The End of the World: A Political Thread. A New Hope coming soon!

Status
Not open for further replies.
yankeessuck said:
Actually its the exact opposite. You are equating it to that. This is normal politics before Trump lowered everyone's standards. 30 years ago he ran for President and was forced to answer for his plagiarism. 14 years ago Howard Dean blew up for yelling Byahhhh. Explaining a past position is hardly anything outrageous. And its just one video talking about it. Big whoop.

He isn't being canceled. He is leading the primary and is leading in black voters. And doing so after a debate where his dentures almost fell out and told parents they should play a record player for their kids.
Click to expand...

Plagiarism is plagiarism today or in 1982. It was just as wrong 50 years ago as it is today. You always have to answer for something that has always been wrong. What he said was boring then, but now looking at it with what we know about addiction, it looks terrible. It is ONLY terrible in hindsight looking back with modern eyes. It isn't about how long passes for something, it is how it was/would have been judged at the time it was said.

Our past is filled with stuff that was nothing to us back then but today would be labeled offensive. Heck, imagine all the stuff in textbooks we learned in public schools?

Him getting old and answering questions poorly is a very valid reason for not liking him now.
 
Kerosene31 said:
Plagiarism is plagiarism today or in 1982. It was just as wrong 50 years ago as it is today. You always have to answer for something that has always been wrong. What he said was boring then, but now looking at it with what we know about addiction, it looks terrible. It is ONLY terrible in hindsight looking back with modern eyes. It isn't about how long passes for something, it is how it was/would have been judged at the time it was said.

Our past is filled with stuff that was nothing to us back then but today would be labeled offensive. Heck, imagine all the stuff in textbooks we learned in public schools?

Him getting old and answering questions poorly is a very valid reason for not liking him now.
Click to expand...

And that's where him pointing to his record after that should come into play. As long as he can do that then its a nonissue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yankeessuck
horns said:
Another California poll with slightly larger sample put Harris at almost double that of Yang. http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=58e0ba48-d312-4f29-9007-67c41aa7d9a5. That's the only CA poll I see where Yang beats her on 538. Yang's problem is he is an Internet star with younger voters who are also the least reliable voting bloc.
Click to expand...

Oh no doubt but the fact that she loses to him in any poll is a HUGE problem for her, she was leading in CA when she first announced and now she's got basically no shot of carrying her home state.
 
JinCA said:
Oh no doubt but the fact that she loses to him in any poll is a HUGE problem for her, she was leading in CA when she first announced and now she's got basically no shot of carrying her home state.
Click to expand...

In a poll whose methodology includes automated collection over landlines (sure to turn off the older folks who use that) and an online panel of participants isn't exactly unlikely to produce outlier results.
 
Kerosene31 said:
Holding someone's words up from the 1980s against a modern standard is just an impossibly silly purity test that nobody is going to pass. You mean Joe wasn't reverse woke 3+ decades ago?

The problem with this is once you start doing it, you instantly start disqualifying older candidates with experience and automatically accept younger ones. Don't vote for Biden because of what he says today, not what he said long ago.
Click to expand...

I agree that you shouldn't be held to what you said 30 years ago if you've done things that prove you've moved on from that, but when you listen to him there he sounds like every old republican man did back then. I remember he got into trouble a long time back for saying something about not being able to find someone who speaks English when you walk into a 711 or something to that effect. The fact that his views back then helped to ruin so many peoples lives shouldn't be something that's glossed over though either, he's been wrong about a lot of things.

His response when asked about his view on reparations the other night to me proved that he may be a well intended man but he doesn't really know what he thinks, I don't think he's racist but I do think he's clueless. Also regardless of what should or shouldn't happen this kind of video will be used against him to try to suppress voter turnout among minority communities. It's better to get this kind of thing out now while you have other options, maybe he can rise above it and maybe he can't but I'd rather know now than wait to find out during the general.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: yankeessuck
hrudey said:
In a poll whose methodology includes automated collection over landlines (sure to turn off the older folks who use that) and an online panel of participants isn't exactly unlikely to produce outlier results.
Click to expand...

Again I don't really think he's beating her here but the fact that she's behind so many other candidates in her home state is devastating for her campaign, she's never recovered after her initial rise for the Biden attack came back down to earth and she never will she's just not someone who excites people, she's got no charisma and she has no vision for the future.
 
JinCA said:
I agree that you shouldn't be held to what you said 30 years ago if you've done things that prove you've moved on from that, but when you listen to him there he sounds like every old republican man did back then. I remember he got into trouble a long time back for saying something about not being able to find someone who speaks English when you walk into a 711 or something to that effect. The fact that his views back then helped to ruin so many peoples lives shouldn't be something that's glossed over though either, he's been wrong about a lot of things.

His response when asked about his view on reparations the other night to me proved that he may be a well intended man but he doesn't really know what he thinks, I don't think he's racist but I do think he's clueless. Also regardless of what should or shouldn't happen this kind of video will be used against him to try to suppress voter turnout among minority communities. It's better to get this kind of thing out now while you have other options, maybe he can rise above it and maybe he can't but I'd rather know now than wait to find out during the general.
Click to expand...

Not exactly what I meant. Time doesn't make everything go away. This was something that only looks bad 30 years later. Had it been something racist that was always bad it would be different. Putting drug users in jail wasn't anything in the 80s.

Him fumbling his speech today is perfectly fine. I actually agree.
 
Kerosene31 said:
Not exactly what I meant. Time doesn't make everything go away. This was something that only looks bad 30 years later. Had it been something racist that was always bad it would be different. Putting drug users in jail wasn't anything in the 80s.

Him fumbling his speech today is perfectly fine. I actually agree.
Click to expand...

The issue about the drug users in jail is that while it may have sounded fine at the time it showed a complete lack of judgement, it ended up ruining peoples lives so just going along with what conservatives were doing and actually being more conservative than Reagan on the issue just to try to sound like he was tougher on crime to boost his ego really caused a lot of damage, it's not just the words it's what the policies he championed actually did to people and the harm they caused that matter.
 
JinCA said:
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
JinCA said:
The issue about the drug users in jail is that while it may have sounded fine at the time it showed a complete lack of judgement, it ended up ruining peoples lives so just going along with what conservatives were doing and actually being more conservative than Reagan on the issue just to try to sound like he was tougher on crime to boost his ego really caused a lot of damage, it's not just the words it's what the policies he championed actually did to people and the harm they caused that matter.
Click to expand...

I agree, it was a terrible thing... in hindsight. That's the important part. Was he able to see something ahead and get in front of it (decades before anyone else?)? Nope. He shouldn't be blasted for that specific thing though, as looking at it at the time it was standard, and of course he's clarified his position on it.

This isn't about Biden, I don't push anyone to vote for him. I dread him winning the nomination. It is this SJW tactic of taking something from the distant past and examining it with modern values and expecting it to pass. It is about being able to make mistakes (within reason) and come back from them. It isn't like he was making horribly racist statements or something, just pushing an agenda that ended up with some very negative consequences that he likely never imagined (nor did anyone else).

The problem is once you start doing this you start thinning your candidates down to only the very young. While I am no fan of Biden (rooting for Warren), he shouldn't be punted out because of this. If people don't like what he's saying and doing today, that's fine.

Obama was against gay marriage in 2008. Should we have not voted for him? Have you seen the venom thrown at Obama in these debates over things like *gasp* locking up and deporting illegal immigrants? You just need to be careful. I'm not saying leave the past alone, but don't hyper-examine something from the past up against 2019 standards. Take a look at the intent at the time. Did Obama hate gays in 2008? Of course not, he was making a strategic move (that worked).
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Plainview
Kerosene31 said:
I agree, it was a terrible thing... in hindsight. That's the important part. Was he able to see something ahead and get in front of it (decades before anyone else?)? Nope. He shouldn't be blasted for that specific thing though, as looking at it at the time it was standard, and of course he's clarified his position on it.

This isn't about Biden, I don't push anyone to vote for him. I dread him winning the nomination. It is this SJW tactic of taking something from the distant past and examining it with modern values and expecting it to pass. It is about being able to make mistakes (within reason) and come back from them. It isn't like he was making horribly racist statements or something, just pushing an agenda that ended up with some very negative consequences that he likely never imagined (nor did anyone else).

The problem is once you start doing this you start thinning your candidates down to only the very young. While I am no fan of Biden (rooting for Warren), he shouldn't be punted out because of this. If people don't like what he's saying and doing today, that's fine.

Obama was against gay marriage in 2008. Should we have not voted for him? Have you seen the venom thrown at Obama in these debates over things like *gasp* locking up and deporting illegal immigrants? You just need to be careful. I'm not saying leave the past alone, but don't hyper-examine something from the past up against 2019 standards. Take a look at the intent at the time. Did Obama hate gays in 2008? Of course not, he was making a strategic move (that worked).
Click to expand...

If Hillary would have been for gay marriage in 2008 she would have used it against him. Just he used being against the Iraq War against her.

This is just the type of normal politics you always see. If you are going to be a lifetime politician then your career as a whole is going to matter. It has nothing to do with SJWs
 
yankeessuck said:
It has nothing to do with SJWs
Click to expand...

It does if you are taking something said/done a long time ago that caused zero uproar at the time and examining it now under modern standards. You're expecting people to be retroactively "woke".

You can question anything you like, but if you still let this specific thing bother you (after reading a lengthy policy on it where he even specifically admits getting it wrong), I don't know what to tell you.

What gets ignored is time. You only got angry at this once you knew it existed and you immediately expected a response. Yesterday you didn't know it existed, today it is a "scandal". If you want to look for dumb things said by Biden, you don't need to go back to before the release or Return of the Jedi. What if the tape got lost to the ages purely by accident?

Also a video with a couple minutes of actual footage followed by 20 minutes of "outrage" should be a red flag in itself.

I'm not saying it is off limits to ask about anything old - of course it is fine. Stuff like this though feels like going way, way, way too far.

What PV posted is the perfect example. Praising the brave Afghan rebels at the end of Rambo. At the time it was fine, now in retrospect it looks horrible. Did the makers of Rambo intend to offend?
 
Last edited:
Kerosene31 said:
It does if you are taking something said/done a long time ago that caused zero uproar at the time and examining it now under modern standards. You're expecting people to be retroactively "woke".

You can question anything you like, but if you still let this specific thing bother you (after reading a lengthy policy on it where he even specifically admits getting it wrong), I don't know what to tell you.

What gets ignored is time. You only got angry at this once you knew it existed and you immediately expected a response. Yesterday you didn't know it existed, today it is a "scandal". If you want to look for dumb things said by Biden, you don't need to go back to before the release or Return of the Jedi. What if the tape got lost to the ages purely by accident?

Also a video with a couple minutes of actual footage followed by 20 minutes of "outrage" should be a red flag in itself.

I'm not saying it is off limits to ask about anything old - of course it is fine. Stuff like this though feels like going way, way, way too far.
Click to expand...

Its not because as I have said this type of thing is nothing new. I don't see this as disqualifying but I'm simply saying its a fair topic to be brought up. It should not be only about what you are saying today. That is a completely ridiculous notion when talking about career politicians.

And just because something didn't upset the public doesn't mean people were right to support it. 3/4 of the public supported the Iraq War but obviously it should never have happened.

I think the complaint about the video is fair but just not in the way you are looking at it. The Young Turks are just biased and their coverage of the candidates is going to be biased.
 
I'm not saying you can never bring up the past (thought I made that more than clear). Just that this particular case is one of those way over the top cases.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Plainview
  • Like
Reactions: Viktor
Kerosene31 said:
I'm not saying you can never bring up the past (thought I made that more than clear). Just that this particular case is one of those way over the top cases.
Click to expand...

Biden doesn't even sound like a Democrat from that time in that video, he's always been one to puff his chest and try to sound like a tough guy. It wouldn't be as hard to let go of it if today he would say that if he had known then what he knows now he would have done things differently, he never does that he's too hard headed to admit a mistake. It's not about being woke, I don't expect a video of him from the 1970's to pop up where he says he supports trans rights or this ridiculous notion of hundreds of genders it's simply wanting to see him be right about at least one thing and so far it's hard to find that.

He has a long record, just about everything I've seen that he led on so far he did the wrong thing, he has no sense of foresight or is even that thoughtful in the way he expresses how he comes to the conclusions that he does. I like Joe Biden I always have, he does seem like a good and decent guy but when I look at him through a clear lens and not rose colored glasses I see a lot of issues there that would make me worry about him being out nominee let alone our President. He'd still be a million times better than Trump but we have better options and we shouldn't go out of our way to make excuses for him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back