Official LRC President Joseph R Biden Thread

The pro Labor Dems and Biden work to screw the unions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-07gRkTewQ

You don't. I'm 100% confident that you don't. Not even close. And you never will, because your perceptions are flawed, your biases are too strong, and your impulses, while probably virtuous, limit your understanding.

You are out of touch, too emotional, and illogical with your repeated reference to the 97% "mostly peaceful protest" argument. The flaws in that argument have been addressed before, but you failed to acknowledge or try and counter them. I'm too high on 'ludes at the moment to repeat them again, but they are easy to find in this thread.

I'd further add that the "97% peaceful" argument rests on the false premise that the 97% peaceful protests are even relevant or need to be accounted for at all. They aren't and they don't. The issue is the BLM-riots, not the BLM peaceful protests. You are trying to excuse and minimize the BLM-riots by raising an irrelevancy. You are a BLM-riot denier, which makes renders you unprincipled and hypocritical at times.

Right, you only care about the small percentage of protests that escalated to violence and think the 97% peaceful protests representing the larger social movement are “irrelevant.” That’s exactly what I said.

It’s like if I were arguing that the sport of basketball is great because it brings people together, and then you said hold on there bucko, that can’t be right because some basketball games break out into fights and it sounds like you’re dismissing that. You’re a basketball fight denier.

the other point is that the looting was done by political BLM marchers. The looting was done by leeches using a moment to team up and steal stuff. Nothing political about it - just gangs robbing places.

it's like if the DC Cops had all gone to the capitol building on J6 to defend the nation and gangs of people looted in the meantime. not politics - just stupid crime.

That said, yes, in some instances BLMers did burn stuff down and break glass. but that was small compared to the vastness of the movement.

That's kind a new spin. Basically the "no true Scotsman" argument. I'd point out the the national media, many liberal politicians, and large portions of the public (including many posters here, probably you and Hunter Blow included) were most certainly not referring to BLM looters as leeches at the time. I recall one spectacularly demented time when a prominent CNN announcer compared looters to American revolutionaries from 1776. And don't forget the now infamous Minnesota Freedom Fund and Kamala Harris's words. $20 million in 4 days was not donated to bail out people the big donors considered leeches.

To the extent you can accuse me of post hoc conflating looters/rioters with peaceful protesters, you are trying to disassociate the two using far less facts and logic.

Right, you want to minimize the extent of BLM-riots by attempting to quantify them with respect to other irrelevant events. It's like saying the Klan wasn't that dangerous in the 1920s because 97% of white people didn't burn crosses on black people's lawns. In fact, it's like saying the Klan wasn't that dangerous in the 1920s because 97% of fish at the time had gills. Totally irrelevant.

Your 97% argument is also misleading, flawed and illogical for other reason provided to you earlier in this thread that you failed to address (but rather just kept repeating 97% as if that means something in an of itself).

I could be wrong, but am nearly certain (not 100%) that he meant to say the looting was NOT done by political BLM marchers. Just a typo. Or thinko. Or something-o.

Ja, korrekt, what ivyguy said. Typo.

the protesters were not the looters.

That's how El Runkin interpretted it. He's saying it's a No True Scotsman fallacy to assume they are not political activists.

I’m not minimizing the extent of anything, but I am quantifying it within the larger framework of the movement. You can’t look at the riots without looking at the protests. They can’t be separated. All of these events occurred around the same time as part of the same larger social movement. The 2020 BLM social movement is both the riots and the protests, and there were a lot more peaceful protests than there were riots but you try to paint the whole BLM movement as if only the rioters and looters are representative.

If I were arguing in your analogy, I would be arguing that white people are not dangerous despite the small percentage that are violent racists, and you would be saying the white people are violent as evidence of the Klan because you ignored the “irrelevant” fact that 97% of white people were peaceful.

And you keep addressing our last argument about this in this thread, but this thread is a bit long to comb through, don’t you think? Just repeat yourself or quote yourself or link the page but don’t tell me I’m wrong for not addressing an argument that I have to go on a scavenger hunt to find.

Yep, I caught the typo, and knew what he was saying, and I was pointing out that he was engaging in No True Scotsman. Which he was.

Agip is getting intellectually lazy these days. First the DeAngelo bit, then this exclusion fallacy. He needs to return to the rigorous analysis of yore.

We know for a fact that large protests create an opportunity for criminals because of the spread of the police force. We know that some of the looting can be attributed to these criminals who were not part of any march or protest. Because of the police force thinning out over a large city, criminals will drive all around and hit a bunch of stores that are nowhere near the protests.

Of course we don’t really know how much can be attributed to that because a lot of looting and a lot of property damage did occur nearer to the protests. Maybe they’ve tried to study this though and I’ll see what I can find.

Amusing story. Apparently Kanye west set up trump with Fuentes. Kanye wanted to take down trump in a battle of right wingers. Or Sort of a kompromat action. Heh.

but trump wanted a public dinner with a mentally ill Jew hater, so he got this. Deserved.

nbcnews.com

The inside story of Trump’s explosive dinner with Ye and Nick Fuentes

NBCNews

What was supposed to be a private dinner ended up being a political nightmare.

Link:www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/...

"needs to return to the rigorous analysis of yore."

We should all aspire to this, not just Agip.

GOP Crime Blotter

sedition and other anti- American crimes division

A jury has convicted Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes of masterminding a plot to violently subvert the transfer of power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden, finding that he entered into a seditious conspiracy against the U.S. government.
The jury also convicted Rhodes ally Kelly Meggs, leader of the Florida Oath Keepers, of seditious conspiracy. But the jury acquitted three co-defendants — Jessica Watkins, Kenneth Harrelson and Thomas Caldwell — of joining Rhodes in that conspiracy. All five, however, were convicted on additional felony charges, including obstruction of Congress.

AND - why did you post that? You do know that all of you Libs were screaming and crying about the January 6 "insurrection" and then you got tired of that and began screaming and crying about the Mar-a-Lago document scandal. Nothing ever happens about these alleged "scandals" - NOTHING. Trump is never going to be indicted. It has been 7 years. You sound like fools to keep saying he will be arrested. Actually fools to say this for 7 years and it has never happened.

And look at all the left wing fools who were crowing about Matt Gaetz getting indicted....Bufoons..all of them.

The Biden Administration has criminals and circus freaks on the payroll.