:up:

Roevember 21 — 180 Proof

What does this mean?

It’s remarkable how much time and effort silly things like this take up within “philosophy.” Still kind of fun as a game I guess.

“Everyone’s mad here. I’m mad; you’re mad.”
“How do you know I’m mad?”
“You must be — or you wouldn’t have come here.”

That being said this strategy isn't that really much different from Trump's to be honest — Mr Bee

You’re right. It isn’t fair, really, but because he’s been a lying degenerate clown for so long, any bullshit he spews is shrugged off.

You stick with those MAGA-GOP talking points — 180 Proof

Well there’s no need to get nasty. :gasp:

Also, when you say it won’t be Joe Biden as the nominee — care to bet on that too?
— Mikie
Like taking candy from a baby. :yum:
— 180 Proof
I (technically) have won this bet but lost the other one that Diaper Don wouldn't be the GOP nominee. — 180 Proof

Yeah, you did. I was as shocked as anyone. What did we end up betting? $10 to charity of choice? Let me know and I’ll pay up. I’d forgotten about that.

Needless to say, I hope you’re right here too.

Anyway — he’s within the margin of error in swing states and is down with black men by a lot compared to 2020. Women could save the day if they come out strong — but will they? Will it be enough? I have doubts.

I’ve seen enough. Ready to make my official prediction:

Trump wins.

Which is unbelievable and sad, but so it goes. Looks like men aren’t ready for a woman president, yet again. But it’s more than that — it’s that she has no message.

She could have run with a strong and consistent message of taxing the rich to pay for popular programs. Instead she’s raced to the “middle,” on the advice of the most pathetic intellectual weaklings known to man, and desperately tried to appeal to conservative voters. She’s done so with climate change and fracking, on guns, and on war. She doesn’t answer questions directly. She regurgitates the same lines like “hopes, ambitions, and desires.” There’s barely been any policy proposals, and the ones that have been proposed are “eh.” They’ve once again left Bernie and progressives in the cold— and they’ll pay for it, especially among the Gaza crowds.

The DNC strategy at this point is to lay low, appeal to the middle, say as little as possible (see any of the uninspiring, friendly interviews she’s done), and bring it back to how bad Trump is and was. It’s a terrible strategy and a terrible candidate. They even defanged Tim Walz, who is now left with endlessly talking up school lunches — which is all the party allows him.

So the democrats put up another loser in the 4th quarter and will blow it try again against the worst candidate and former president in history. 4 more years of Trump’s climate denial and federal judges (given that republicans are going to win the senate), which will do generational damage, and the further destruction of institutions that do any good for regular people.

It feels like 2016 again: no real enthusiasm for the Democrat. There was none in 2020 either, but it was a pandemic and we were sick of Trump. That was motivation enough — plus Biden, a man, also hadn’t fully degenerated into the shell he is today, and still had a little Obama fairy dust on him from his years as VP. The electorate’s memory is also poor and rose-colored, and usually rebel against whoever is in office.

So despite what the polls, or Allan Lichtman, or Bill Maher, or Nate Silver or anyone else says, I think Trump will win at least one of the blue wall states — Michigan? — and that will be all he needs, as he will carry Georgia and North Carolina and Arizona.

Maybe some good comes out of it. Who knows. I hope I’m wrong — but I won’t be.

Ps. Sorry @180 Proof. I’ll put money on it.

Ethel Kennedy. 96. It amazes me she was still around.

Speaking for myself, I respect every pro-Isreal Jew who openly, vigourously denounces and opposes the mass murdering, ethnic cleansing, apartheid policies of the US/Nato-backed Netanyahu regime. — 180 Proof

The truly pro-Israel Jews are those who don’t want to see Israel destroyed. Which is exactly what they’re doing with these policies.

I spent the past three years sailing through storms and visiting research labs around the world to learn about the recent increase in extreme cyclones. I spoke to captains who logged changes in the Gulf Stream, the jet stream, trade winds and storm seasons. I interviewed scientists who studied amplifying typhoons in the Pacific, whose barometric pressure could drop so low that they triggered a spider web of earthquakes. I studied major cyclones that hit parts of the Middle East for the first time and some of the first hurricane landfalls to strike Europe. Experts consistently tied storm intensity, range and destruction to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere — and said that if we reduced it, storm intensity would also diminish in lock step.

Here is a glimpse of where we are headed. The heat accumulating in the ocean from global warming will make tropical cyclones last longer than they once did, and occasionally move slower, making damage many times worse. Rapid intensification — in which storm winds increase by 35 miles per hour or more in 24 hours — will continue to rise, especially in coastal waters.

A 2021 study by Yale University researchers shows that warmer waters in the north and south will soon draw extreme storms toward the poles, threatening to inundate densely populated, and especially unprepared, cities like Washington, D.C., New York and Boston. A northwestward migration from the region where most Atlantic tropical cyclones originate could result in an uptick in landfalls along the East Coast later this century.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/opinion/hurricane-milton-florida-storm-surge-climate-change.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Q04.RYJo.4A9XWKePGo6H&smid=url-share

If only we listened.

If only we start listening.

I'm irrelevant too because I don't get to vote. — unenlightened

You’re always relevant in this thread, at least.

So Israel’s goal of reducing most of Gaza and southern Lebanon to rubble will undoubtedly be achieved, guaranteeing a stronger Hamas and Hezbollah in the future and prolonging the conflicts for decades more.

Missing accomplished.

Forgive me, I will not take your advice. If no one shovels out the shit, then the whole thread becomes shit. — unenlightened

That was directed at John— but I’d say the same of you. But I appreciate your efforts, whatever it is they’re claiming. The climate issue attracts a lot of idiots.

Anti-zionism is effectively anti-semitism. — BitconnectCarlos

:lol:

There's no apartheid. — BitconnectCarlos

:rofl:

Magnificent. :ok:

I think you’re in over your head here mate. Why do you go on like this? — John McMannis

Answer:

A troll, a complete troll, and nothing but a troll. — unenlightened

I see you’re engaging with a number of intellectually deficient individuals. My advice is to just let them be. Banging your head against a brick wall is useless— eventually you just have to stop. Ignore feature is helpful there.

Anyway, back in the real world:

https://www.france24.com/en/video/20241007-in-utah-climate-change-denial-persists-as-america-s-dead-sea-disappears

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna174260

A Changing Climate Is Scorching the World’s Biggest River

In one stretch in the Brazilian state of Amazonas, the river was 25 feet below the average for this time of year, according to the agency, which began collecting data in 1967.

Parts of three of the Amazon River’s most important tributaries — major rivers in their own right, each spanning over 1,000 miles — have also fallen to historical lows.

I think Biden said it best the other day (for once): if you deny the climate crisis, you’re braindead at this point.

Your choice to not choose between possible administrations ignores the extreme rhetoric from the Trump side that has been going on for years. As citizens, these differences appear in outcomes in our communities. — Paine

Yes.

If I had to go before a tribunal and defend my choice of voting for Harris, it would give me pause. But it isn’t that serious. People want to believe it’s their only political power— to fill in an oval every 4 years — and thus all the hand-wringing.

It’s overthinking it. Vote against Trump and keep at the local work — organizing, striking, protesting, lawsuits, unionizing, boycotting, etc. That’s it. Will a Trump or Harris administration make achieving goals easier or harder? I think the answer is clear.

The one area I understand feeling bad about: support for Israel’s genocide. Seems like Harris is all-in for Israel, just as Biden has been. True enough. It’s also true, however, that Trump is an even bigger supporter. So not only do we make it worse with him in office, we get all the other terrifying, horrible, shitty things along with it.

A vote against the worst candidate when there’s really just two options isn’t an endorsement of the less bad candidate, nor the two-party system. Sitting out or voting third party, particularly in a swing state, is helping to elect the worst candidate. This is true if you believe Harris is the worse candidate too.



Cool— so you’re irrelevant.

Funny, I thought this thread was about the election, not the spewing of tiresome, disingenuous bullshit from Trump cultists— or sifting through it to see if there’s any point or coherence (spoiler: there isn’t).

, loads of Americans are still convinced to vote for people who vilify social welfare programs, public schools, publicly owned entities, organized labor, American manufacturing, self-sufficient practices, and the like. — creativesoul

:up: :up:

At this point, to be a climate denier takes really hard work. Must be like playing whack-a-mole. Unprecedented heat, hurricanes, floods, droughts, etc.— but nah, nothing to see. Or it’s all “natural,” so no need to care about emissions. Or it’s “not so bad,” because it probably won’t wipe out every human.

I was thinking of a good film metaphor for all this— and of course Don’t Look Up was a good one, but there has also been another staring us in the face for 50 years: Jaws.

Try picturing the shark as climate change, and it all makes sense. And Republicans are still the mayor.

I am afraid that in their attempt to sound moderate, Harris and Walz will lose support among some groups, and they will try to stick with an economic plan that does not sound popular to the majority (middle class) they are trying to appeal to in other ways. — Eros1982

I think that’s a disaster too. But not surprising.

I am just glad that Vance did not refuse global warming; he even blamed democrats for not having done enough with renewables — Eros1982

No he didn’t. He rambled a bunch of nonsense and then threw in a lie about nuclear. He also said “if you believe” emissions are causing climate change. An absolute joke.

The fact that you give him a pass while criticizing the Democratic ticket, and yet claim you care about climate change, shows how unserious you are — or how fake. The choice is clear for anyone truly concerned about that issue. Should take about 10 seconds.

A forgettable "VP debate" — 180 Proof

Yeah, nothing great. They were polite. Walz stumbled with the Hong Kong answer— Vance stumbled with January 6th and gave ridiculous answers on guns, Climate change, abortion, child care and healthcare. Should have been a slam dunk for Walz— too bad.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/29/world/middleeast/middle-east-war-peace-nasrallah.html

The key paragraph:

“But an ironclad alliance with Israel built around strategic and domestic political considerations, as well as the shared values of two democracies, means Washington will almost certainly never threaten to cut — let alone cut off — the flow of arms.”

Notice the vague, careful phrasing. Translation: there’s nothing the US can do because the Israel lobby is too powerful (“domestic political considerations”) and is an extension of our economic agenda (“strategic considerations”) in the region.

There’s plenty we can do: namely, STOP SENDING WEAPONS. Stop funding the war. Period. Shame on The NY Times for talking nonsense. This isn’t the 1990s — we see right through it now.

Maggie Smith— not on the list, but probably should have been.

I hate Taylor Swift! Haitians are destroying music— they’re eating the Snoop Dogs; they’re eating the Doja Cats.

$14.70 per share — 180 Proof

Oof. That’s less than the IPO. :rofl:

Donald Trump and other insiders can now sell shares of DJT, just as stock hits new low

Don’t waste too much time with climate deniers. Ignore feature works great. That’s my recommendation.

Anyway— yes, for denialists who don’t understand a single thing climate scientists say, but want to sound as if they alone have special knowledge, it’s important to develop the strawman of “they think the world will end in 12 years!”

Idiots are gonna idiot.

Noam Chomsky b. 1928

Oh cool, the dude who worships the guy who said anyone burning the flag should get put in jail is gonna lecture us on free speech absolutism. Pass.

What I found is someone who is willing to ask the hard questions. — L'éléphant

:rofl:

Pay attention to these bogus beliefs:

That Israel only “defends” itself (it doesn’t).

That “wiping out Hamas” is even possible (it isn’t).

That some words in a charter are ultra-important (they aren’t).

That gaza isn’t a concentration camp (it is).

That Israel isn’t the overwhelming military power (they are).

Then you’ll have a better understanding of why these conversations go nowhere. The assumptions are so far apart it’s beyond rationality.

These people who keep trying to kill Trump must really hate the establishment. Since Trump is the embodiment of the establishment, he’s an easy target.

Anyway, look forward to this being forgotten in 48 hours.

“I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT!”

Quiz:

Who said the above?

A) a random troll on Instagram
B) a 9-year-old boy
C) a young girl who couldn’t get tickets
D) a 78-year old former United States president

Any guesses?

Anyways, what are other people's most uninteresting philosopher/philosophy and why? — schopenhauer1

Jordan Peterson. A bumbling, jumbled pile of garbage from what I can tell. No substance whatsoever. I’m reluctant to even include him— but many consider him a “philosopher.” Oy.

More classically: I agree about Wittgenstein to a degree. But mostly nearly all the analytic types from the 50s. :yawn:

Yes. Fun to watch the corporate-owned trickle-downers try to navigate all this.

Yeah, he’ll pretty much say anything at this point. Taxes, abortion, electric cars (now that Elon is on his side, he likes them), anything.

And always remember: they’re EATING the DAWGS.

If democrats had majority control of congress Trump could pass legislation supporting workers. — praxis

True— but that’s assuming he wants to help workers; his entire business and political life says otherwise.

Trump wins and inexplicably prevents on "blood bath" he promises a 100% tariff, but they would still be cheap. — Fooloso4

There’s already a 100% tariff.

And yes I’d buy one. BYD seems fine to me.

I think the doddering dotard should now take his very-stable genius brain, with his best words, and drop out of this race.

The obese, 78-year old lunatic should enjoy himself. He’s most likely only running again to avoid court losses anyway— and since he has never had any principles, he can do it. Just drop out that make up a story, say it a thousand times, and his supporters will come up believe it’s true.

Israel actually sent in special commando troops to al-shifa hospital. I don't believe any civilians were killed during the operation miraculously. — BitconnectCarlos

So it can be done… :chin:

I thought causalities were inevitable because war is hell, WWII, good intentions and so on.

“They’re eating the DOGS!”

What to do about the rockets being fired from the hospital? — BitconnectCarlos

We have the answer: obliterate the hospital, and everyone in it. Since they’re non-human anyway, it doesn’t matter much.

Guess we just can't go to war then. — BitconnectCarlos

Yeah, I guess nothing can be done. Genocides are inevitable.