“I, the old white presumptive opposition candidate for president, was able to be tricked into saying the only way black people can be black is by voting for me” doesn’t really frame things any better for me?
2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Moderators: Shirley, Sabo, brian, rass, DaveInSeattle
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
- The Sybian
- The Dude
- Posts: 19086
- Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
- Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Actually, I take that as Klobuchar knowing to shut up and not make it about her at a time when black people are fighting for their voice to be hear.
[OTOH, maybe she is just trying to distance herself and her past involvement from the story to keep her image clean]. Either way, I'm happy any time I don't hear from Klobuchar. Maybe it's irrational, but I just don't like her.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
-Pruitt
- Nonlinear FC
- The Dude
- Posts: 11026
- Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:09 pm
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I have the same reaction to her, Syb.
The stuff about how she treated her staff hits very close to home and is unforgivable to me.
The stuff about how she treated her staff hits very close to home and is unforgivable to me.
You can lead a horse to fish, but you can't fish out a horse.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
She's the exact type of white person that disgusts me. Her persona. The way she talks. Her haircut. The stories about her. Her complete lack of empathy. I wouldn't want her running a fast food restaurant.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
- The Sybian
- The Dude
- Posts: 19086
- Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
- Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
You can say it, she is the prototypical "Karen"
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
-Pruitt
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Eh. Didn't a couple of folks here vote for Rocky Anderson the last time around?Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:04 amThe stuff about how she treated her staff hits very close to home and is unforgivable to me.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Days ahead of you: viewtopic.php?p=275364#p275364
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
- Nonlinear FC
- The Dude
- Posts: 11026
- Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:09 pm
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I had to google that guy.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:25 amEh. Didn't a couple of folks here vote for Rocky Anderson the last time around?Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:04 amThe stuff about how she treated her staff hits very close to home and is unforgivable to me.
I'm just being honest about Klobuchar. I don't care about gender, if it comes out that you're a psycho with your staff, I'm only voting for you if I have zero choice in the matter.
You can lead a horse to fish, but you can't fish out a horse.
- The Sybian
- The Dude
- Posts: 19086
- Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
- Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I did as a protest vote in 2012 when I knew Obama had NJ wrapped up. Was he known for treating staff poorly? He wasn't vetted since he was an insignificant 3rd party candidate. I liked his platform and I liked him in the very few interviews I heard, but I really didn't know that much about him.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:25 amEh. Didn't a couple of folks here vote for Rocky Anderson the last time around?Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:04 amThe stuff about how she treated her staff hits very close to home and is unforgivable to me.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
-Pruitt
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Oh my, yes. My secretary and I still joke about it.
I was lucky because Rocky had a six-month honeymoon period with every new associate the firm hired. And he left the firm to run for mayor after I had been here only four months. So I managed to stay on good terms with him. But from what I gathered, he was just as bad if not worse than Klobuchar.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
- The Sybian
- The Dude
- Posts: 19086
- Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
- Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Just don't tell me he speaks with a nasal, whiny Minnesota accent.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:32 pmOh my, yes. My secretary and I still joke about it.
I was lucky because Rocky had a six-month honeymoon period with every new associate the firm hired. And he left the firm to run for mayor after I had been here only four months. So I managed to stay on good terms with him. But from what I gathered, he was just as bad if not worse than Klobuchar.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
-Pruitt
- govmentchedda
- The Dude
- Posts: 12844
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:36 pm
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Until everything is less insane, I'm mixing weed with wine.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I've deployed with weapons to a war zone.
If I shot at a suspected terrorist playing by this "shoot to wound" mentality, I'm going to fucking Leavenworth.
In fact, my ROE based of the Law of Armed Conflict and the Geneva Conventions means that my threshold for even taking a shot must be very, very high. Much higher than cops against Americans.
In my predeployment training we did a simulation of being in a crowded town square. Lots of noise. People with guns that weren't aimed at us. Threats everywhere. But we couldn't do anything until a goddamn bomb went off and we ran for cover. And we still had to fight our way out of it obeying the rules.
Just shut the fuck up, Joe.
If I shot at a suspected terrorist playing by this "shoot to wound" mentality, I'm going to fucking Leavenworth.
In fact, my ROE based of the Law of Armed Conflict and the Geneva Conventions means that my threshold for even taking a shot must be very, very high. Much higher than cops against Americans.
In my predeployment training we did a simulation of being in a crowded town square. Lots of noise. People with guns that weren't aimed at us. Threats everywhere. But we couldn't do anything until a goddamn bomb went off and we ran for cover. And we still had to fight our way out of it obeying the rules.
Just shut the fuck up, Joe.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
God that was a weird photo op. Just standing there showing a bible?
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
The message was for the Nazis and white supremacists in both the speech and the photo op.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I’m still voting for Jill Stein or writing in “Not Joe Biden” though.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I guess this is the source of the misunderstanding of Biden’s statement. I wouldn’t rely on “Proud Socialist’s” report of what Joe Biden is saying without reading it for myself.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Dude. Please don't do this. It's bad enough that the right-wingers have created their own reality. If the Bernie supporters do it also, we're all fucked.
There is no actual reality in which Biden was encouraging cops to shoot people who are actually unarmed or saying that was okay as long as they aimed for the legs. Yes, as often happens with people speaking out loud and thinking as they go, you can put some words together, ignore other ones, and make a quote seems like something than what the speaker said and intended. Heck, it's quite amusing when you do that with people's posts here. ("I ... like ... D".)
But just as Obama has never thought that the US had 57 states, Biden was not approving of police shooting unarmed people in the legs.
(I'm curious, because I don't know exactly what work you do - do you have much experience reading transcripts? have you had the special joy of reading a transcript of your own words?)
There is no actual reality in which Biden was encouraging cops to shoot people who are actually unarmed or saying that was okay as long as they aimed for the legs. Yes, as often happens with people speaking out loud and thinking as they go, you can put some words together, ignore other ones, and make a quote seems like something than what the speaker said and intended. Heck, it's quite amusing when you do that with people's posts here. ("I ... like ... D".)
But just as Obama has never thought that the US had 57 states, Biden was not approving of police shooting unarmed people in the legs.
(I'm curious, because I don't know exactly what work you do - do you have much experience reading transcripts? have you had the special joy of reading a transcript of your own words?)
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
And yes if Trump says "if they're unarmed, charging you with a knife or something, shoot them right in the heart", that is worse! But direct quotes aren't open to only Steve's interpretation and that quote was controversial among a demographic directly affected.
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Thanks for linking that clip. I think it adds important context.
And if you think there are multiple possible interpretations, maybe you can provide yours.
It seems to me – and please tell me if you think I have it wrong – that before Biden mentioned shooting in the leg, …
Biden talked about setting up a police oversight board.
He referred to his time in the Obama Administration, when they set up the ability of the DOJ Civil Rights Division to review police practices and procedures.
He talked about how that was “how we were able to stop ‘stop and frisk.’”
He talked about setting that up again “with more teeth in it.”
He said that “we also have to fundamentally change the way in which police are trained.”
He points out that a lot of other people have been shot by police, not just African Americans. He names Hispanics and whites.
After the sentence about shooting in the leg, he says “there’s a lot of different things that can change.”
He says “the culture has to be dealt with.”
In the sentence itself, he mentions a situation where a person is “coming at [a cop] with a knife or something.”
He suggests cops could be trained to shoot the person coming at the cop with a knife or something “him in the leg instead of in the heart.”
What’s your interpretation of his statement?
How do you interpret Biden’s references to police oversight, giving the Civil Rights Division more teeth, stopping stop-and-frisk, changing the way police are trained, and changing the police culture? Do you interpret that as Biden saying the police should be more deadly? Just as deadly as they have been? Or less deadly?
How do you interpret the phrases “coming at him with a knife or something” and “instead of in the heart”? Again, do you interpret that to mean that cops should be more deadly or less?
And of course the word “unarmed.” In isolation, the word unarmed generally means “with no weapons whatsoever.” But words are never said in isolation. Given the whole statement, do you think it’s at least possible to interpret “unarmed” to mean “without a gun”?
Finally, do you think it’s at least *possible* to interpret (as I do) “coming at him with a knife or something” and “shoot him in the leg instead of in the heart” as Biden referring to a specific type of situation where police are authorized to use lethal force, and suggesting that cops use non-lethal force instead? And if that interpretation is possible, why do you portray it as “Biden approves of cops shooting empty-handed folks as long as they do aim for the leg”?
And if you think there are multiple possible interpretations, maybe you can provide yours.
It seems to me – and please tell me if you think I have it wrong – that before Biden mentioned shooting in the leg, …
Biden talked about setting up a police oversight board.
He referred to his time in the Obama Administration, when they set up the ability of the DOJ Civil Rights Division to review police practices and procedures.
He talked about how that was “how we were able to stop ‘stop and frisk.’”
He talked about setting that up again “with more teeth in it.”
He said that “we also have to fundamentally change the way in which police are trained.”
He points out that a lot of other people have been shot by police, not just African Americans. He names Hispanics and whites.
After the sentence about shooting in the leg, he says “there’s a lot of different things that can change.”
He says “the culture has to be dealt with.”
In the sentence itself, he mentions a situation where a person is “coming at [a cop] with a knife or something.”
He suggests cops could be trained to shoot the person coming at the cop with a knife or something “him in the leg instead of in the heart.”
What’s your interpretation of his statement?
How do you interpret Biden’s references to police oversight, giving the Civil Rights Division more teeth, stopping stop-and-frisk, changing the way police are trained, and changing the police culture? Do you interpret that as Biden saying the police should be more deadly? Just as deadly as they have been? Or less deadly?
How do you interpret the phrases “coming at him with a knife or something” and “instead of in the heart”? Again, do you interpret that to mean that cops should be more deadly or less?
And of course the word “unarmed.” In isolation, the word unarmed generally means “with no weapons whatsoever.” But words are never said in isolation. Given the whole statement, do you think it’s at least possible to interpret “unarmed” to mean “without a gun”?
Finally, do you think it’s at least *possible* to interpret (as I do) “coming at him with a knife or something” and “shoot him in the leg instead of in the heart” as Biden referring to a specific type of situation where police are authorized to use lethal force, and suggesting that cops use non-lethal force instead? And if that interpretation is possible, why do you portray it as “Biden approves of cops shooting empty-handed folks as long as they do aim for the leg”?
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I think this gets at a big part of it. "Cops should kill less people" isn't "cops shouldn't kill people". Even if the latter is, like seemingly everything we discuss between us, deemed utopian because cops (in America) simply must have some leeway to kill, there's tremendous backlash to the perceived centrist framing of "what if they just kill less".Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:06 pmHow do you interpret Biden’s references to police oversight, giving the Civil Rights Division more teeth, stopping stop-and-frisk, changing the way police are trained, and changing the police culture? Do you interpret that as Biden saying the police should be more deadly? Just as deadly as they have been? Or less deadly?
How do you interpret the phrases “coming at him with a knife or something” and “instead of in the heart”? Again, do you interpret that to mean that cops should be more deadly or less?
I think it can be interpreted either way. I'm not the one flipping out over a different (and self-admittedly more common based on phrasing) interpretation of an ambiguously worded comment.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:06 pmAnd of course the word “unarmed.” In isolation, the word unarmed generally means “with no weapons whatsoever.” But words are never said in isolation. Given the whole statement, do you think it’s at least possible to interpret “unarmed” to mean “without a gun”?
Sure.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:06 pmFinally, do you think it’s at least *possible* to interpret (as I do) “coming at him with a knife or something” and “shoot him in the leg instead of in the heart” as Biden referring to a specific type of situation where police are authorized to use lethal force, and suggesting that cops use non-lethal force instead?
Because this wasn't an example of blood-lusting Biden, it was an example of terrible candidate for this moment in history Biden, and when people are interpreting it the cynical way I refuse to turn opposition to them in order to be a part of the clean up crew after yet another unforced error.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:06 pmAnd if that interpretation is possible, why do you portray it as “Biden approves of cops shooting empty-handed folks as long as they do aim for the leg”?
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I’m curious. In more liberal countries, are police not allowed to shoot if they’re charged by someone with a knife?
I mean, I can certainly understand saying that police should not be allowed to shoot in that instance. I just wonder if that is really the policy anywhere.
But while I can understand pushing for that policy, I don’t know how “coming at him with a knife” can be interpreted to mean “coming at him with nothing in his hands.” And really, Biden’s statement is only an “error” if you read it that way.
I mean, I can certainly understand saying that police should not be allowed to shoot in that instance. I just wonder if that is really the policy anywhere.
But while I can understand pushing for that policy, I don’t know how “coming at him with a knife” can be interpreted to mean “coming at him with nothing in his hands.” And really, Biden’s statement is only an “error” if you read it that way.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
- A_B
- The Dude
- Posts: 23564
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:36 am
- Location: Getting them boards like a wolf in the chicken pen.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I think cops are taught to shoot for the torso because that's where the body mass is and therefore less likely to miss. You try to fire at the leg of a knife wielding suspect and miss then the suspect may be on you. I think non-lethal force is usually best handled by tasers, so I don't really have much of an issue with a cop needing to take someone out who is clearly* holding a deadly weapon.
* - this of course is open to much debate as well
* - this of course is open to much debate as well
Hold on, I'm trying to see if Jack London ever gets this fire built or not.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
I think in the ideal "very bad guy with a knife charge a cop in front of numerous unbiased witnesses", a majority would say the cop defending himself with a gun is ok. The problem is all of the outside factors; mental health, racism, variable determination of threat, cops straight up fucking lying, etc, etc ... where even what Biden says acknowledges some level of violence is necessity. I don't think even I'm that far left, I think present-day there's justifiable police violence, but given that there are people left of me and people who might be where I'm at who interpreted the quote the same way, I don't view it as just digging for something to complain about. Even though he's better than Trump.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/us/p ... polls.html
Long way still but kind of makes you wonder what if Warren or Sanders would have won and a landslide delivered majorities in the house and Senate. Not as bad as the republican majorities with which they accomplished nothing but a bit scary nonetheless.
Long way still but kind of makes you wonder what if Warren or Sanders would have won and a landslide delivered majorities in the house and Senate. Not as bad as the republican majorities with which they accomplished nothing but a bit scary nonetheless.
- govmentchedda
- The Dude
- Posts: 12844
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:36 pm
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Strong disagreeHaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:25 am https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/us/p ... polls.html
Long way still but kind of makes you wonder what if Warren or Sanders would have won and a landslide delivered majorities in the house and Senate. Not as bad as the republican majorities with which they accomplished nothing but a bit scary nonetheless.
Until everything is less insane, I'm mixing weed with wine.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Important checks on any party. Particularly if a candidate is on the fringe of that party which Warren and Sanders definitely are. Really need battleship turn style policy changes.
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Incredible. Following a nationwide orgy of police brutality, Sanders wants to pay cops even more!
No, of course that’s not a fair representation of Sanders’ recommendations. But he does in fact suggest raising cop pay. So if you ignore everything else he says and focus on that, you can completely misrepresent what he was doing.
No, of course that’s not a fair representation of Sanders’ recommendations. But he does in fact suggest raising cop pay. So if you ignore everything else he says and focus on that, you can completely misrepresent what he was doing.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Actually, when he writes that he wants to raise police pay, which I acknowledge a reasonable person would agree he does write, he does not really mean he would raise police pay and over the next 48 hours I intend to twist myself into knots spelling this out for everyone here ...
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Twisting myself in knots by quoting what Biden actually said?mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 9:01 am Actually, when he writes that he wants to raise police pay, which I acknowledge a reasonable person would agree he does write, he does not really mean he would raise police pay and over the next 48 hours I intend to twist myself into knots spelling this out for everyone here ...
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Yeah, there was only one person removing emphasis on a very important word Biden used. But whatevs. I can't imagine anyone who isn't being a troll who actually cares about what Biden said in relation to what has gone on in this country over the last 10 days.
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
What has gone on is a response to police violence. People far less white than the three of us have taken issue with what Biden said.
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Well of course. They were told that "Biden said it's okay for cops to shoot unarmed people in the legs."
That's the thing - when I read your post on this a few days ago, the first time around, I actually believed you. I believed that Biden had actually said it was okay for cops to shoot unarmed people as long as they aimed for the legs. I thought to myself, JFC, Biden needs to shut up. I fucking believed it. The thought that I needed to look for myself didn't even cross my mind.
Then when you brought it up again, in the other thread, I thought there had to be some missing context or something. So I looked for and found the actual quote. And found out that I had been deceived.
So, sure, people who read tweets like Ryan Knights are going to be upset with what they've been told Biden "said". Because how many of them are going to look up the actual quote, or watch the entire two minutes of video?
That's the thing - when I read your post on this a few days ago, the first time around, I actually believed you. I believed that Biden had actually said it was okay for cops to shoot unarmed people as long as they aimed for the legs. I thought to myself, JFC, Biden needs to shut up. I fucking believed it. The thought that I needed to look for myself didn't even cross my mind.
Then when you brought it up again, in the other thread, I thought there had to be some missing context or something. So I looked for and found the actual quote. And found out that I had been deceived.
So, sure, people who read tweets like Ryan Knights are going to be upset with what they've been told Biden "said". Because how many of them are going to look up the actual quote, or watch the entire two minutes of video?
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
That's condescending as fuck.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:48 am Well of course. They were told that "Biden said it's okay for cops to shoot unarmed people in the legs."
The two minutes of video is Biden talking about reducing the number of police killings and suggesting one way to achieve that. You see that as aspirational, others don't.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:48 amThat's the thing - when I read your post on this a few days ago, the first time around, I actually believed you. I believed that Biden had actually said it was okay for cops to shoot unarmed people as long as they aimed for the legs. I thought to myself, JFC, Biden needs to shut up. I fucking believed it. The thought that I needed to look for myself didn't even cross my mind.
Then when you brought it up again, in the other thread, I thought there had to be some missing context or something. So I looked for and found the actual quote. And found out that I had been deceived.
So, sure, people who read tweets like Ryan Knights are going to be upset with what they've been told Biden "said". Because how many of them are going to look up the actual quote, or watch the entire two minutes of video?
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Whatever. I just know that from now on, I have to check the receipts, and I really don't like that feeling.mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:00 amThat's condescending as fuck.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:48 am Well of course. They were told that "Biden said it's okay for cops to shoot unarmed people in the legs."
The two minutes of video is Biden talking about reducing the number of police killings and suggesting one way to achieve that. You see that as aspirational, others don't.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:48 amThat's the thing - when I read your post on this a few days ago, the first time around, I actually believed you. I believed that Biden had actually said it was okay for cops to shoot unarmed people as long as they aimed for the legs. I thought to myself, JFC, Biden needs to shut up. I fucking believed it. The thought that I needed to look for myself didn't even cross my mind.
Then when you brought it up again, in the other thread, I thought there had to be some missing context or something. So I looked for and found the actual quote. And found out that I had been deceived.
So, sure, people who read tweets like Ryan Knights are going to be upset with what they've been told Biden "said". Because how many of them are going to look up the actual quote, or watch the entire two minutes of video?
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.