Landlord

Gotta join the discord and you'll get daily orders.

I thought the discovery of gravity waves a few years back was the final major prediction of Einstein's relativity and nail in the coffin for Newton.

According to https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ this isn't true, they have 2,174 deaths recorded on Thursday.

We've known that Newtonian physics are incomplete/incorrect for a long time, though, right?

Not sure if you knew this, but copy/pasting a tweet on Huskerboard is a different thing than retweeting. There's also the issue of ad hominem which nobody on this board has ever seemed to have heard of before.

Fair enough, and I think you're underestimating the proliferation of stuff like creepy joe biden into the social feeds of the average joe. I see that stuff on facebook allllll the time, across political affiliations. I'm not sure what you mean by "accepted as true" though, in regards to hundreds of montage videos showing Joe grabbing and cuddling and kissing and nuzzling all manner of women and girls. People don't believe the videos are real? Or they don't think that what they're seeing is creepy and inappropriate?

I didn't filter anything either, and I don't think anyone made that claim. The only thing I'm arguing is what I predict will happen and how the average voter will process it. I'm not making any claims of things being unworthy of discussion or not, just calling out my hunch of how I think it will actually play out, regardless of how I personally feel about it or what news I consume, etc. As far as the question of whether it would work on Bernie, Warren, and others, no, not in the same way. Hillary is married to a President who had a documented affair that some would classify as assault, and multiple credible rape allegations. Trotting out Bill's accusers front row at the debate worked to great effect against her. Biden has a long history documented in video and photo of inappropriate creepy old man touching, and an assault allegation that, if not credible, is at least high profile. It would work against him too, imo. Bernie doesn't have a backdrop of those things. Warren doesn't have a backdrop of those things (although he would destroy her on the Native American ancestry bit). It wouldn't work against them because there's no weak spot, real or perceived by the common voter, to exploit.

Mine wasn't actually in quotations - google treats quotes as searching for that exact specific sentence.

I wouldn't put it past him, and if he does it, it will work. So.....yeah.

I just googled "Trump Sexual Assault" news articles, here's what came up: So no I don't think people will be covering Trump's assault charges in court when we get into general election campaign/debate time.

Yeah, because she said women have the right to be believed, while being married to a husband with multiple credible rape allegations and one essentially proven and documented infidelity assault against him. I'm sure her advisors rightly told her not to because she would get skewered over the hypocrisy. Biden is also on record with a, "believe women" sort of message. With that established, you think he can respond to Trump saying, "I never did that, and the woman accusing me of assaulting her is doing this for political reasons and is pro-Russia and has no credibility and shouldn't be believed, and also Trump buddy you've assaulted lots of women", and it will work out well for him? Most of the people in our country don't dive deep into the facts and reporting on these things. They are "informed" by headlines and sound bytes. They'll hear Biden sounding like a guilty defensive hypocrite, or they'll see headlines saying, "Biden gets defensive over sexual assault allegation."

It's not weird to see it talked about in the context of how it will play out in the election. This conversation is contextual to that, it's not happening in a vacuum where all we're talking about is the horror of sexual assault. We all know about Trump's evil sexual history; and we know that it didn't stop him from getting elected and doesn't seem to matter to his base. Biden is in a no-win scenario here. If Trump brings it up, say during a debate, Biden can't retort with, "You've been charged with sexual assault by 25 women" because it will make him look like a guilty hypocrite who's deflecting. He also can't ignore it and focus on issues, because it will also make him look guilty and deflecting. Edit: It's essentially a cloud hanging over Biden that makes no 'winning' way to address it or not, and also takes away his ability to a large extent to attack Trump on the basis of character.

I wish there was a standardized and readily available source for how they are determining deaths. There is something that seems....not exactly fishy but suspect about too many reports of how deaths are being casually attributed to covid or doctors being given permission and instructions to assume it in cases where it isn't verified. I trust the numbers generally but wish I knew with certainty how they get there so I could disarm arguments that it's being artificially inflated.

everybody just needs to do some WOO-SAH breaths.

Sorry blitz but it's clear to everyone that you are, if not outraged or butthurt, then at least having some sort of bitter meltdown. The reason people aren't addressing the issue is because your personal inability to engage in any kind of stoicism or to look at Biden with even 10% impartiality is clearly obvious. Sorry it's exhausting but you are presenting yourself as crazed and heartbroken. And this coming from someone who understands and sympathizes with your position probably more than anyone on here.

Pretty sure that one sentence was the only thing making people take it a way other than you intended. It came across as your only focus on wrongdoing was the people struggling who haven't been 100% responsible with their money while ignoring the bad behavior of the powerful entities at play.

Who determines the sound doctrine and orthodoxy?

Then I guess the entire conversation turns into a conversation about what the word fringe means. Is it strictly a number of people? Is it the outlandishness of what they believe? I don't actually have a working definition other than things I attend or am interested in that the overwhelming majority of the population is totally oblivious to.

Pretty strategic and mostly empty words imo. Some not insignificant liberal urban millenials have figured out that Obama is a classic centrist game-playing politician, and not the hope and change revolutionary he branded himself as. I think the Dems are slightly over-estimating Obama's effectiveness to young people. I guess we'll see. About fainted in my chair when Obama mentioned that the Republicans were willing to spend trillions on tax cuts for the wealthy though.

THIS. This is journalistic behavior we need. Look at Trump absolutely squirm and not answer. My biggest criticism of the media is that there isn't enough of this in the face of explicit lying, double talk, and deflection. Bravo Paula Reid.

yeah, but who is doing it more and rigging it worse right now?

Sure you don't have to. But we need to know the stakes. If Trump gets another 4 years, there's an overwhelming chance that he gets at least one more Supreme Court seat, maybe two. That means, essentially, for the rest of our lives, there won't be such a thing as fair elections. For the next several decades the SC will rule in favor of out of control Republican gerrymandering and voter suppression and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it directly, because those seats will stay no matter what, and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it indirectly, because Republicans will unfairly win more and more seats in Congress. The Supreme Court is the only reason I feel I absolutely must vote for Biden, and if he was a convicted rapist I would still absolutely vote for him as much as it disgusts me to say so.

I'd call it more the pragmatic thing to do than the mature thing, but I agree. It's the right move to vote for Biden. That's what I'm doing. It'll probably be right next time too. And then, somewhere down the road of the future, I imagine we will all maturely insure our own destruction by maturely riding this inevitable momentum of this out of control snowball machine we're all powerless to dismantle or resist. THIS is more the perspective of #NeverBiden voters or abstainers, I think. It's a nihilistic realization that there is nothing to be done in life but be held hostage by the system that serves the powerful, forever. It's people broken hearted and jaded enough to see the writing on the wall and just quit the game. We're not going to have a revolution. We're not going to meaningfully redistribute wealth. We're not going to reach a state of equitable opportunity. We won't be able to make a dent in the calcified dominance heirarchy. So what the hell is the point? Now you can call it wrong or pessimistic or immature or whatever, or paint it as simple-minded whiney brats not getting their way, but it's at least not an unreasonable perspective to have.

no. stop with this.

The world (as we know it currently) not being saved doesn't mean the world is going to end or that everyone will be dead in ten years. But it does mean that we're heading down a path of increased destruction, hostile living conditions, and irrevresible damage to the planet which directly correlates with ease of living especially for the poor. Bernie rightfully has this as the most urgent pressing issue that demands a dramatic and aggressive response. And he's the only one taking it seriously enough. That doesn't mean he's a savior. But it does mean he's the only presidential candidate that there's any evidence would/could actually attack it with an appropriate level of commitment. And the reality of that situation, and him not going to be the President, is sobering.