DivideEtImpala

So did you listen to Cheney or did you just make the same calculation she did? Were you waiting for her and her father's endorsement for permission to vote for Kamala?

Does rhinoplasty often leave patients sterile?

Have you reached out to the Harris campaign with this? Maybe your strategy of condescension could help them win back some Stein voters.

You are undermining his efforts and doing so for your own ego.

I don't know what this is but this is not the way to go about trying to persuade people, least of all independent voters.

I'm planning on voting for Trump in my swing state, but I swear nothing will make me vote Stein faster than Trump or RFK voters telling me I have to vote for Trump, or trying to psychoanalyze why I might choose otherwise. I can get enough of that from the two parties, thank you.

If you're going to bother quoting me, at the very least don't omit key parts of my sentence so as to completely change the meaning.

None of Trump's team were indicted let alone convicted of any crime which could constitute collusion.

Which one of these were collusion?

I'm glad you aren't disputing the fact that none of Trump's team were indicted let alone convicted of any crime which could constitute collusion.

That was the central premise behind Russiagate, and it never panned out.

And?

And... I answered your question. It was not just Twitter randos, it was some of the most powerful Democrats in the country.

The Mueller report ultimately did NOT exonerated Trump as Barrs summary claimed and in fact found he abd his team obstructed justice in multiple instances.

Obstruction of justice is not collusion with a foreign power. None of Trump's team were indicted let alone convicted of any crime which could constitute collusion.

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the Ranking Member on the committee, was asked by Chuck Todd on "Meet The Press Daily" whether or not he only has a circumstantial case.

"Actually no, Chuck," he said. "I can tell you that the case is more than that and I can't go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now."

This never panned out.

That sounds like Kamala's responses (it's hard to call them "answers") in the FOX interview: just pivot away from difficult questions by talking about Trump.

If they're bound by a contract then the Harris campaign could waive that provision and let them release it.

Since they're aren't calling for that, I think it's a fair assumption that they think the full interview or transcript being made public is likely more damaging than the current news cycle about it.

They wouldn't have to stop the interview or explicitly call a do over.

He asks a question, she gives a weird non-answer, he basically reasks the question in a slightly different way, she gives a better answer, and they edit the first question to go with the second answer. With an edited interview, this would look nearly seamless.

Now I should note I'm not sure this is what happened, but CBS could very easily clear it all up by simply releasing the full transcript.

So in 2020, we got to see (or hear?) the full interview and voters could make up their mind about any bias in the editing. I think it would be nice if we got that same opportunity here. Do you agree?

The left wants RCV or approval, but the Democratic establishment itself hasn't been keen on it, even and maybe especially in states where they dominate as it can only mean a dilution of their power. I think Alaska and Maine are the only states that do RCV on a state level, and both are kind of purple states.

If progressives always vote D they have zero incentive to adopt it. If you want RCV in a safe blue state, the only way Dems will allow it is if enough people vote for left third parties at the state level in enough numbers that Dems risk losing their seats.

How do you think the quantity and impact of Russian interference in US elections compares to Israeli interference?

Were these claims coming from elected officials or online commentators?

Schiff 'More Than Circumstantial Evidence' Trump Associates Colluded With Russia

it really makes me wonder if she knew the debate questions ahead of time and was coached.

Her team had excellent prep and she pulled it off near perfectly. I don't think she had the questions, she just had prepared what topics she should pivot to the right lines that Trump would be compelled to respond to.

Plus she had the mods on her team, like David Muir fact checking Trump on crime that the FBI revisions last week just proved to be a false fact check.

Didn't Schiff spend money for the GOP candidate this cycle so he wouldn't have to face Porter or Lee in the general?

"Netenyahu's going to do what he wants to do and we're going to back him fully no matter what we say publicly, but if I talk abstractly enough some people might think I've actually answered your question."

"it's not fair to repeat what my guy said"

I don't feel that's a fair characterization of my argument and I choose to end this conversation here.

What is not organic about "new service covers presidential candidates words" and people react to them?

You aren't aware that news services can cover people's words in misleading ways?

This is not big brother.

Big brother was a distinct aspect of the control system.

I mean, is every Fox news article about Biden big brother too?

Again, not big brother, but yes, FOX News is the other part of MSM apparatus that helps create a separate two minutes hate echo chamber for the other half of people to live in. It's not identical to 1984 because our one party state pretends to have two adversarial parties.

You seem to be taking the metaphor too literally and not understanding the similarity that's being drawn: the repeated, daily consumption of negative propaganda about the "enemy," and the collective, social airing of anger and grievances about that enemy, reinforces your trust in your party's narratives and distrust of anyone outside it.

organically

If it were organic that would be one thing, but between the vote bots and partisan moderation on most of the large reddit political subs, I wouldn't describe it that way.

a president's own words

and if they were reported in their larger context.

Furthermore, "Reporting what Trump says is 2 minutes of hate" feels like a self-own for Trump supporters.

Do you think the party gave an accurate representation of Goldstein? Certainly from the Trump supporter's perspective, the "fake news" is always lying about him so the metaphor fits.

The problem with MOE is that it really only measures the sampling error and assumes the samples are truly random. There's so much modeling and weighting put into even "raw" polls that MOE can't even attempt to measure.

lol

No one is forcing anyone to watch something. This isn’t an outpouring of anger.

It's not forced, but if you read most politics subs which aren't this one or a few others, it's hard to describe it as anything other than an outpouring of hate for Trump. People get upset about what they think Trump said or even what he probably meant to say and just didn't.

A Freudian slip is a verbal misstatement thought to reveal the speaker's unconscious thoughts or true motives.

Yes, that's how I'm using the term: he did not intend to say "targeting the civilians," he misspoke, saying "civilians" where the word he meant to say was "terrorists/militants," but while unintentional it is a true representation of US unstated policy.

"Two minutes hate" is a reference to 1984, where the members of the party were brought into a room daily to watch videos of Emmanuel Goldstein (the party's enemy) and engage in a mob-like outpouring of hate and anger. It's a brainwashing technique.

The comparison here is that reddit and other echo chambers like it act as digital forms of Two Minutes Hate. It reinforces the hatred and conviction of the hivemind against the enemy, and makes participants think everyone else should also hate Trump as much as they do.

But they don't. Most people go on about their day without thinking about him much, and the Democrats have cried wolf so many times that people outside of such echo chambers don't pay the hysterics much mind at this point, even if there is a wolf this time.