Official Election 2020 Doomsday Thread
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Status
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2019
Friendly reminder that total deaths in 2020 are lower than total deaths in 2019.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2018
Man, if you asked me what I thought about Trump on the Monday before the election, back when I thought there was no way he'd lose, I would have basically said "meh," but now that it looks like the old man and the cop are going to win with an asterisk and just the absolute worst people are in full gloat mode, I'm about ready to put on a MAGA cap and fly Old Glory and the blue Trump flag from the bed of my two-ton pickup truck.
Fuck! I took the blackpill. Pardon while I take some ipecac and stick my finger down my throat to induce vomiting.
Yeah, the "free money" economic policies weren't great, but the more I think about it the more it seems like he had some of the sanest foreign policies of any presidency since I became politically aware - more saber-rattling but less actual stabbing people. I've always believed that he was a pretty shitty white supremacist despite what the press says and that his military has been sent off to kill fewer brown people than… I don't know, Carter maybe? should be yet more proof of that.
I know there's not much chance the media will be critical of the Biden/Harris administration's decisions to any reasonable degree, especially in the honeymoon year after the inauguration, but… that sure would be nice, wouldn't it?
Fuck! I took the blackpill. Pardon while I take some ipecac and stick my finger down my throat to induce vomiting.
Yeah, the "free money" economic policies weren't great, but the more I think about it the more it seems like he had some of the sanest foreign policies of any presidency since I became politically aware - more saber-rattling but less actual stabbing people. I've always believed that he was a pretty shitty white supremacist despite what the press says and that his military has been sent off to kill fewer brown people than… I don't know, Carter maybe? should be yet more proof of that.
I know there's not much chance the media will be critical of the Biden/Harris administration's decisions to any reasonable degree, especially in the honeymoon year after the inauguration, but… that sure would be nice, wouldn't it?
IdisC
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2019
Most of you guys over there don't even realize that you make this comparison purely based on the way the red scare got stuck in your culture around the first and second world war.
The US is hardly left and right, but mostly centrist and right compared to the rest of the world, and that also involves all non-communist countries that are actually left and aren't even near being communist. You're even less near communism than leftist countries that are far from communist in the first place and putting some money in stuff like (I dunno, let's draw from the hat here) public transport which is mostly third world country compared to the rest of the rich world, just so it's less appalling and better for the economy, won't suddenly cause you to have to get your rationed bread at a CommOffice just because public transport is also good for 'people'(spoopysocialismskellies even though in every other country it's just basic infrastructure without any political identity tied to it in the first place). Slippery Slope and all that.
Would be nice if everybody would just go back to seeing it how it really is, where left and right was just 'I prefer to spend money on stuff for people' versus 'I prefer to spend stuff on companies'. Which is something adults can debate on rationally and disagree on fervently and aggressively, instead of all this back and forth sperging. Blablabla, if you hate SJW sperging, don't be the fucking same and all that.
Noideawhattopick
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2019
If you want to spend your time or your money on people by all means, do it. I choose what I want to do. Sometimes I devote time to help others or not that's none of anyone's business.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2020
I think the sort of lefties he's talking about are. If you were born into the wrong demographic or have "too much," you're this monster it's okay tti mistreat and exploit because of your "privilege" you have to atone for, even though it's apparently impossible. The tamer environmentalists in their group don't seem to care if your state's got rolling blackouts and is on fire a third of the year from shitty forest management, and the other ones seem to get off on telling you how they'll make you live in a pod and eat bugs. Just look at how many of these guys were mocking opponents of the lockdowns for wanting to feed their kids, or for being so "racist" they cared if their family's city burned down.
A lot of this kind of lefty does what they do out of sadism, then humiliates you by trying to force you to call them virtuous.
introvertedobserver
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2020
That's not really what Left vs Right means nor ever meant.
Left Vs Right was about equality/freedom (on the left) and hierarchy/authority (on the right).
The terms come from the French Revolution when Monarchists/King's supporters were seated on the right and and supporters of the revolution on the left during the National Assembly.
Then around Hitler's time it morphed more into a "Commie" vs "Nazi" terminology (where "Nazi's" were ultra-nationalistic and established a legal hierarchy). The Nazi (and in general fascist) economies were not free market/capitalist. They were private-owned, effectively government controlled and centrally planned. The Nazi government decided everything about the economy and only allowed people that would follow its "guidelines" to own businesses. If a business owner didn't "put the nation first" (i.e. do what the Nazi's told them, what prices to set, how much to produce, etc...) they were disappeared and replaced. The "authoritarian" part started getting phased out to a degree around this time as well (Soviet-commies were just as Authoritarian as Nazis).
Then after Nazi's fell and it became Communists vs free market/"Capitalists" when speaking in the context of purely economics (and in America using Government for "social change" vs hesitation/resistance to social change), While in Europe it maintained its definition from WWII (which wasn't strictly economic or focused on social change).
The "hierarchy", "authority", and "nationalist" parts never really made their way into our usage of the spectrums until more recently.
It has never been "give money to people" vs "give money to companies" though. If anything it would have been "wealth redistribution" vs "individual freedom to keep wealth".
King's Gambit Accepted
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2018
I know everyone is interested in Arizona, Pennsylvania and Georgia. Personally, I'm still waiting for the 2016 Iowa caucus to be be corrected. I'm sure the massive voter fraud perpetrated by Ted Cruz will be proved any day now and DJT will be declared the true victor.
IdisC
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2019
Fair way to word it. But in a center right (but when compared to the US still a lot more left) country generally this comes down to problems like: 'putting money in this commodity is good for people's ability to do business and economic mobility' versus 'putting money in this will help other people become more economically mobile as well if they aren't yet,'. And the discussion is then about the details and in how much every side thinks the other point matters.
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2020
you can't think in terms of "left" and "right". was the french revolution left or right? they had no niggers. that's the correct answer. is the us left, or right, or centrist? we have niggers. its all so obvious you idiot. this is a fact that no one can dispute.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2020
I'm glad you happened to cover this, I was wondering about the origins of left and right in reference to politics earlier today since it doesn't make any sense to me in a modern context of commies and nazis with everything else seemingly somewhere in between.
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2018
I’ve been pro-mask from the very start but I start to think that it’s actually false that the masks do much to stop the spread of the virus, HOWEVER there’s a theory that the mask decreasing the viral load when you get infected is probably a big deal. We see a decrease in critical cases with a huge increase in cases overall (which is only partially explained by more testing) which may be attributed to mask use.
I think Sweden was stupid to not have a lockdown because at this time we only had reports from China and it could have been much, much more serious for all we knew. But their data is interesting. Their death rates (which are still the only real indication of how serious the disease actually is as far as I’m concerned) went to near zero after the initial wave and stayed there even now that the second wave is here and the infection numbers are through the roof again. They actually did seem to achieve herd immunity. At the cost of a lot of lifes, but they succeeded (probably).
This brings me to my single hottest take on Corona to piss off both libs and cons here all at once: The best course of action was probably to use masks everywhere but have no lockdown and continue as usual in every other aspect of life. Fastest way to get to herd immunity without losing too many people while maintaining quality of life and keeping the economy afloat.
WeedMeister
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2020
You are still projecting American politics onto your definition. The right is about traditionalism and keeping the status quo. Left is about progressivism and willingness to take risks. This is why Commies were always considered to be extreme left. Because they were trying to get rid of virtually every building block of the western civilization in their attempts to achieve an utopia.
You are also conflating being left-wing or right-wing with being authoritarian or libertarian. For example, freedom to own guns is something US has lived with for hundreds of years and as such, fight for the right to own guns is considered (and rightfully so) to be a right-wing policy in America despite being also libertarian. At the same time, a push for guns in any country where they have been illegal for a while is, by all means, a left-wing policy.
The problem arises when people try to permanently marry certain policies or stances to being left or right regardless of the context they exist in. I.e. saying that anything involving racism is inherently right-wing because Hitler (and you could argue that Hitler was pretty left-wing by the standards of his own time, just not as left as Bolsheviks) and because people used to be racist as fuck all over the place when we are clearly seeing a huge raise of what is, undeniably, left-wing racism in USA.
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2020
You are not wrong but look at 2000-2008 George W. Bush supporters felt the same lashing the right was doing in 2012-2020 its how it works both sides have irredeemable shit flingers that is accepted or rejected depending on what side of the coin you are on. This is old news shit that existed for a long time. At the end of the day humans just like to piss each other off and to me this is fine because it is part of human nature.
introvertedobserver
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2020
I'm not projecting a damn thing.
That's the history of the terms left and right. You have access to the internet, this shit is not hard to look up.
EyelessMC
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
TL;DR Here is "The Left", along with almost every single Democrat, university student/grad, and the vast majority of those preening over the travesty that is transpiring:
"Classical Liberal" is as rare as a sincere conservative (ie not a neo-con or even "muh god emperor"). You can debate, discuss and even be friends with classical liberals. Heck, you can even go to the range for some shots and then go to the bar for some shots.
"Liberals" today are not this. They are, factually speaking, demoralized.
How do you know if you're talking to someone who is a classical lib vs a demoralized soul? Simple: Let's say you're talking with someone. They start parroting the term "red scare"--as if Communists (Socialists) infiltrators weren't discovered in so many facets of America ranging from media (Hollywood), government and yes, even academia. There was never a "red scare" as in "people scared for no reason of commies all around them". History from just over forty years ago has been totally rewritten in their minds just as it is continually being rewritten right now in mainstream media.
Show this person what they believe is wrong with evidence. If they accept it or decide to research it themselves (not using something like Snopes), then it's fine. If they react on emotion, arguing without research, parroting indoctrinated talking points, or even react violently, they are demoralized.
They even argue without irony that gulags weren't and aren't abject horrors.
As I posted before:
To look at the faces and hear the voices of the demoralized is to stare into the very face of the utterly dehumanized through indoctrination.
Socialism/Communism utterly strips all moral fiber and logical acuity in favor of the ideology which pits all opposed or neutral to the ideology as the enemy, and the enemy is deserving of any evil that befalls them (hence the mass rape campaigns, the public genocide/lynchings, the evils of the gulags, Black Maria vans etc.). As for those under the ideology? They must refrain from ever speaking anything that would undermine the champions of the ideology (hence the tolerance of pedophilia and silencing of victims in Stalin's government).
Victims are silenced. Truths that would undermine the ideology or its champions are erased or concealed. Any and all cruelty is justified against those opposed to the ideology and/or its champions. It's expected you, being faithful to the ideology, are to spy on your fellow ideologues continually to watch for treachery, and if found you must expose them, report them, shame them and regard them as dead to you no matter who they are (spouse, child, etc.)
In short: Socialism is literally a cult. It meets all the qualifications of a cult by any definition. It's the world most successful, widespread and enduring cult without deity. Do not communicate with the demoralized. It is pointless. It's like trying to break someone from cult indoctrination. You will only frustrate yourself at best, become their violent target at worst.
P.S. "wealth redistribution" literally means "forced wealth redistribution" because it's not based on charity. It's state-enforced, meaning the government uses force to take what is yours to give it to those who it deems less fortunate. That is literally government theft under the guise of Robin Hood logic.
You are adults. Everyone posting here should know better.
"Classical Liberal" is as rare as a sincere conservative (ie not a neo-con or even "muh god emperor"). You can debate, discuss and even be friends with classical liberals. Heck, you can even go to the range for some shots and then go to the bar for some shots.
"Liberals" today are not this. They are, factually speaking, demoralized.
How do you know if you're talking to someone who is a classical lib vs a demoralized soul? Simple: Let's say you're talking with someone. They start parroting the term "red scare"--as if Communists (Socialists) infiltrators weren't discovered in so many facets of America ranging from media (Hollywood), government and yes, even academia. There was never a "red scare" as in "people scared for no reason of commies all around them". History from just over forty years ago has been totally rewritten in their minds just as it is continually being rewritten right now in mainstream media.
Show this person what they believe is wrong with evidence. If they accept it or decide to research it themselves (not using something like Snopes), then it's fine. If they react on emotion, arguing without research, parroting indoctrinated talking points, or even react violently, they are demoralized.
They even argue without irony that gulags weren't and aren't abject horrors.
As I posted before:
To look at the faces and hear the voices of the demoralized is to stare into the very face of the utterly dehumanized through indoctrination.
Socialism/Communism utterly strips all moral fiber and logical acuity in favor of the ideology which pits all opposed or neutral to the ideology as the enemy, and the enemy is deserving of any evil that befalls them (hence the mass rape campaigns, the public genocide/lynchings, the evils of the gulags, Black Maria vans etc.). As for those under the ideology? They must refrain from ever speaking anything that would undermine the champions of the ideology (hence the tolerance of pedophilia and silencing of victims in Stalin's government).
Victims are silenced. Truths that would undermine the ideology or its champions are erased or concealed. Any and all cruelty is justified against those opposed to the ideology and/or its champions. It's expected you, being faithful to the ideology, are to spy on your fellow ideologues continually to watch for treachery, and if found you must expose them, report them, shame them and regard them as dead to you no matter who they are (spouse, child, etc.)
In short: Socialism is literally a cult. It meets all the qualifications of a cult by any definition. It's the world most successful, widespread and enduring cult without deity. Do not communicate with the demoralized. It is pointless. It's like trying to break someone from cult indoctrination. You will only frustrate yourself at best, become their violent target at worst.
P.S. "wealth redistribution" literally means "forced wealth redistribution" because it's not based on charity. It's state-enforced, meaning the government uses force to take what is yours to give it to those who it deems less fortunate. That is literally government theft under the guise of Robin Hood logic.
You are adults. Everyone posting here should know better.
CoilZero
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2019
Non-US citizen dropping in here to derail the interesting left/right conversation,
I've been checking the news, saying that DJT has been filing lawsuits, and/or asking for recounts in certain key-states due to claims of voter fraud. Unfortunately, a lot of US media outlets are blocked where I live so I can't find many details. I don't know how much I'd be willing to believe them anyway.
Can anyone break down how this works exactly and, objectively speaking (regardless of who you'd want to win), what are DJT's odds of changing the outcome of this election? You don't have to info dump everything, not asking for someone to be my butler, but a general idea, a useful link or even a referral to a post in this long thread would be appreciated.
I clearly am speaking from a place of limited knowledge, but, even if the voting outcome in 2-3 states was reversed, Biden would still meet the 270 electorate minimum in most cases, no? Trump would have to take MI, WI, GA, PA, NV and AZ to really turn the tables. Just seems like a long shot or an attempt to delay the process. Then again, I don't know?
I've been checking the news, saying that DJT has been filing lawsuits, and/or asking for recounts in certain key-states due to claims of voter fraud. Unfortunately, a lot of US media outlets are blocked where I live so I can't find many details. I don't know how much I'd be willing to believe them anyway.
Can anyone break down how this works exactly and, objectively speaking (regardless of who you'd want to win), what are DJT's odds of changing the outcome of this election? You don't have to info dump everything, not asking for someone to be my butler, but a general idea, a useful link or even a referral to a post in this long thread would be appreciated.
I clearly am speaking from a place of limited knowledge, but, even if the voting outcome in 2-3 states was reversed, Biden would still meet the 270 electorate minimum in most cases, no? Trump would have to take MI, WI, GA, PA, NV and AZ to really turn the tables. Just seems like a long shot or an attempt to delay the process. Then again, I don't know?
cantankerous jackalope
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2019
Even if you are Riden with Biden, you have to respect the sheer balls on Trump if he actually believes that this is some deep state conspiracy. If they did actually manage rig the election of the most powerful country on earth.... AGAINST its nationalist incumbent president... this kind of shadow government has the power and influence to clearly be capable of yeeting him off the face of the earth, and it’s not like that hasn’t been done to a US President before. To face down that kind of group in such a public way is nothing if not admirable of the brass balls required. Granted I don’t have the perspective of a 74 year old that’s lived a lifetime of wealth and riches that I can’t even begin to imagine, so maybe it isn’t as brave as I’m imagining but I doubt it,
Makes you wonder what kind of conversations have happened that we’ll never know about - guy probably has a dead mans switch or something,
Again, this is assuming that Trump actually believes his own claims that it is being rigged.
Makes you wonder what kind of conversations have happened that we’ll never know about - guy probably has a dead mans switch or something,
Again, this is assuming that Trump actually believes his own claims that it is being rigged.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2019
Trump can take GA, PA, and AZ or NV and win if NC finally finishes counting sometime this year without flipping.
214 + 16 (GA) + 20 (PA) + 15 (NC) = 265 so pretty much one more turn and its over.
GA is super close that even a legal recount might flip the script which is happening now. PA had a lot of alleged fuckery going on so that might lead somewhere. Now he just needs NV/AZ with NC finishing their chalk mark tally hopefully before we all kill each other in the streets.
So it isn't as big of an up hill battle as you're saying, plus you can swap GA with MI and AZ/NV with WI and reach the same 270+.
As far as his chances. I'd honestly follow the later ends of the election fraud megathread for that, some decent back and forth discussion and it is much easier to follow than this trainwreck of a thread. I'm not confident enough to make any real speculation because it depends on how what an audit actually turns up and what Trump's lawyers have vs whatever Biden's defense brings.
Last edited:
- Status