The death of P&R and what it says about where we are.

[samhain]

(03-12-2023, 01:19 PM)masonbengals fan Wrote: Good grief... & some of you wonder why P&R has taken a downturn. Bat shit crazy post like the above is exactly why.

Sorry rant over...
Bye

It will happen in my lifetime.  State sponsored political violence.  The framework has already been set in place by the Qanon movement and it's mainstreaming.  The Qanon movement will soon have real legislators in power to enact their agenda.  

[samhain]

(03-12-2023, 01:20 PM)Goalpost Wrote: same.  

The truth hurts.  Call me crazy all you want.  it will happen while we are alive. Hatred of half the country is the only fuel that the right runs on. How am I wrong in any way?

[Dill]

(03-11-2023, 10:56 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Well, people can call him authoritarian if they want, but Ron DeSantis did not force me to take a vaccine (which has now been shown to not prevent spread, contraction or be any better than natural immunity) , Joe Biden and Andy Beshear did. Ron DeSantis did not force me to wear a mask (which have now been shown to be useless) for yeasrs anytime I left my house, Joe Biden and Andy Beshear did. I couldn't go anywhere in Kentucky without a mask for years, but I went to Florida to visit a friend and tossed it as I crossed the Florida Georgia line, met him at a cigar bar in Orlando and had beers and smokes) . So I think people have it twisted when they are looking for authoritarians.

Not only are there already protocols in place for handling pandemics--including decisions about quarantine--but conditions under
which they may be imposed or rolled back are subject to all manner of checks and monitoring and democratic accountability. Not perfect,
but not "authoritarian" in character. 

 "Authoritarian" policies are imposed unilaterally by a leader/party with an eye towards enhancing/maintaining power and order without accountability. E.g., when they bypass educators and democratic process to control school curricula, unilaterally excluding knowledge areas which might contest the authoritarians ideological control and hold on power. Putin and Orban have directly forbidden the teaching of many subjects in their countries--like gender/LGBQT studies. Educators have no say. 

DeSantis is doing the same in Florida right now, adding critical history to the list of above-mentioned excluded subjects, and that's one reason I want to call him an authoritarian.  And I could add examples. 

PS If "natural immunity" (of uncertain duration) is better than the vaccine at preventing the spread of COVID, that is still no argument against the vaccine--or would anyone argue that it is better to just get the disease to get immunity against the disease? On the other hand, the refusal of people to get vaccinated keeps the virus spreading and mutating. Authoritarianism figures into vaccine policy when one party's leaders spread disinformation about the topic to enhance their chances for regaining or retaining power. That often requires de-legitimating medical authority in favor of ideological, just as changing the curricula unilaterally requires de-legitimating educational authorities. 

[samhain]

(03-12-2023, 02:29 PM)Dill Wrote: Not only are there already protocols in place for handling pandemics--including decisions about quarantine--but conditions under
which they may be imposed or rolled back are subject to all manner of checks and monitoring and democratic accountability. Not perfect,
but not "authoritarian" in character. 

 "Authoritarian" policies are imposed unilaterally by a leader/party with an eye towards enhancing/maintaining power and order without accountability. E.g., when they bypass educators and democratic process to control school curricula, unilaterally excluding knowledge areas which might contest the authoritarians ideological control and hold on power. Putin and Orban have directly forbidden the teaching of many subjects in their countries--like gender/LGBQT studies. Educators have no say. 

DeSantis is doing the same in Florida right now, adding critical history to the list of above-mentioned excluded subjects, and that's one reason I want to call him an authoritarian.  And I could add examples. 

PS If "natural immunity" (of uncertain duration) is better than the vaccine at preventing the spread of COVID, that is still no argument against the vaccine--or would anyone argue that it is better to just get the disease to get immunity against the disease? On the other hand, the refusal of people to get vaccinated keeps the virus spreading and mutating. Authoritarianism figures into vaccine policy when one party's leaders spread disinformation about the topic to enhance its chances for regaining or retaining power. That often requires de-legitimating medical authority in favor of ideological, just as changing the curricula unilaterally requires de-legitimating educational authorities. 

Kind of speaks the the issues China is having with covid at present.  They had no herd immunity due to extreme lockdown, plus a really ineffective vaccine.  Now they have 5 variants running around wreaking havoc and mutating faster than in other large populations.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(03-11-2023, 12:21 PM)samhain Wrote: State/Federal workers were as well as medical personnel.  Otherwise, no unless it was at employer discretion.  I saw a stat that 30 percent of the workforce at my current employer were vaccinated.  As employers love to tell disgruntled employees in these situations, you're free to work somewhere else.

Masks were similar.  Some places required it for entry, at their discretion.  Some people followed the guidelines others didn't.  

I rarely wore a mask outside of work or a hospital during covid.  I must be really lucky, as Beshear/Biden never had me put into a concentration camp.

Same here....there were mandates (not laws), and it was ultimately left up to the business owners. I wore a mask for a while after my quarantine from COVID, but that was only to try be extra safe in public around people that could become seriously ill with the virus. Love thy neighbor and all.....and I'm a practicing Christian.

[basballguy]

(03-04-2023, 09:57 PM)samhain Wrote: It's difficult to deny that this subform has been dying a slow death for the last 6 months or so.  

It's not for lack of relevant topics.  

We're as close to WW3 as we've been since the 1980's.  We have a president that barely keeping his shit together if at all.  We have two candidates opposing him that are quite possibly as authoritarian as we've ever seen in this country.  Shifts in law and public discourse have been seismic.  

Still, crickets here, for the most part.

This is a bad symptom, IMO.  

To me it's a sign that we've all accepted reality.  Both sides are dug in so deep that there will be zero chance of compromise for the foreseeable future.  People would rather see the country die a slow, painful death than see the other side get credit for keeping it alive.  

Good shit, people.  We all get what we deserve in the end.

This forum has always been a shit show.  If i were to put a number on on it i'd say it's 90% left and 10% right.  And with that, the 90% is very flagrant in their POVs...and some of them are beyond reason.  

Now, without naming names, there are a few right leaning individuals which also have absurd POVs but we'd be lying to ourselves if we weren't saying left leaning individuals were making productive conversations prohibitive on this forum.  

[Dill]

(03-14-2023, 01:58 AM)basballguy Wrote: This forum has always been a shit show.  If i were to put a number on on it i'd say it's 90% left and 10% right.  And with that, the 90% is very flagrant in their POVs...and some of them are beyond reason.  

Now, without naming names, there are a few right leaning individuals which also have absurd POVs but we'd be lying to ourselves if we weren't saying left leaning individuals were making productive conversations prohibitive on this forum.  

I'm curious about how you are defining "productive."

I find conversations productive for me when they produce new and relevant information, and when reasoned exchanges expand my and others' understanding of political issues. That includes defining terms to mutual agreement for use in discussion, and asking people for evidence or to explain apparent contradictions in a position--and then in good faith waiting to hear them out. But it excludes jamming discussions with personal insults, bad faith misconstruction, and red herrings. 

I can also see how this view of productive conversation could be experienced as "prohibitive" according to a different view of "productive," if it doubles down on logical analysis and questioning evidence. By my definition of "productive," conversations which debate, test, and occasionally reveal disinformation are very productive. I and a few others may have made it more difficult to disseminate disinformation about CRT, for example, so others could feel "prohibited" from initiating discussion about it.  Bels often makes it difficult to argue against assault weapon bans and the like; he may on occasion "prohibit" me from holding certain views about assault weapons by offering counter-evidence. But he is not prohibiting me from making productive conversations; he is engaging me in one, even if it does not result in the "product" I want.

For me the forum is one source of information about how many typical U.S. voters perceive, understand, and respond to policies. People often go into more detail about why they hold their views here, offering a kind of insight polls do not. 

E.G., I've gotten a lot of "ancillary" benefits from conversations in this forum. That is, in hearing peoples' objections to each others' views, and hearing their reasons for believing what they do, also teaches me a lot, even if no one is persuaded or refuted. E.g., if I hear two different posters offer COVID policies as examples of "authoritarianism," that tells me a lot about how they define or see authoritarianism--and how they don't. So I found listening to them "productive" in that it brings me a step closer to understanding their political choices (and factoring that into future responses); with no reason to suppose they are outliers, I am then curious about the source(s) of their definitions. Can't get that insight from a book or MSNBC--only be engaging with actual voters. 

It also means I cannot get that insight if right wingers don't feel free to participate. We are in a conundrum though if "feel free" requires a challenge free environment. I agree with you that some of my liberal minded friends have at times descended into overreach hyperbole in their description of GOP racism and totalitarian intentions, but I don't understand why that "prohibits" anyone who disagrees from challenging their overreach. You grant there are right wingers who overreach too, but their posts don't seem to prohibit much. Often they start conversations. Because they are only 10% in your guestimation? Do "rightists" and "leftists" react differently to views which challenge their politics? 

I'm also curious about how you are defining "left" and "right." I consider myself a "leftist," but I don't see many here (2-3) that I would call that. Most seem left leaning liberals or liberal centrists, and rightists. And it's ok to be those things. Even better if we agree on what makes one a whatever. 

[BFritz21]

(03-04-2023, 10:51 PM)Nately120 Wrote: It's all been said at this point, I guess.  Biden is old and unpopular, Trump is old and unpopular and is going to run for a 3rd time in a row and if he loses he's probably going to run in 2028, too.

After the mid-terms was when it seems like this place fizzled out, possibly due to our conservative-leaning members tapping out a bit after a 3rd disappointing election cycle in a row.  We're left with left-leaning posters who are pessimistic about the democrats and fatalistic about the republicans.

Every day Biden is old and mostly uninspiring.  Every day Trump lies about something insane or proposes something nuts.  Every day DeSantis turns Florida into a bizarre authoritarian paradise.  Every day there is a mass shooting no one even bothers to point out anymore. It's all various shades of crap, and most people don't want to deal with crap unless they're being paid for it.  Truthfully, the fact that I posted so much about politics on a football message board is probably going to rank pretty high on my deathbed regrets list.

So it goes.

Some or all of this may have been said, but it's because everyone came on here to ***** during the Trump years and then, during election season, so many posted because they wanted Trump out and posted how everything would be so much better without him.

Biden got elected and is declining in mental capabilities at an alarming rate. It's not really the Republicans' game to ***** and blame the President for all of the problems in the country, even though Biden is much more to blame for the current situation than Trump was for anything, so now that Biden's failing and they don't have Trump to blame, the Democrats have nothing to post in this forum.

The stock market is and economy is heading for a recession and massive layoffs are most likely coming, so will people stop voting on emotion when voting for President?

[*Nately120*]

(03-15-2023, 05:20 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: It's not really the Republicans' game to ***** and blame the President for all of the problems in the country,

You'll have to point me towards these supposed Republicans who aren't blaming Biden for the current state of the country.  Hell, I heard some major GOP voices blame Biden for stuff that happened before he was president. 

[BFritz21]

(03-15-2023, 06:40 PM)Nately120 Wrote: You'll have to point me towards these supposed Republicans who aren't blaming Biden for the current state of the country.  Hell, I heard some major GOP voices blame Biden for stuff that happened before he was president. 

I meant they don't ***** and complain non-stop because he hurt their feelings and blame him for things that he had no control over.

If people bash Biden, it's because he's a shitty President, not because he hurt their feelings because they're sensitive snowflakes.

[*Nately120*]

(03-15-2023, 07:33 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I meant they don't ***** and complain non-stop because he hurt their feelings and blame him for things that he had no control over.

If people bash Biden, it's because he's a shitty President, not because he hurt their feelings because they're sensitive snowflakes.

So democrats ***** about dumb stuff and Republicans ***** about sensible stuff?  What a whiney country.  

[BFritz21]

(03-15-2023, 08:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: So democrats ***** about dumb stuff and Republicans ***** about sensible stuff?  What a whiney country.  

Pretty much.

[HarleyDog]

(03-15-2023, 05:20 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: The stock market is and economy is heading for a recession and massive layoffs are most likely coming, so will people stop voting on emotion when voting for President?

Interestingly, it appears tens of thousands of people who worked so hard in the social media and internet companies, shielding the lefts mistakes and blaming Trump for everything so people would vote for anyone but him, are getting laid off. Lies and deception have consequences.

[*Nately120*]

(03-15-2023, 08:48 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Pretty much.

Conservatives can't move on from Trump until they admit that he may have had a single flaw beyond being a big meanie.

[BFritz21]

(03-15-2023, 08:52 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Interestingly, it appears tens of thousands of people who worked so hard in the social media and internet companies, shielding the lefts mistakes and blaming Trump for everything so people would vote for anyone but him, are getting laid off. Lies and deception have consequences.

That's just because layoffs are necessary since everything is so bad under Biden.

(03-15-2023, 08:53 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Conservatives can't move on from Trump until they admit that he may have had a single flaw beyond being a big meanie.

He had flaws but he was good for the country and a hell of a lot better than Biden.

I've said all along, it's like being the CEO of a successful company: you can't always just be Mr Nice Guy or things never get done.

[*Nately120*]

(03-15-2023, 10:59 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: That's just because layoffs are necessary since everything is so bad under Biden.

He had flaws but he was good for the country and a hell of a lot better than Biden.

I've said all along, it's like being the CEO of a successful company: you can't always just be Mr Nice Guy or things never get done.

I thought the GOP wanted to move on to DeSantis.  Seems like half of conservatives overvaluing Trump is getting in their way.

Or are you of the "anyone but Biden" mind set?  

[BFritz21]

(03-15-2023, 11:13 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I thought the GOP wanted to move on to DeSantis.  Seems like half of conservatives overvaluing Trump is getting in their way.

Or are you of the "anyone but Biden" mind set?  

Either one would be a hell of a lot better than Biden, or do you think Biden's a good President and will even be with it enough to run again?

[*Nately120*]

(03-15-2023, 11:43 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Either one would be a hell of a lot better than Biden, or do you think Biden's a good President and will even be with it enough to run again?

Im not big on the culture war stuff so I'd go with Biden out of those 3 by default.  I'm not as enthused about my vote as you are, though. 

Gary Johnson and Ron Paul were the only politicians I felt positive supporting, but the GOP has left guys like them in the dust. 

But to the topic at hand, this place seemed to empty out after the midterms. 
 

[Dill]

(03-15-2023, 10:59 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: That's just because layoffs are necessary since everything is so bad under Biden.
He had flaws but he was good for the country and a hell of a lot better than Biden.
I've said all along, it's like being the CEO of a successful company: you can't always just be Mr Nice Guy or things never get done.

I didn't think Trump's mixed messaging on the pandemic was especially good for the country. 
He wanted ramped up production of a vaccine and got it. Good.   But then 
he politicized the pandemic and medical knowledge so his own followers boo mention of it at his rallies.

Attempting a coup was not good either.  A "flaw"? If ends up being indicted and jailed for that, we'll see a lot more
trouble.

But he made us oil independent. 

Even if I were a Republican who wanted tax cuts for the rich, the keystone pipeline, and oil independence, 
that would not, for me, offset all the other damage; now he is directing his followers to "retribution."

How is that better than Biden? 

(03-15-2023, 08:52 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Interestingly, it appears tens of thousands of people who worked so hard in the social media and internet companies, shielding the lefts mistakes and blaming Trump for everything so people would vote for anyone but him, are getting laid off. Lies and deception have consequences.

?? If the people in question were blaming Trump for mismanagement of the pandemic and his own vaccine program, not to mention an attempt to retain power by coup, then I don't think they were lying and deceiving. What "left mistakes" could cancel out Trump lawlessness for voters--assuming we both think democracy important to retain?  How did social media "shield" people from "the left"? Nothing comes to mind so I need specifics.

Also, I thought that social media played a central role in Trump's ascent to and maintenance of power.  
Different groups get on social media and generate their own content, which is rarely fact checked. That favors Trump, right? 
So his followers were busy through both election cycles. Reporters at Fox risked firing if they fact checked Trump--i.e., if they DID NOT lie and deceive. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/facebook-twitter-don-t-censor-conservatives-they-hire-promote-them-ncna1245308

[*Nately120*]

(03-16-2023, 06:41 PM)Dill Wrote: I didn't think Trump's mixed messaging on the pandemic was especially good for the country. 
He wanted ramped up production of a vaccine and got it. Good.   But then 
he politicized the pandemic and medical knowledge so his own followers boo mention of it at his rallies.

The one 9D chess conspiracy I'll buy into a bit is the notion that liberals went overboard embracing and championing the vaccine in hopes that conservatives would say "If they're into it, I ain't."  Maybe it was outright malice, or maybe it was simply the idea that if they're really going to be suicidally spiteful, that's on them.