Knicks · Biden out (page 9)

ESOMKnicks wrote:I can certainly find a speech by Kamala to form an unbiased opinion about her as a potential future president on my own. But I was sincerely asking for recommendations from knowledgeable people, whose opinions I have grown to trust over 10 years of reading their basketball discussions, and was sincerely expressing my current thoughts, while admitting that they may be based on insufficient and superficial info.

The fact that I asked people who are actively involved in a political discussion topic for advice as to what to watch to get better informed, and instead got loads of feedback about everything that may be wrong with me is very telling. Political discourse is fraught with too much mistrust, paranoia and hostility, and there is too much tendency to carp on the other interlocutor's alleged intentions and choice of words rather than substantive things. And such attitude is, regrettably, coming not only from the Trumpist camp. "Oh, he said "ditzy", he must be trying to pull off a right-wing provocation here!"

Social phenomena like Trumpism exist precisely because of such "us vs them" mentality.

And, Martin, yes, I am an American and an FL-registered voter to boot. The fact that I am an immigrant and have been living outside of the US for 20 years does not make me any less American than you. Especially as far as the IRS is concerned.

And I do not think my English is any worse than yours, frankly.

Seems you are aware of the climate. So should maybe put more effort into choosing your words more carefully if you actually do want good faith discussion.

Kamala made her chops as a District Attorney of San Francisco & the Attorney General of California...

Her campaign has gone the route to electrify and unity, and based on the outstanding results thus far has been the correct strategy. So if being called ditzy by someone on the Internet is the price. That is a winning trade off.

When you cut through the leftist media propaganda. And listened to Trump directly when attempting to have an intellectual conversation about the policies he will put in place to help Americans. Should be clear that he has none. All he can do is say he will fix it with no communitive details on how. That everything will be the worst in American history if Kamala is President. Same thing he was saying vs Biden prior and Hillary before that. If elected Trump will do what Trump does. He will give rich ppl hefty tax breaks and finesses any way he can for his own pockets. Everything else will be left to his cabinet members who won't be formed by the best possible candidates of the brightest minds and highest character. But by the people who are considered the most loyal. Not including the possibilities that they rig rules and landscapes for future elections in GOP favor. On the other hand Kamala whether you agree or not actually can verbally communicate her plans and have the intellectual conversation communicating the details of how.

newyorknewyork wrote:Seems you are aware of the climate. So should maybe put more effort into choosing your words more carefully if you actually do want good faith discussion.

I asked for suggested things to watch or listen to from Kamala to form a better informed opinion about her. Instead, people jumped at me for using the word "ditzy". Is this a healthy climate?

You then go on to imply that Kamala has already inspired enough people to take home the presidency, so she will do just fine without me voting for her. Fair enough. Then maybe I should indeed just get lost and stay home on Nov 5.

BTW, I considered Dubya to be ditzy too, so at least give me some points for making this word more gender-neutral.

American public - Inflation is hurting our pockets
Corporate America - Corporate profits as a share of national income are up by about 29%While our economy has returned to or surpassed its pre-pandemic levels on many indicators, workers’ share of corporate income has still not recovered.
Kamala Harris - Vice President Kamala Harris will propose the first-ever federal ban on “corporate price-gouging” in the food industry, her campaign announced.
Trump/MAGA - She's a radical, left wing, liberal, socialist.

Edit

newyorknewyork wrote:Prime example of the disconnect.

American public - Inflation is hurting our pockets
Corporate America - While our economy has returned to or surpassed its pre-pandemic levels on many indicators, workers’ share of corporate income has still not recovered.
Kamala Harris - Vice President Kamala Harris will propose the first-ever federal ban on “corporate price-gouging” in the food industry, her campaign announced.
Trump/MAGA - She's a radical, left wing, liberal, socialist.

That's because administrative regulation of prices - except for times of emergencies, natural disasters, war, etc., or natural monopolies - is not the solution. And inflation is being caused not by some persistent and pervasive "corporate price-gouging", but by the pace of creating money and subsequent self-fulfilling inflationary expectations. Anyone who has studied basic economics and finance will tell you that.

Whatever MAGA proposes as its own remedy isn't any better. Probably worse, because MAGA will definitively end the independence of the Fed and force interest rate reductions, which will only stimulate inflation. While the fight against "corporate price-gouging" will most likely end up being some harmless form of shadow boxing. As I said above, expecting sensible economic policy from either camp at this point is a ludicrous delusionary hallucination, I have given up hope on that by now.

ESOMKnicks wrote:I can certainly find a speech by Kamala to form an unbiased opinion about her as a potential future president on my own. But I was sincerely asking for recommendations from knowledgeable people, whose opinions I have grown to trust over 10 years of reading their basketball discussions, and was sincerely expressing my current thoughts, while admitting that they may be based on insufficient and superficial info.

The fact that I asked people who are actively involved in a political discussion topic for advice as to what to watch to get better informed, and instead got loads of feedback about everything that may be wrong with me is very telling. Political discourse is fraught with too much mistrust, paranoia and hostility, and there is too much tendency to carp on the other interlocutor's alleged intentions and choice of words rather than substantive things. And such attitude is, regrettably, coming not only from the Trumpist camp. "Oh, he said "ditzy", he must be trying to pull off a right-wing provocation here!"

Social phenomena like Trumpism exist precisely because of such "us vs them" mentality.

And, Martin, yes, I am an American and an FL-registered voter to boot. The fact that I am an immigrant and have been living outside of the US for 20 years does not make me any less American than you. Especially as far as the IRS is concerned.

And I do not think my English is any worse than yours, frankly.

Your level of interaction and the way you choose to communicate is poor. There is an absolute reason you are getting the responses in the way you are, you created that tone.

If you'd like to change that up, you'd get a better response.

You have a harden opinion that you start with, not a very well informed one, and then you go from there.

I will let you know that I asked if you were American not to diminish that capacity. I literally thought you were from eastern Europe or something close to that from previous posts and did not know if you at all had even an above middle school level understanding of American politics, your post suggested that was your competency level.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Prime example of the disconnect.

American public - Inflation is hurting our pockets
Corporate America - While our economy has returned to or surpassed its pre-pandemic levels on many indicators, workers’ share of corporate income has still not recovered.
Kamala Harris - Vice President Kamala Harris will propose the first-ever federal ban on “corporate price-gouging” in the food industry, her campaign announced.
Trump/MAGA - She's a radical, left wing, liberal, socialist.

That's because administrative regulation of prices - except for times of emergencies, natural disasters, war, etc., or natural monopolies - is not the solution. And inflation is being caused not by some persistent and pervasive "corporate price-gouging", but by the pace of creating money and subsequent self-fulfilling inflationary expectations. Anyone who has studied basic economics and finance will tell you that.

Whatever MAGA proposes as its own remedy isn't any better. Probably worse, because MAGA will definitively end the independence of the Fed and force interest rate reductions, which will only stimulate inflation. While the fight against "corporate price-gouging" will most likely end up being some harmless form of shadow boxing. As I said above, expecting sensible economic policy from either camp at this point is a ludicrous delusionary hallucination, I have given up hope on that by now.

This is complete gibberish.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Seems you are aware of the climate. So should maybe put more effort into choosing your words more carefully if you actually do want good faith discussion.

I asked for suggested things to watch or listen to from Kamala to form a better informed opinion about her. Instead, people jumped at me for using the word "ditzy". Is this a healthy climate?

You then go on to imply that Kamala has already inspired enough people to take home the presidency, so she will do just fine without me voting for her. Fair enough. Then maybe I should indeed just get lost and stay home on Nov 5.

BTW, I considered Dubya to be ditzy too, so at least give me some points for making this word more gender-neutral.

For one I didn't read people jumping at you calling her ditzy. I read multiple people giving historical context around the wording of ditzy. Foolsball with the context within the Lib Women's movement. ALPH with the context towards Women of color.

Your statement about cutting through left wing media propaganda is terminology that also will push people believing its a bad faith argument. Especially as your opening sentence. As well as the points made that Trump has been on the scene since 2016 and has been POTUS. And your just now hearing a speech from him? Ditzy was the sprinkles to a cake already seemed baked in bad faith. Now this may or may not have been your intention. But I'm just letting you know that based on your choice of words to start the conversation off will lead ppl to believe so.

I didn't imply she has already inspired enough people to take home the presidency at all. I stated that the campaign strategy her team hit the ground running with. Which makes sense due to the circumstances of Biden stepping down and her needing to rally support to earn the nomination and support from the voting public only months to the election. I doubt I or anyone here will be the difference in you voting for Kamala or not. Especially is the topic isn't even about her policies.

My first comment about her being the DA & GA was basically the YouTube search key words that you could put to find all the videos you want about her in prosecutor mode.

martin wrote:
This is complete gibberish.

An argumentative and completely unfounded assertion.

newyorknewyork wrote:
For one I didn't read people jumping at you calling her ditzy. I read multiple people giving historical context around the wording of ditzy. Foolsball with the context within the Lib Women's movement. Todd with the context towards Women of color.

By the way, in my original message I actually used two D-words of similar meaning. But only the second one elicited righteous historical context reactions.

And this alleged historical context is not the way this word has been used at least in the last 30 years, at least not by anyone I have ever come across.

Thanks for the links, I remember those proceedings well, but Kamala was not a household name back then, so I never singled her out.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:
This is complete gibberish.

An argumentative and completely unfounded assertion.

No, it's just a direct response to your level of interaction.

martin wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:
This is complete gibberish.

An argumentative and completely unfounded assertion.

No, it's just a direct response to your level of interaction.

I am sorry I have written something that you have disliked reading, so I will just shut up on this entire topic. Hope your disapproval of my viewpoints does not extend also to basketball topics.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:
This is complete gibberish.

An argumentative and completely unfounded assertion.

No, it's just a direct response to your level of interaction.

I am sorry I have written something that you have disliked reading, so I will just shut up. Hope your disapproval of my viewpoints does not extend also to basketball topics.

Lots of people gave you very direct feedback on your posting style, you may want to read the room. It's up to you to figure out what you do with it.

It's an incredibly low threshold you need to clear to ask for political information in this type of setting and you are absolutely way below that standard of normal, adult, while trying to even have an above middle school level of maturity when asking fellow posters for this type of information.

You may want to reflect on how you reacted to an in-kind level type response.

Start there.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:
For one I didn't read people jumping at you calling her ditzy. I read multiple people giving historical context around the wording of ditzy. Foolsball with the context within the Lib Women's movement. Todd with the context towards Women of color.

By the way, in my original message I actually used two D-words of similar meaning. But only the second one elicited righteous historical context reactions.

And this alleged historical context is not the way this word has been used at least in the last 30 years, at least not by anyone I have ever come across.

Thanks for the links, I remember those proceedings well, but Kamala was not a household name back then, so I never singled her out.

The question you need to ask yourself and not us. Is why would you believe a 60 year old woman whose resume consist of District Attorney(9yrs), Attorney General(5yrs), US Senator(4 yrs), & Vice President(4yrs) would ever hold a collection of powerful positions like these. While being weak, ditzy, or whatever other D words you used for first impressions?

newyorknewyork wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:
For one I didn't read people jumping at you calling her ditzy. I read multiple people giving historical context around the wording of ditzy. Foolsball with the context within the Lib Women's movement. Todd with the context towards Women of color.

By the way, in my original message I actually used two D-words of similar meaning. But only the second one elicited righteous historical context reactions.

And this alleged historical context is not the way this word has been used at least in the last 30 years, at least not by anyone I have ever come across.

Thanks for the links, I remember those proceedings well, but Kamala was not a household name back then, so I never singled her out.

The question you need to ask yourself and not us. Is why would you believe a 60 year old woman whose resume consist of District Attorney(9yrs), Attorney General(5yrs), US Senator(4 yrs), & Vice President(4yrs) would ever hold a collection of powerful positions like these while being weak, ditzy, or whatever other D words you used for first impressions?

Right, and then compare that to the resume of JD Vance and ask yourself how much of a poser that guys is. And don't let his very metrosexual and compulsive eyeliner application fool you.

martin wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:
For one I didn't read people jumping at you calling her ditzy. I read multiple people giving historical context around the wording of ditzy. Foolsball with the context within the Lib Women's movement. Todd with the context towards Women of color.

By the way, in my original message I actually used two D-words of similar meaning. But only the second one elicited righteous historical context reactions.

And this alleged historical context is not the way this word has been used at least in the last 30 years, at least not by anyone I have ever come across.

Thanks for the links, I remember those proceedings well, but Kamala was not a household name back then, so I never singled her out.

The question you need to ask yourself and not us. Is why would you believe a 60 year old woman whose resume consist of District Attorney(9yrs), Attorney General(5yrs), US Senator(4 yrs), & Vice President(4yrs) would ever hold a collection of powerful positions like these while being weak, ditzy, or whatever other D words you used for first impressions?

Right, and then compare that to the resume of JD Vance and ask yourself how much of a poser that guys is. And don't let his very metrosexual and compulsive eyeliner application fool you.

Who this guy.

Vance was chosen because that's who The Heritage Foundation wanted chosen to represent. Trump will Trump, finessing for himself. Vance will push the Project 2025 agenda for The Heritage Foundation.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:
This is complete gibberish.

An argumentative and completely unfounded assertion.

No, it's just a direct response to your level of interaction.

I am sorry I have written something that you have disliked reading, so I will just shut up on this entire topic. Hope your disapproval of my viewpoints does not extend also to basketball topics.

The views you have expressed and the way you have expressed them in this thread would lead most to believe that your intention here is to be combative. You started off by using the phrase "leftist media" which essentially is a MAGA talking point. You then proceeded to act as if you've just discovered that Trump's speeches are rambling and vile - acting ignorant of the past 9 years of Trump speeches. Then you asked for others to lead you to links to essentially help you disprove that Kamala is a ditz. When people challenge - you seem to get angry and now threaten to quit this thread.

Not sure what you are really looking for but if you are wondering about the hostility towards you in this thread - perhaps re-read your own posts.

CSPAN plays speeches etc generally without opinion. You can access Youtube clips of speeches and past interviews. The debate will be coming up. You can watch the Democrat Party Convention.

foosballnick wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:
This is complete gibberish.

An argumentative and completely unfounded assertion.

No, it's just a direct response to your level of interaction.

I am sorry I have written something that you have disliked reading, so I will just shut up on this entire topic. Hope your disapproval of my viewpoints does not extend also to basketball topics.

The views you have expressed and the way you have expressed them in this thread would lead most to believe that your intention here is to be combative. You started off by using the phrase "leftist media" which essentially is a MAGA talking point. You then proceeded to act as if you've just discovered that Trump's speeches are rambling and vile - acting ignorant of the past 9 years of Trump speeches. Then you asked for others to lead you to links to essentially help you disprove that Kamala is a ditz. When people challenge - you seem to get angry and now threaten to quit this thread.

Not sure what you are really looking for but if you are wondering about the hostility towards you in this thread - perhaps re-read your own posts.

CSPAN plays speeches etc generally without opinion. You can access Youtube clips of speeches and past interviews. The debate will be coming up. You can watch the Democrat Party Convention.

+1 thanks, better said than me certainly

ToddTT wrote:

When I die and my soul is taken to Heaven, I would t be surprised if an Angel that looks like her is pulling me up, and being a perpetual swine Id be trying g to look up her white robes.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Prime example of the disconnect.

American public - Inflation is hurting our pockets
Corporate America - While our economy has returned to or surpassed its pre-pandemic levels on many indicators, workers’ share of corporate income has still not recovered.
Kamala Harris - Vice President Kamala Harris will propose the first-ever federal ban on “corporate price-gouging” in the food industry, her campaign announced.
Trump/MAGA - She's a radical, left wing, liberal, socialist.

That's because administrative regulation of prices - except for times of emergencies, natural disasters, war, etc., or natural monopolies - is not the solution. And inflation is being caused not by some persistent and pervasive "corporate price-gouging", but by the pace of creating money and subsequent self-fulfilling inflationary expectations. Anyone who has studied basic economics and finance will tell you that.

Whatever MAGA proposes as its own remedy isn't any better. Probably worse, because MAGA will definitively end the independence of the Fed and force interest rate reductions, which will only stimulate inflation. While the fight against "corporate price-gouging" will most likely end up being some harmless form of shadow boxing. As I said above, expecting sensible economic policy from either camp at this point is a ludicrous delusionary hallucination, I have given up hope on that by now.

Agree, money supply is one of the causes for inflation taught in a basic economics class. Ie. over $800 billion pumped into the American spending pockets. (FYI, given mostly by Trump administration)However, another elementary position would be one that ignore real world dynamics.
One being corporate responsibility/greed to increase profit margins and stock prices by taking advantage of this newly created money supply. Typically price gauging is when companies raise prices despite no increase in costs but rather to take advantage of a favorable advantage. Secondly, in our current political climate it is favorable for republican aligned corporations, to keep inflation high, heading into the elections. Similar to what we saw when Trump demanded Republicans vote against any border policy agreement which would be seen favorable for the Biden administration despite the benefit to the migrant issue.

Think you have a valid point in wanting to find out more about Harris. And you have the right to look for a platform that best meets your concerns. Sounds to me like it’s Ukraines plight against Russia? And if so, one would think you would understand why so many would rather vote for anyone but Trump as those that would vote for anyone but Putin.

Although you are tired of the reasoning, many of us think it is more important to fight against a candidate who has already proven to be racist, misogynistic, narcissistic, divisive , anarchist, a pathological liar, one showing signs of dementia and who has proven he only cares about himself and is willing to sacrifice anyone and anything. Including our constitution, rule of law and democracy.

HofstraBBall wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Prime example of the disconnect.

American public - Inflation is hurting our pockets
Corporate America - While our economy has returned to or surpassed its pre-pandemic levels on many indicators, workers’ share of corporate income has still not recovered.
Kamala Harris - Vice President Kamala Harris will propose the first-ever federal ban on “corporate price-gouging” in the food industry, her campaign announced.
Trump/MAGA - She's a radical, left wing, liberal, socialist.

That's because administrative regulation of prices - except for times of emergencies, natural disasters, war, etc., or natural monopolies - is not the solution. And inflation is being caused not by some persistent and pervasive "corporate price-gouging", but by the pace of creating money and subsequent self-fulfilling inflationary expectations. Anyone who has studied basic economics and finance will tell you that.

Whatever MAGA proposes as its own remedy isn't any better. Probably worse, because MAGA will definitively end the independence of the Fed and force interest rate reductions, which will only stimulate inflation. While the fight against "corporate price-gouging" will most likely end up being some harmless form of shadow boxing. As I said above, expecting sensible economic policy from either camp at this point is a ludicrous delusionary hallucination, I have given up hope on that by now.

Agree, money supply is one of the causes for inflation taught in a basic economics class. Ie. over $800 billion pumped into the American spending pockets. (FYI, given mostly by Trump administration)However, another elementary position would be one that ignore real world dynamics.
One being corporate responsibility/greed to increase profit margins and stock prices by taking advantage of this newly created money supply. Typically price gauging is when companies raise prices despite no increase in costs but rather to take advantage of a favorable advantage. Secondly, in our current political climate it is favorable for republican aligned corporations, to keep inflation high, heading into the elections. Similar to what we saw when Trump demanded Republicans vote against any border policy agreement which would be seen favorable for the Biden administration despite the benefit to the migrant issue.

Think you have a valid point in wanting to find out more about Harris. And you have the right to look for a platform that best meets your concerns. Sounds to me like it’s Ukraines plight against Russia? And if so, one would think you would understand why so many would rather vote for anyone but Trump as those that would vote for anyone but Putin.

Although you are tired of the reasoning, many of us think it is more important to fight against a candidate who has already proven to be racist, misogynistic, narcissistic, divisive , anarchist, a pathological liar, one showing signs of dementia and who has proven he only cares about himself and is willing to sacrifice anyone and anything. Including our constitution, rule of law and democracy.

Let’s not forget that the convicted felon also completely botched the handling of a pandemic that he said would just go away, “like a miracle”.

And he didn’t want to smear his makeup, so he convinced half of the nation that wearing a mask, or taking covid seriously, was a sign of weakness.

Oh, and January 6th. And nearly getting his vice president murdered as well.

I’m sure there’s one or two hundred things I’m forgetting.