Police misbehavior thread

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8271
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Zohar » Tue May 29, 2018 2:16 pm UTC

Uh, no. All of this is wrong. Intent does not need to exist for sexual assault to occur:
"The term “sexual assault” means any nonconsensual sexual act proscribed by Federal, tribal, or State law, including when the victim lacks capacity to consent."
This is true for many other countries in the world as well. Intent matters in that it can lead to harsher sentencing, but it doesn't change the fact of a sexual assault having occurred.

Janet Jackson agreed to one thing. A thing that she did not agree to, of a sexual nature, happened. That the FCC fined the CBS for an indecent act proves this has at least some standing as a sexual act. So yeah, this was sexual assault.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

speising
Posts: 2282
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby speising » Tue May 29, 2018 2:36 pm UTC

just because someone deems something indecent doesn't mean it is a sexual act.
now you'd have to show that ripping open the bra was one.
if JJ had bared her breast on her own, the "indecent act" would have been the same. yet, even you couldn't argue for any assault here.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Tue May 29, 2018 3:24 pm UTC

speising wrote:just because someone deems something indecent doesn't mean it is a sexual act.
now you'd have to show that ripping open the bra was one.
if JJ had bared her breast on her own, the "indecent act" would have been the same. yet, even you couldn't argue for any assault here.

It wouldn't be assault because you can't assault yourself. But assault isn't the point you were trying to make just two lines above, and it would almost certainly have still been seen as a sexual act.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

speising
Posts: 2282
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby speising » Tue May 29, 2018 3:26 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
speising wrote:just because someone deems something indecent doesn't mean it is a sexual act.
now you'd have to show that ripping open the bra was one.
if JJ had bared her breast on her own, the "indecent act" would have been the same. yet, even you couldn't argue for any assault here.

It wouldn't be assault because you can't assault yourself. But assault isn't the point you were trying to make just two lines above, and it would almost certainly have still been seen as a sexual act.

in context, i was answering to
"The term “sexual assault” means any nonconsensual sexual act...

obviously, that definition lacks the mentioning of at least two parties which have to be involved. Zohar argues that it is a sexual act since "the FCC fined the CBS for an indecent act", and thus possibly sexual assault. i argue that that is a non sequitur.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3942
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Dauric » Tue May 29, 2018 3:45 pm UTC

"Sexual Assault" possibly, however more of a third-degree manslaughter than first-degree premeditated murder.

IMO I'm not really that sympathetic (to either performer, or the army of managers and producers behind the event) though. It was a pre-planned theatrical stunt that glorified ripping off a woman's clothes, sung to a song that the lyrics are.. not expressly consentual. On top of that at a venue of hyper-masculinity in the first place.

If Timberlake had tripped on a loose piece of gaffer's tape and in the process of flailing wildly to catch his balance the only handhold he could reach hapened to be Jackson's costume, then I'd be of the opinion that accidents happen, and 'Ol Murphy was there to see to it that the accident was as embarassing as possible. Under these circumstances it would clearly not have been sexual assault, just a terribly humiliating accident.

As it was the difference between the planned events and the accidental reveal was about as minimal as possible (Indeed the difference between the planned stunt and the actual event was one piece of lacy fabric), and to reiterate it was a stunt that glorified tearing a woman's clothes off in public with less than expressed consent in an environment of masculine dominance. These circumstances it certainly enters potential Sexual Assault territory, but again, more in the way accidentally hitting and killing a pedestrian while driving is third degree manslaughter as opposed to first or second-degree murder.

As far as consequences go it bothers me less that Ms. Jackson's career tanked after this stunt than it does that Timberlake's hasn't.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

cphite
Posts: 1293
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby cphite » Tue May 29, 2018 4:04 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:Uh, no. All of this is wrong. Intent does not need to exist for sexual assault to occur:
"The term “sexual assault” means any nonconsensual sexual act proscribed by Federal, tribal, or State law, including when the victim lacks capacity to consent."
This is true for many other countries in the world as well. Intent matters in that it can lead to harsher sentencing, but it doesn't change the fact of a sexual assault having occurred.


She consented to him pulling off the front of her outfit; which is the relevant "act" in this case. We know this because the outfit was designed for that to happen, and because both she and her official representation have outright stated that it was part of the act. We also know, based on their statements, that the underlying garment failed and came off due to a malfunction. Timberlake pulled on the outer garment (as they agreed would happen) and more came off than was expected. That does not constitute any additional act on his part, much less an act of sexual assault.

This sort of thing happens to dancers, cheerleaders, athletes, and similar performers all the time - there is a plethora of examples on YouTube if you don't believe that. It's not necessarily sexual assault just because a breast or some other body part is exposed.


Janet Jackson agreed to one thing. A thing that she did not agree to, of a sexual nature, happened.


The thing she did not agree to happened by accident, because her costume failed.

That the FCC fined the CBS for an indecent act proves this has at least some standing as a sexual act. So yeah, this was sexual assault.


The network was fined for failing to prevent an "indecent" act from being broadcast - which is why many live performances are broadcast on delay - and while that might be seen as implying a sexual component, a sexual component does not automatically imply that any sort of assault was involved. In order for there to have been an assault, you would have to show that either Timberlake pulled away her costume without her consent - which we know is not the case because we have their statements that this was a planned part of the dance routine; or that Timberlake deliberately pulled away more than he was supposed to - which we have no evidence to support.

The far more likely explanations are that either the wardrobe simply failed in some manner, or that Timberlake messed up and grabbed her wrong. Either of those things falls easily into the realm of accident.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8271
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Zohar » Tue May 29, 2018 5:10 pm UTC

speising wrote:obviously, that definition lacks the mentioning of at least two parties which have to be involved. Zohar argues that it is a sexual act since "the FCC fined the CBS for an indecent act",

No, I'm arguing that it goes to show it's not a stretch to consider this a sexual act. Also, you need more than one person for sexual assault because there has to be a nonconsentual action. You will consent with yourself. If JJ started masturbating on stage she would also not be a victim of sexual assault, but it would still be a sexual act.

or that Timberlake deliberately pulled away more than he was supposed to - which we have no evidence to support.
We have plenty of evidence that Timberlake pulled away more than he was supposed to (there's video proof), and that being deliberate or not is, again, irrelevant.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Tue May 29, 2018 5:22 pm UTC

speising wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
speising wrote:just because someone deems something indecent doesn't mean it is a sexual act.
now you'd have to show that ripping open the bra was one.
if JJ had bared her breast on her own, the "indecent act" would have been the same. yet, even you couldn't argue for any assault here.

It wouldn't be assault because you can't assault yourself. But assault isn't the point you were trying to make just two lines above, and it would almost certainly have still been seen as a sexual act.

in context, i was answering to
"The term “sexual assault” means any nonconsensual sexual act...

obviously, that definition lacks the mentioning of at least two parties which have to be involved. Zohar argues that it is a sexual act since "the FCC fined the CBS for an indecent act", and thus possibly sexual assault. i argue that that is a non sequitur.

I know what you were responding to. The point is that your response in itself was already a non sequitur, quite apart from the fact that it also fails to respond to Zohar's point.

Zohar: Sexual assault is any nonconsensual sexual act.
speising: Let's imagine this other obviously consensual act. It's clearly not assault. Checkmate!

speising: Just because it's indecent doesn't mean it's sexual.
speising: Let's imagine this other indecent act. It's not assault.
(okay but the point you just made a second ago was about the sexual part, not the assault part)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

elasto
Posts: 3568
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby elasto » Tue May 29, 2018 6:16 pm UTC

I don't think it's helpful to term something as a sexual assault if everyone involved says it was accidental, even if by some linguistic gymnastics it's vaguely defendable. 'Assault' as a word should be reserved for intentional acts, just as we wouldn't call an accidental death 'a murder'. Words like assault and murder carry just too much baggage.

(On a side-note, it's this sort of overly-zealous 'determination to label as a victim someone who does not see themselves as a victim' and 'determination to be offended on behalf of someone who was not offended' that drives a wedge between the right and left - and has produced the backlash that, in part, resulted in Trumpism.

This isn't a '#metoo' moment. Jackson was stigmatised by the reaction to the accident and bipolar attitude America has towards public nudity, not by the accident itself. Sex is everywhere but god forbid anyone actually shows a nipple. That's what we should be focused on fixing.)

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1904
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Sableagle » Tue May 29, 2018 6:23 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:Uh, no. All of this is wrong. Intent does not need to exist for sexual assault to occur:
"The term “sexual assault” means any nonconsensual sexual act proscribed by Federal, tribal, or State law, including when the victim lacks capacity to consent."
This is true for many other countries in the world as well. Intent matters in that it can lead to harsher sentencing, but it doesn't change the fact of a sexual assault having occurred.

Janet Jackson agreed to one thing. A thing that she did not agree to, of a sexual nature, happened. That the FCC fined the CBS for an indecent act proves this has at least some standing as a sexual act. So yeah, this was sexual assault.

So ... if I'm cycling along the carriageway and a group of schoolgirls are walking along the footway and you come up behind me in your SUV, yacking away on a hand-held 'phone, try to overtake right away despite there being oncoming traffic, make a total arse of it and send me and my bicycle tumbling onto the footway and in the resultant heap of bodies my hand happens to come to rest on a girl's backside, that's me indecently assaulting a minor, is it?

One of us must have committed a sexual assault. You said so yourself.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8271
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Zohar » Tue May 29, 2018 6:40 pm UTC

elasto wrote:I don't think it's helpful to term something as a sexual assault if everyone involved says it was accidental, even if by some linguistic gymnastics it's vaguely defendable.

"Linguistic gymnastics" being literally the law. Got it.

Sableagle wrote:in the resultant heap of bodies my hand happens to come to rest on a girl's backside, that's me indecently assaulting a minor, is it?

IANAL, but I don't think "crashing into someone" would count as a sexual act.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 669
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby SDK » Tue May 29, 2018 6:44 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:IANAL, but I don't think "crashing into someone" would count as a sexual act.

417 disagrees.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Quercus » Tue May 29, 2018 7:01 pm UTC

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe from a brief googling that sexual assault is a strict liability offense in the US. Therefore the general test of mens rea applies, which means that the defendant must be shown to have intended the illegal act (whether they know the act is illegal or not is irrelevant, but they must have intended to commit the act of which they are accused). Under this principle I don't believe that a pure accident could count as sexual assault.

Note that I'm speaking purely from a dry legal perspective. From an ethical standpoint the whole thing, particularly the aftermath, reeks of exploitation, as Zohar has written about.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8271
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Zohar » Tue May 29, 2018 7:08 pm UTC

The phrasing for the law in the US doesn't require intent. In Texas there's a state law that requires "intentionally or knowingly" doing whatever they define as sexual assault. Some countries require intent, some don't.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Quercus » Tue May 29, 2018 7:31 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:The phrasing for the law in the US doesn't require intent. In Texas there's a state law that requires "intentionally or knowingly" doing whatever they define as sexual assault. Some countries require intent, some don't.


IANAL, but my understanding was that mens rea in common law jurisdictions attaches to the legal system as a whole, and doesn't need to be specified in a particular statute. An exception can be specified (creating a strict liability offense), but requiring intent is the default position. Not sure why Texas would feel the need to additionally specify intent, but then I'm even less of an expert on Texas law than I am on US law.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8271
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Zohar » Tue May 29, 2018 7:39 pm UTC

Yeah, I'm not really sure either. My (expert on sexual assault) husband did confirm it doesn't require intent but I haven't asked him if he meant in a legal or practical sense.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4552
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby LaserGuy » Tue May 29, 2018 7:43 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:The phrasing for the law in the US doesn't require intent. In Texas there's a state law that requires "intentionally or knowingly" doing whatever they define as sexual assault. Some countries require intent, some don't.


Yes, US law appears to require explicit intent.
Spoiler:
18 U.S. Code § 2246 - Definitions for chapter

(3) the term “sexual contact” means the intentional touching, either directly or through the clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8271
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Zohar » Tue May 29, 2018 7:53 pm UTC

According to that definition what JT did, even if intentional, would not count as assault (did not touch her breast). Surely forcibly stripping someone is illegal, so I'm fairly certain we're missing something here.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

elasto
Posts: 3568
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby elasto » Tue May 29, 2018 8:01 pm UTC

'Forcibly' stripping someone probably is illegal but accidentally stripping someone probably isn't, and probably shouldn't be, even if done with force. As a kid I dived into a swimming pool once and my swimming trunks got dragged off. Was I guilty of some sexual crime like flashing..?

It's true that the law has its own vernacular, and legislators are free to (mis)use terms in any way they wish - so they can term consensual sex between teenagers as 'rape', and label teenage girls as 'child porn manufacturers' for sending nude Snapchats to their boyfriends - but I still think more is lost than gained if in common parlance we use the same language for accidents as we do for predatory behaviour. The ideal would be if the law didn't do it either.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8271
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Zohar » Tue May 29, 2018 8:43 pm UTC

I don't disagree on that, I'm saying I don't think the link above covers everything we're talking about. Regardless, we're waaaay off-track here. I don't even think that JT needs to be prosecuted here. But it doesn't change the experience of JJ throughout all of this. That she's a champ and took it in stride is remarkable, but as natraj said - not unusual for black women.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Tue May 29, 2018 11:32 pm UTC

elasto wrote:On a side-note, it's this sort of overly-zealous 'determination to label as a victim someone who does not see themselves as a victim' and 'determination to be offended on behalf of someone who was not offended' that drives a wedge between the right and left - and has produced the backlash that, in part, resulted in Trumpism.

Yeah that's some bullshit right there. Like, every word of what you just said...was wrong level bullshit.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

arbiteroftruth
Posts: 449
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:44 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby arbiteroftruth » Wed May 30, 2018 8:33 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
elasto wrote:On a side-note, it's this sort of overly-zealous 'determination to label as a victim someone who does not see themselves as a victim' and 'determination to be offended on behalf of someone who was not offended' that drives a wedge between the right and left - and has produced the backlash that, in part, resulted in Trumpism.

Yeah that's some bullshit right there. Like, every word of what you just said...was wrong level bullshit.


Speaking as someone who is very much more right-leaning than the average in this community, but who has no love for Trump: anecdotally, elasto is right. I'm not a Trump fan in general, but there is still a definite catharthis related to his complete disregard for the type of attitude that the text filters around here force me to refer to as "basic human decency" (and the existence of such a filter only amplifies the catharthis of seeing someone say "fuck that").

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Wed May 30, 2018 12:04 pm UTC

Trump was elected by racists who didn't like that it was becoming slightly less acceptable to be openly racist, yes, but that's not the claim elasto made.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10244
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Wed May 30, 2018 12:42 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Trump was elected by racists who didn't like that it was becoming slightly less acceptable to be openly racist, yes, but that's not the claim elasto made.


While I'm sure a lot of Trump's supporters were indeed racist, I would be hesitant to describe even the majority of them as such, and he would never have been able to win on the racist vote alone. Otherwise we might as well claim that Obama was elected by black supremacists. Sure, some of his voters were indeed black supremacists, but not anywhere close to a majority.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Wed May 30, 2018 12:48 pm UTC

If you vote for an openly racist "solution" to your problems, you're racist.

"Black supremacists" on the other hand barely even exist.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed May 30, 2018 1:51 pm UTC

arbiteroftruth wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
elasto wrote:On a side-note, it's this sort of overly-zealous 'determination to label as a victim someone who does not see themselves as a victim' and 'determination to be offended on behalf of someone who was not offended' that drives a wedge between the right and left - and has produced the backlash that, in part, resulted in Trumpism.

Yeah that's some bullshit right there. Like, every word of what you just said...was wrong level bullshit.


Speaking as someone who is very much more right-leaning than the average in this community, but who has no love for Trump: anecdotally, elasto is right. I'm not a Trump fan in general, but there is still a definite catharthis related to his complete disregard for the type of attitude that the text filters around here force me to refer to as "basic human decency" (and the existence of such a filter only amplifies the catharthis of seeing someone say "fuck that").


I'm with elasto and arbiter here. This sort of thing is exactly why Trump enjoys power, and why he can get away with all sorts of stuff, so long as he delivers on frustrating leftists.

You can call every Trump voter a racist, but that's really not true. I'm not even a Trump voter, and I know that. Sure, sure, some definitely are, but any election with two candidates involves some degree of tradeoffs that folks accept in order to get what they want. It seems odd to label the entire other side of the political spectrum as awful people, and then be astonished that partisanship exists, and your side is routinely denied power.

It's basically exactly the error Clinton made with her "basket of deplorables" comment.

But all that is kind of an aside, and none of this really calls for police intervention or misbehavior. If one is looking for racism, a lot of police behavior provides far more clear cut examples than mere voting.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Wed May 30, 2018 2:18 pm UTC

If what they want are racist "solutions" to their problems, then they're racist. Sorry I don't make the rules.

And I'm certainly not going to change my mind based on a string of disagreements from posters with a history in this very thread of consistently denying the presence of racism no matter how blatant.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9997
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby addams » Wed May 30, 2018 2:31 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:It's basically exactly the error Clinton made with her "basket of deplorables" comment.
In my opinion, "Basket of Deplorables was not a mistake.

That moment like so many others was twisted then amplified by agents and bots that mean us ill will.
That so many deplorables jumped on the 'Band Wagon' does Not reflect well on the people of my Nation.

For a Grandma that had seen 'Despicable Me' one through three on a loop, it was charming.
It doesn't take much to cause the Aggressive White SnowFlakes to melt into a Despicable Mess!

I know a few Trump Voters, Deplorable is a soft word.
In Orange Man's mouth...It has too many syllables.
Last edited by addams on Wed May 30, 2018 2:50 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed May 30, 2018 2:40 pm UTC

addams wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:It's basically exactly the error Clinton made with her "basket of deplorables" comment.
In my opinion, "Basket of Deplorables was not a mistake.


I mean, she did lose, so...

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Wed May 30, 2018 2:51 pm UTC

She got several million more votes, so...

And while publicly calling Trumpets racist may not be the best political move, that has no bearing on the truth of the statement.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9997
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby addams » Wed May 30, 2018 2:53 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
addams wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:It's basically exactly the error Clinton made with her "basket of deplorables" comment.
In my opinion, "Basket of Deplorables was not a mistake.


I mean, she did lose, so...
And; He is a sore winner.
And; What Gmalivuk said.

And; I learned a something.
The U.S. has a sore loser law.
In United States politics, a sore-loser law is a law which states that the loser in a primary election cannot then run as an independent in the general election.
He had all but promised to break That Law, too.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed May 30, 2018 3:03 pm UTC

addams wrote:And; I learned a something.
The U.S. has a sore loser law.
In United States politics, a sore-loser law is a law which states that the loser in a primary election cannot then run as an independent in the general election.
He had all but promised to break That Law, too.


We don't have any such law on a federal level. A few states have such a law, but even there it is not common. If he opted to run in the general, the worst that would happen is that those states might opt to print his name on the ballot, and he would instead be forced to rely on write in votes in those states.

It is not anything like a criminal act.

gmalivuk wrote:She got several million more votes, so...

And while publicly calling Trumpets racist may not be the best political move, that has no bearing on the truth of the statement.


It isn't particularly accurate. No more so than calling every Gore voter an environmentalist would be.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3942
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Dauric » Wed May 30, 2018 3:14 pm UTC

Reinvigorating the coal industry was an important part of Trump's support that had nothing to do with race. It's stupid for economic reasons (Natural Gas production has been steadily getting more economic than coal extraction for about a decade now), but it's an issue that swayed a lot of voters in regions historically- and heavily-invested in coal mining. Trump also made a lot of noise in his campaign about bringing manufacturing back to the U.S., again stupid for economic reasons (and his protectionism of U.S. steel and aluminum has been having adverse effects on the companies that actually manufacture consumer goods in the U.S.), but in itself is not a race issue.

When it comes to political issues and electoral victories, personal prosperity has historically swamped any other issue.

Trump has proven himself to be a racist shitbag to be sure, but to tar all Trump supporters as racists is to miss important other factors that contributed to his win and to ignore the failures of the Democratic party to be able to address economic issues in a convincing way for large segments of the population. To unseat Republicans in upcoming elections it's not enough to point out how horrible they are as people (which at this point is an exercise in diminishing returns), but the Democrats will have to get ahead of the Republican claims that they bring capitalist prosperity. Unfortunately for this year's midterm elections in this regard last year's tax reform package has reduced taxes for pretty much everyone, and the inevitable price to pay for those tax reductions probably won't hit home in the voter's pocketbook for at least another year or two.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby freezeblade » Wed May 30, 2018 3:29 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
addams wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:It's basically exactly the error Clinton made with her "basket of deplorables" comment.
In my opinion, "Basket of Deplorables was not a mistake.


I mean, she did lose, so...


Doesn't mean she was wrong. Only that the deplorables choice won due to technicality (I count the electoral college as a technicality, he lost the overall vote by a good margin)
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8271
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Zohar » Wed May 30, 2018 3:47 pm UTC

Do we really need to discuss again if Trump and Trump voters are racist or not? Has anyone's mind changed since the last time this was discussed here?
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed May 30, 2018 3:48 pm UTC

freezeblade wrote:Doesn't mean she was wrong. Only that the deplorables choice won due to technicality (I count the electoral college as a technicality, he lost the overall vote by a good margin)


The electoral college is odd, but it wasn't a surprise to either contestant. Both understood the rules of the game as given, and he won. Had the rules been different, maybe Trump would have won, maybe not, but it'd have been a different contest with different strategies employed. Ultimately, however, she did lose.

And it's not really normal for winners to do so by bashing the electorate they require for votes. Clinton suffered from an elitism problem. Yeah, some of this was due to Republicans piling on wherever they saw vulnerability, but part of the problem was of her own design. So, definitely a strategic mistake.

As for "she wasn't wrong", what does that mean, exactly? She explicitly acknowledged that she was wrong later, when she walked back her overstatement.

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby freezeblade » Wed May 30, 2018 3:51 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:As for "she wasn't wrong", what does that mean, exactly? She explicitly acknowledged that she was wrong later, when she walked back her overstatement.


I mean that there are a section of Trump voters (the percentage of which is left as an exercise for the reader) that are deplorable, and are irredeemably racist pieces of shit.

Was it was politically a good move to point this out? probably not. But it is true.
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed May 30, 2018 4:21 pm UTC

freezeblade wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:As for "she wasn't wrong", what does that mean, exactly? She explicitly acknowledged that she was wrong later, when she walked back her overstatement.


I mean that there are a section of Trump voters (the percentage of which is left as an exercise for the reader) that are deplorable, and are irredeemably racist pieces of shit.

Was it was politically a good move to point this out? probably not. But it is true.


There are. Her correction never changed that part of her allegation, she simply walked back the "half" portion of it. The mere statement that some are racist or what have you is definitely correct, but claiming that half or all are racist is an overstatement. That latter part is the source of the conflict.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9997
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby addams » Wed May 30, 2018 4:49 pm UTC

Let's go back to the statement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZHp4JLWjNw

oh, sigh.... She was tired.
I can hear it in her voice.

For me, personally, the words, "Basket of Deplorables" still have charm.
She did walk back saying the word half.

Orange calls other human beings Animals.
How long before we become Insects to his Deplorable Followers?

It takes a sliver on the Vin Diagram where True Believers and Truly Fu*ked Up overlap to strike Terror into the hearts of his targets.
He lives firmly in that sliver on the Vin Diagram and calls to his moral and intellectual equals to join him. And; Mindlessly, they do.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed May 30, 2018 4:55 pm UTC

addams wrote:Orange calls other human beings Animals.
How long before we become Insects to his Deplorable Followers?


That particular claim was regarding members of MS-13. While obviously a pejorative, coming out against violent gangs of criminals is pretty boring.

I'm not going to bother to defend Trumps on claims of racism overall(he has said much worse), but your attempt to draw an equality between Trump's anti-criminal statement and Clinton's anti-Republican statement is a bit misguided.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dauric and 11 guests