It’s also strange that the number of participants doesn’t match up. Newsweek says 2,045 but your link says 2,203. Of course we would know what the issue is if they left a link to the poll rather than a vague description.
It seems like you’re right though and this is bullshit.
Not funding genocide =/= perfection
Being able to beat the worst president in history in a debate =/= perfection
Biden is still your best choice.
Unless he drops out, yeah no shit.
Now apparently cuz 3 fucking yokels think hes old we’re throwing all rational political thinking out the window to pull a last minute change and you fucking idiots think that can actually win?!??
I will remind you of this in November. If Biden wins, I will happily admit that I was wrong and you were right.
Certainly hyperbole. But there are examples linked and I think anyone paying attention has seen this behaviour, especially since the debate but also previously in response to criticism of his Gaza policy, e.g. “oh so you think Trump would be better?!”
The downvoters are really proving the point here
She’s looking at it with the knowledge afterwards that someone is actually going to do it. And not if they have to be sure before they shoot someone. trump rallies are full of idiots climbing on shit and being idiots.
Exactly this. It’s really easy to look at the situation afterwards and have trouble believing how it could have gotten that far. But that’s because from the outside we don’t know how many incidents they have narrowly avoided or how many potential incidents turned out to be nothing.
This is also classic conspiracy theory territory. Could it be that the world is complex and scary? That even trained secret service agents make potentially fatal errors? No, because we can pretend that even though there was a shooter it was all planned and under control. Somehow the idea that things like this are under the control of some malicious enemy is more comforting than the horrible unpredictability of it all in reality.
There was a zero percent chance that some random person with a rifle was able to scale a roof, unless there was just an unbelievable failure of intelligence. And you want to know why it’s unbelievable? Because I don’t effing believe it. I don’t believe it. I want the names of the Secret Service agents that allowed this remarkable security failure to go down, because I don’t believe this.
The “school” of hard knocks strikes again. She is still on the same bullshit. Obviously the secret service wanted this to happen, or something 🙄
Yeah they chose quite the time to make the perfect the enemy of the good
Removed by mod
That would be a really shit poll though, your methodology would be “I found people who I knew would answer the question this way” and everyone would see. If there is a methodological issue with this poll that isn’t hand-waving I’d be interested to hear it.
E.g. “but who answers the phone anymore?” They know this issue and use a bunch of complicated statistical shit to adjust for it or just improve the methodology. The people making these polls actually tend to know what they’re doing.
I’m unable to articulate the natural reaction that I have when somebody tries to sell me garbage. I can’t articulate it when somebody explains to me, ‘Well, the moon landings definitely happened.’"
Owens continued: “I’m just like, no, I don’t know. Instinctually, it just doesn’t register to me. Just feels like that is a lie. And I’ve realized that I’ve been thinking deeply about this, this pagan cult that we exist in. It is backed by a false science deity. That is what it is. It is the science. This is the new god.”
So she just “instinctively” doesn’t believe stuff that “feels” like a lie, and this proof that everyone else worships the “science deity.” No mention of the giant rocket that left the surface of the earth and the video footage of both that and the surface of the moon itself?
This is the fundamental problem with this type of thinking. Sure you have some aspect of faith (I wasn’t there, can’t 100% confirm the authenticity of the footage myself), but it’s clearly based on quite a solid piece of evidence. Dismissing that, on the other hand, is literally based on faith, her faith that this footage is fake based on no evidence whatsoever.
I contribute that, maybe, to coming from the school of hard knocks," she said, adding, “I am grateful for having gone through the school of hard knocks because you are required to have an element of common sense in order to survive.”
The “school of hard knocks” apparently does not have a good science program.
I only read this article to work out why she specified “pagan” and I still have no idea.
And now we grasp at straws. Anything to avoid facing the reality of the situation.
He might have had a bad connection for a second. It would be more compelling if it had been, I don’t know, on the debate stage with 50 million people watching.
Everyone rightfully talks about how awful Trump is, but as soon as Biden does something like support a genocide or come across like a doddering old man in a debate, all of a sudden “Trump does it too” is apparently a defense.
Before someone jumps down my throat about the election being a choice between two people, it’s not. People might also hate both and not vote. Not saying it’s wise, just saying it’s possible.
Yeah I also watched a 30 minute highlight video because since Trump has been involved I’ve found watching the whole thing to be intolerable. I am totally open to anybody showing me “high points” for Biden that maybe CNN skipped over in their condensed version.
He got a couple zingers off
Lol please share. “Morals of an alleycat”? (or whatever the exact quote is)
As for the rest, I agree that obviously for general factual content Biden even on his deathbed will beat Trump. However it was undermined by the errors, e.g. getting the price of insulin wrong and millions/billions mixed up more than once. That is the problem.
I’ll bet you that if he was on his A game, everyone would have been yelling performance enhancement drugs!
Almost certainly. But he wasn’t so it’s not really the point here.
Seems like caving into republican talking points way too easily…
You know what they say about stopped clocks. They will always have this shit to say about Biden, absolutely. So why have I (and many others, NYT included) all of a sudden “caved into” republican talking points after ignoring or arguing against them until now?
Honestly to me the more interesting “talking points” at the minute are from some democrats, who after (assumedly) reacting in horror with the rest of us after the debate, have latched onto the “He had a cold” excuse that they came out with and tried to pass the whole thing off as a “stutter” issue.
I think people can see the difference between a stutter and whatever the hell happened at the debate. He wasn’t stuttering, he was freezing up and getting sentences jumbled up. He was not capable of having a coherent debate, and the only saving grace is that Trump isn’t either (different reasons, but still).
So I find it a little strange how people are talking about his performance, now. We all know what we watched, and that is why everybody freaked the fuck out straight afterwards. Trying to gaslight everyone is not a productive or helpful strategy. (Not you necessarily, by the way, just “the discourse” in general. I would like to see any examples you have of what you’re saying)
This is not fair description of his debate performance. He didn’t stutter, he crashed like an old computer trying to keep 50 chrome tabs running and then barely dragged himself out of it with incoherent nonsense like “we beat Medicare.”
It doesn’t disqualify him, it just lowers the bar for Trump.
This is getting down voted here, but it shouldn’t be just because some people disagree. The NYT editorial board coming out with this is a Big Deal. It has the potential to change the race. A lot of influential people still read it.
The people downvoting don’t care. This community is particularly bad for it, imo. There is a group of people who will downvote literally anything bad for Biden, and think that people like return2ozma, who seems to genuinely be a democrat, are posting bad news as part of some plot to suppress the vote (?) and help Trump win.
One time I saw one poll with good news for Biden upvoted and another, equally legit poll in a different state (I think this was a swing state too) but showing Trump in the lead sitting on zero. It is not about whether it is significant for these people, it is literally “Is this good or bad for My Guy? Does this fit the echo chamber I want to live in?”
They absolutely should not downvote something like this, you’re totally right. Any relevant political analysis/news from a respected source should get upvoted. But the (justified) fear of Trump is making tribalism hit hard and turning some people into petulant children with nothing to do but demand we “vote blue” and prop up the narrative.
If they commit a crime then we can lock them up. If they don’t then they have the same rights as you and me. And that is a GOOD THING.
So we can class them as a specific subgroup that we’re allowed to mistreat and don’t have the same rights as everyone else? We could make them wear little badges.
I wonder why no other country needs this kind of affirmation? 🤔🤔🤔 hmmmmmmm what a mystery
Is there a minimum “rate” for a genocide, then?
Can’t help you there. You should maybe pay more attention.
This is just saying, “but Trump would be worse!!!” in more intelligent language. It is literally what I said happens. Criticising Biden’s Gaza policy is NOT a statement about the election, the only reason to make it one is if you want to squash any criticism of him quickly and easily without engaging in a substantive discussion of the issue.
So people ignore the specific criticism of policy, turn it into electoral calculus and then insinuate that because of the criticism of policy, the person must be considering voting for Trump, which would make them disloyal or betrayers. The thing you said has “NEVER” happened was literally your example of what does happen.
Unless you’re going to say the thing you disagree with is that the post claims it’s a “furious accusation”? But, just like you saying “every single time” (obviously not) this is hyperbole and it’s not fair to solely focus on that. I’m sure you didn’t mean literally every time and I’m sure the writer was just trying to add a bit of spice
Edit: came across a great example https://lemm.ee/comment/13326190