• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Presidential Election: Biden v. Trump

myDeaconmyhand said:
Ok, sure. Do you admit that the US "interferes" in other elections, and have you considered how the world should prevent us from interfering further?
Click to expand...

Why can’t we simultaneously deem it unacceptable that the Russians interfered in our election and also admit that we interfere in other elections? Can’t we be pissed about both?
 
birdman said:
Why can’t we simultaneously deem it unacceptable that the Russians interfered in our election and also admit that we interfere in other elections? Can’t we be pissed about both?
Click to expand...

Me, sowing: this fucking rules.
Me, reaping: ah shit!
 
Us, sowing: We suck.
Us, reaping: They suck.

It’s not hard.
 
That’s not how we see ourselves interfering in foreign elections.
 
birdman said:
Who is “we?”
Click to expand...

I think Townie is saying it’s impossible to think your enemy sucks and your side sucks as well and want to change both.
 
PhDeac said:
I think Townie is saying it’s impossible to think your enemy sucks and your side sucks as well and want to change both.
Click to expand...

He probably just thinks you're bullshitting about Americans being guilty or regretful about our imperialist foreign policy. Most of the people who will even admit to it are Republicans who think it's good.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
He probably just thinks you're bullshitting about Americans being guilty or regretful about our imperialist foreign policy. Most of the people who will even admit to it are Republicans who think it's good.
Click to expand...

Americans aren’t regretful about shit. I didn’t say they were. I’m using the same “we” birdman is using. Reasonable people who are critical of US foreign policy. Those reasonable people don’t have to ignore Russia.

Do you have fucking blinders on? This is some walk and chew gum shit. You act like you can’t criticize your own side and want to defeat the other side at the same time. You and Townie do it with the US and Russia. You do it with Democrats and Republicans. It’s nonsense. Fix your side and defeat the other side.

What good is it going to do if you stand by your principles hating on the US and Dems while Russia helps Republicans tread all over our basic human rights?
 
I haven't posted in depth about Russian election interference in months, if that. It's out of my depth right now. My *only* commentary was to point out that I don't think Democrats seriously acknowledge how much the US interferes in foreign politics, which is why the liberal outrage over Russia is harder to take seriously.
 
Well I personally have had plenty of concern and even taken action against American imperialism in the past so I guess that means I’m allowed to be pissed about Russia.

Now, what you all are missing is, the most upsetting part is that much of the GOP at best turned a blind eye to Russia’s interference, but probably the establishment gleefully accepted Russia’s help, and at worst they actively sought their help. I’m not mad because Russia did what Russia does, I mad because the Republicans party is complicit. This isn’t about Russian imperialism it’s about the Benedict Arnolds running the GOP.
 
Shooshmoo said:
I mean, he did get you. Why did you choose crack instead of what he actually said?

Solid horseshoe theory evidence on this thread.
Click to expand...

Apparently he supports the WAR ON DRUGS. Had he chosen opiod addiction it would be a clear indication of a HEALTHCARE CRISIS !!!
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
It's not a real mystery why the campaign has been trying to hide the guy for the past 5 months, on the interview circuit he's good for at least one ridiculous and offensive gaffe per week. Last week when he got pressed about a mental health test he asked the black interviewer if he should have to take a drug test if maybe he was on crack.
Click to expand...

Starting to agree with the NYT that Biden needs to sit out the debates, which are a poor indicator of Presidential qualification.
 
PhDeac said:
Americans aren’t regretful about shit. I didn’t say they were. I’m using the same “we” birdman is using. Reasonable people who are critical of US foreign policy. Those reasonable people don’t have to ignore Russia.

Do you have fucking blinders on? This is some walk and chew gum shit. You act like you can’t criticize your own side and want to defeat the other side at the same time. You and Townie do it with the US and Russia. You do it with Democrats and Republicans. It’s nonsense. Fix your side and defeat the other side.

What good is it going to do if you stand by your principles hating on the US and Dems while Russia helps Republicans tread all over our basic human rights?
Click to expand...

Painting with a pretty broad brush in that first sentence, eh Ph?
 
Lol. Shoo busts out the horseshoe dumbshit again. Both parties just voted to not cut the pentagon budget and Chris Murphy is tweeting about doing coups and not a single elected Dem spoke out against his statement. There’s your horseshoe theory.
 
Shooshmoo said:
I mean, he did get you. Why did you choose crack instead of what he actually said?

Solid horseshoe theory evidence on this thread.
Click to expand...

I'm honestly curious about the type of person who still makes a racist distinction between cocaine and crack. Seems like an 80's-90s mindset. Trying to understand - do you all think Biden purposefully chose to say cocaine instead of crack? Like, whats the internal logic there? " If I ask him if he's on cocaine, I'm just being offensive and weird, but if I say "crack" thats racist and too far."?
 
I thought it was interesting you chose to say crack instead of cocaine, and I made a joke out of it.

I assume we are all aware of the discriminatory sentencing guidelines with harsher penalties for crack than powder cocaine. One reason why that was such a problem (and a motivator in enacting those guidelines) was crack was more often used in the black community and powder cocaine in the white community. As mentioned, the interviewer was also black.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
I'm honestly curious about the type of person who still makes a racist distinction between cocaine and crack. Seems like an 80's-90s mindset. Trying to understand - do you all think Biden purposefully chose to say cocaine instead of crack? Like, whats the internal logic there? " If I ask him if he's on cocaine, I'm just being offensive and weird, but if I say "crack" thats racist and too far."?
Click to expand...

If Biden had accused a black interviewer of being on crack, that would have been a major story. As it should have been. And yes, it came out of the 80s-90s when crack crimes were disproportionately punished vis-a-vis powder cocaine crimes.
 
Buttermaker said:
Starting to agree with the NYT that Biden needs to sit out the debates, which are a poor indicator of Presidential qualification.
Click to expand...
I think this is a terrible idea and plays right into the Republican strategy of ginning up some sort of hypothetical fear with no actual basis. Trump is a terrible debate or anyway so I'm not really sure what the big fear is here.
 
ChrisL68 said:
I think this is a terrible idea and plays right into the Republican strategy of ginning up some sort of hypothetical fear with no actual basis. Trump is a terrible debate or anyway so I'm not really sure what the big fear is here.
Click to expand...

Its not fear. Its republicans trying to come up with a rationalization to vote for Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top