• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Haubergeon

Member
Jan 22, 2019
2,269
The post he had supported was an effort post that went out of its way to emphasize the nuance of fighting sexual abuse vs. using the language of sexual abuse in other contexts to score points. It was a bad call to begin with and nothing about the post dismissed anything until it was given that label.

The fact that that post was taken action against and so few others in that thread were only serves to reinforce a culture of bad faith bait-posts designed to just get people to drive-by snipe at each other instead of try to make serious, thought-provoking posts to further a deeper discussion about current events instead. You can post in a thread 40 times doing nothing but selectively quoting other people's posts and going out of your way to avoid directly seriously engaging with anyone but if you make a long, sincere post that might make people re-evaluate themselves in ways they dislike or find uncomfortable, you're way more likely to get in trouble for it, or at least, the punishment is far more likely to be severe than constantly de-railing threads in exactly the same way over and over again.

It sucks and makes me want to stick to the gaming side of Era because as someone interested in politics it is completely repelling to try and engage with politics now that the 2020 election is heating up and only see exactly the same kinds of circular arguments with posters that just dislike each other over and over again. These threads are infested with people motivated by personal dislike of other posters trying to rile them up instead of caring about what any of the topics are.
 

Deleted member 19003

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,809
If you think "potentially worse than Trump in matters like foreign affairs." means Trump is good you're either posting in bad faith or you have incredibly awful reading comprehension.
Good thing I didn't say that. I was re-affirming Mercury Fred 's paraphrasing.

You can reference the other posts on the matter in here, like Otisa's for a response to that assertion. Not to mention that post DOES NOT say Trump's FP is good (and like crazy you even quoted it and still tried to suggest it did).
I never suggested that the post said Trump's FP was good o_O I only said Mercury Fred's paraphrase was correct (I only quoted your response to him, not the other poster). Don't put words in my mouth pls.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 3896

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,815
You can reference the other posts on the matter in here, like Otisa's for a response to that assertion.

Quote. The. Post. Your paraphrasing means less than nothing to me in these threads.
"She would've been a disastrous President, and potentially worse than Trump in matters like foreign affairs."

lol!

If anything, my paraphrase was more generous, but go off.
 

Deleted member 11413

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,961
"She would've been a disastrous President, and potentially worse than Trump in matters like foreign affairs."

lol!

If anything, my paraphrase was more generous, but go off.
You can't understand why South Americans have a different perspective on US foreign policy than you or I? She literally praised Kissinger in that interview, obviously that is gonna piss off South Americans.
 
Last edited:

jviggy43

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
18,184
"She would've been a disastrous President, and potentially worse than Trump in matters like foreign affairs."

lol!

If anything, my paraphrase was more generous, but go off.
I was referring to your second argument about defending sexism.

The original topic in question which brought up the Stern quote in that thread specifically tried to spin that post by saying Brazil was suggesting Trump's FP would be good. Also no, it isn't a ridiculous claim to suggest that Hilary would have been an awful president in terms of FP, irrespective of Trump's tenure. Again, read Otisa's post regarding the matter, its a good one and continuing to try to shit up THIS thread with mod whining over things they didn't say or imply is grossly pathetic as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. At all.
 

Deleted member 8644

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
975
She literally said more than once that she would take advice from Henry fucking Kissinger.
If you can't understand why people were worried about her foreign policy you really have absolutely zero idea of what you're talking about.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,227
There's no way to know who deleted what post unless you're on the staff, so it's not really a thing we can discuss.



The post he had supported was an effort post that went out of its way to emphasize the nuance of fighting sexual abuse vs. using the language of sexual abuse in other contexts to score points. It was a bad call to begin with and nothing about the post dismissed anything until it was given that label.

Wow. I don't understand how that's dismissing issues of sexism. If that's a bad faith post then what does a good faith post look like? A single sentence explaining a ban isn't always enough.
 

skullmuffins

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,418
They were right about it being gross to use the framing of MeToo to try and win a political spat based on an unrelated issue. It trivializes the trauma and pain of sexual abuse victims. To be clear, Warren did not do that, but these pundits did and it's disgusting.
it is not disgusting for women to recognize parallels between how a woman is treated when she makes even mild accusations of sexism and how a woman is treated when she makes an accusation of sexual harassment. what I see is people asserting, without evidence, that this was a deliberate smear orchestrated by the warren campaign and using that likely false basis to say it's disgusting to make any comparisons between a "political attack" and #metoo issues.
As I say again and again, if Warren didn't want this to be talked about, all she had to do was confirm Bernie's denial. That she contradicted him necessarily created the conditions to have it litigated in the media. The only possible interpretations of this are that she deliberately saw an opening to reopen some of the 2016 wounds associated with Bernie, or that she has absolutely zero media savvy if she is telling the truth.

Neither of these scenarios paint her in a very flattering light, but at least if it's intentional, you can give her some credit for ruthlessness and gusto.
"warren should have lied to protect bernie" is what I'm getting from this.
 
Oct 25, 2017
21,442
Sweden
The post he had supported was an effort post that went out of its way to emphasize the nuance of fighting sexual abuse vs. using the language of sexual abuse in other contexts to score points. It was a bad call to begin with and nothing about the post dismissed anything until it was given that label.
I personally find it a bit weird that that post warranted a duration pending ban, while someone else straight up calling a left-wing poster a "fascist" in the same thread just got a 3 day ban
 

gutter_trash

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
17,124
Montreal
Don't you guys see that CNN wanted both progressive candidates to divide each other?
Don't you see that CNN wants an insurance Company darling to win?

Liz took the bait.
Bernie didn't want to take the bait.
 

Relic

Member
Oct 28, 2017
631
Assuming the conversation happened (both parties agree it did), literally the only two places it could've come from were Warren or Sanders. So yes, it did come "from her campaign" -- she chose to leak it.
 

Bobson Dugnutt

Self Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,052
Don't forget the 50 pager!

3 threads combined pretty sure we're over 100

oh shit lol, that was a conservative estimate by me. I didn't know there was a third thread , unless you mean it not going down well on poliERA. Even if half the posts are people like me wondering how it ended up being such a shitstorm that's still not great.
 

Poodlestrike

Smooth vs. Crunchy
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
13,489
Official Staff Communication

Alright, this thread is nearly entirely off-topic at the moment. Let's get back to discussing the subject of the thread please folks. Thanks.

 
Oct 25, 2017
1,705
yeah no, to both points

imagine that, politics being cynical

i'd be more surprised if the topic of sexism in the electorate DIDN'T come up in a strategy meeting - he probably said something blunt thay came across as more harsh than intended because it was a private meeting between friends and allies, she privately complained about it to her own friends since it rubbed her the wrong way

but this was never actually a big deal to either of them, just another regular imperfect human interaction

if Warren actually leaked this she would have been prepared to at least try to capitalize on it, rather than whatever her response has been
 

Deleted member 19003

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,809
it is not disgusting for women to recognize parallels between how a woman is treated when she makes even mild accusations of sexism and how a woman is treated when she makes an accusation of sexual harassment. what I see is people asserting, without evidence, that this was a deliberate smear orchestrated by the warren campaign and using that likely false basis to say it's disgusting to make any comparisons between a "political attack" and #metoo issues.

"warren should have lied to protect bernie" is what I'm getting from this.
This. Women complaining about sexism (even seemingly mild comments on it) and being shut down or ignored IS a problem and should be properly addressed. There's nothing disingenuous in pointing out that it has a place in MeToo. It's concerning that quite a few people have tried to hand wave this away, twisted it as Warren being the bad guy for ever mentioning it, or worse, suggested that Warren should have LIED about it all.
 

gutter_trash

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
17,124
Montreal
Gutter i dont know how you went from Harris to Bernie but i just want to say that im here for it
it's mostly the compilation of Health Care Horror Stories that continuously come out of the US.

it is really not normal that a rich industrialized liberal democracy does not have Public Health Care for All.

and watching CNN with continuous adds from Insurance Companies non stop and hearing Chris Cuomo repeat Insurance Companies talking points... it's so fucked up
 

Deleted member 11413

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,961
User Banned (2 weeks): ignoring staff post
Not the first time US libs try to ignore the perspective of latin@s and it wont be the last!
Yup
Of course I can. And it's certainly understandable to be weary of a Clinton admin foreign policy. But it's not understandable to say it would have been potentially worse than Trump's.
It was said in direct response to her praising Kissinger. The man responsible for fucking over South America.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,826
User Banned (2 weeks): ignoring staff post
The "Clinton foreign policy would have been potentially worse than Trump's" is ridiculous. Between that and lauding (then deleting) a post that supports a take dismissing concerns of issues around sexism... 👀
This is gaslighting bullshit. Anyone who read the original effort post can see that. "Dismissing concerns of issues around sexism" is such a mealy-mouthed, disingenuous pretense to just get rid of a guy who l's insights hit too close to home.
 

Deleted member 11413

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,961
it is not disgusting for women to recognize parallels between how a woman is treated when she makes even mild accusations of sexism and how a woman is treated when she makes an accusation of sexual harassment. what I see is people asserting, without evidence, that this was a deliberate smear orchestrated by the warren campaign and using that likely false basis to say it's disgusting to make any comparisons between a "political attack" and #metoo issues.

"warren should have lied to protect bernie" is what I'm getting from this.
Sorry, I strongly disagree with this. It's extremely personal to me because I am a sexual abuse victim and seeing pundits cynically trot out trauma like mine to try and win Twitter arguments on something completely different will never stop pissing me off. MeToo is about listening and respecting victims, not political low blows.
 

pigeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,447
As I say again and again, if Warren didn't want this to be talked about, all she had to do was confirm Bernie's denial. That she contradicted him necessarily created the conditions to have it litigated in the media. The only possible interpretations of this are that she deliberately saw an opening to reopen some of the 2016 wounds associated with Bernie, or that she has absolutely zero media savvy if she is telling the truth.

Neither of these scenarios paint her in a very flattering light, but at least if it's intentional, you can give her some credit for ruthlessness and gusto.

according to the intercept story, warren had already told several journalists about the conversation in an off-the-record dinner

so the answer to why she didn't just confirm Bernie's denial is probably that she couldn't do so since she had already told some journalists the story before any of it broke, and they would know she was lying
 

gutter_trash

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
17,124
Montreal
Denying you did something is not "not taking the bait" especially if you did do that thing. "I'm not going to discuss a private conversation between friends"" is "not taking the bait."
you used the words private, in private conversation. Somebody opened up their mouth to someone who was not part of that private conversation. And it wasn't Bernie who told a reporter
 

The Adder

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,091
you used the words private, in private conversation. Somebody opened up their mouth to someone who was not part of that private conversation. And it wasn't Bernie who told a reporter
Neither did Warren, what's your point? Moreover, I see you trying to sidestep the original argument, y'ain't slick as ya think.
 

Pekola

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,507
This isn't an essay by an acclaimed, award winning columnist, but I also think it's something we can look to:


I don't want to go into details about abuse, because it's...difficult. But I think it's important that women (and those adjacent) have these conversations. Because there's women on both sides of the discussion, and not with the express interest of "dismissing concerns of sexism".
 

Seeya

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
7,984
according to the intercept story, warren had already told several journalists about the conversation in an off-the-record dinner

so the answer to why she didn't just confirm Bernie's denial is probably that she couldn't do so since she had already told some journalists the story before any of it broke, and they would know she was lying

One of the things to note is that the intercept story says that among those present, they disagree on if Warren said Sanders said that.
 

caliph95

Member
Oct 25, 2017
35,160
according to the intercept story, warren had already told several journalists about the conversation in an off-the-record dinner

so the answer to why she didn't just confirm Bernie's denial is probably that she couldn't do so since she had already told some journalists the story before any of it broke, and they would know she was lying
I think Wapo cited a source that backed up Sanders statement being more about Trump than what cnn implied
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,899
Ontario
This isn't an essay by an acclaimed, award winning columnist, but I also think it's something we can look to:


I don't want to go into details about abuse, because it's...difficult. But I think it's important that women (and those adjacent) have these conversations. Because there's women on both sides of the discussion, and not with the express interest of "dismissing concerns of sexism".
Elle magazine embarrassing the american pundit class.
 

FunkyMonkey

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,419
so she mentioned it a year ago, and it's the media, not her, that decided to drop it right before Iowa caucus?

where are all the posters accusing her of waiting to talk about it now? where y'all be?
 

Deleted member 3896

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,815
This isn't an essay by an acclaimed, award winning columnist, but I also think it's something we can look to:


I don't want to go into details about abuse, because it's...difficult. But I think it's important that women (and those adjacent) have these conversations. Because there's women on both sides of the discussion, and not with the express interest of "dismissing concerns of sexism".
Watching a Jacobin columnist sidestep the mechanisms and effects of sexism as they function with regard to this dustup while drilling down into a class argument instead is, I guess, to be expected.
 

pigeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,447
One of the things to note is that the intercept story says that among those present, they disagree on if Warren said Sanders said that.

I think Wapo cited a source that backed up Sanders statement being more about Trump than what cnn implied

yes, among people who heard about the dinner, there seems to be genuine disagreement as to what was said, and there also seems to be genuine disagreement over how warren described it off the record to reporters in the first place, which probably helps explain why the whole story has been so annoying

nevertheless, warren can't deny the story after telling it to reporters privately, and clearly some are under the impression she said Bernie said a woman can't win, since its relatively clear a journalist under that impression from the off-the-record dinner is how this story got published in the first place
 

Fart Master

Prophet of Truth
The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
10,323
A dumpster

gutter_trash

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
17,124
Montreal
I think Wapo cited a source that backed up Sanders statement being more about Trump than what cnn implied
speculation on the 2018 PRIVATE conversation revolving around 2020 intentions:

"How do you compete against Trump in 2020?"
"What are the expected things Trump would do in 2020 against Democrat A) Democrat B) Democrat C)?"
"Democrat W is a Woman, how would Trump behave around a Democrat W in 2020 compared to how he behaved around Hillary Clinton in 2016?"
"LOL, you don't have a chance against Trump"

then Warren got mad and told someone about it
 
Oct 26, 2017
2,699
New Orleans
Is there a thread about the Sanders campaign researching whether Warren could be both vice president and treasury secretary at once? Because that's the most important information in this thread, I think.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,899
Ontario
Watching a Jacobin columnist sidestep the mechanisms and effects of sexism as they function with regard to this dustup reckon with the contextual implications of specific media responses, while drilling down into a class argument instead make an argument for why these discourses ought be kept seperate is, I guess, to be expected.

did you even read the article once you found out they wrote for Jacobin?
 

gutter_trash

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
17,124
Montreal
Is there a thread about the Sanders campaign researching whether Warren could be both vice president and treasury secretary at once? Because that's the most important information in this thread, I think.
because they need to combine the totality of delegates (Warren + Sanders) to overtake Joe Biden's delegate count at a brokered convention

the best way to stop that is to have both hate each other, divide and not join forces.

so someone wanted both to feud and not join forces in August