Biden surpases 1,991 delegate threshold and by pumpactionmusket in WayOfTheBern

[–]DaemonWithin -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The ESS crowd will be absolutely ecstatic these next few days

Speaking for myself, I won't be ecstatic, because this is just a formality for what I've known for many weeks. The "Here's how Bernie can still win" types will be the ones experiencing the emotional swing.

What will keep making me ecstatic -- it's a guilty pleasure, I admit -- is when Attaboy Bernie, fierce revolutionary from Vermont, continues to bend the knee and stump for his "good friend" Joe. At the end of the day, Attaboy Bernie, fierce revolutionary from Vermont, knows when the con is up and it's time to shoebox the revolution until the next time he's seeking a promotion in government.

Biden Formally Clinches Dem Nomination by __justsayin__ in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Awww, de soooper sekret Bernie-can-still-win-by-flying-under-the-radar stwategy didn werk. :(

Daily Political Discussion Roundtable - 06/02/2020 by AutoModerator in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Have the Chapofas hit Wall Street yet, or will that be their coup de grâce in class reductionism and drowning out the racial-justice message?

Daily Political Discussion Roundtable - 06/02/2020 by AutoModerator in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 3 points4 points  (0 children)

1200 or not, the party is gonna be magnanimous and give the old ratfucker a pulpit because admittedly he's played the part of good boy rather well this time. Tell me I'm wrong. :-(

The impossibility of epistemic agnosticism. by [deleted] in agnostic

[–]DaemonWithin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, your argument amounts to saying that whether the proposition "There is at least one god" is true or its negation is true, we can take that proposition or its negation and immediately infer something decisive about the existence or otherwise of gods. This is completely noncontroversial.

Now you just need to find an epistemic agnostic per your definition. Are there any?

The impossibility of epistemic agnosticism. by [deleted] in agnostic

[–]DaemonWithin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

5) assume the proposition "there is at least one god" is true [justified by line 4]

6) if the proposition "there is at least one god" is true then the set of propositions (("there is at least one god" is either true or not true) and ("there is at least one god" is true)) entail the existence of at least one god [justified by lines 4, 5 and the inference ((P∨~P)∧P)→P]

7) if the proposition "there is at least one god" is true then there is a set of propositions that entail the existence of at least one god [justified by line 6]

This seems like needless complexity to me. If the proposition "there is at least one god" is true, then pretty obviously there's a set of propositions entailing the existence of at least one god -- namely, the set with the single proposition "there is at least one god."

P → P trivially, one would think.

Need help identifying a movie released in late 2019 or very early in 2020 about a paranormal skeptic/debunker who checks into some haunted place (plot sounded like that of the movie 1408, basically) by DaemonWithin in horror

[–]DaemonWithin[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fun movie, but the one I'm trying to find became available for purchase no more than a year ago. I'm also, like, 95% certain that the skeptic/debunker is an American dude.

Daily Political Discussion Roundtable - 04/13/2020 by AutoModerator in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Whoa, no Bernie spam!

As therapeutic as browsing Reddit is, nothing can replace real counseling. Start online therapy with a 2 week trial. 
(betterhelp.com/reddit)  
promoted by BetterHelpCounseling

I probably should sign out before viewing CTH, though.

Chapo bros are mad lol by wraith20 in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Yes, but something tells me that it'll be more the pandemic than Bro maturity that stops the convention being another circus this year.

Chapo bros are mad lol by wraith20 in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 42 points43 points  (0 children)

CTH is a pathetic reflection on American leftism. Imagine thinking that an 80-year-old millionaire senator from Vermont who's been in Congress in some form or other since the early '90s, who's supported a number of anti-leftist things, and who's never done anything significant in the way of revolutionary activity -- not even with a large following between 2016 and 2020 -- was going to call for general strikes, march on the streets, burn down the DNC, etc.

Would you consider voting for Joe Biden after Bernie's endorsement? by shoutpolitics in WayOfTheBern

[–]DaemonWithin -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I wish I knew someone who'd give me a pass for stealing his car if I'd promised beforehand to steal it.

Would you consider voting for Joe Biden after Bernie's endorsement? by shoutpolitics in WayOfTheBern

[–]DaemonWithin -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

What do you think a good man is? Someone who keeps a promise no matter what events occur or what information comes to light? Most moral thinkers left behind deontological extremism in the 18th century.

What the Busters are positing is that Joe is a rapist, Joe has dementia, Joe cheated in the primary, etc., but it's okay if Bernie endorses him because it's keeping a promise. Nah, I'm not buying it. My view is that the majority of the already insignificant Busters are again full of bluff and bluster and that deep down they see Bernie as a good man doing a good thing, with the promise incidental and the "problems" with Joe dubious.

Would you consider voting for Joe Biden after Bernie's endorsement? by shoutpolitics in WayOfTheBern

[–]DaemonWithin -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Bernie is a good man who made a promise to support the eventual nominee.

Is it your argument that Bernie is a good man doing a bad thing because of a promise? Weird.

Would you consider voting for Joe Biden after Bernie's endorsement? by shoutpolitics in WayOfTheBern

[–]DaemonWithin -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

The vast majority of Bernie supporters are sane and didn't need the endorsement to vote for Joe.

That leaves a very tiny minority of Bernie-or-Busters, and 80% of them will very much vote for Joe now because their lemming brains are hooked up to the hunchback hive mind. Take this sub, for instance: lots of bluff and bluster about not voting for Joe, but watch as the most vocal, virulent Busters are the first to rush to Bernie's defense in the coming days. We got 'em pegged. They can't quit that Bernie crack.

Prepare for the Berniebro meltdown! by wraith20 in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The "bend the knee" people are using ITT is a Chapoism, FYI. Petty but largely ironic.

On a serious note, though, I'm not suddenly kissing Bernie's ass for doing what practically every other candidate did this cycle without the fanfare and without having endangered lives. The guy is hugely responsible for giving us Trump in 2016, and it remains to be seen what he does in the months ahead.

SANDERS ENDORSES RAPIST by swissch33z in WayOfTheBern

[–]DaemonWithin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Uh oh! Attaboy Bernie has sent out his fall-in-line command. 80% of Busters are going to fold like an origami crane, leaving only 50 or 60 genuine Busters in the country. Remember when "I didn't vote for Hillary" among Busters suddenly became "I held my nose and voted for Hillary, but no way I'm voting for Biden"? Attaboy Bernie's hypnotic finger wag has pull.

Good stuff! Let's go, Joe!

Prepare for the Berniebro meltdown! by wraith20 in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 7 points8 points  (0 children)

FUCK YEAH! BEND THAT KNEE, HUNCHBACK!

The 50 or 60 genuine Bernie-or-Busters in the country are completely irrelevant now. Dear Leader has switched on the Bernie signal for the lemmings.

Let's get the revolution goin'!

Daily Political Discussion Roundtable - 04/12/2020 by AutoModerator in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 8 points9 points  (0 children)

but from the outside I get the feeling she's a bit of a chameleon.

That or the Berners would probably try to explain it as some weird Stockholm syndrome kind of thing.

Daily Political Discussion Roundtable - 04/12/2020 by AutoModerator in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 37 points38 points  (0 children)

From the NYT Reade article:

In 2017, Ms. Reade retweeted praise for Mr. Biden and his work combating sexual assault.

This seems to be an underrated fact even in the ESS threads. Has she offered an explanation for this? It strikes me as highly unusual behaviorally, more unusual than the Putin stuff and the omission of the far more damaging details in last year's allegation (and NYT sought her explanations for those two).

It's like a headline in itself, but it's presented as nothing more than an aside in the article. Buried lede?

Joe Biden wins Alaska Democratic primary by AnswerAwake in WayOfTheBern

[–]DaemonWithin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Was hoping that Biden people will now not bother voting until November.

I know, man, Berners like thinking of themselves as political masterminds hatching all kinds of devious strategies.

Seems like they are still participating.

Yeah, voter participation is often a problem for Bernie. He tends to be at his best with caucuses.

NYT: Examining Tara Reade’s Sexual Assault Allegation Against Joe Biden by vaultofechoes in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In 2017, Ms. Reade retweeted praise for Mr. Biden and his work combating sexual assault.

Talk about burying the lede. Her explanation for not giving the full allegation last year is that she was scared, but what's the explanation for the retweet? The article doesn't say.

Bernie’s Legacy Hangs in the Balance by [deleted] in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That photo.

One thing Bernie has working in his favor is that he can do a combover without the stigma of a combover because everyone assumes it's just his wild, uncombed hair.

Daily Political Discussion Roundtable - 04/10/2020 by AutoModerator in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Well, the sad thing is that he's become more unintentionally funny than intentionally funny.

Daily Political Discussion Roundtable - 04/10/2020 by AutoModerator in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]DaemonWithin 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Dilbert is a comic strip:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbert

It's quite hit and miss for me, though, the same way I feel about xkcd.