American Politics

[kkck]

??
If republicans were trying to get stricter gun control laws passed, then they wouldn't be getting blamed the way they were. Not same at all, wtf

Blaming it on mental illness is a lazy copout

The US has both, a legislation issue when it comes to gun control AND a mental health crisis. It's obviously not a good combination and pointing this out is not a copout.

______________________

I suppose with this it's also worth mentioning hostile foreign governments with troll armies fostering political extremism online for the past several decades (mostly but not exclusively russia).

 

[ninjabot]

"edgy palestinian tweets" is quite the euphemism... using this topic to dunk on MAGA toadies while unironically caping for genociders is insane. But I guess his motive is pissing everyone off so I guess he's excelled at something.

It's a wonderful thing to see the man work.

1: Say edgy thing on twitter to drudge up attention
2: Fight with people tone policing him
3: Lure someone into a debate due to the anger he's cultivated via twitter
4: Obliterate person in said debate, because they're more concerned with righteous indignation for his "edgy tweets" rather than factual rebuttle of his now magically reserved and meticulously chosen language (There's a reason the only people that think he did bad in the Finklestein debate are the people that haven't watched it)
5: Profit

My only regret is that for money's sake he stows Nebraska Steve for the conversations with the big names, so his true powerlevel is only ever felt by nobody twitchpol folks. We needed this guy for Shapiro. I think he just had a convo with Michael Knowles coming up where he softballs him too. The closest we got to real Destiny was his conversation with Gorka.

 

[kkck]

Hmmm, isn't that the sort of person you'd block on twitter and then never think about?

 

[M3J]

"edgy palestinian tweets" is quite the euphemism... using this topic to dunk on MAGA toadies while unironically caping for genociders is insane. But I guess his motive is pissing everyone off so I guess he's excelled at something.

Dude's such a dumbfuck and an embarrassment

The US has both, a legislation issue when it comes to gun control AND a mental health crisis. It's obviously not a good combination and pointing this out is not a copout.

______________________

I suppose with this it's also worth mentioning hostile foreign governments with troll armies fostering political extremism online for the past several decades (mostly but not exclusively russia).

It is, even more so with republican politicians because they continue to oppose mental health measures, and I believe Trump even removed the ban on people with mental health not being able to get guns.

But also if he really did have a mental health issue, why didn't he try to shoot the crowd? Why just one person?

 

[ninjabot]

Hmmm, isn't that the sort of person you'd block on twitter and then never think about?

Me specifically? Nah. That is however, the thing he says people should do if they can't handle it. Just block him: you're not obligated to let him exploit your emotions for his profit.

 

[kkck]

So like, if you can handle it then get willfully exploited?

 

[ninjabot]

So like, if you can handle it then get willfully exploited?

Nope. If you can handle it, push back on his arguments. Contend with the facts he presents. Correct his misinformation if you see any, not his tone. That's what he does for everyone else.

Don't even need to be a rich dude with your own talk show. Email him, hop in discord and hash it out.

Good luck :3

 

[kkck]

Nope. If you can handle it, push back on his arguments. Contend with the facts he presents. Correct his misinformation if you see any, not his tone. That's what he does for everyone else.

Don't even need to be a rich dude with your own talk show. Email him, hop in discord and hash it out.

Good luck :3

That's sounds like how you'd handle a normal internet troll. But that i would argue is a different animal from someone who profits of the engagement one way or the other. What's the point of giving attention to someone who is simply harvesting anger for internet points? It sounds straight up unhealthy. More so than engaging with @M3J even

 

[ninjabot]

That's sounds like how you'd handle a normal internet troll. But that i would argue is a different animal from someone who profits of the engagement one way or the other. What's the point of giving attention to someone who is simply harvesting anger for internet points? It sounds straight up unhealthy. More so than engaging with @M3J even

It's not JUST salt farming. He's an edgy guy who says correct things in a mean way. He's a professional debater. Because he started out as a twitchpol debater people view that as him lacking the chops to hang with the big boys, and in reality they don't have the chops to hang with him. He's also not afraid of talking to anyone, and will debate anyone, Left or Right wing, publicly.

Funny you should mention M3J and my unwillingness to stop engaging with him despite half a year of vitriol: Debate isn't about reaching the person you're debating, it's about reaching the audience who's watching the debate. I keep responding to him, because you're here. And hblock is here. And xi0 is here (sometimes). And sometimes franckie and Raven and anyone else that stops in.

Because more people need to think like me, and less people need to think like M3J.

And yes, there IS a guy I blocked years ago during the Rittenhouse situation, but that's because it's easy to tell when someone's attacking you or attacking your arguments. That dude was a fucking cunt, lol.

 

[M3J]

That's sounds like how you'd handle a normal internet troll. But that i would argue is a different animal from someone who profits of the engagement one way or the other. What's the point of giving attention to someone who is simply harvesting anger for internet points? It sounds straight up unhealthy. More so than engaging with @M3J even

well fuck you too

Because more people need to think like me, and less people need to think like M3J.

Be a coward that would rather lick the asses of evil people and normalize genocide while pretending to be a good person? People like you are why we have people like Trump, and why USA is in a bad shape.

Thankfully I'm willing to stop engaging with stupidity. If you're hellbent on supporting a genocidal president that was told he wouldn't get support from a group of people, and he loses, don't blame anyone but Biden and his supporters.




Anyway, I read that Trump didn't even bother to contact the family of the victim who was killed? I'm not shocked, or learning that the victim was as right wing as they come. Same with the shooter. Wild how "DEI hire" became the new slur for racists.

 

[ninjabot]

Be a coward that would rather lick the asses of evil people and normalize genocide while pretending to be a good person? People like you are why we have people like Trump, and why USA is in a bad shape.

I'm not normalizing genocide and you don't actually care about genocide in general. Only the ones you can benefit politically from. Which is wierd, because you're not benefitting off of the backs of these dead Palestinian kids, because you're not about to blackmail the DNC into electing some Leftist president that's gonna do something about it in your lifetime. You're just helping democrats lose you worthless ally.

Thankfully I'm willing to stop engaging with stupidity. If you're hellbent on supporting a genocidal president that was told he wouldn't get support from a group of people, and he loses, don't blame anyone but Biden and his supporters.

I will blame every American that didn't vote for him and endevour to bully them off the internet.

 

[xi0]

It's a wonderful thing to see the man work.

1: Say edgy thing on twitter to drudge up attention
2: Fight with people tone policing him
3: Lure someone into a debate due to the anger he's cultivated via twitter
4: Obliterate person in said debate, because they're more concerned with righteous indignation for his "edgy tweets" rather than factual rebuttle of his now magically reserved and meticulously chosen language (There's a reason the only people that think he did bad in the Finklestein debate are the people that haven't watched it)
5: Profit

My only regret is that for money's sake he stows Nebraska Steve for the conversations with the big names, so his true powerlevel is only ever felt by nobody twitchpol folks. We needed this guy for Shapiro. I think he just had a convo with Michael Knowles coming up where he softballs him too. The closest we got to real Destiny was his conversation with Gorka.

Damn, you're even doing tricks on it

I did watch some of the Finkelstein "debate" and he came off like a know-nothing shitheel. There's a lot you can say about Finkelstein but you can't say he isn't learned. Same with Rabbani and Morris. He had no business being there.

Keep in mind I wasn't praising him there. Especially after his stance on Gaza, he has no business being seen as an advocate for left-wing causes. I mean, he had no business being held up in that manner in the first place if people knew some of his other deranged moments. But having the gall to use Palestinians to shit on inbred MAGAs is kind of a new low given where he's stood on the issue. Not that he or his followers would give a fuck, I guess.

 

[ninjabot]

Damn, you're even doing tricks on it

I'd argue I'm just being factual.

I did watch some of the Finkelstein "debate" and he came off like a know-nothing shitheel. There's a lot you can say about Finkelstein but you can't say he isn't learned. Same with Rabbani and Morris. He had no business being there.

I'll be honest: this doesn't read as someone who paid attention to his claims, but rather someone who paid attention to the adhoms and insults from Finklestein rather than the arguments Steven made. And you know how I know that's all there was for Steven to contend with?

Because Finklestein admits it himself, while gloating at how unprofessional he was... because that was his plan to begin with.

Is there anything, anything at all he said that you would identify as factually incorrect? You're my last hope for someone in this forum that's left leaning who's entire argument doesn't begin and end at "genocide". Please, please don't disappoint me.

Keep in mind I wasn't praising him there. Especially after his stance on Gaza, he has no business being seen as an advocate for left-wing causes. I mean, he had no business being held up in that manner in the first place if people knew some of his other deranged moments. But having the gall to use Palestinians to shit on inbred MAGAs is kind of a new low given where he's stood on the issue.

And where has he stood on the issue if you don't mind me asking? What is Steven's official statement about Palestine/Palestinians/the Israel Palestine conflict? As for the bolded, he is bar none the best rhetorician on the Left, and I hold you to a high enough standard that I expect you not to let mean words prevent you from recognizing that.

I'm willing to correct that standard though.

EDIT: OH, likewise, the tweet you quoted from him refers to conservatives that were Zionists and happy with his debates about Israel and Palestine. He's not saying that "MAGA Republicans are as bad as Palestinians", because he isn't saying that Palestinians are bad. He's saying that he has no sympathy for MAGA Republicans that die supporting Trump in the same way he has no sympathy for Palestinians that die supporting Hamas, and calling out the hypocrisy of the pearl clutching Republicans that were okay with the Palestinian stance, but not the MAGA stance.

Admittedly, I can't expect you to know that without having kept up with his content. I will say though, you're at rung 2 of the ladder lol. Better hope that testicular fortitude escapes you or you'll slip right down to rung 5.

 

[kkck]

It's not JUST salt farming. He's an edgy guy who says correct things in a mean way. He's a professional debater. Because he started out as a twitchpol debater people view that as him lacking the chops to hang with the big boys, and in reality they don't have the chops to hang with him. He's also not afraid of talking to anyone, and will debate anyone, Left or Right wing, publicly.

Funny you should mention M3J and my unwillingness to stop engaging with him despite half a year of vitriol: Debate isn't about reaching the person you're debating, it's about reaching the audience who's watching the debate. I keep responding to him, because you're here. And hblock is here. And xi0 is here (sometimes). And sometimes franckie and Raven and anyone else that stops in.

Because more people need to think like me, and less people need to think like M3J.

And yes, there IS a guy I blocked years ago during the Rittenhouse situation, but that's because it's easy to tell when someone's attacking you or attacking your arguments. That dude was a fucking cunt, lol.

You are making that sound borderline heroic but to me it's all inherently clickbaity. TBH to me it's weird to talk about the people talking about an issue rather than talk about the issue. Politics by proxie?

I was mostly joking about m3j. And you respond to me because he is here? I mean, on recent topics we've covered here we've been on more or less the same page (obviously there's stuff where we aren't).

 

[ninjabot]

You are making that sound borderline heroic but to me it's all inherently clickbaity.

*nods*

TBH to me it's weird to talk about the people talking about an issue rather than talk about the issue. Politics by proxie?

I agree! It's why we shouldn't be attacking Destiny, but rather the arguments he's making. That is my exact argument. All this Destiny stuff is tertiary.

I was mostly joking about m3j.

I know you were. And I wasn't being overly malicious with my response, but I do believe everything I said. I don't want more Americans that are fine with losing to Trump if it means they can virtue signal about something that's got nothing to do with our election. More M3J's means less votes for democrats.

And you respond to me because he is here?

Yeah, but we haven't debated in a long ti-

I mean, on recent topics we've covered here we've been on more or less the same page (obviously there's stuff where we aren't).

Right, yeah. I haven't forgotten our trans conversation that we never finished. I know I'm further left than you on certain things. I got smoke for you too when the death of democracy stops being the main topic at hand lmao... but there're bigger fish to fry right now.

 

[M3J]

I was mostly joking about m3j. And you respond to me because he is here? I mean, on recent topics we've covered here we've been on more or less the same page (obviously there's stuff where we aren't).

how much do we agree on? I'll be surprised if it's more than five things, but I see you more as a centrist/moderate.

I know you were. And I wasn't being overly malicious with my response, but I do believe everything I said. I don't want more Americans that are fine with losing to Trump if it means they can virtue signal about something that's got nothing to do with our election. More M3J's means less votes for democrats.

Or, Dems choosing a different candidate who doesn't have a history of saying and doing horrible stuff and passing evil policies would mean more votes for Democrats. That's what democracy is, people voting for whom they want, IF they choose to vote.

I never shared what I actually thought about this whole thing until few months ago until I saw how easily Biden lied about the genocide.

 

[xi0]

I'd argue I'm just being factual.

It's possible to be factual while fanboying

Because Finklestein admits it himself, while gloating at how unprofessional he was... because that was his plan to begin with.

Is there anything, anything at all he said that you would identify as factually incorrect? You're my last hope for someone in this forum that's left leaning who's entire argument doesn't begin and end at "genocide". Please, please don't disappoint me.

Okay? I used "debate" in quotes in the first place, didn't I? I saw it mostly as a farce in the first place. Why would anyone expect Lex Fridman to hold a proper debate? It doesn't change the resumes of the people involved.

Doesn't begin and end at "genocide"... I'm not sure what this is addressing really. I don't agree with most of his viewpoints but my stance was on the "debate" I watched, not on the entire topic itself.

Is there anything, anything at all he said that you would identify as factually incorrect? You're my last hope for someone in this forum that's left leaning who's entire argument doesn't begin and end at "genocide". Please, please don't disappoint me.

It's been months since it happened, and I didn't really want to retread the topic in the first place, so I'll just cop out. But the suggestion that anyone who thinks Destiny did poorly in that "debate" didn't watch it is absurd from my viewpoint. You can wax poetic about his skills in debating, I take exception with him being there. You think it doesn't matter that he was included in a debate with 3 scholars on the subject after only paying attention to the topic for 3 months, I do think it matters. We're at an impasse.

And where has he stood on the issue if you don't mind me asking? What is Steven's official statement about Palestine/Palestinians/the Israel Palestine conflict? As for the bolded, he is bar none the best rhetorician on the Left, and I hold you to a high enough standard that I expect you not to let mean words prevent you from recognizing that.

I'm willing to correct that standard though.

I think saying "mean words" is kind of nebulous. Is calling for people to kill BLM protestors just "mean words"? Is being such a "rhetorician" that you publicly argue in favor of saying racial slurs "mean words"? I mean, this isn't about getting upset at words that are used, I'm not a wokescold. I'm talking about what he's arguing for there. It doesn't necessarily negate any of his good takes, but acting like he's the best the Left has while saying demonstrably awful things is too much for me.

EDIT: OH, likewise, the tweet you quoted from him refers to conservatives that were Zionists and happy with his debates about Israel and Palestine. He's not saying that "MAGA Republicans are as bad as Palestinians", because he isn't saying that Palestinians are bad. He's saying that he has no sympathy for MAGA Republicans that die supporting Trump in the same way he has no sympathy for Palestinians that die supporting Hamas, and calling out the hypocrisy of the pearl clutching Republicans that were okay with the Palestinian stance, but not the MAGA stance.

I understood the point of his tweet. I'm not clutching pearls at what he said about those people either. What I take exception with is invoking the death and maiming of people that he tacitly supported when he decided his next angle would be engaging in zionist apologia, in order to shit on conservatives. He's really the last person who should be making this kind of point.

Admittedly, I can't expect you to know that without having kept up with his content. I will say though, you're at rung 2 of the ladder lol. Better hope that testicular fortitude escapes you or you'll slip right down to rung 5.

Rungs of what latter? What are you even talking about?

 

[ninjabot]

Or, Dems choosing a different candidate who doesn't have a history of saying and doing horrible stuff and passing evil policies would mean more votes for Democrats. That's what democracy is, people voting for whom they want, IF they choose to vote.

Do you really, really believe that's at the top of the minds of the average Democrat in America?

I never shared what I actually thought about this whole thing until few months ago until I saw how easily Biden lied about the genocide.

I'm not bothered by your empathy for Palestine. Empathy/sympathy is a respectable thing to value in a person. And I do admire that about you.

But there's a such thing as too much empathy. Remember what Tobirama said about intense love turning into intense hate? That's what I get from you when you talk about Israel. I don't want that shit effecting your electoral choices, because your electoral choices effect your fellow countrymen. And condemning us to 4 more years of Trump for things that don't even effect Americans is not respectable.

IMHO.

 

[xi0]

Also, just to be clear on where I am personally, I don't care about someone rustling conservative jimmies or being insulting to awful people with awful views. Those people don't deserve any deference, regardless of their circumstances.

 

[ninjabot]

It's possible to be factual while fanboying

Fair.

I think saying "mean words" is kind of nebulous. Is calling for people to kill BLM protestors just "mean words"? Is being such a "rhetorician" that you publicly argue in favor of saying racial slurs "mean words"? I mean, this isn't about getting upset at words that are used, I'm not a wokescold. I'm talking about what he's arguing for there. It doesn't necessarily negate any of his good takes, but acting like he's the best the Left has while saying demonstrably awful things is too much for me.

Did he call for the killing of BLM protestors, or the rioters? Hell, if I wanted to be super cheritable, he never called for the killing of anyone, but gave his blessing to the people doing the shooting (Rittenhous). Was he arguing in favor of saying racial slurs in public to other people, or in private where they don't harm anyone?

It's not about being a wokescold, it's about incorrect retelling of the facts of those arguments. Or rather, misremembering of those arguments. I won't accuse of you finessing his arguments to make them sound worse than they are, but I think accuracy is important.

I understood the point of his tweet. I'm not clutching pearls at what he said about those people either. What I take exception with is invoking the death and maiming of people that he tacitly supported when he decided his next angle would be engaging in zionist apologia, in order to shit on conservatives. He's really the last person who should be making this kind of point.

I disagree.

Rungs of what latter? What are you even talking about?

The numbered list I wrote out.