0 users browsing Discussion. | 1 guest | 12 bots
| hunterk |
Posted on 19-11-20, 01:07
|
|
Post: #51 of 60
Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 1644 days Last view: 1565 days |
Posted by sureanemyao_ming.png |
| BearOso |
Posted on 19-11-20, 01:38
|
 Post: #131 of 175 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 1452 days Last view: 1452 days |
Posted by sureanem A google search defines support as: "give assistance to, especially financially; enable to function or act." The word choice doesn't matter, though. "Giving support to" him enables him.
No, an ethical person would look at him and realize that, even though he shares the same political alignment, his views are crazy, and it doesn't boil down to casual politics. If you look at it mathematically: your ballot is just a number n you select between -1.0 and 1.0. The electoral outcome is the average of all ballots. Assuming you know the projected outcome, why would you ever cast a ballot where -1.0 < n < 1.0? Either your desired outcome is below the projected outcome, and then you vote 1.0, or it's above, and then you vote -1.0. That assumption of yours won't pass muster. There are an electoral college, districts, and gerrymandering to deal with. It's winner-take-all. The resulting president isn't going to change alignment based on the voting average. |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-11-20, 21:06
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #685 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1765 days Last view: 1763 days |
Posted by BearOso Look man, I'm an ESL speaker. Do you understand what I'm saying or not? I think it seems pretty clear anyway: "To back a cause, party, etc., mentally or with concrete aid." (emphasis added) No, an ethical person would look at him and realize that, even though he shares the same political alignment, his views are crazy, and it doesn't boil down to casual politics. Doesn't matter, if he's a better choice than communists. Anything else, wasting your vote. That assumption of yours won't pass muster. There are an electoral college, districts, and gerrymandering to deal with. It's winner-take-all. The resulting president isn't going to change alignment based on the voting average. Only for populations - the net effect of my vote's pretty gradual, taking into account courts, news, overton, etc. Furthermore, FPTP is only in USA and UK. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| BearOso |
Posted on 19-11-20, 22:09
|
|
Post: #134 of 175 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 1452 days Last view: 1452 days |
Posted by sureanem Your English is perfect, probably better than mine. I meant that supporting someone in any way is going to help push their agenda unless it's completely passive.
I was talking about Hitler. Many voting for him knew he was all for extinguishing certain races. Even among those afraid of the communists, those who knew of Hitler's insanity and didn't agree did not vote for him. Trump's racism may be more subtle, but I think the present situation now parallels it. They didn't vote for classical conservatism. His supporters voted for him because they shared his beliefs, or they believed his lies.
It's the US and UK we've been talking about. Regardless, you've stated that you're just a conservative, not a supremacist, so I won't question you any further. |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-11-20, 22:52
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #687 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1765 days Last view: 1763 days |
I meant that supporting someone in any way is going to help push their agenda unless it's completely passive. For sure, that's true. But supporting someone doesn't mean you support them, just that you are supporting them. That was the distinction I was trying to make: you can support the KKK without necessarily being a racist. I was talking about Hitler. So was I. People wanted to push the national conversation to the right, he was the right man for the job. Not even any need to dislike the communists. My thesis here is simple: Voting for a non-extremist candidate is a waste of your vote since you could get more bang for your buck, so you just have to find the closest extremist candidate. By geometry, there are only two of them. Ergo, Hitler. Regardless, you've stated that you're just a conservative, not a supremacist, so I won't question you any further. I have never once stated that. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| creaothceann |
Posted on 19-11-21, 00:58
|
 Post: #214 of 456 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 45 days Last view: 2 days |
Posted by sureanem  My current setup: Super Famicom ("2/1/3" SNS-CPU-1CHIP-02) → SCART → OSSC → StarTech USB3HDCAP → AmaRecTV 3.10 |
| StapleButter |
Posted on 19-12-18, 23:37 (revision 2)
|
|
Post: #5 of 5
Since: 12-26-18 Last post: 1801 days Last view: 1781 days |
Posted by mnk hello transphobe, please get fucked with something hard and spikey. also: you are completely wrong about all of this, but I know you are just going to ego-trip and keep going around with your dick in your mouth, like all transphobes on the internet. not too surprised seeing this board. regardless, I reported that to the staff. |
| Kawaoneechan |
Posted on 19-12-19, 00:26 (revision 1)
|
|
Secretly, I'm the Metaknight
 Post: #452 of 599 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 197 days Last view: 8 hours |
Yeah, as an LGBTQ ally and admin of this board Now, you might wonder why it took this long for me to notice. That'd be because I have the political threads on ignore. So thank you StapleButter for your report. Edit: considering how long it was since mnk was last here, let's just skip the warning. |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-12-20, 01:33
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #696 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1765 days Last view: 1763 days |
It seems like we finally have some hard, quantitative data on impeachments. https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/4353/What-will-be-the-balance-of-power-in-Congress-after-the-2020-election It seems like it hurts the Democrats, but not that much. Their chance of winning has dropped by about 5%, which is not a great deal, although it isn't nothing either. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| creaothceann |
Posted on 22-02-24, 06:38
|
|
Post: #385 of 456 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 45 days Last view: 2 days |
*bump* https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/t0082j/rworldnews_live_thread_russian_invasion_of/ My current setup: Super Famicom ("2/1/3" SNS-CPU-1CHIP-02) → SCART → OSSC → StarTech USB3HDCAP → AmaRecTV 3.10 |
| CaptainJistuce |
Posted on 22-02-24, 08:27
|
|
Custom title here
 Post: #1058 of 1164 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 65 days Last view: 2 days |
We asked Putin nicely to stop and he ignored us, so now we will ask him SLIGHTLY LESS NICELY, because that worked really well with Hitler. Seriously, if they're gonna directly compare it to WW2, maybe remember what it took to end this last time. When sanctions don't work, you need to be willing to follow up with something more direct. And if you aren't willing, then your pretty words are meaningless and you shouldn't bother with the sanctions. --- In UTF-16, where available. --- |
| creaothceann |
Posted on 22-02-24, 13:02
|
|
Post: #386 of 456 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 45 days Last view: 2 days |
Posted by CaptainJistuce Sure, if there weren't nukes. Sanctions are better than nothing, which could be seen as silent approval. https://liveuamap.com My current setup: Super Famicom ("2/1/3" SNS-CPU-1CHIP-02) → SCART → OSSC → StarTech USB3HDCAP → AmaRecTV 3.10 |
| CaptainJistuce |
Posted on 22-02-24, 22:52
|
|
Custom title here
Post: #1059 of 1164 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 65 days Last view: 2 days |
SPEAKING OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS... Ukraine had them. They had the third-largest stockpile in the world after the collapse of the USSR. They gave them up in exchange for written promises of protection from the US, UK, and Russia. (Specifically, they delivered them to Russia.) Twenty years later, one signatory of the agreement is an active aggressor (again) and the other two are wringing their hands wailing about how terrible this is and how impotent they are. Good look, everyone. This will DEFINITELY ensure other countries trust us to uphold our bargains and that they aren't just pieces of paper to be acknowledged when it is convenient. --- In UTF-16, where available. --- |
