War Room Lounge V43: STEM is Overrated

[senri]

This is such a weird analogy but it made me laugh pretty hard. I'm going to make an obscure reference to this one day.

Mr. Savage is slowly beginning to insert efficiently. His juices extravasates fluid poetry.

 

[TheGreatA]

Good lord, dude.

I hope that you respect Chomksy more than Greenwald. Here's Chomsky's semi-famous appraisal of lesser evilist voting (I disagree with it to a large degree, but it's more comprehensive and less reductive than Greenwald's). https://chomsky.info/an-eight-point-brief-for-lev-lesser-evil-voting/

Also, I have no idea what kind of wacky other-dimensional math you'd have to use to say "2 Biden terms = 1 Trump term." Two Biden terms will result in a mixed bag of slightly better domestic outcomes and slightly worse domestic outcomes relative to where the country was before, with definitively more positive outcomes than negative outcomes and with the end result being that government presently and in the future is in a significantly better place than it was before. The courts would be filled with highly competent centrist liberals that would advance things like workers rights, voting rights, civil rights against government intrusion and recovery rights against corporate tyranny. Environmental agencies would be headed by professionals trained in and disposed toward defending the environment. Consumer agencies would e headed by professionals trained in and disposed toward defending consumers.

A Trump term would represent a wild swing in the other direction toward incompetence, corruption, policy making and executive appointments purely for the purpose of fucking over consumers/citizens/etc. for the benefit of corporations and rich people, and the proliferation of incompetent and corrupt hacks into the judiciary that will pang for generations and continue to leverage the government toward permanent minority rule.

They are not remotely comparable. And this is coming from a guy who really doesn't like Biden and who thinks he's the worst possible outcome of the Democratic field: his history on consumer protections, race relations, and his continued coziness with private capital is extremely concerning to me, as is his ideological commitment to the golden mean. Also, I think you severely underestimate the power/influence of a president's party/supporters on their policy. There is absolutely no chance that Biden would be as conservative as president in 2020 as he was as a senator in 2006.

I would say that the danger of Biden, for the American left, is that he might go relatively unopposed compared to Trump, while not being revolutionary by any means when it comes to policy. He represents a return to "normalcy", and may put the "left" back in the fringe.

I think the American left's best chance was to follow up on Obama's momentum, and yes, Trump's, the latter being a whacky enough right-wing candidate to cause a backlash that made many people turn harder left. If all of that generated "bad-will" results merely in Biden, then it will make the left appear somewhat impotent.

A post-Trump election, either now or in another 4 years, is the "window of opportunity" for a legitimate left-wing candidate to make it, as far as I see it. If Biden wins, I'm not sure if that door is going to be opened again, for a fairly long time. Unless he's just a complete hack and botches everything up, forcing Dems to abandon their model.

 

[JDragon]

GoT spoiler

Spoiler

Latest Game of Thrones episode sends curveball to children named Khaleesi
WARNING: contains spoilers from season eight, episode five. Sharp change of fortune for dragon queen leaves many wondering about the thousands named after her

 

[TheGreatA]

GoT spoiler

Spoiler

Latest Game of Thrones episode sends curveball to children named Khaleesi
WARNING: contains spoilers from season eight, episode five. Sharp change of fortune for dragon queen leaves many wondering about the thousands named after her

Never name your children after a dictator, until seeing their run through.

 

[Lead]

ever been to pittsburgh?

What’s this about

 

[Islam Imamate]

This illustrates the problem, though, because in reality Sanders wasn't fucked by anyone but voters who didn't vote for him. So to a portion of his loony supporters, the mere fact that he doesn't win is proof that the system is "rigged" and thus that it's better to have Trump as president than someone who is objectively much better for the office than Trump. It reads as a cult and that his supporters don't actually care about making the world better (and, in fact, actively support making it worse if they don't get their way).

Come on Jack, you know that is not entirely true. There's the well publicized story of Donna Brazile, at the time the vice chair of the DNC, leaking a debate question to the Hillary campaign. We also have leaked communications, which the DNC even apologized for btw, which showed which candidate was their preferred one:

Many of the emails discussed how to undermine Clinton's rival Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and overall revealed some negativity toward him.

Wikileaks likely had its own bias against Clinton but that doesn't mean they fabricated the emails. And I will go as far as to say I even understand why the DNC felt the way that it did because Clinton was a Democrat superstar with a long history in the party while Bernie was a lifelong independent using the party's primary because he knew it gave him the best shot at winning. Plus you are right to point out that he got fewer votes, if Bernie was an electoral juggernaut this wouldn't matter. Just look at Trump, the GOP was desperate for him to not win the nomination to the point that they ended up closing ranks behind Ted Cruz, who was probably the guy they figured they were going to have to close ranks against, because of how unstoppable Trump was at the polls.

But at the end of the day its clear that the DNC was not exactly neutral, by the end they were hoping to anoint Clinton and Sanders was a thorn in their side. Again I understand where they were coming from. In addition to the deeper history Clinton had with the party its also the case that reasonable people at the time felt that she was the more likely to beat Trump. And to be fair the Sanders campaign had antagonized the DNC with claims of bias so there is an element of self-fulfilling prophecy there; no one is going to like the people accusing them of being biased.

 

[Islam Imamate]

This happened with my brother in law. In 2016, he was saying he would’ve liked to see a Biden-Kasich election with the assumption he’d vote for Biden. Last week, he was complaining that Biden was going to ruin dems chances and he needs to step aside for the other candidates.

Things have changed bigly since 2016, I don't think its crazy for people to change their minds since then.

Not my favorite, but a solid #2

I wanted to like this post but I noticed only Plats liked it and I didn't want to ruin that.

I would say that the danger of Biden, for the American left, is that he might go relatively unopposed compared to Trump, while not being revolutionary by any means when it comes to policy. He represents a return to "normalcy", and may put the "left" back in the fringe.

I think the American left's best chance was to follow up on Obama's momentum, and yes, Trump's, the latter being a whacky enough right-wing candidate to cause a backlash that made many people turn harder left. If all of that generated "bad-will" results merely in Biden, then it will make the left appear somewhat impotent.

A post-Trump election, either now or in another 4 years, is the "window of opportunity" for a legitimate left-wing candidate to make it, as far as I see it. If Biden wins, I'm not sure if that door is going to be opened again, for a fairly long time. Unless he's just a complete hack and botches everything up, forcing Dems to abandon their model.

That's how I see it but he's still preferable to Trump at the end of the day. As I have said before, I am going to be pissed if I have to vote for Biden to get rid of Trump.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

A Plat like is worth 2 pleb likes imo.

 

[Islam Imamate]

A Plat like is worth 2 pleb likes imo.

Not even 3/5ths huh? Harsh.

 

[Lead]

Things have changed bigly since 2016, I don't think its crazy for people to change their minds since then.

If it was a case where the politician acquired more experience from 2016 to 2020 that changed their opinion on them, I could understand that. But with Biden, it clearly isn’t that. He’s just the front runner and now instead of people just saying “he’s a good option but I like so and so”, they are getting fairly angry with him and pulling him through the mud. I don’t see a reason for that big of a change.

 

[Islam Imamate]

If it was a case where the politician acquired more experience from 2016 to 2020 that changed their opinion on them, I could understand that. But with Biden, it clearly isn’t that. He’s just the front runner and now instead of people just saying “he’s a good option but I like so and so”, they are getting fairly angry with him and pulling him through the mud. I don’t see a reason for that big of a change.

It could also be that they learned more about his political history since then. In 2016 I think he was primarily judged as Obama's VP, certainly by younger people like me. But now that he is running and is a serious contender, more of a microscope is being put to his past. Of course that may not be the case for your brother-in-law.

 

[Lord Coke]

Somebody just stole my close friends deposit. I have literally stopped my entire nation spanning firearms litigation practice to bring the HAMMER of GOD down on this guy and everything and everyone he ever cared about.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Come on Jack, you know that is not entirely true. There's the well publicized story of Donna Brazile, at the time the vice chair of the DNC, leaking a debate question to the Hillary campaign. We also have leaked communications, which the DNC even apologized for btw, which showed which candidate was their preferred one:

What I said was entirely true. If the question is "did some DNC employees prefer Sanders?" The answer is yes. How that translates to him being "fucked by the DNC" is the real question, though. Note that the race wasn't even close among voters.

Also, we're not talking about "leaks," we're talking about foreign intelligence stealing communications and releasing them in a misleading way. And the real tension wasn't about Clinton being a "Democrat superstar," it was about Bernie not dropping out of the race after the point when it became clear that it was over.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Things have changed bigly since 2016, I don't think its crazy for people to change their minds since then.

Biden was an old man in 2016. There's nothing new coming out here. What's more, it was entirely predictable, and I predicted it. The same thing happened with Clinton in 2008, when a lot of Republicans said that they might have voted for her in the general but Obama was too radical, and some of the left made similar comments. Even similar in that Clinton was perceived to be stronger among working-class whites and in the Rust Belt. I also predicted the souring on Bernie that we're seeing from the right (and if he does win the nomination, a lot of True Progressives will start saying that he's a neoliberal sellout and go third party, stay home, or otherwise argue that actually Trump winning is better for the cause).

 

[Trotsky]

I would say that the danger of Biden, for the American left, is that he might go relatively unopposed compared to Trump, while not being revolutionary by any means when it comes to policy. He represents a return to "normalcy", and may put the "left" back in the fringe.

I think the American left's best chance was to follow up on Obama's momentum, and yes, Trump's, the latter being a whacky enough right-wing candidate to cause a backlash that made many people turn harder left. If all of that generated "bad-will" results merely in Biden, then it will make the left appear somewhat impotent.

A post-Trump election, either now or in another 4 years, is the "window of opportunity" for a legitimate left-wing candidate to make it, as far as I see it. If Biden wins, I'm not sure if that door is going to be opened again, for a fairly long time. Unless he's just a complete hack and botches everything up, forcing Dems to abandon their model.

I agree with a lot of what you say, and I think the concern and skepticism you describe is valid, but I'm far less concerned about it than I once was. I genuinely want Sanders to get the nomination because I think that Sanders is a generationally good person - and that frankly translates into him being a generationally authentic leftist because he's optimally responsive to heeding criticisms and adjusting his thoughts and positions when he's wrong (1990s criminal justice reform, Israel, etc.) and he's strong when he's unfairly criticized by right-wing liberals on issues on which he's right (protecting gun ownership).

Because of that, I have a certain faith in Sanders to stick to doing what's right that I likely will not have in another left-wing politician for some time (it's something of a miracle that Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn came up at the same time). However, I don't worry that the state of left-wing sentiment will dry up in America. Right now, we're seeing a generation of young people (18-35 years old) that are unprecedentedly ideological in American history. They aren't necessarily socialists, or anarchists, or communists, but they're driven toward the same goals of those systems: defending the powerless, litigating the powerful, and creating a just society based on a dialectical and internationalist view.

Right now, Joe Biden is skating by on the overwhelming support of senior citizens/Baby Boomers. He's beating Sanders like 75% to 10% among those crusty fucks. The actual difficulty going forward will be getting left-wing candidates into the Democratic Party. Right now, Sanders crowdfunding model has not been applied to down-ballot races, and cases like AOC are the exception to the rule.

 

[HockeyBjj]

Today's shitshow thread of the day started early

A flat earther anti vaxxer created a thread on early ages evolution

 

[Jack V Savage]

I agree with a lot of what you say, and I think the concern and skepticism you describe is valid, but I'm far less concerned about it than I once was. I genuinely want Sanders to get the nomination because I think that Sanders is a generationally good person - and that frankly translates into him being a generationally authentic leftist because he's optimally responsive to heeding criticisms and adjusting his thoughts and positions when he's wrong (1990s criminal justice reform, Israel, etc.) and he's strong when he's unfairly criticized by right-wing liberals on issues on which he's right (protecting gun ownership).

Because of that, I have a certain faith in Sanders to stick to doing what's right that I likely will not have in another left-wing politician for some time (it's something of a miracle that Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn came up at the same time). However, I don't worry that the state of left-wing sentiment will dry up in America. Right now, we're seeing a generation of young people (18-35 years old) that are unprecedentedly ideological in American history. They aren't necessarily socialists, or anarchists, or communists, but they're driven toward the same goals of those systems: defending the powerless, litigating the powerful, and creating a just society based on a dialectical and internationalist view.

Right now, Joe Biden is skating by on the overwhelming support of senior citizens/Baby Boomers. He's beating Sanders like 75% to 10% among those crusty fucks. The actual difficulty going forward will be getting left-wing candidates into the Democratic Party. Right now, Sanders crowdfunding model has not been applied to down-ballot races, and cases like AOC are the exception to the rule.

I disagree with all of this.

Good piece from Chait on Biden yesterday:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...?utm_source=tw&utm_medium=s1&utm_campaign=nym

 

[Islam Imamate]

What I said was entirely true. If the question is "did some DNC employees prefer Sanders?" The answer is yes. How that translates to him being "fucked by the DNC" is the real question, though. Note that the race wasn't even close among voters.

How about the fact that Brazile leaked a question to her during the primary?

And on the issue of DNC employees not liking Sanders, don't you think that could've translated to some bias even if only unconsciously? I mean, they were talking about crafting narratives that would hurt his campaign, at the very least there seemed intent to favor Clinton in action even if it didn't lead to any. Not saying these things were instrumental in Sanders losing, I think he would've lost to Clinton in a perfectly fair contest. And saying the DNC "rigged" the primaries is definitely stretching it. But the impression of bias didn't only come from sore losers.

Also, we're not talking about "leaks," we're talking about foreign intelligence stealing communications and releasing them in a misleading way.

Do you think the emails are legitimate or fabricated?

And the real tension wasn't about Clinton being a "Democrat superstar," it was about Bernie not dropping out of the race after the point when it became clear that it was over.

Which is something that Clinton herself did in 2008 and it made sense for her then and it made sense for Sanders now. Maintaining your campaign allows you to continue to expand your profile which is useful if you plan to run again as both Clinton and Sanders ended up doing after losing their respective primaries.

Biden was an old man in 2016. There's nothing new coming out here. What's more, it was entirely predictable, and I predicted it. The same thing happened with Clinton in 2008, when a lot of Republicans said that they might have voted for her in the general but Obama was too radical, and some of the left made similar comments. Even similar in that Clinton was perceived to be stronger among working-class whites and in the Rust Belt. I also predicted the souring on Bernie that we're seeing from the right (and if he does win the nomination, a lot of True Progressives will start saying that he's a neoliberal sellout and go third party, stay home, or otherwise argue that actually Trump winning is better for the cause).

Sure some people are not appraising him in good faith and are flip flopping when convenient, not going to deny that. But I think its possible to have good faith reasons for a change of heart. I think a lot of people did some rethinking after 2016.

 

[Trotsky]

Somebody just stole my close friends deposit. I have literally stopped my entire nation spanning firearms litigation practice to bring the HAMMER of GOD down on this guy and everything and everyone he ever cared about.

Good lord, Alan. I went to that link in your signature thinking it was to benefit a children's charity, and instead it's selling stuff like this:

No, I will not consider this for my next gift-buying occasion. And I believe novelty dog tags are considered in bad taste.

What I said was entirely true. If the question is "did some DNC employees prefer Sanders?" The answer is yes. How that translates to him being "fucked by the DNC" is the real question, though. Note that the race wasn't even close among voters.

Also, we're not talking about "leaks," we're talking about foreign intelligence stealing communications and releasing them in a misleading way. And the real tension wasn't about Clinton being a "Democrat superstar," it was about Bernie not dropping out of the race after the point when it became clear that it was over.

Your continued implication that the race was some route and that any shenanigans are thus arbitrary is pretty annoying. By the second wave of elections, Sanders was nationally polling within a couple points of Clinton and winning in most open primaries, and Clinton's entire lead disappears if you take out the former confederacy.

 

[Trotsky]

I disagree with all of this.

Good piece from Chait on Biden yesterday:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...?utm_source=tw&utm_medium=s1&utm_campaign=nym

What do you disagree with?

Also, that article by Chait doesn't really contradict anything that I said, but it is phenomenally condescending and purposefully cynical (I'm not sure that's the right word - maybe dismissive? dishonest?) about the impetus for Sanders voters in the 2016 primary, characterizing Sanders voters in the postindustrial Midwest and East as disinterested protest voters that were attracted to Sanders....apparent social centrism rather than a genuine expression of their franchise on matters of economy and furthering the tired centrist argument that the left is somehow an extension of the right (when the left presents consistent principles and positions, and only the center-left forms their political opinions according to how they situate relative to the right).