KCRag Forum

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 6:03 pm You're right, I'm emotionally attached to Bill Gates. I love him so much.

What year you living in? The majority of people will believe accusations these days without any proof. I.E - Kavanaugh.

Sometimes I wonder if you ever get sick of telling me everything I say isn't correct. I think if I said black is black, you'd find an angle to argue my comment.

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:11 am You came into a politics thread on a message board, what do you think happens in here?

mykn wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:33 am I would also love to know where this enlightened man gets his news from.

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:11 am

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 6:03 pm You're right, I'm emotionally attached to Bill Gates. I love him so much.

Prove me wrong.

What year you living in? The majority of people will believe accusations these days without any proof. I.E - Kavanaugh.

Yes, exactly, in principle you are "open-minded" enough (as you keep telling us) to believe an accusation if it has been "proven" (of course, anybody should "believe" something that has been proven to be true), but in practice it is vanishingly rare that a sexual assault victim will be able to provide evidence that actually meets your standard of proof, and so you default to believing the man who says he didn't do it.

Sometimes I wonder if you ever get sick of telling me everything I say isn't correct. I think if I said black is black, you'd find an angle to argue my comment.

You came into a politics thread on a message board, what do you think happens in here?

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:04 am Where do you even get your news from? If the WSJ is too “far left” for your tastes I can’t imagine there’s any news source left that you’re willing to entertain. Yet, you hold such strong convictions you must be getting your ideas from somewhere right?

DColeKC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:34 pm

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:04 am Where do you even get your news from? If the WSJ is too “far left” for your tastes I can’t imagine there’s any news source left that you’re willing to entertain. Yet, you hold such strong convictions you must be getting your ideas from somewhere right?

Ugh. The two links posted were from biased news sources quoting other news sources. I'm referring to Newsweek and Salon. He could have taken one more step and just posted the stories from the more trustworthy WSJ. Do you get your ideas from somewhere or do you take in information and formulate your own? I know people like to assume anyone who doesn't have a "fuck trump" shirt must be Fox News junkies who are brainwashed by the conservative media. My convictions also aren't set in stone but pliable. I'm learning everyday and don't mind swallowing some pride here and there.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:26 pm

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:11 am

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 6:03 pm You're right, I'm emotionally attached to Bill Gates. I love him so much.

Prove me wrong.

What year you living in? The majority of people will believe accusations these days without any proof. I.E - Kavanaugh.

Yes, exactly, in principle you are "open-minded" enough (as you keep telling us) to believe an accusation if it has been "proven" (of course, anybody should "believe" something that has been proven to be true), but in practice it is vanishingly rare that a sexual assault victim will be able to provide evidence that actually meets your standard of proof, and so you default to believing the man who says he didn't do it.

Sometimes I wonder if you ever get sick of telling me everything I say isn't correct. I think if I said black is black, you'd find an angle to argue my comment.

You came into a politics thread on a message board, what do you think happens in here?

It makes sense you're a lawyer. I know this is by far the danger zone of the forum and I expect some heated conversations. I don't default to believing men or the accused. Sure, I've heard some credible accusations that sound like they're true. I've also heard some BS like the Kavanaugh situation that's fairly easy to side with the accused.

I guess maybe I'm the only one that goes back and forth with you. Maybe that makes me the forum idiot!

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:11 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:26 pm

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:11 am
Prove me wrong.


Yes, exactly, in principle you are "open-minded" enough (as you keep telling us) to believe an accusation if it has been "proven" (of course, anybody should "believe" something that has been proven to be true), but in practice it is vanishingly rare that a sexual assault victim will be able to provide evidence that actually meets your standard of proof, and so you default to believing the man who says he didn't do it.


You came into a politics thread on a message board, what do you think happens in here?

It makes sense you're a lawyer. I know this is by far the danger zone of the forum and I expect some heated conversations. I don't default to believing men or the accused. Sure, I've heard some credible accusations that sound like they're true. I've also heard some BS like the Kavanaugh situation that's fairly easy to side with the accused.

I guess maybe I'm the only one that goes back and forth with you. Maybe that makes me the forum idiot!

I mean Trump literally bragged that he just forces himself on women and your response in this thread was that it's never been "proven" that he actually did it, so you'll excuse me if I'm not super convinced of your purported openmindedness in this area.

grovester wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 1:19 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:34 pm

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:04 am Where do you even get your news from? If the WSJ is too “far left” for your tastes I can’t imagine there’s any news source left that you’re willing to entertain. Yet, you hold such strong convictions you must be getting your ideas from somewhere right?

Ugh. The two links posted were from biased news sources quoting other news sources. I'm referring to Newsweek and Salon. He could have taken one more step and just posted the stories from the more trustworthy WSJ. Do you get your ideas from somewhere or do you take in information and formulate your own? I know people like to assume anyone who doesn't have a "fuck trump" shirt must be Fox News junkies who are brainwashed by the conservative media. My convictions also aren't set in stone but pliable. I'm learning everyday and don't mind swallowing some pride here and there.

So if you get your news from NPR, why didn't you see this?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/npr-e ... 1603386611

https://twitter.com/NPRpubliceditor/sta ... 1223940096

DColeKC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 10:23 pm

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:11 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:26 pm

It makes sense you're a lawyer. I know this is by far the danger zone of the forum and I expect some heated conversations. I don't default to believing men or the accused. Sure, I've heard some credible accusations that sound like they're true. I've also heard some BS like the Kavanaugh situation that's fairly easy to side with the accused.

I guess maybe I'm the only one that goes back and forth with you. Maybe that makes me the forum idiot!

I mean Trump literally bragged that he just forces himself on women and your response in this thread was that it's never been "proven" that he actually did it, so you'll excuse me if I'm not super convinced of your purported openmindedness in this area.

Egotistical men often brag or say they’ve done things that are lies in the moment to impress or dominate others. You can’t really take his comments at literal. Actually, you can and you do. Trumps morally fucked, no doubt about that.

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 1:08 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 10:23 pm

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:11 pm
I mean Trump literally bragged that he just forces himself on women and your response in this thread was that it's never been "proven" that he actually did it, so you'll excuse me if I'm not super convinced of your purported openmindedness in this area.

Egotistical men often brag or say they’ve done things that are lies in the moment to impress or dominate others. You can’t really take his comments at literal. Actually, you can and you do. Trumps morally fucked, no doubt about that.

You are free to believe whatever you want, and I'm not interested in endlessly talking in circles, but this is exactly why people call you an apologist and accuse you of making up excuses. In the end, you'll even turn "Trump's morally fucked" into a reason to believe he isn't a serial sexual assaulter, just a liar (about assault).

phuqueue wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:42 am I've said repeatedly throughout this thread that I don't like Biden, so I don't know what you're still waiting for. I do believe Tara Reade's allegation and the other allegations that have been made by other women (although only Reade alleges sexual assault). If I lived in a swing state, I would probably grudgingly vote for Biden anyway, because there are only two viable options and Reade's allegation against Biden can't be disqualifying when the only alternative is Donald Trump. I generally agree with Noam Chomsky on the lesser of two evils, so I do think that a vote for Biden is defensible, but I don't live in a swing state, so my vote doesn't matter anyway and I will probably not be voting for him.

Anything else you're still waiting for?

The position outlined below is that which many regard as the most effective response to this quadrennial Hobson’s choice, namely the so-called “lesser evil” voting strategy or LEV. Simply put, LEV involves, where you can, i.e. in safe states, voting for the losing third party candidate you prefer, or not voting at all. In competitive “swing” states, where you must, one votes for the “lesser evil” Democrat.

Riverite wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:02 pm

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 17, 2020 10:40 pm

earthling wrote: ↑Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:03 pm

Agree it's a frivolous decision but am talking about ideology types who do think this way. I've run across several hard conservatives in MO who would never live in a heavy blue state. And lefties in NYC/LA who would never live in a heavy red state. It's not most people but when someone is moving for other reasons, hard line ideology types are more likely to consider that as a factor. There's a book somewhat related to this called The Big Sort, which studied how many moving people will select a neighborhood/county that leans towards their social/political disposition with other followup studies that alludes to harder line ideology types may factor decision at a state level if the state has a heavy leaning political identity.

It's easy to say you would never live in a red state or a blue state and much harder to actually move if the state that you currently live in suddenly meets that criterion. There are 330 million people in this country, so I'm not gonna sit here and tell you that nobody ever moved because they didn't want to be in a state that went for whichever presidential candidate, but the number of people who have done or will do this is not statistically significant. The GOP trifecta in Jefferson City is a much bigger problem for KC than whatever reputational damage it will suffer for being in a state that goes to Trump. That's already priced into whatever anybody thinks about KC or MO anyway.

People do move, more than you think. I’ve personally heard a number of people tell me that they would flat out refuse a job in a red state. If youre a straight white man it probably isn’t that important where you live, but I can promise you people will find a way if their rights are on the line

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:00 pm

Riverite wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:02 pm

phuqueue wrote: ↑Sat Oct 17, 2020 10:40 pm
It's easy to say you would never live in a red state or a blue state and much harder to actually move if the state that you currently live in suddenly meets that criterion. There are 330 million people in this country, so I'm not gonna sit here and tell you that nobody ever moved because they didn't want to be in a state that went for whichever presidential candidate, but the number of people who have done or will do this is not statistically significant. The GOP trifecta in Jefferson City is a much bigger problem for KC than whatever reputational damage it will suffer for being in a state that goes to Trump. That's already priced into whatever anybody thinks about KC or MO anyway.

People do move, more than you think. I’ve personally heard a number of people tell me that they would flat out refuse a job in a red state. If youre a straight white man it probably isn’t that important where you live, but I can promise you people will find a way if their rights are on the line

Business news has been dominated with stories about relocations due to election and tax. Biden proposed tax levels are helping driving East and West Coat rich to low or no income tax states. They are taking their businesses with them in many cases.

phuqueue wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:55 am

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:00 pm

Riverite wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:02 pm

People do move, more than you think. I’ve personally heard a number of people tell me that they would flat out refuse a job in a red state. If youre a straight white man it probably isn’t that important where you live, but I can promise you people will find a way if their rights are on the line

Business news has been dominated with stories about relocations due to election and tax. Biden proposed tax levels are helping driving East and West Coat rich to low or no income tax states. They are taking their businesses with them in many cases.

Ah yes, this is why Kansas is famously booming under their beloved governor Sam Brownback.