Jump to content

very honest

Knob Twiddlers
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


very honest last won the day on November 24 2019

very honest had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

191 Excellent


About very honest

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Selected

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

1326 profile views
  1. warren got a college scholarship for debate. she holds her own in debates, even when people are coming at her. she demonstrates a quality of thoughtful presence that i don't see in any other candidate. bernie shouts messaging. biden butchers messaging. pete figures out what people want to hear in real time. klobuchar vibrates about how she can do it. yang thinks UBI is why he is good on climate change. warren is the only one who seems to be internalizing what it is to lead the US right now. i wonder if bernie's ties to the word socialist would be poison in the general. it seems like most people voting GOP are doing so because of the safety-net vs sink-or-swim idealogy. also a lot of dem voters are susceptible to being swayed right based on it. bernie just flies the white flag on that. if he could win some trump supporters, it may be offset by GOP voters mobilized against a socialist, and dem voters chilled by the idea of electing an all-out socialist.
  2. just learned about the audio from the end of the debate, when warren wouldn't shake hands with bernie. it's pretty amazing. warren confronts bernie for calling her a liar on national tv. bernie retreats like oh shit. 1 minute in: i thought the split screen of this moment in the debate, in which the warren/bernie thing is broached, made warren look good. background for those not following closely: warren and bernie met ahead of deciding to campaign, in Dec 2018, at warren's DC condo. recently word leaked that bernie had expressed doubt that a woman could win. after the media started reporting this hear-say, warren released a statement herself, to state herself how she remembered it: i wonder if there was some ambiguity in the actual Dec '18 exchange. like bernie asked "do you think a woman can win" and she said "yes" and he said something like "i don't know". in this realistic scenario, she would be correct to describe him as having disagreed, and he would be correct to say he did not say a woman could not win. the sentiment, which is a misconception that a woman may be at an electoral disadvantage, is a factor in the decision making of primary voters. democrats want a candidate who will beat trump. there's this weird thing that happens where someone who is not bigotted will hesitate to support a candidate because of the bigotry of others. it serves to amplify and enable the effect of bigotry. in the warren campaign they are aware of this sentiment, and it is disconcerting because it is plainly not true. Hillary won popular vote by 3 mil, 2016 was tossed by Cambridge Analytica, Putin, and Comey, etc. to me, it's believable that something like the conversation occurred in that dec '18 meeting, in which warren invited bernie to her condo because they overlap in political following and both wanted to run. bernie had pushed for warren in 2016 and only announced himself running in 2016 after warren declined. i find it incomprehensible that warren could manufacture this. she is a genuine person. it's to be expected that she would mention bernie espousing this sentiment to someone else, eventually. a lot of people get caught in this subtle shade of bigotry. i caught myself saying outloud "do you really think mayor pete could win, he's gay." i reflected on it afterward and realized that it is a strange dynamic in which someone who is not strictly bigotted can, in effect, reinforce bigotry. it's a dynamic worth pointing out. it's not hard to believe that bernie could have expressed something like this idea. there is absolutely no reason warren would be sworn to secrecy about this ugly notion bernie voiced. she mentioned it to someone and word got out. this whole thing just illustrates and reinforces, for me, that warren is sharper and more on top of things than sanders.
  3. one of the reasons he did the interview was to get it out so that he would be less of a target. wish i could find a full interview video to post here. this was a big deal. central player singing on maddow. maybe the biggest single piece of evidence so far in the ukraine scandal. here are a bunch of clips msnbc put up. maddow split the interview because it wouldn't all fit in one show. the second half is tonight. 9pm msnbc.
  4. warren is no snake and no corporate shill. really wondering about the info streams consumed by some of you. she's the best candidate since barack. only disinfo is blinding people to it.
  5. can't handle how good the afx acid is. wtf
  6. reminder lossy encodings do not equal the actual songs
  7. yeah, man. still getting good enjoyment. the live show was incredible, too.
  8. big endorsement today. tim heidecker for bernie. https://medium.com/@thetimheidecker/wow-im-endorsing-bernie-sanders-8ffc8ff07b87 it makes me really happy to see creatives putting their voice in the fray. tim must do a ton of shit in red states. a huge slice of his revenue must be republicans. these guys generally have a real reluctance to put themselves out there politically. especially people like tim, who i think i've seen be serious 3 times, this being one of them.
  9. those 4 new field day tracks make a nice little ep
  10. responding to this: in other news, Mark Zuckerberg Got $27.3 Billion Richer In 2019
  11. it had just taken off from tehran airport. it was on fire when it was going down. here's the first tweet mentioning "ukrainian airlines," time-stamped 3:22am UTC time. first reports of iranian missiles fired were around 11pm UTC time. between 11:30 and 12am UTC, reports of their impacts started coming out, impacts at Erbil air force base and the Ain Al Asad base. there were reports of a second round of missiles fired from iran, around 12am UTC time. i was watching tweetdeck.twitter.com during this. i was watching for reports of impacts from this second round. i did not notice any from reputable sources, but i may have missed it. flight ps752 took off from tehran at 2:42 am UTC time and lost contact a couple minutes later. if iran had launched anti-air missiles at 12am, i don't think they would still be flying around at 2:42am. there were reports of iran fighter jets taking off at 1:08am UTC. iranian FM announced they were done at 2:32am UTC trump announces "all is well" at 2:45am UTC i'm also seeing people saying that photos of wreckage seem to indicate shrapnel damage. there's the results of some research into @StephenG's question. TLDR: unclear, but not unlikely it was inadvertently taken down by iranian air defense.
  • Create New...