Underlore

I have an Adri, your argument is invalid.

Psychology

Dore v Seder #BernieOrBust Debate

TLDR: HRC can’t beat Trump anyway in the general. If you’re terrified of Trump, you better start busting ass right now to get Bernie the nomination.

Ok. So I’m making this because I knew watching it would piss me off and I’ll have a bunch to say about the whole thing so here it all is on one place. And yes it badly pissed me off. But the YouTube comments made me feel better.

Telling the net Sam is full of shit is not new information to them. Yay for being on the right side of history.

It’s interesting though how much time this debate cost me. What Sam cost me. I hope the day I spent writing this is worth a day doing what I do on twitter. I’ll never know which was more helpful.

As you likely already know, I’m wildly pro #BernieOrBust http://underlore.com/bernie-or-bust/

Before the debate even begins I knew what one of the problems was going to be. Narrow focus. Sam is a minutia type guy. He’ll zoom in on tiny little regions, fight in those regions as if they are totally isolated and then move to another tiny region. That will be a recurring theme.

His core argument is SCOTUS appointments. But I shred that argument later. Long story short, SCOTUS isn’t an emperor any more than POTUS is.

So here we go.

0:00

Right away Jimmy sets himself up for a bit of a stumble. He talks about what HRC says like it matters. That’s a large and bad concession to make. The entire debate imo should center around actions not words. Mainly because HRC doesn’t mean anything she says.

2:48

Again, error. Speaking like influencing HRC’s rhetoric is influencing the party in any actual way is wrong because again nothing she says matters. We know FOR A FACT what choices she’ll make when it comes time to actually make or influence policy. She is functionally a neocon. Period. I don’t care about one word that comes out of her mouth.

4:05

See? Right away, Seder jumps into he said she said about Clinton as if her talking points matter, as if what she says matters, and Jimmy can’t refute it yet because he just gave up that ground.

4:58

Seder aiming his microscope at minutia. Yeah, Sanders wasn’t focused on process first because he hadn’t seen the cheating yet. (#ExitPollGate/#AZPrimary/#NYPrimary/etc) But what’s it matter to the big picture which happened first? It doesn’t. This is fantasy football meets daily grind for these people. (Cenk/Kyle/Sam) and all the other #UniteBlue (DINO?) cowards.

5:12

Lessig is completely irrelevant. He did it for ego and he didn’t do his homework on Bernie and he was trying to pull a Nader. I’m glad they didn’t let him in the debates. He’d have hung on splitting Bernie’s vote. I’ll always be grateful to Martin for dropping out for that reason. That man has my respect.

5:18

Sam is playing the hipster here imo. He’s only bringing up Lessig because virtually no one knows who he is in this context and wants to drop the name and show everyone how informed he is. It’s a rhetorical/ego thing, not a logic thing. And as I said the whole topic is irrelevant starting at 4:58.

5:40

Jimmy Dore deploys his biggest weapon, the fact that he’s allowed to turn everything into a joke. It’s like a rhetorical tactical nuke. And now everything Sam said between 4:58 and 5:40 becomes moot. Well done ūüôā He didn’t use this tool much further on, but that’s probably because to Jimmy this isn’t a laughing matter.

6:23

Bernie doing all the wrong things in terms of crafted presentation signals his authenticity. It screams disregard for appearance. In this context, the wrong thing is the right thing. That’s why everyone loves his hair. We love a guy who does not give a fuck.

7:08

Jimmy should not downplay Bernie’s chances and he shouldn’t hedge about “the movement” because that just goes back to rhetorical influence. If they steal the nom from Bernie this shit isn’t going to matter because HRC will just spend the next 8 years quietly making it literally impossible for anyone like Sanders to ever get that close again. This is the last progressive running for POTUS in the USA. If Bernie “loses” to her cheating, all future ones will be all talk and neolibs, or sacrificial lambs for RNC/neolib candidates to feast on.

7:45

No. Active HRC supporters lost the ignorance card months ago. No more doubt benefit for them. Now they are simply DINOs and RWNJs. They know exactly what they are voting for. The nullification theory is nice, but it’s not the case. Though it’s possible that argument will spread just because it’s impossible to disprove.

8:52

Blaming the DNC for HRC is backwards thinking because she owns the DNC. If anything we should blame the Clintons for our piss poor crop of “democrats” in all other regions of government.

9:10

Really Sam? You think HRC has a great resume!? Are you on bath salts? As a senator her biggest accomplishment was naming a post office, and voting and stumping for the Iraq war using Bush’s exact script. As sec state she gave birth to Isis with her monstrosity in libya, and made everything she touched comprehensively worse.

Her resume is “great” for a neocon. We whine about Trump’s racist blather but when it comes to actually exterminating minorities on this planet HRC has at least a high 5 digit kill count. Seven if you include the Iraq war, which she stumped for.

9:21

Not clear Sam?? Only because you won’t pull your head out of your ass. She’s a monster. She is a literal war monger and pathological liar. #WhichHillary

11:39

Yes. Exactly. All the pro Bernie anti Hillary corruption and election fraud talk means exactly zip if the DNC knows ultimately you’ll do as you’re told. At the end of the day, if they know they can take your vote for granted, they will. Period.

In a way, because of this, I hate non #BernieOrBust #FeelTheBern types even worse than Hillary supporters because at least the HRC crowd isn’t pretending to be something they ultimately won’t be when it matters.

13:03

Yes. Neolibs = neocons + abortion. Well said.

13:19

Yes. Excellent point. We vote for people because we can’t vote for policy directly. The idea is to vote policy through people. It makes absolutely zero sense to vote in an election against your own interests. Tactical voting is a failure of the system, not a part of it.

14:08

Jimmy ends the debate for all rational people right here. Trump will not have the DNC cloak to protect his right wing madness. Plus he’ll have the RNC/white/male cloak to get leftist stuff done. It’ll be the exact opposite of Obama. We might actually slide left under Trump for many of the same reasons we’ve slid right under Obama.

HRC on the other hand will be able to get away with virtually everything, being ignored by the left and financed by the right.

Sam looks confused. How dim is this guy? His whole premise is tactically voting and then doesn’t understand that the votes were cast grudgingly. Just because someone wins an election doesn’t mean they get the support of their voters, especially in our system.¬†What a slave brain. Guy expects extorted grudging votes to be given gleefully and with genuine support because that’s how his mind works. Guy has gone into internal appeasement mode full time.

If Trump is elected he will be opposed by the entire democratic base, half the republican base, two thirds of independents. Virtually all of the women, all of the minorities, and at least two thirds of the young. Everything he does will be news like it is right now and it will be wildly opposed whenever it’s insane.

 

0:00

Sam pretending he doesn’t know neoliberalism exists. Assuming voters equal supporters. Whatever pal.

2:06

Out with the microscope again. Oh they lost the senate and not the house. The point is that they were losing for the first time like ever and it terrified them. To understand why: adamcurtisfilms.blogspot.com

2:20

Yes yes let’s debate tie color percentages in march of 82. So tired of the microscope.

3:15

Drop some more names Sam. Maybe someday you’ll get to the point. Sidenote: That’s why I never watched his videos. Him and HR goodman have this same problem. They make huge rambly noise filled videos. Both are pathologically averse to getting to the point.

4:22

Finally, getting to the point. Finally recovered from his involuntary minutia senate v house correction.

4:54

Could you say “uh” a few hundred more times? I guess I can’t handle 2 milliseconds of silence and he¬†can’t handle Jimmy having a turn to speak. Win/win. Amirite?

5:11

Bernie did not fail to get the AA/latino vote. They were virtually all crammed into the front half of the southern fried primary. And also badly disenfranchised by voter suppression laws while at the same time being hilariously misinformed by the MSM. On top of all the closed primary absurd deadlines party suppression.

You can’t rig an entire system to both suppress the minority vote, and crush insurgent candidates and then blame the candidate when they lose.

5:22

Sam’s whole theory that Bernie is tapping into something new is wrong. What changed was that he was the first real reformer to run on the democratic ticket since Carter. End of discussion. That’s the only thing that really changed.

Obama won in 08 expressly because we’ve been waiting for that and that’s what he promised.

Others could have run but they weren’t from the inside or refused to drop their egos (Nader/Greens) long enough to actually have a chance. Or of course they were cheated out of it at some earlier stage.

6:05

Are you ever gonna let Jimmy talk? Anyway. No Obama preemptively surrendered on the single payer option. He’s a neocon also. He’s just as Jimmy said, pro abortion DINO. Understand, Obamacare wasn’t an effort to save the healthcare system, it was an effort to save the insurance industry.

7:05

Yes! Exactly. Obama was dead weight on healthcare. He’s a democrat In, Name, Only.

8:10

Yea break out that microscope. God I hate this guy. He’s so hellbent on gutting his own influence. It’s pathetic. Why even talk about national policy if you want to think so narrow and specifically? Go be on some city council where the microscope is the right tool for the job.

This goes to the whole problem with democracy.

8:25

Sam’s head is stuck in his microscope so he apparently doesn’t remember that healthcare was and is a mess because Americans could look at the whole rest of the fucking planet and see a better way and we were tired of literally sacrificing our children on the altar of insurance profits.

Jimmy’s right. It was placate us, or face the pitchforks. Sadly we got swindled. Obama bailed out the insurance industry by throwing the DNC cloak over the Heritage foundation’s plan while simultaneously throwing the public option under the bus.

Sam can’t step back and realize that at the time it didn’t matter what the republicans didn’t want because the majority was awake and screaming for once. The Establishment¬†had two choices, fix it to our satisfaction sufficiently to douse the torches, or face joblessness after the next election because you literally picked your insurance donors over our fucking children.

See also: Hillary Care

9:07

Yeah. It’s called tactical voting you sanctimonious shill. If you weren’t such a robot you’d understand that people have this thing where they can do something they hate to avoid something worse, which is funny that you don’t understand because that’s the entire point of you cowards voting for HRC. Or hell, maybe it isn’t. Maybe you’re just a DINO too. Too much fame too much money.

9:21

“I’m definitely open…” he says while not shutting up long enough for his guest to answer a question. Also trying to drag Jimmy down into microscope land. “mechanically” “walk me through” etc.

9:27

Changing topic before Jimmy gets to answer.

10:01

Sam finally shuts up. But Jimmy is flustered because it’s clear that Sam is going to not let him talk if he pauses for even one second. And I’m sick of that tone like it’s absurd to think that people will vote one way and act another in a system and party utterly dependent on tactical voting.

People will vote green, and write in Bernie, or not vote at all, and then do what they do policy by policy, issue by issue.

There are two layers of politics in this country. Electoral politics and activism.

Trump can win and still be opposed by the majority. Why are we even having to explain this when the entire premise of #UniteBlue is tactical voting against your own interests!

Tellingyourself

It’s ironic. #UniteBlue says vote the candidate you hate to prevent something worse from happening. And the fact is, that’s exactly what #BernieOrBust is doing, only we don’t define “worse” based on party labels. And we can think past the upcoming election.

11:45

Hey Sam, if you’re gonna have a guest and ask them a question, how about you let them answer it? If you just wanna monologue, make a video. Oh right, no one would watch it. That’s why you’re having Jimmy here. Basically no one cares¬†what you have to say otherwise.

13:21

SCOTUS? Really? Have you seen Obama’s pick? Are you aware that HRC is further right than Obama? Do you still not understand that simply because she’s wearing the DNC cloak whoever she picks will be assumed to be good by the bulk of the democratic base?¬†But ANYONE Trump picks will get instant inspection and radical opposition?

I’m tired of Sam pretending party label has no impact on popular reaction when he defines victory almost exclusively by party label! It’s hair tearingly awful.

Sad fact: If HRC was running as a republican on the exact same platform she’d lose virtually all her supporters, including Sam.

13:57

And again, the microscope. SCOTUS picks aren’t emperors either. We can undo any damage they do if we control the executive and congress. That’s how checks and balances work, and we need to take them both anyway. That’s the whole point of the political revolution.

14:36

Have you seen this election? Again. #ExitPollGate You think HRC gives a flying eff¬†about the voting rights act? Every time there is election failure and mass disenfranchisement, she wins. She’s not going to pick anyone for SCOTUS that will allow Bernie 2.0.

15:06

Yay look at all this neat stuff under my microscope! /facepalm

16:20

If you have to scream how huge the issue is, it’s probably not all that huge frankly. Nothing the SCOTUS does can’t be undone with additional legislation. Again, microscope guy¬†thinks that his current field of vision is the entire world. Did you not notice citizen united? Society can react and respond to SCOTUS¬†rulings.

Your buddy Cenk is all the time talking about the power of a constitutional amendment.

Quit acting like a lousy¬†SCOTUS¬†is the end of the world. We’ve been there for like a decade already. Scalia could have lived another 30 years. So what?

16:41

Sam’s entire argument is based on an HRC that doesn’t exist. He is calling her a democratic president. But the whole problem is SHE ISN’T A DEMOCRAT! What the eff¬†will it take for you people to understand that?

Bernie or Bust

17:04

Yeah let’s aim the microscope at her appointments. Now aim it at Bush’s appointments. Can you even see a difference? No, because there isn’t one. You’re telling me I’m supposed accept a one party system because one half of it is worse than the other half.

No. It’s gone too far already.

No Farther

I am not sacrificing progressivism in America to avoid a republican president. No. Not gonna do it.

0:23

The point isn’t HRC’s appointments being better or worse than Trump. The point is killing neoliberalism so we can at some point stop picking between evils! WTF is wrong with you people?

1:28

If we can’t rely on democrats they why are you willing to saw your feet off to avoid a republican president? Why do you keep assuming HRC isn’t every bit functionally a republican?

######

2:29

Sam is basically Cenk. Only with a different branch. He thinks SCOTUS is an emperor. He keeps assuming the SCOTUS operates in a vacuum and isn’t subject to the checks and balances system.

If he really believes that, then what’s the point of voting in the first place? I guess in his mind we’re a double republic. We pick the people who pick the people who pick the policy now.

No.

2:45

So if Trump appointed Hitler 19 times, eventually we’d just get tired of saying no? That’s a specious¬†assumption. Jimmy is right.

We only have to fight Trump’s picks for 4 years. You honestly think he’ll get a second term? No. Not unless he swings left HARD.

Which ironically is more likely coming from him than HRC and is all the more reason to not fear-vote for HRC as if Trump is Emperor Satan.

3:18

The look on Sam’s face when Jimmy said it’s easy to stand up is priceless because right there you see the cowardice that defines that man. Standing up is the last thing he’s capable of. He’s a whipped dog. A blue dog?

5:06

Sam completely misreads the direction of demographics in this country. Did he miss Bernie getting like 70% of the youth vote? What happens to young people? They get older. They are the future of this country and 70% of them are democratic socialists now.

Again… HRC can’t beat Trump anyway in the general. If you’re terrified of Trump, you better start working right now to get Bernie the nomination.

5:40

Oh god oh god I’m losing, let’s aim my microscope somewhere else. Evade evade!

6:42

Sam is confusing can’t with won’t. HRC and neolibs won’t fight for us, but they will fight Trump because they don’t have a choice. End of debate.

8:01

Sam is so hung up on partisan identity politics that he misses that it’s not “Obama’s” TPP, it’s their same donor’s TPP. Their money men will pick up the phone and tell them to “compromise” and vote in favor of the TPP and bang, we’re stuck with it. They might even get a cherry on top as a reward from neolibs for suddenly “working with” them.

All the obstructionism blamed on Obama hate is theater. The obstructionism itself is the point. Do you not remember starve the beast? The moment something they want looks like it’s coming, obviously they’ll pass it.

8:11

That is exactly the point. Trump will be inept. HRC on the other hand is a pathological liar as well, only she’s good at it, at least relative to Trump, plus she has that all important DNC cloak of invisibility. Pay no attention to the neocon behind the curtain.

If Trump signed the TPP it would 100% chance die in congress.

8:53

Yes it did, but also Obama wasn’t running against Bernie Sanders he was running AS Bernie Sanders. (Sam actually denies this later which is mind blowing in its absurdity.)

It doesn’t matter what we got, the point is what we were trying to get. If we on the other hand pick HRC over Sanders, you can say goodbye to ever seeing a real progressive in the white house ever again. Ever. Trump HAS to beat her to discredit neoliberalism so that we can run someone like Bernie in 2020 with a united front and a reformed party cleared of these neoliberal saboteurs.

9:40

HRC IS NOT A PROGRESSIVE! If we let HRC masquerade as a progressive we will never get an actual one ever again.

10:15

Microscopes AND cowardice this time.

Sam is a RWNJ. I realize this now. Dude is like Cenk.

Plan B is keep fighting like we have spines. Just because surrender always works doesn’t mean it’s a good plan A.

10:35

Dude, Bush is not Trump.

Bush is a garden variety idiot right winger. No one was 100% seriously comparing Bush to Hitler. It’s so funny. You’re so terrified of what Trump might be you’ll vote Cheney/Kissinger 2016 to avoid it, and yet pretend blindness to the polarising get out the opposition vote power of a candidate your camp is literally calling Hitler. Well which is it? He’s not so bad, or he’s barbarians at the gate? It can’t be both.

10:48

Sam seems blissfully unaware of the implosion the right wing is facing now because of Trump. How nice for him.

11:35

Yes, if the choice is between a neoliberal who stole the nomination from a progressive, and a republican, we should pick the republican so that we can get the progressive we should have picked last time.

If we show that we’ll be good little doggies and vote on command when whapped with the newspaper we can say goodbye to ever getting anything other than the newspaper.

This isn’t hard to understand.

 

12:25

Because the leftist base like you won’t fight for anything because they will think they’ve already won. It’s exactly like how Obama gets a pass on all the neocon crap¬†that he does, like solidify the bush tax cuts. Because HRC wears the DNC cloak she can get away quite literally with murder. Just as Obama did.

13:37

Dead on. The reason crap¬†is so broken is because no one is willing to endure short term hardship for long term gain. Again and again they have learned that we’ll just keep voting lesser of two evils lesser of two evils lesser of two evils until finally we’ve forgotten what good even looks like.

It’s time to stand up, be willing to take a punch, and say NO MORE!

13:54

The hell¬†it does. Trump has single handedly gutted the republican party. Are you high? Did you just call Trump establishment? Really? Apparently the RNC wasn’t informed. They threw like 15 candidates at him. He crushed them, all.

16:20

Sam still thinks what she says matters. That’s just insane. We know what she’ll do. Whatever her donors want. End of debate.

Trump doesn’t even have donors in that sense. He’s the only wild card left if it’s down to HRC v Trump.

16:27

His party won’t let him? The one that just did everything they could think of to stop him from being the nominee and failed hilariously? His party that has zero financial control over him? The same congress you think would be powerless to stop lousy¬†SCOTUS¬†appointments? XD

Doublethink is an art form in some brains. Guy¬†just don’t have the mental ram to hold¬†the whole picture in memory at the same time do you. That’s why he¬†microscopes. He¬†can’t think of the whole big picture all at once.

18:16

This. We’ll never see a progressive as an option if we keep kissing fear’s ring.

18:39

Dude wants precedent during the debate of an unprecedented situation. That’s climate change denier level sophistry. “Well can you show me precedent of global warming killing off humanity? I didn’t think so. HOAX!”

This is basic logic. Which would you rather have, an enemy at the gate or a traitor in your midst? A sword on your shield or a dagger in your back?

Do I really have to explain how a turn coat is more lethal than an enemy general? What planet do you live on Sam?

20:13

Sam wants a nice safe comfortable well known well researched easy path to pulling the dagger out. Well, at this point, there isn’t one. That bridge is burnt. The DNC burnt it with the cheating. #ExitPollGate and all the rest. We either stand now or get used to kneeling forever. Sam is clearly already there. He no doubt has a boot taste preference at this point.

21:04

Voting Cheney/Kissinger 2016 is not “moving the ball forward” it’s by definition voting DINO on the grounds that republicans are worse. Which means that for all future time all they gotta do is stay further right than the DNC and they win either way.

It’s like trying to win¬†tug of war by dropping the rope. As opposed to suddenly giving slack and then yanking hard while they are off balance.

Sam is cool with a one party country just so long as that party doesn’t screw us quite as hard as it could be screwing us. O.o

21:20

Let’s roll out the hyperbole. For Cenk it’s “I’ve been to too many holocaust museums” and for Sam it’s 30-40 years of slightly more right wing SCOTUS.

1:41

Pedantry to the rescue!

Sam demands a 200 year study and citation and global consensus. Because logic isn’t good enough for a YouTube debate.

2:32

Are you high? If they get rid of the filibuster they are screwed forever the next time they are in the minority.

2:46

It’s easier for democrats to drum up opposition, among democrats to oppose republicans, than it is for democrats to drum up opposition among democrats, to oppose democrats. Do I really have to explain why that is? Tell me, which is harder, shooting your enemy in the leg or shooting your friend in the leg?

Would you rather be shooting at enemies or friends? Which is harder?

3:55

This is SO pathetic. Sam thinks “fighting” HRC is getting her to lie more like a lefty. Sam is convinced that simply calling yourself a democrat MAKES you a democrat.

Besides, that theory is shot already. Obama got elected sounding like Bernie. Turns out he’s as neocon as HRC. How easy was it for us to pull him left? Apparently not very since it didn’t happen. The man literally kills American citizens and endorses child labor¬†to make Nike more money. And the left can’t get him to budge.

4:10

It ain’t about pulling Trump to the left either you ring licking sycophant. Quit looking for boots to polish you pathetic little toady. It’s about replacing these people and crushing everything they do until we get the replacement.

Christ you’re allergic to courage aren’t you.

4:34

No, Trump is not a neoliberal. He’s a republican. And HRC is a neoliberal. Which is a fancy word for DINO. That’s just Jimmy getting tired of being badgered.

4:56

But they will fight against Trump because he evicerated their party. Republican voters have made voting against their interests an artform.

5:09

Where’s the evidence!? Did you miss the last 8 years of Goldman Sachs rule? What protects Obama from left wing hatred? What got him reelected? Lesser of two evils, and the cloak of the DNC membership. The evidence is him getting away with TPP, whistleblower crackdowns, drone strikes, not closing gitmo, endless war, banking free pass, and on and on and on. All because spineless people like you think D = better than R no matter what.

6:14

Sam’s just completely full of it. I refuse to believe he doesn’t understand the mechanism of neoliberal DNC cover. Does he just not understand what propelled the Clintons to power?

Cft69S3XIAEtBRc

Bull.

Closet RWNJ. Like the rest of HRCs base.

7:23

That’s it? After decades of neoliberalism, that’s your trophy case of achievement? Sounds to me like “it could be worse” lesser of two evils tactical voting simply made things worse at the end of the day. You mean giving up doesn’t work? Shocker. Bottomline question: Are things net positive or net negative under your approach? Net negative, obviously. What you are “doing” (which is to say, not doing) isn’t working.

7:30

1. What HRC say means NOTHING. 2. Lesser of two evils voting didn’t influence the color of her lies, Bernie Sanders did. Because her thought controllers realized that we are not bluffing.

7:39

You could go “on and on” taking credit for stuff¬†#BernieOrBust has done. Yes, you could. But it wouldn’t mean anything.

8:00

Sam can’t let Jimmy speak for more than 20 seconds without interrupting him.

8:15

More deeply deeply pathetic trophies. Toys found in cereal boxes on balance. And that’s the basis of your whole strategy?

8:22

Obama care was a bailout of the insurance industry. We’d have had single payer now but for Obama’s (neolib) stabbing us in the back.

8:50

Sam is rewriting history. He thinks Healthcare reform was a unilateral political thing. Like Obama and company just decided to fight one day for health care. No dude, we got sick of feeding our kids into the for-profit wood chipper of health insurance. And we’re still sick of it, we just got divided by ppl¬†like Sam on whether or not the insurance company bailout was a solution or not just because it briefly slowed the slide to the right.

9:50

Sam lives in fantasy football land where what a politician says is all that matters.

10:15

That’s the core of the issue. Sam here is either a liar or he’s wildly ignorant. I say liar, because I’m decent at poker, but whatever. We’ll say he’s just an innocent moron.

10:27

Yes it would be better if we get a right winger in office because then we’d actually fight unified and effectively instead of DEBATING EACH OTHER ON WHETHER OR NOT A FIGHT IS NEEDED! WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU!?

10:47

Yess yess you smarmy git. What do you think “yes we can” and “change” meant??

12:02

Yes, that’s indisputable. We voted for FDR and we got Bill Clinton 2.0. Watch his address. Tell me he’s not talking the Sanders talk.

WTF is Sam saying? That we were voting for just a little change? Yes we can… Compromise? No¬†dude. Wake the eff up.

12:26

Exactly. He beat HRC the same way Sanders would be beating HRC if not for the southern fried primary and straight up election fraud. #ExtiPollGate

12:54

Again, exactly, either you think we need revolution¬†or your don’t. Sam is clearly comfy.

13:05

Sam crying loser tears because he can’t put the revolution under his microscope and understand it. Dude is the narrowest thinker I’ve seen in this context. He’s trying to be the Chomsky of YouTube. Let’s just drill down to the most meaningless tiniest detail and live there for a year.

“And welcome folks to our 99 part series on the price of yams in ecuador and how that relates to the the economic theory prevalent in the last quarter of 1992, because I think that’s just SUPER important.”

14:59

OMFG I’m tired of Sam taking all the credit for good stuff and blaming all the bad stuff¬†on us.

The whole reason over half the country doesn’t vote is because they recognize that voting neolib v republican is utterly pointless!

CfvJnpRUYAMSLnb

The whole reason the right controls what it does is because neoliberalism isn’t working!

17:06

Sam denies that having a neoliberal in the mix splits the left but look at what we’re doing. Having a debate between leftists over whether or not our enemy is our enemy. If the election was between Trump and Trump. We wouldn’t be having a discussion. But because it’s Trump and HRC we are, ONLY ONLY because she’s labeled a democrat. End of debate.

17:38

That’s what you call letting Jimmy have the last word? Such a petulant child. Yes yes Sammy, it’s YOUR show, you win. /head pats.

Nuclear Advocacy’s Failure

Contents
An open letter to the intellectual elite of the pro-nuclear movement.

ChPC5pTWMAQ-7fz
Here is why for decades we have failed to awaken the populace to the truth of nuclear power. Here is why for decades we have failed to counter the effects of essentially one lunatic, one actress, and one movie despite all the facts being on our side.
Pro nuclear intellectuals are rather keen to complain about the ignorance of the populace when discussing nuclear energy in the context of why “won’t people listen” type conversations. They¬†often¬†drone on about lousy “education” for example. (Ironic, since much of the pro-nuclear community is right wing, and¬†accordingly¬†view quality education as a free-market¬†privilege, by definition to only ever be given to a small elite minority who can pay for it. But anyway.)
We’re often as a result patting ourselves on the back for being so brilliant as to see the truth.¬†But if we’re so brilliant and educated, why do the seemingly stupidest of the uneducated anti-nuclear people¬†have all of us combined completely over a barrel in terms of policy and social influence? What good is being a collection of hyper-educated geniuses if we can’t even effectively counter one lunatic and her library of lies?
For decades apparently (my time and¬†long¬†before) nuclear’s entire approach to convincing lay people of things has¬†essentially¬†been to¬†simply clone the way we convince each other of things. With facts, logic, charts, and exhaustive arguments. When those efforts failed with the general public we lament the dimness¬†of the people and then try again later in the exact same way. More charts, more massive technical essays, more echo-chamber conventions, and it never ever works.¬†This is again ironic when the golden age of nuclear power was full of organized public relations backing.
Why do we keep doing the same failed thing over and over?
What we need are memes, demonstrations, films, social media presence, and activism.
Our old way has consistently failed because it fundamentally misunderstands our target¬†audience, the general public.¬†At the same time we are seemingly unable to¬†admit we’re capable of misunderstanding anything, expressly because we are more or less a collection of hyper-educated, often genius, individuals, rarely¬†familiar with¬†stepping outside the areas where we truly do know more than virtually everyone else on the planet.
The real problem is that we are the ones that lack an education in the science of public relations. And rest assured, it is and has been a science for a very long time. We say they need to go back to school for physics, and that’s true, but we need to go back to school for sociology, psychology, and public relations.
Here’s just a small taste of the toolset at our disposal to defend nuclear energy via¬†the right and from the left.

We need to shift a major portion of our efforts to the public relations and activism fields.
Examples:
  • Ready memes to counter every fragment of the anti nuclear argument. And not tons of them, so that anyone can carry the debate solo with images alone.
  • Public demonstrations meant to educate and provide context by their very existence. Such as anti-radiation demonstrations at coal plants.
  • Widespread social media engagement particularly aimed at the science type figures that are either silent or blatantly anti-science in their anti-nuclear fervor. (Tyson and Nye spring to mind.)
  • We also need to draw constant parallels between anti-nuclear crusaders and climate change deniers because here we have a ready-made work flow for dealing with powerful anti-science types, which the general public¬†already accepts, particularly the left, which is the main source of anti nuclear activity.
    Because is what anti-nuclear is also by definition anti-science and anti-climate.
Those of you with the magic PHD need to very publicly step up to popular science figures to question their anti-nuclear comments and silences because you are the only ones that can.
I highly recommend we all learn twitter. Twitter’s very format forces the creation of pithy media, and bite sized arguments and unlike the other platforms it is much more like one giant lobby and crowd, as opposed to a hotel with many rooms. And before anyone complains about complexity of argument not fitting in a tweet, save that crap, because if science can fit a smartphone in my pocket, it can fit a good argument into a tweet. After all, you can link video and images to tweets, and a picture is worth a thousand words.
Also I might add, virtually all the political figures you’d ever want to influence have and use twitter accounts, including the president and all three people with a real shot at becoming the next one.
Thanks for your time ūüôā
Resources section:

Videos:

Bernie Sanders is Going To Win

In response to:

TLDW: Guy gives 30% chance of Bernie victory.

 

TLDR: I’m giving 100% chance of Bernie victory.

O.o 30%? You yourself did a video before western Saturday saying all he had to do was perform as he had previously and he’d win. Does Bernie EVER LOSE a supporter? Has that ever happened even once?

Now he massively over performs his polling, only loses once due to clear election failure, and you’re still saying 30%?

Here, I’ll go ahead and prove I get it better than Kyle: I predict Bernie will win the nomination. It’s called. It’s done. All we have to do is keep doing what we’re doing.

(Like I actually did on July 1, but my predicted path to his victory was wrong, as I mistakenly assumed the AA vote would like the guy cloning MLK’s platform, marched with MLK, and got arrested on the right side of the civil rights movement. http://underlore.com/batman-feels-the-bern/)

Kyle is clearly consumed with the argument to moderation. He believes the middle path and cynicism are more truthful by default. Reality isn’t like that. Truth is truth and it can be anything. It can be the middle or an extreme or even knowable. It can be eternal or fluid. Truth just doesn’t give a fuck.

It’s possible to over compensate and be wrong in the other direction. Being honest doesn’t just mean defending an assertion that you find unfavorable. It also means being clear about conditions that are favorable.

He has this problem in common with Cenk.

But hey, I view these people like Wikipedia. I can listen critically just as well as I can read critically and no human source of data is infallible. Nor do I need them to be.

It’s funny, Him and Cenk go on and on about how bias the media is, they themselves work in alternative media, they complain that the media isn’t giving him credit for his wins, and then they say that the msm is a massive roadblock. There’s a contradiction. If the MSM is such a massive roadblock, then where are his wins coming from? At what point do you take away the msm’s credit for the ability to influence votes?

People whine about money in politics, but the major spending target of that money is TV advertising. So if we let TV ads pick for us, is that money’s fault or ours? And really DO we let TV pick for us? Money didn’t help Jeb.

Bernie is proving with his rallies and wins and donations and volunteers, that msms bias isn’t the hurdle they’re constantly saying it is.

How’s that for facts?

Here’s another one, Kyle STILL hasn’t done the homework on WHY the primaries are southern fried.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/03/22/southern-primaries-frontloaded-unfair-clinton-sanders-trump-column/82094230/

There ARE two primaries, BY DESIGN.

Cenk himself is already fond of saying during election coverage that it’s not like a race, the elections have already happened it’s just when counts come in. That’s true now to a large extent.

There are two polls that already determined this election in advance. The rest is expensive red tape and information distribution.

1. Which candidate is most favorable? 2. Which platform is most in-line with the majority’s desires? Bernie and Bernie’s. We already share Bernie’s positions, we just have to A. Be informed he exists, and B. be informed of his character. As that information and ONLY that information spreads, he already wins elections in its wake.

He’s already won, like I said in July. I was just wrong about the demographics of how. It’s like how the world changed the very second fire was discovered. It just took time for the effect to ripple out. Clockwork.

“All these roadblocks” boiled down to one that isn’t even a block, as proven by his landslide wins. He’d have landslid Arizona also And all the states with closed primaries and voter suppression had those two policies been reversed.

There’s no new media. Guy has 300,000 subscribers, it’s already impossible to get a response out of him.

Writing this comment is literally like talking to the TV. Mainly the only people that hear it are the other people in the room.

Kyle’s right about one thing. There is no choice. http://underlore.com/bernie-or-bust/

Best I ever got as a response out of these people was a like on my tweet from Jimmy D. and Ana K.

Why don’t republicans love China?

Because Bernie Sanders I see a lot of bullshit about China coming out of the right wing types these days.

It’s a republican wet dream as far as I know. There’s like no real social safety nets, there’s no real environmental regulation, nothing like an actual minimum wage, nothing like real privacy protection, a de facto slave trade, obsessive cultural worship of the past, no unions, no real justice system just a lot of arbitrary executions and censorship and militarized police, huge and belligerent actual military, institutionalized sexism, it’s financial systems are a deregulated bubble factories thick with corruption and insider trading, the list is endless. Not to mention they are the direct or indirect obvious beneficiaries of every trade pact on the planet. Trade pacts which the right wing ADORE.

It’s like if Fox news ran a country. China seems the end product of libertarianism. Socialism for the corporations and oligarchs, and heartless individualism for everyone else. Which is exactly what all right wing policy demands. That’s the entire point of starve the beast, since Reagan.

Literally the only difference between China and a theoretical right wing utopia is no government enforced Christianity, and maybe a few differences of label. Functionally they seem nearly identical to me.

The very term libertarian BEGAN as a corporatist lie. A philosophy tailor made to justify pro business regulation and deregulation. And isn’t that what China is now? Just a massive corporation with a bunch of wholly owned subsidiaries with the entire populace in the role of employees?

Links:

http://www.alternet.org/visions/true-history-libertarianism-america-phony-ideology-promote-corporate-agenda

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-08-28/republicans-misguided-china-bashing

Softball Questions

TYT, It sounds to me like you are complaining about bishops being interviewed for the job of pope, on the grounds that they are not being harassed about being religious. A town hall isn’t the place for that. You guys are missing the point of a right wing town hall.

The right wing mutilates the crap out of itself on terms it can understand during debates. Why would right wing audiences want to see the same in the town hall? Softball is the only way right wing voters get to see an example of them being given everything they want without direct personal opposition. Which is what they would get as president.

Think about it, no one ever really got in Bush’s face while he was president. Because he was the freaking president. Softball questions are actually a pretty great way to preview what each candidate as president would look like.

Also you guys are talking like it’s the media’s job to basically interrogate the right about why they are right wing generally, and that’s fair out in the world in the context of problem solving, but that’s unfair in the context of a town hall given that in other contexts you accept the existence of the right wing.

You never for example overtly and seriously argue that the right wing should be banned. You never overtly argue for a one party system. Think about what that means. It by definition means that you agree that the existence of the right wing is legitimate, in which case you must also grant it is legitimate for it to explore itself in some contexts unchallenged. This is one of those contexts.

Everyone knows everything there is to know about the right wing. These candidates are virtual clones of each other. There’s no new information to extract from them from either side. Just like everyone knows that those bishops all believe the same things, we know all these regressives believe the same things, wrong or not.

The function of the press as a watchdog is to challenge them on this stuff, true, which they don’t, but a town hall is supposed to be partisan friendly. This is actually like the one place where where softballs kind of are fair play.

Now, you cry but what about the left getting hardballs, how is that fair? Well it’s fair because that’s what the left wants. Progressives have a lot bigger decision to make intrinsically when choosing a direction and a leader.

This is about the fundamental difference between conservation and progress. There’s only one past, but there are many possible futures. Wanting to regress is a unidirectional goal, but wanting to make progress is an infinitely more complicated hypothetical because you can go in any direction except back.

This town hall is exactly what was expected, exactly what it should be, and that’s why I didn’t watch it.

TYT seems to understand this when they comment on the fear of being called liberal media. That’s exactly what the media are afraid of because that’s exactly what it would be if they were to ask hard (IE, how dare you be right wing) questions, in the context of a town hall.

The time to ask them that sort of question is out in the real world when their policies fail. That’s the kind of question you ambush them with while they are getting off a bus or otherwise have them cornered. Like if you catch them drinking some water you ask them how they’d feel if you told them deregulation put lead in it.

Even TYT must realize fairness isn’t it’s actual goal. Yes you are saying ask both hardball questions, but that’s what you want them to do. That’s even but it’s not fair. You’re asking to get your way in both cases, but another form of fair is to not get your way in both cases. Would you rather the left get softball questions too in the context of debates and town halls? Of course not. Because that’s not the function of a town hall for the left wing.

Realize. This is what the right wing wants and expects from partisan contexts that already agree with them. It is not what the left wing wants and expects. The right in these contexts wants easy mode, the left wants to be challenged. Conversely, in a left wing debate everyone in civil, in a right wing debate they tear eachother’s throats out. The media is right wing biased, no question, but this softball town hall is not in my opinion an example of it.

Who’s really entitled?

The Worship of Mammon

My Thoughts

As if we’re the entitled ones because we want a fraction of the wealth we create to be spent on making our lives dignified and comfortable.

You entitled right wing types can’t see a millimeter past your own narcissism and greed.

You don’t think you owe anyone anything, but news flash, you do.

We’re only alive because of each other. The very thoughts in your head are in a language you did not invent. You made very likely nothing in your life. How much stuff in your life says made in China on the underside?

We’re in this together, and as much as you want the toy box of life all to your spoiled self, eventually you’re going to have to grow up and learn to share like a big boy.

You people call us entitled while you parrot talking points penned for you by the biggest parasite class in all of human history.

We’re not buying your bullshit anymore.

If you won’t share your toys with the other children, the adults will take them away. You can try to understand or you can have a tantrum.

Either way, as responsible adults, we’ll treat you with the compassion your toddler mind clearly isn’t yet capable of. Maybe in a couple decades you’ll be an adult, or maybe you’ll self destruct before then despite our best efforts.

But unlike you, I welcome you to the human family and wish you a better time than I had, even if some of my tax money pays for it. Because that’s the adult thing to do. The right thing.

Even obnoxious children deserve a better future.

They say we’re generous with other people’s money and that we just want free stuff. Well, apparently it’s equally easy to be greedy with other people’s money. Where do you think the 1%’s massive wealth came from?

You’re buying into the lie. Wealth extraction is not wealth creation. Your masters aren’t even job creators. As if working to death to make money for them is a privilege in the first place. But no they can’t even share that much.

Trickle down is a lie. The 1% is a bloated tick on the economy of humanity. Wall Street is a fraudulent casino where the losses are paid for in public blood. And congress is its inept gridlocked public relations division.

They say we just want free stuff. But no one believes that lie. Not even you. Do you think they’ll reward you for being a good little drone just because you repeat the lie?
This isn’t about free anything, it’s about getting some say over how all that money the 1% stole from us is spent.

We’re not even going to take what you’ve already got. We’re just going to limit how much more you can take.

No more subsidies, no more tax loopholes, no more high frequency trading without a tax, no more banks big enough to hold the global economy hostage, no more off shore tax havens, no more revolving door appointments, no more 76,000% return on lobbying investment, no more purchased elections, no more immunity for executives, no more stolen pensions, no more lead in the water, no more pretending the ocean isn’t rising, no more bombing random countries for a stock bump.

Your time has ended.

Free stuff. What a giggle.
2016-02-14_023734

 

Does that look free to you?

We already paid for everything we’re demanding, and frankly you fops can never pay us back for the lives your greed has already destroyed and ended.

You’re getting off easy with peaceful reform.

We’re unrigging the system. And you should thank us for saving you from your own greed. Because I assure you, you’d like the alternative even less.

You have a very simple choice and I’ll explain it with someone else’s words.

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” ~JFK

Some whine about the violence implied and to them I say, playing the victim now? I didn’t even know crocodiles had tear ducts.

The ones in favor of an entire economy built on extortion playing the victim card. Because mah profits.

Have you ever looked at history? Do you know what usually happens when wealth concentrates like this?

Your masters are literally killing us by the tens of thousand ever year, at least. And you have the pampered balls to whine about threats.

What a laugh coming from a social Darwinist tough guy. Where’s that fitness now? Already looking for someone to tattle to?

Your masters have made it clear they’ll never stop. They’re like the lunatics in Dr Strangelove worrying about a mine shaft gap.

Even if we were literally their slaves they’d still obsess over ways to spend less and make more till the sun ran out of hydrogen.

They will not stop until stopped. That is blatantly obvious. They could have switched over to nuclear power decades ago and halted all greenhouse gas production. France showed the world how it’s done. But they are too lazy and spoiled and above all pathologically greedy.

There’s two ways to stop them. One is peaceful and political.

The other? Well, assuming people will not be slaves and yet we continue down this path of making substantive reform a fantasy, I ask you, what’s the outcome?

What would you do to avoid having 20 years of your life cut off because some patent holder decided you weren’t profitable enough to live?

Would you peacefully watch your child die to protect stock growth this quarter?

Don’t act like I’m being violent. And don’t act like you’re tough. You people are cowards.¬† Intellectual terror is your defining trait. That’s why your masters imprison more people than China. That’s why they spend more on the war machine than the bulk of the planet combined.¬† That’s why they live in gated communities defended by private security companies. That’s why they arm their racist shock troop police like a literal army and send them to ring and mace every protest into silence. That’s why they tap our phones and amass enough data on us to make the Stasi look bored and sloppy.

They know the alternative and they know they can’t stop themselves. Avoiding violence is our goal. Not yours, and not theirs.

External Links

I Like Bernie, But…

Bernie Sanders is a democratic socialist. He believes that our current economic system isn’t doing enough for poor and middle-class Americans and that democratic change is needed to create a more fair and just America. But this isn’t radical or scary! Many of the programs instituted by Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson that we take for granted today ‚ÄĒ such as Medicare, the 40-hour work week, the minimum wage, and Social Security ‚ÄĒ can be considered socialist programs.

Libertarians and Conservatives must choose: Competitive Enterprise or Idolatry of Property

In this analysis, I’d like to focus on one of the directions that conservatism has gone a-wandering.  But note first: I’ll try to do this without taking a single position that could fairly be called even slightly left-of center Рby the old standards at least. My entire critique will be from what used to be a completely conservative perspective. You’ll know this by the historical figure whom I cite above all others.

Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs

About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006.

Sociology, philosophy and political history, documentary films about power and how it works in society.

Extremely informative and eternally relevant documentaries on the science and application of crowd based volition manipulation first called propaganda and later rebranded as “public relations.”

Ayn Rand by Darryl Cunningham

Important context about the philosophical root of conservatism which is the worship of money above all else.

10 corporate welfare programs that will make your blood boil

The money for Sanders’ platform can easily come from eliminating the costliest entitlement programs for the top 1 percent and multinational corporations. Here’s a breakdown of the most superfluous giveaways to the rich and how much they cost the rest of us:

Underlore Links

(None yet)

Videos

Photos

Underlore © 2013