Total posts: 9,115
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
In his book How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them (2018), Jason Stanley defined fascism as "a cult of the leader who promises national restoration in the face of humiliation brought on by supposed
I am talking about reading this book or actually listening to the audiobook to get your perspective. I couldn't find it free though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
the rule of elitesseems to be in direct conflictwith "cultural liberalism"
We currently have rule by the elite. What is wrong with a populist being the fist of the people so the elite are supplanted?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I will see if I can find an audio book of that
Created:
Posted in:
Maybe not. Maybe my screen just made the thread appear bright red
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I appreciate that and agree. I like to see Owen participating and am trying to make him feel welcome by responding to his views. My fear is that him popping out to say something useful like that could go ignored and if he felt ignored it could affect his participation
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Owen_T
I feel like there is a possibility JoeBob could be mafia and trying to just not draw any attention. Did he say he was going to be less active earlier?
That happens frequently. Good observation. Let's get a claim from him
VTL.joebob
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
uh I'll be honest here neither of you are giving me good vibes, need to think it over
They could both be scum. It's usually 3 random names the mod randomizes until at least one scum is rolled.
I can say I wish I hot the role because nobody would know the results until dp2 when we had more to work off of.
Created:
Posted in:
I am annoyed I gave up my role and character now. I like to hang onto that stuff
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
motivation to trade himself 1-for-1 for a townie this early on, but considering he daycopped 7000series guilty in Battlebots Mafia when he was scum, I'm not 100% sure.
There was 2 scum teams that game if I remember correcf I was confident in my read and thought lynching scum would get me town read the entire game
Created:
Posted in:
It does bother me that Austin seems to know I am town even after CCing him mistakenly. I understand changing your read after I acknowledge I gucked up, but why the town read prior to me acknowledging thay?
Created:
Posted in:
I think it's savant. Lunatic saying I am scum is just RVS but savant seems to be feigning confusion at some things.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
I was not going to look at my role again, but when I did I noticed it said Mia. I don't know how I would have explained myself if I got you lynched.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
I guess I need to watch the show. I disagree with giving characters similar names.
Created:
Posted in:
Hold on
I am Mia not Maya
Did he misspell Mia or are there 2 characters with damn near the same name?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
At least it's more original than your daycop claim. If you're town and actually get us to MYLO straight off a badly done reaction test, then we are not playing together again.
And if we are both literally the same character I won't be playing in Casey's games again.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
I don't want to wait 2 weeks for your explanation bro. I want to know in the twilight phase what the fuck was going through your head
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
Austin is too aggressive I am Maya Fey. I am not sure why he felt the need to make a fake claim so early
Created:
Posted in:
I am Maya Fey I die at the beginning of the series but return to help family, therefore I am a Restless spirit
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
The results are real. I will not clarify my role any further because I believe it would be anti-town. I will claim my character though: Maya Fey.
Bro I am literally Maye fey. Jesus christ shake the rust off
Unvote VTL austin
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
Also it's not really a "soft-claim" if scum do their research, and I don't know why Austin would give three names he doesn't have. Especially if he said he was sussing me based on mechanics.
I doubt he has names yet. He said it as a Segway to an unnecessary soft claim that was not soft enough
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
Wylted can you confirm whether or not you made this post
Are you in law school? This is exactly the shit lawyers do. Also not sure how you found that so fast. It is anti town to speculate. It is also anti town to be obvious as fuck
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
I agree but your soft claim annoyed the shit out of me and I town read you because I know pie helped design the game and loves that role.
Really that soft claim was really on the nose and if I feel like the scum team picked up on it, than town should also know what it is
Really that soft claim was really on the nose and if I feel like the scum team picked up on it, than town should also know what it is
Created:
Posted in:
I am going to keep my vote on savant. I really don't like him acting like Austin claimed information. He literally stated that it was a soft claim. He never said he had results
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
What is a dreamer?
A person receives 3 names and at least one person in the 3 names is definitely scum.
I think austin soft claimed that, not stated any results.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
Although there's also a good chance Austin is scum and is lying through his teeth. Either way, there's one scum between me, WyIted, Luna, and Austin
I took it to be a soft claim not Austin actually giving results, I guess we can see what he says
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
How would you feel if I said there's one scum in you, Wylted, and Savant
Okay soft claiming dreamer, the role is useless now. Good job
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I said nothing close to this. He did not say, suggest, or imply that most Mexicans are not rapists. He stated that when Mexico "sends it's people" those people are bringing drugs, crime, and rapists. But "some" he "assumes" are good people. You can pretend all you want that this is some kind of kind words speech towards Mexicans, but that's just straight up delusional. There is no context in accordance with the English language that comports with that. You're just making shit up and it's really sad.
You know that the word some would technically mean a majority right? So are you nitpicking over what percentage of illegal immigrants are bad people?
It is not a coincidence that during the Trump presidency hate crimes spiked and for the first time in decades white supremacists all over the country felt comfortable showing their faces. To quote Andrew Gilliam; "I'm not saying he's a racist, but the racists sure think he's a racist". That is what matters.
Yeah like with celebrities getting caught faking Maga attacks in the middle of a snow storm.
They're calling him a racist because that is how he portrays himself. Read his speech above, point me to one part of that which doesn't scream "terrible people!"
Okay sure
When did we beat Japan at anything? They send their cars over by the millions, and what do we do? When was the last time you saw a Chevrolet in Tokyo? It doesn't exist, folks. They beat us all the time.
Statement implies we can and should be doing better to compete with Japanese car manufacturers it shows confidence in American aut manufacturers.
When do we beat Mexico at the border? They're laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically. They are not our friend, believe me. But they're killing us economically.
Mexico is making smarter economic decisions than the United States and we can do better
The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else's problems.
A call to stop being the world police and bailing out the world. Insinuating we should be empowering nations to take care of problems before they reach our shore
Thank you. It's true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best.
Mexico employs a strategy of making cartel issues our problem so they can weasel out of solving them
They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists.
Same thing
And some, I assume, are good people.
A statement indicating he is aware most are good people and if not most a good amount that shouldn't be lumped in with the criminals
Yada Yada yada
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
He said it was based off of gut though, not probability
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Yeah that's what I thought would happen but I encourage to consider that after my streak of being scum for like 80% of games that I am.mow overdue and owed being town by god.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
What is yo I r chess rating. I AM 450 ON CHESS.com
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
privatization and promoting corporate power is certainly a hallmark of fascism (merging state and corporate power)
You mean to tell me fascist that grow the government so large they can essentially spy on everyone are actually capitalists who support a night's watchman state?
Created:
Posted in:
You knew what he meant when you heard that and you are being disingenuous though. Let's be honest for once. You know that Trump.is not some white bayionalist or secret KKK member.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
You keep referencing thrown away ballots as if you're not describing exactly what happens now. I understand you prefer the run off election model but having nearly every election across the country run twice is a non-starter so it's a waste of time to use as a basis for comparison.
I already showed you that even in elections with RCV you have frequent problems such as in sanfransisco where errors caused the wrong person to sit on the board for 6 months or in the Minneaopolis mayoral election where less than 50k votes were cast and it took 30,000 man hours and 3 weeks to correct.
Certainly a ru off would be superior to dealing with that.
One way to know your position is weak is when you have to make up the opposing argument in order to refute it. I never said he called "all" Mexicans rapists, that's what you're mind interpreted so that so you can apply the 100% standard which almost no claim can live up to. I said he called Mexicans rapists, which is a generalization.
Finally, I am glad you now agree that he said most Mexicans are not rapists and was merely referencing amnesty international stats and saying that criminals can slip through invested.
It's not semantics, it's basic English and inference. He did in fact call for the banning of Muslims, and you defend it in part by claiming he only called for it temporarily
If he is blatantly racist and using that as an excuse to better vet refugees, than I am sure he would directly say that.
I mean if every leftist is calling him racist for suggesting some level of border security and claiming republics are racist for also supporting secure borders and meritocracy than certainly it would help him win an election by being openly racist and not giving off these hints that set conspiracy y theorists off.
Created:
Posted in:
Here is how I would do it. Randomize and if Owen ended up scum randomize again and again until I got a randomization where they were town
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
It's obvious you got that from 420-1776
How dare you call me a plagiarist
Created:
Posted in:
Owen t is town BTW. It would be a major dick move to make them scum on their first game.
Created:
Posted in:
That actually 100% confirms savant to be scum.
I can't believe we already caught one
VTL savant
Created:
Posted in:
The ban also restricted north korea and Libya was left off of it
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
It actually is. You are really hinging your position on the idea that we must value voter turnout to such a degree that it overrides the obvious benefits of RCV
That's one of the lesser premises and one I gave you because I thought you cared about it, I have shown that it delays the results of elections, increases inaccurate results and results in thrown away ballots.
it's pretty hard to take you seriously on that argument if you don't seem to care about the effect on turnout voter ID laws have particularly within certain segments of the population
Yeah the one in a million votes that don't occur because of voter ID is certainly comparable to a reduction of 20% in participation. Voter ID is just common sense. It is significantly more important to have security than it is that an issue that effects almost no honest voter because the 1 out of a million people it effects might be black but probably not.
So perhaps you are better off advocating for a different tabulation method rather than abandoning RCV all together.
Wrong because we know if I vote for RCV in my district, I don't get a say in the tabulation method, so it is better to just oppose it until the people writing bills to pass RCV have a better plan to implement it.
his isn't an opinion, it's an entire reimagination of what he said. His words were clear and were nothing close to this.
you know I can just watch the video to disprove this right?
Give me the time stamp where he says all mexicans or even illegal immigrants. He even qualifies the statement by saying some are great people.
The definition of some is "A portion of" .
"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on" - Donald Trump, December 7th 2015
You are getting into semantics, you know he uses imprecise language. Even your quote does not say a permanent moratorium on it, just a temporary one of a few weeks until some statistics can be gathered to reduce the odds of terrorism. Here is the actual bill and it only talks about using statistics of where a disproportionate amount of terrorists come from. It restricted it for 90 days and so it did exactly what everyone knew it would do, just make sure people from high risk countries as proven by statistics were vetted better, and this only applied to refugees not immigrants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769
Moreover, it's just sad to see people keep defending him with such obvious nonsense. If you can't defend him with the truth perhaps you should evaluate why you defend him at all
You are the one lying by claiming that he said every single mexican is a racist and that he wanted to ban muslims when you can literally look at the executive order and see that it's a lie
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
@Double_R
explain how having to research 20 candidates is easier than researching just a few?Non-sequitor. RCV is a method of selecting the winner, it has nothing to do with how many candidates end up on the ballot.
not a non sequiter because there are race with 20 people and my ballot risks being exhausted if i do not no my order preference for all 20
The source I provided linked to multiple studies as well. So your argument is that "your" studies are real but "mine" are fake. Doesn't exactly scream unbiased.
I will look again but the studies showing reduced participation in st. paul and Minneapolis compared to surrounding areas pretty much proves my point, and that is leavin out the numbers from san fransisco and new york.
Tell me your position on voter ID.
irrelevant
The other problem here is that you don't seem to have considered is that RCV doesn't have to be tabulated the way it does currently. The current system is that each round the least favored candidate gets removed and the ballots retabulate until someone reaches 50%. I understand why they do it this way, but they could do it another way...Limit the retabulation to two rounds. The first round, if no one gets to 50% then remove everyone except the top two and retabulate with only those two choices. This is exactly how a run of election works except you wouldn't need to hold two separate elections. What do you think about that option?
I think it is a superior option to RCV. or what is currently being touted as RCV.
It wasn't because he put an R next to his name. Calling Mexicans rapists and calling for the banning of all Muslims from entering the United States (among many other things) has a way of alienating large numbers of people.
irrelevant to the topic, we can take it to another thread. I think you know my opinion is I watched the speech that is taken from and it's clear trump was saying that their are a lot of criminals that sneak in illegally and he was referring to statistics by amnesty international that shows 3/4 of female immigrants coming across the border who originated in South America are sexually assaulted at least once through their journey.
Also the Muslim ban was him banning the countries statistically most likely to have terrorists which yes are predominantly from Muslim countries but non muslims can live in muslim countries and some muslim countries do not have the same problems with radical ISlam were not in the ban, so no it was not a Muslim ban and I can only assume that since you have to lie about his beliefs and policy positions, that you secretly agree with them, otherwise you would just debate against his actual positions instead of strawman arguments. Either way and I should ignore these points because you are taking me off topic, you can start a new thread for these tangents if you want.
tell me with a straight face that these are the two smartest and best qualified individuals on earth
The most qualified people on the planet have better shit to do with their time than run for public office. I don't know what to tell you but RCV doesn't fix this
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
and sure, there are some "problems" with some incompetent implementations of RCVbut these are SOLVABLE
Then prove it is solvable by doing it in Minnesota, New York and San Fransisco before advocating for it to be implemented elsewhere because the versions we currently see is obviously what will be implemented elsewhere.
I see you have a new premise though.
You are arguing that RCV breaks up the 2 party system.
on the following statement
TWO OF THE MOST IDIOTIC BUFFOONS in history"
This is just you giving into cynicism because despite 99% of people doing the same thing, many still think its cool and different to be cynical.
You have a life long public servant in Joe Biden who has proven his dedication to the United states with that service and has served in one prior presidential administration for 2 terms. He is running against somebody who prior to putting an R beside his name was pretty much beloved by the entire nation with a track record of success in business and in media, and who became popular in the political realm with some populist stances that appeals to a wide demographic.
SO you are just letting cynicism take over, which is lazy. It's doesn't make you smart to be a cynic, its just an intellectual shortcut taken because it is easier than applying critical thinking and it just so happens that cynicism is popular so you can make statements that easily appeal to most people like "Both candidates are buffoons"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tidycraft
Created:
-->
@whiteflame
I am currently teaching him how to get a job so that way he doesn't need to be paranoid that money hungry capitalists actually care about his political opinions and not how much money he can make them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
you're completely skipping the questionwould you personally prefer
It doesn't matter. My personal feelings do not matter and is beside the point. I am not going to be held verbally hostage and walk down your list of simple binary choices that are irrelevant. Whether I prefer 8 choices or 2 does not mean we should have RCV. It doesn't even address my premises. If you want an answer, personally I prefer more options. now what about me preferring more options has to do with me thinking that RCV is a terrible ideal to implement without a bunch of other changes occurring first to ensure the success of RCV without the negative baggage?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
T
In an ideal world, I would support RCV for the primaries. In this one, I do not. Personally I would like it tested first. My instinct is that in party primaries it would likely result in more extreme candidates who would lose more often in the general election
It's each parties business how they run their primaries within the law. I am not a democrat, they can run their primaries how they want. I prefer the current way it is done, at least until we set up a system that mitigates the negative effects of RCV so the cost benefit analysis changes.hat's not the questionthe question iswould you prefer a PRIMARY ELECTIONwith 10 people narrowing down the choice to foods to ONLY 2 OPTIONS ?
In an ideal world, I would support RCV for the primaries. In this one, I do not. Personally I would like it tested first. My instinct is that in party primaries it would likely result in more extreme candidates who would lose more often in the general election
Created: