that. I am happily married with three kids. I don't care very much about women noticing me.

The "Incel community" believes all sorts of ridiculous stuff, like the whole "black pill" philosophy, which is just plain wrong and defeatist. Also, many of them have abhorrent misogynist views. I am a lifelong feminist.

Basically, I am getting flack for some basic claims rooted in pretty established evolutionary psychology, which I also happen to teach. I have never been of the opinion that facts should just be wished away. Furthermore, I see no discrepancy between being a feminist and also believing in the existence of fairly deep-rooted human instincts that results in some often pretty unfortunate human behaviour patterns.

I have not read through all of this, but I think the flak you're getting is more because you were playing rape apologist for Biden (under the hypothetical that he actually did what is alleged, which he didn't).

[BlueSwan]

I'd challenge anybody to an honest intellectual debate about these things. The only responses I have gotten are people resorting to balling me a misogynist, or an incel or defending rapists. All of those claims are ridiculous. I am a lifelong feminist. I find the "incel community" abhorrent and just plain wrong in their worldviews. And I of course would never defend rapists.

This is irrelevant breeder sh!t to me, but "I just wish that women noticed me for my good behavior!!!" is textbook incel sh!t, Jack.

Except I didn't write that. I am happily married with three kids. I don't care very much about women noticing me.

The "Incel community" believes all sorts of ridiculous stuff, like the whole "black pill" philosophy, which is just plain wrong and defeatist. Also, many of them have abhorrent misogynist views. I am a lifelong feminist.

Basically, I am getting flack for some basic claims rooted in pretty established evolutionary psychology, which I also happen to teach. I have never been of the opinion that facts should just be wished away. Furthermore, I see no discrepancy between being a feminist and also believing in the existence of fairly deep-rooted human instincts that results in some often pretty unfortunate human behaviour patterns.

I have not read through all of this, but I think the flak you're getting is more because you were playing rape apologist for Biden (under the hypothetical that he actually did what is alleged, which he didn't).

I think one would only get that from my posts if they were intent on reading that into it. This is sometimes the problem with online discussions. I am pretty confident that if we had this discussion in real life nobody in their right mind would ever consider me to be a "rape apologist".

[John Dule]

I think one would only get that from my posts if they were intent on reading that into it. This is sometimes the problem with online discussions. I am pretty confident that if we had this discussion in real life nobody in their right mind would ever consider me to be a "rape apologist".

Ok, "rape" is the wrong word to use, I'll agree with that. And you do say a lot of things that are unfortunate truths. The one that I find the most objectionable is this:

Rape is one thing (and I most certainly do not consider this to be rape, no more than a woman grabbing a man's penis should be considered rape), but typical male sexual aggressiveness should not be considered disqualifying IMO. And that includes a lot of the creepy stuff Donald Trump has done (again, excluding the actual rape accusations).

I have debated with myself for some time how to react to the MeToo movement's attitude towards this sort of behavior. I do not like the idea of subjecting people to the justice of the mob, and I don't like passing judgement on people who are accused of sexual misconduct when there is no substantive evidence against them. But at some point I had to ask myself... why should I bother defending guys who behave this way? I've known dudes like Trump in real life; I think they spawn on damp towels in gym locker rooms. I've never liked them and their sadistic frat-boy attitudes, and I've always wanted them to get what's coming to them. The fact that Trump was caught on tape talking about grabbing women's crotches waylays any doubts I might have had about the veracity of the accusations, too. So I absolutely think that his actions are disqualifying, and not at all "typical" of male sexual displays.

[BlueSwan]

I think one would only get that from my posts if they were intent on reading that into it. This is sometimes the problem with online discussions. I am pretty confident that if we had this discussion in real life nobody in their right mind would ever consider me to be a "rape apologist".

Ok, "rape" is the wrong word to use, I'll agree with that. And you do say a lot of things that are unfortunate truths. The one that I find the most objectionable is this:

Rape is one thing (and I most certainly do not consider this to be rape, no more than a woman grabbing a man's penis should be considered rape), but typical male sexual aggressiveness should not be considered disqualifying IMO. And that includes a lot of the creepy stuff Donald Trump has done (again, excluding the actual rape accusations).

I have debated with myself for some time how to react to the MeToo movement's attitude towards this sort of behavior. I do not like the idea of subjecting people to the justice of the mob, and I don't like passing judgement on people who are accused of sexual misconduct when there is no substantive evidence against them. But at some point I had to ask myself... why should I bother defending guys who behave this way? I've known dudes like Trump in real life; I think they spawn on damp towels in gym locker rooms. I've never liked them and their sadistic frat-boy attitudes, and I've always wanted them to get what's coming to them. The fact that Trump was caught on tape talking about grabbing women's crotches waylays any doubts I might have had about the veracity of the accusations, too. So I absolutely think that his actions are disqualifying, and not at all "typical" of male sexual displays.

I generally agree. The main disagreement regards whether ill behaviour in ones personal life should be considered disqualifying for political office and this I don’t think is a black or white issue. I don’t personally think Al Franken grabbing someones behind while taking a photo is disqualifying. Is it stupid, absolutely, but disqualifying? I say let the voters decide. I generally don’t think what people did in high school or in college while young, dumb and drunk, should be disqualifying decades later. I don’t think Bill Clinton engaging in consensual sexual acts with an intern should be disqualifying. Let the voters decide.

[lfromnj]

I've seen a truck with Blue Lives Matter flag and then one with just American flags. No trump flags, but the message was pretty clear.

[Hammy]

I think it is possible that China set this virus up deliberately to destabilize the West and especially the US economy.

For China it doesn’t matter if 3.000 of their people die or not, if they achieve their long term goals abroad ...

[S019]

Might be the easiest question ever asked on this board....

North Carolina.

GEORGIA IS A LIKELY STATE. It’s not flipping anytime soon. It has close calls but never flips.

Texas will flip long before Georgia does

>TX will flip before GA, this makes no sense, I agree with NC flipping before GA, but GA being a Likely/Safe R state is one of the worst takes that I've seen in a long time.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Every Viet Cong member, regardless of age or circumstances, deserves a painful and ghoulish death, and the same goes for any other communist, thief, or liberty hating traitor. The only good communist is a dead communist.

[CookieDamage]

Might be the easiest question ever asked on this board....

North Carolina.

GEORGIA IS A LIKELY STATE. It’s not flipping anytime soon. It has close calls but never flips.

Texas will flip long before Georgia does

>TX will flip before GA, this makes no sense, I agree with NC flipping before GA, but GA being a Likely/Safe R state is one of the worst takes that I've seen in a long time.

This is coming from the person who predicted Rs would hold the house in 2018.