Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Campaign 2020 First Bernie Sanders Thread 2020

As it seems I "started" this, let me say a few words.

Words are a thing of mine, I like to try to be accurate and consistent in using their proper meanings. Like Perotista does with his statistics - keep it accurate and objective.

I also tend to believe that sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me (full disclosure, I didn't coin that phrase).

When I read GNTs post about Sanders (several times), I perceived the following things (in other words, I formed an opinion):

I perceived a level of something bordering on hatred for Sanders - I called that 'spleen', as in 'venting one's spleen". It's also called 'ranting', so thereby qualifying sweet and to the point of the name of this forum. By my logic, it isn't an attack to say that someone here is ranting.

I also noted that Senator Sanders was labelled a 'loser', or some other insulting and demeaning term of non-endearment at least 8 times, including a declaration that he had a failed career. The rationale for that was limited to these two facts: Sanders never introduced a bill that got passed; and Sanders has lost some elections. There are a great many other facts associated with Sanders' career, which indicate that he has had a great deal of influence, most of it positive and aligned with my world view. Therefor, I assessed the (too) numerous 'loser' and 'failure' comments to be irrational (rational: based on or in accordance with reason or logic), as they ignored a lot of Sanders' 'wins'.

As for using the word 'emotional' (characterized by intense feeling), that too was a perception, arising from the tone of the rant, and supported in my opinion by the overuse of 'loser' and the spleen venting about Sanders.

I probably don't need to review the meaning of sensitive, but let me leave it at perhaps being supported by a pretty hyperbolic reaction to my observations, and the interpreting of my comments as an 'attack'. I have to say that if my expression of a logically substantiated opinion is an attack, and I have to watch what I say to the degree of suppressing my perceptions and opinions in order to not offend someone who is completely free to express theirs, that the person being coddled is probably overly 'sensitive'.

Now, you have the choice of taking these comments as 'discussion', or 'attacks'. You pays yore money and you takes yer chances... step right up!

And, son, if you choose to be a self righteous prick then it's all on you. And I didn't call you that until you said goodbye and walked out the door. I honestly thought I'd never see you again and wasn't particularly disappointed by that assumption.

Now you can stay or you can go, I don't particularly care one way or the other. But be aware that when you dish out bullsh*t somebody here is gonna call you on it. Getting all butthurt and whiny about it aint gonna win you brownie points.

You will be respected here as long as you are respectful.

You will be well considered here as long as you consider your words well.

You've upset a dear old friend of mine and caused him to resign from the position I talked him into taking. A position, I might add, that has proven fatal to all that have taken it on. None have survived it since 1994.

Please go away, you haven't the wit to run with this crowd.

This is more or less why I hardly ever post.

Oh, for [censored]'s sake.

Howl's it hangin', Hamish?

(Mid-afternoon is my slow brain time...)

Meh, bubbles tend to burst because assets have become over-valued. Deregulation generally impacts that process indirectly, mostly when it helps create the conditions for growth which folks later become overly-optimistic about.


:shrug: if you want to talk political messaging, sure - but that is a far cry from reality. People like a simple "President Good = Economy Good; President Bad = Economy Bad" approach because it doesn't require them to do a lot of thinking, and generally lets them confirm that they are on the Right Side (it's always entertaining when the White House flips and so do people's opinion of how well the economy is doing).

Regular folks calls that 'greed'.

No, it's called optimism, and, in this case, is an application of the fallacy that current trends will continue forever without understanding their basic drivers.

'At's what I said, greed. Maybe I should have said, stupid greed?

This is a classic Dunning-Kruger Effect: Greedy people don't know they're greedy.