2020 US Elections

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

Evidence of word coding?? I'm not sure you can dispute the point.

Or we're saying that when Black and Brown offend at the same rate, for the same or very similar crimes, then the prisons should be evenly split for the demographic percentage. I think it's highly noted that there's a disproportionate amount of prison terms handed down in the demographic differences.

And yes, I agree #45 has nothing to gain from delving into cupboards for skeletons looking at his own, but that's not the point for him. The aim was for Biden to be rattled and present poorly.

He'll have two more chances at it.

Well I'm relatively new to US political discourse. Watched it from afar since Reagan was voted in but never felt the need to comment until now (2016 on) so perhaps I'm missing something wrt specifically the Dems using "word coding". A quick search returned this from 2012, no idea who it is though ...

How To Read Political Racial Code

Using certain words to invoke stereotypes and racial fear is a reprehensible but time-worn tactic

ideas.time.com

Not saying it doesn't exist and sure it does especially at the extremes, but throughout the whole political system I'd have thought I'd have heard more about it. Feel free to point me in the right direction though.

 

[The perfect fumble]

 

[domalino]

And you're a fool believing that the way forward is to go back to the conditions that created the fool in the hot seat.

You're actually pretty sad not to see it.

The USA in a car driving 80mph off a cliff, and your position is screaming "Don't reverse, that just means we're going back down the road that lead us to the cliff!!"

 

[Bigga]

No lens, it's just looking at what Trump actually did/said.

He spoke about Biden's son's drug addiction, a call to arms for a white supremacist group and about a ban on cows.

There was zero substance to his answers. No health care plan, no economic revival plan... Nothing. It was a monkey throwing shit around.

He threw few and landed zero punches in a political debate. No two ways about it.

I agree on that what #45 produced was ineffectual to a degree, but to think that he landed nothing is an error and just the way you look at things from what you see.

Your lens.

#45 actually managed to mention the length of time Biden has been in office (47 years) and what he's produced which was a negative Crime Bill affecting PoC.

That's a two punch combo.

Was it enough to do damage? Ultimately no, but the fact that he put it out there and Biden had no response has been rippling a little from what I'm seeing in the places that matter to my demographic.

My lens.

 

[DrBlueBob]

Not innocent at all!

The Dems took their cue from the Repubs in using coded language to demonise a section of society.

That particular vernacular has disappeared from their language otherwise it would be fine to use now, wouldn't it...?

If you can't beat them join them.

 

[Bigga]

The issue is that no one thinks Biden presented poorly but you, and you're hardly an impartial judge here. Not even the post-debate Fox New panel I watched thought Biden did badly or that Trump was able to fight to anything more than a draw, at best. Trump played exclusively to his base and came off as a raving lunatic. He also managed to make the whole thing so unwatchable that fewer people will bother with the next one, which also happens to be one of Trump's last chances to sway the race. For the candidate up by seven points that's a huge win.

And this is what I mean.

It's this tool type of response that can't see past what they want to get at!

First a clown has a go about a word I believe was said in misspeak and now another draws a conclusion that I said Biden "presented poorly"!!

Bunch of idiots!!

None of you are expansive thinkers on anything! You want bandaids for something that need major surgery, but you'll continue to put shit loads of the same bandaid on despite the bleed through, all whilst driving to the 'next hospital' every four miles!

And you believe there's not a single shill amongst you.

Sad.

 

[Damocles]

This might be one of those situations where you should look at what the racists think Trump said, because they think he's just put them on stand by for war.

The far right racists despise Trump because of his links and overwhelming support of Israel, and his constant talk about how much he has/wants to help black people. In fact the other day they were absolutely furious because he "gave a trillion dollars to black people for no reason".

Racists hate Trump. But you'd actually have to know about racists to know this rather than read a fuzzy screenshot of a message from Telegram so I can see why you're confused - most are.

So the media, the left and the far right have all interpreted his words the same way, and you're fighting to pretend he said something else.

By "the media", you mean "the left wing media" which is the same as "the left wing". The "right wing media" did nothing of the sort. And as I've shown, and if you want I'll go round their forums and screenshot their posts so you know exactly what they think of Trump rather than some bullshit you saw on Twitter, the far right not only didn't take it that way but vehemently dislike the man.

So really what you mean is that you and your bubble have interpreted it in that way. Which is exactly the point that I made earlier. It doesn't matter what he says, you people will make it up anyway.

 

[Damocles]

Not even the post-debate Fox New panel I watched thought Biden did badly or that Trump was able to fight to anything more than a draw, at best.

I'm pretty sure that the "post debate Fox News panel" had the former Chair of the DNC, a former Bush staffer who despises Trump, their liberal token law guy and one of the myriad of vacuous blonde white conservative women they seem to employ on it and they might have spoken for about 3 seconds each because of the timing issues and they weasel worded to no real opinion.

Fox News' post-debate show was Hannity which featured Trump Jnr and a bunch of other more "extreme" supporters and they absolutely loved Trump's performance and said that he was "a warrior" and "a fighter" and all these other type of pseudo-macho statements. So I have no idea what you were watching there to be fair.

 

[Damocles]

Well I'm relatively new to US political discourse. Watched it from afar since Reagan was voted in but never felt the need to comment until now (2016 on) so perhaps I'm missing something wrt specifically the Dems using "word coding". A quick search returned this from 2012, no idea who it is though ...

How To Read Political Racial Code

Using certain words to invoke stereotypes and racial fear is a reprehensible but time-worn tactic

ideas.time.com

Not saying it doesn't exist and sure it does especially at the extremes, but throughout the whole political system I'd have thought I'd have heard more about it. Feel free to point me in the right direction though.

Word coding is absolute nonsense.

The biggest bullshit in the galactically large industry of bullshit of politics and the media is "coded language". It's a really shitty excuse because the person didn't say what you wanted them to say to demonise them, so instead you pretend that they really DID say it but they said it in such a way that it is hidden unless you "know the code". It's Pizzagate symbol, McCarthy red scare bullshit.

Word coding means that you can assign any statement, any belief, any idea, to any person in the history of the world because instead of relying on what they actually said then you're relying on what they didn't say as proof that actually they said the thing they didn't say. It's literally making things up. I cannot see how people continuously over generations fall for this same bullshit.

The only use that the article that you posted has is to prove that even 8 years ago when Mitt Romney was running, up until the other day a darling of Democrats and the go to example of "a good/normal Republican", they were still calling Republican Presidential nominees secret racists. It has been the cornerstone of every DNC election strategy since, to my knowledge, at least 2002 and presumably before. Oh and that MSNBC was always a shit network.

 

[cjn]

I'm pretty sure that the "post debate Fox News panel" had the former Chair of the DNC, a former Bush staffer who despises Trump, their liberal token law guy and one of the myriad of vacuous blonde white conservative women they seem to employ on it and they might have spoken for about 3 seconds each because of the timing issues and they weasel worded to no real opinion.

Fox News' post-debate show was Hannity which featured Trump Jnr and a bunch of other more "extreme" supporters and they absolutely loved Trump's performance and said that he was "a warrior" and "a fighter" and all these other type of pseudo-macho statements. So I have no idea what you were watching there to be fair.

I watched whatever the fuck this was. Outside of Donna Brazile, who is basically just there as window dressing, I'm not sure why you think this crew would be Biden friendly.

"Special Report’s" Bret Baier and "The Story’s" Martha MacCallum will co-anchor live coverage outside the debate venue. They’ll be bringing in a team of commentators for post-debate analysis, including senior political analyst Brit Hume, co-host of "The Five" and "The Daily Briefing" anchor Dana Perino, as well as co-host of The Five and political analyst Juan Williams. FNC contributors Donna Brazile, Karl Rove and Katie Pavlich will also offer analysis throughout the evening."

Instead of debating the conservative bona fides of the panel, which I truly couldn't care less about, you actually think Trump went out there and did well considering he's well behind at the moment? That's the substance I was getting at.