Octopus Overlords

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:46 am That doesn't make any sense. "We will not recognize the country if he gets re-elected." The following sentence is about him holding on to power.

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:51 am

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:46 am That doesn't make any sense. "We will not recognize the country if he gets re-elected." The following sentence is about him holding on to power.

Why wouldn't that make sense? "I don't / won't recognize this country" is a fairly commonly expressed sentiment. The point is that four more years of Trump would irrevocably change America. The next part is about how hard Trump will fight to stay in power, mainly because this is a political fundraising e-mail, and "man, it's going to be so easy to beat Trump in 2020" is a poor message for raising donations.

Though I guess I'm not 100% sure who you are disagreeing with here.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:04 am That's a very generous interpretation. At best it's designed to be very ambiguous.

TheMix wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:39 am

NickAragua wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:30 am I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the "it" is referring to the country, rather than the election results.

This is how I read it. I had to go back and reread it to figure out the outrage.

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:51 am

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:46 am That doesn't make any sense. "We will not recognize the country if he gets re-elected." The following sentence is about him holding on to power.

Why wouldn't that make sense? "I don't / won't recognize this country" is a fairly commonly expressed sentiment. The point is that four more years of Trump would irrevocably change America. The next part is about how hard Trump will fight to stay in power, mainly because this is a political fundraising e-mail, and "man, it's going to be so easy to beat Trump in 2020" is a poor message for raising donations.

Though I guess I'm not 100% sure who you are disagreeing with here.

Holman wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:15 am

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:04 am That's a very generous interpretation. At best it's designed to be very ambiguous.

Pete is the last person in the race I'd expect to deny the legitimacy of an election, and the last I'd expect to sneakily imply that supporters shouldn't either. His brand is 100% Boy Scout.

This is just a poorly worded message from a staffer.

"I am asking you to picture that first day the sun comes up in this country and Donald Trump is no longer the President of the United States. A happy thought for sure," Buttigieg said. "But what comes next?"

"This country cannot afford another four years of Donald Trump. We will not recognize it if he gets reelected."

Kurth wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:27 amAlso, it looks like this phrase "we will not recognize it . . . " is becoming part of Pete's stump speech. He's delivered a couple of times, including recently in Iowa, and with more context, I think it makes clear he is referring to not recognizing the country if Trump gets reelected rather than not recognizing the results of the election:

"I am asking you to picture that first day the sun comes up in this country and Donald Trump is no longer the President of the United States. A happy thought for sure," Buttigieg said. "But what comes next?"

"This country cannot afford another four years of Donald Trump. We will not recognize it if he gets reelected."

Still, it's hard for me to believe that whoever drafted that fundraising spam wasn't purposefully trying to get out a different message.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:27 am It seemed pretty clear to me. It's like saying, "Our home town is going through changes. We won't be able to recognize it if this keeps up."

malchior wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:52 am With the true or not story that Biden is fading fast in Iowa we see that the clown car just keeps getting more clown-y.

malchior wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:12 pm Phew - this was spreading fast! Sad that it is believable.

The source of the tweet got suspended by Twitter - probably for impersonating Jake.

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:38 pm Ah. That is one entrant that would be both mildly shocking (at this point) and actually potentially make a significant impact.

YellowKing wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:24 pm At this point I'm ready for the fucking split.

Let the deplorables go set up their own conspiracy addled shit show nation and let people who have some goddamn common sense live our lives in peace.

LordMortis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:07 am

YellowKing wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:24 pm At this point I'm ready for the fucking split.

Let the deplorables go set up their own conspiracy addled shit show nation and let people who have some goddamn common sense live our lives in peace.

I dream of it being that easy.

Jeff V wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:03 pm Since voter participation favors the donkeys,

Kraken wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:29 pm We should all encourage Republicans to vote on Nov. 4.

Former US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley sent confidential material over a network reserved only for unclassified material because she forgot her password for classified communications, The Daily Beast reported.

The event happened on July 4 and July 5, 2017, after North Korea had tested an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of hitting Alaska. As she and her staff scrambled to draft a statement responding to the test, Haley reportedly used her BlackBerry 10 to trade comments over the OpenNet, a State Department network for communicating sensitive, but not classified, information.

“Can’t find my password,” she wrote on July 5. Other messages instructed staff to make changes to the preliminary statement versions they had drafted.

The revelation was disclosed in emails watchdog organization American Oversight obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.
...
It’s arguable that the OpenNet is more secure than a private email address. Still, there’s a reason the State Department system isn’t suitable for transmitting classified material. Last year, Politico reported that the State Department’s unclassified email system suffered a breach that exposed the personal information of a small number of employees.

malchior wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 11:04 pm The only thing saving her is that I don't think many people will get that this is amounting to nationalizing private property. Patent / IP concerns still are sort of an obscure concept to many people. Smart moderates though have to be like 'enough with this populist bullshit Dems' - we need to beat Trump - not kick off the great revolution.

Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2019 12:29 am

malchior wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 11:04 pm The only thing saving her is that I don't think many people will get that this is amounting to nationalizing private property. Patent / IP concerns still are sort of an obscure concept to many people. Smart moderates though have to be like 'enough with this populist bullshit Dems' - we need to beat Trump - not kick off the great revolution.

I think you're wrong about people not understanding the importance of IP as a real property right, but I'm admittedly a little biased on that front as an IP attorney.

But as far as the rest of this goes, yes. 100% yes! I really, really hate Trump, but I also really hate this populist bullshit from the left and just want it to stop ASAP.

Max Peck wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2019 10:50 am Well, there have always people on all sides with fringe views, but I'm not sure that you can point to Harris on this issue and say that "both sides" have no respect for the Constitution any more than you can point to Gabbard and say that "both sides" are abject Putin-fellating russophiles.