France To Recognize The Palestinian State. Vive la France

[Valcazar]

Ah yes, you are assuming that the entirety of dems who wouldn't vote for genocide is encompassed by the uncommitted numbers.
That's pretty shoddy logic.

It is shoddy logic.
The shoddy logic of the tweet you chose to highlight.
Which I am mocking, because it is shoddy.
This is yet another "the math proves it!" post where the math does no such thing.

The fact that you are still blaming voters for not being as 'smart' as you and willing to vote for genocide is pretty ghoulish.
Its genocide, every human should have a duty to try and stop it.
But you just argue that's naive.

I have never argued that wanting to stop genocide is naive.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1979938379606470663

And there it is.
What your whole strategy was risking.
You valued your own personal feelings over helping people.
That's you in the meme.

 

[Frankfooter]

It is shoddy logic.
The shoddy logic of the tweet you chose to highlight.
Which I am mocking, because it is shoddy.
This is yet another "the math proves it!" post where the math does no such thing.

Another straw man argument, as you have repeatedly noted voters have multiple motivations when they vote. Trying to mathematically prove any politician was elected based on one issue alone is impossible. What I have and continue to argue is that in a close election the one issue that should have been an easy call for Harris and likely was big enough to change the election was support for the genocide. Given the mass student protest on the streets that year should could have mobilized youth instead of alienating them, given the 80% support for ceasefire in her party should could have empowered them. Instead she told them to shut up, she's talking.

Just as you know there is no mathematical proof that Harris didn't lose because of the election.

I have never argued that wanting to stop genocide is naive.

No, you argued that not voting for Harris continuing the election was naive and a waste of a vote.
To which I replied that it turned out that voting for Harris was a wasted vote and a vote to destroy any claims you care about human rights.

And there it is.
What your whole strategy was risking.
You valued your own personal feelings over helping people.
That's you in the meme.

That's your takeaway from that meme?
How sad.

What I find most sad in this year long debate is your willingness to aid the destruction of democracy in america. For someone so steeped in the process and history, your argument has continually been to prop and support the decline of the system rather than work within the system to fix it. The same way you are now arguing that the No Kings protests aren't likely to change much you continually argued that the people working within the system to try to change it were wasting their time. That uncommitted and student protests were wastes of energy. Not once did you argue towards ways to fix either systematic issues or representational issues in the electoral system. All we heard and continue to hear is that the only thing that counts is a vote.

 

[Valcazar]

Another straw man argument, as you have repeatedly noted voters have multiple motivations when they vote. Trying to mathematically prove any politician was elected based on one issue alone is impossible.

And yet you constantly do it.
It's almost comical at this point.

What I have and continue to argue is that in a close election the one issue that should have been an easy call for Harris and likely was big enough to change the election was support for the genocide.

That is not what you've done.
"Gaza was important and I think she fucked up there" is a completely banal statement no one can argue with.
You have, instead, repeatedly insisted you have mathematical proof, even as you have finally admitted up above you can't actually prove that.

Just as you know there is no mathematical proof that Harris didn't lose because of the election.

Unless this is you going back to the "there is proof that Harris actually won and Trump cheated" (which you've posted tweets about on other threads) then sorry, there is mathematical proof Harris lost because of the election. She got fewer votes and the election is why she isn't President.

No, you argued that not voting for Harris continuing the election was naive and a waste of a vote.
To which I replied that it turned out that voting for Harris was a wasted vote and a vote to destroy any claims you care about human rights.

Yes.
We have different views about what the purpose of voting is, especially given the system the voting was taking place in.
Since you don't believe voting is about who is in power, we will continue to have this difference of opinion.

That's your takeaway from that meme?
How sad.

I'm sure it does make you sad if you do any self-reflection.

What I find most sad in this year long debate is your willingness to aid the destruction of democracy in america.

This should be good.

For someone so steeped in the process and history, your argument has continually been to prop and support the decline of the system rather than work within the system to fix it.

LOL!
Wow.
This is going to be good.

The same way you are now arguing that the No Kings protests aren't likely to change much you continually argued that the people working within the system to try to change it were wasting their time.

No.
I have argued constantly that people should work within the system to change it.
And along side parallel to the system to change it.
Hell, I even advocate working completely outside the system to change it on the rare occasions where that makes sense.

Self-delusion doesn't change the system, though, which is why you get so mad at me, I think.

That uncommitted and student protests were wastes of energy.

I never once said either of those things were wastes of energy.
I was at the No Kings rallies and have been at some student protests.
Why would you think I think those things are wastes of energy?

What they aren't is magic.

Not once did you argue towards ways to fix either systematic issues or representational issues in the electoral system. All we heard and continue to hear is that the only thing that counts is a vote.

I actually am wildly against people who think the only thing that counts is a vote.
Votes aren't magic spells that express your feelings.
It would be good if you stopped believing that and thought of votes as one of the many tools to make change.

 

[Frankfooter]

And yet you constantly do it.
It's almost comical at this point.

uh huh, you accuse me of straw man arguments and then....

That is not what you've done.
"Gaza was important and I think she fucked up there" is a completely banal statement no one can argue with.
You have, instead, repeatedly insisted you have mathematical proof, even as you have finally admitted up above you can't actually prove that.

you post a straw man argument.

I never said I have mathematical proof, I said that the numbers support the claim. That's not declaring 100% mathematical certainty its stating I believe there is enough evidence to make this a believable claim. That's been supported by Harris' own statements in her book.

Unless this is you going back to the "there is proof that Harris actually won and Trump cheated" (which you've posted tweets about on other threads) then sorry, there is mathematical proof Harris lost because of the election. She got fewer votes and the election is why she isn't President.

Yes, the results show she lost. But Musk's statement and another court case suggest that its possible the counting wasn't fair. Given how untrustworthy trump and his team are I'm surprised that you think he wouldn't have tried to cheat.

Yes.
We have different views about what the purpose of voting is, especially given the system the voting was taking place in.
Since you don't believe voting is about who is in power, we will continue to have this difference of opinion.

straw man argument #2

You just argued that voting for genocide was pragmatic.
I said 'never again'.

I'm sure it does make you sad if you do any self-reflection.

Non-sequitor

This should be good.

I don't think your support of voting for genocide is good at all.

LOL!
Wow.
This is going to be good.

During the election you continually argued that trying to change the system was not the right tactic and that you just had to accept an AIPAC funded, genocidal choice and not try to rock the boat because trump might win.

You think that was good?

No.
I have argued constantly that people should work within the system to change it.
And along side parallel to the system to change it.
Hell, I even advocate working completely outside the system to change it on the rare occasions where that makes sense.

Yet you also argued that uncommitted was wrong, that student protests were pointless and that every other possible way to change the system was a waste of time.
You were against pushing for change every single time.

Even now, you're back here trying to argue that I was wrong and that wasting your vote on Harris was the best choice, even though it lost and tarred the dems as genocidal instead of just Biden. Have you argued here for any change? Are you pushing for AOC and Mamdani or another movement in the party?
Nope, you're here still trying to blame me for the failure of your plan.

Self-delusion doesn't change the system, though, which is why you get so mad at me, I think.

I get mad at people who are smart and well educated yet still support genocide.
Never again,.

I never once said either of those things were wastes of energy.
I was at the No Kings rallies and have been at some student protests.
Why would you think I think those things are wastes of energy?

What they aren't is magic.

I agree, and the Palestine student protests were magic as well. Harris could have tapped that power but she chose 'shut up, I'm speaking'. You agreed.

I actually am wildly against people who think the only thing that counts is a vote.
Votes aren't magic spells that express your feelings.
It would be good if you stopped believing that and thought of votes as one of the many tools to make change.

Your self delusion is impressive if you think this what you argued for the last year.
You argued that dems owed Harris their vote and to refuse to vote for her was wrong.
I argued that voters tried every path available and every tool possible to try to get her to change her policy and refusing to vote for her was the result of the failure of those actions.

 

[Valcazar]

uh huh, you accuse me of straw man arguments and then....
you post a straw man argument.

I never said I have mathematical proof, I said that the numbers support the claim.

If you now want to back down to the uncontroversial position that it had an effect, then fine.
I have no objection to that. "I firmly believe this and I can find numbers that I can claim support reading it this way" is a time honoured position.
That this whole thing has resulted in you recalibrating your claims then it is good you learned something.
Of course, every other position that is remotely reasonable has the ability to make that claim as well.
It's a very low bar.

That's not declaring 100% mathematical certainty its stating I believe there is enough evidence to make this a believable claim. That's been supported by Harris' own statements in her book.

If you've decided to stop claiming things show that your position is true when they don't, that's growth.
The idea that the situation in Gaza was not a part of the election was never claimed by anyone.

Yes, the results show she lost. But Musk's statement and another court case suggest that its possible the counting wasn't fair. Given how untrustworthy trump and his team are I'm surprised that you think he wouldn't have tried to cheat.

It is possible.
I'm just surprised to see you now take the position "she would have won despite her Gaza policy if Musk hadn't interfered".

straw man argument #2

You just argued that voting for genocide was pragmatic.
I said 'never again'.

Yes. We have repeatedly established that you like to claim your votes have nothing to do with who is in power and are just expressions of morality.
This may or may not be contradicted by your actual voting record in Canada, but I've never bothered to pay enough attention to check.

During the election you continually argued that trying to change the system was not the right tactic and that you just had to accept an AIPAC funded, genocidal choice and not try to rock the boat because trump might win.

You think that was good?

Well, I was right.
Except you are again mistakenly assigning me the position of "trying to change the system was not the right tactic" and not "the tactic to try and change the system you are using is bad and not going to work".

Yet you also argued that uncommitted was wrong, that student protests were pointless and that every other possible way to change the system was a waste of time.

You were against pushing for change every single time.

I never argued any of those things were a waste of time and I am not against pushing for change. (Although obviously I am against "change for change's sake".)
I argued about what you thought they were going to accomplish.
Your inability to understand this is the root of your problem.

Even now, you're back here trying to argue that I was wrong and that wasting your vote on Harris was the best choice, even though it lost and tarred the dems as genocidal instead of just Biden.

Yes. You were wrong to advocate that Trump winning would be better, as you repeatedly did.

Have you argued here for any change? Are you pushing for AOC and Mamdani or another movement in the party?
Nope, you're here still trying to blame me for the failure of your plan.

I am sure that all my friends in New York who had to listen to me assure them a vote for Mamdani was the right thing to do are completely convinced how opposed I am to him.

I agree, and the Palestine student protests were magic as well.

Is your reading comprehension getting worse?
Or are you just prone to typos?

Your self delusion is impressive if you think this what you argued for the last year.
You argued that dems owed Harris their vote and to refuse to vote for her was wrong.
I argued that voters tried every path available and every tool possible to try to get her to change her policy and refusing to vote for her was the result of the failure of those actions.

I'm used to you having made up a fake version of what my argument was, but it's starting to sound like you don't even understand what you were advocating for.
Whether that's because you've always been deluded about it or it has been some kind of editing process you've made to soothe yourself is unclear.

 

[Frankfooter]

If you now want to back down to the uncontroversial position that it had an effect, then fine.
I have no objection to that. "I firmly believe this and I can find numbers that I can claim support reading it this way" is a time honoured position.
That this whole thing has resulted in you recalibrating your claims then it is good you learned something.
Of course, every other position that is remotely reasonable has the ability to make that claim as well.
It's a very low bar.

I say she lost the election over support for genocide. You admit there is no mathematical proof that this is correct or wrong, that the election is complex and people vote for a lot of reasons. So you have no more proof for your claim than I have for mine.

If you've decided to stop claiming things show that your position is true when they don't, that's growth.
The idea that the situation in Gaza was not a part of the election was never claimed by anyone.

Straw man argument.
do better

It is possible.
I'm just surprised to see you now take the position "she would have won despite her Gaza policy if Musk hadn't interfered".

Straw man argument.
do better

Yes. We have repeatedly established that you like to claim your votes have nothing to do with who is in power and are just expressions of morality.
This may or may not be contradicted by your actual voting record in Canada, but I've never bothered to pay enough attention to check.

Straw man argument
do better

Some people, apparently not you, have red lines in what they will or will not support. The way MAGA will back a pedo, fraud, rape allegations or attempted coup and the way you are willing to support genocide. If you are willing to vote to support genocide, that puts you in the same moral camp as MAGA, that we established.

Well, I was right.
Except you are again mistakenly assigning me the position of "trying to change the system was not the right tactic" and not "the tactic to try and change the system you are using is bad and not going to work".

No, you were wrong. Harris lost because she wouldn't change. During the election every time I suggested ways to change the system you would argue that dems owed their vote to Harris or that it was pragmatic to just accept voting to enable genocide.

I never argued any of those things were a waste of time and I am not against pushing for change. (Although obviously I am against "change for change's sake".)
I argued about what you thought they were going to accomplish.
Your inability to understand this is the root of your problem.

As you like to note, its all on record here. Go back and prove this claim. I say every time I suggested pushing for change you said it was not the right path.
The root of your problem is that it appears you just didn't think backing genocide was a problem in the first place.
Not once did you say it was wrong during the election or since.

Yes. You were wrong to advocate that Trump winning would be better, as you repeatedly did.

Its way too early to make this statement, it shouldn't be assessed until after the next election, at the earliest.

I am sure that all my friends in New York who had to listen to me assure them a vote for Mamdani was the right thing to do are completely convinced how opposed I am to him.

Cool story.
I only know what you post here, not what you pretend happens elsewhere.

Is your reading comprehension getting worse?
Or are you just prone to typos?

No, the country wide student protests against the Israeli genocide were magic.
They were a beautiful show of people standing up for what they believe in.
I seem to recall you thought they were pointless.

I'm used to you having made up a fake version of what my argument was, but it's starting to sound like you don't even understand what you were advocating for.
Whether that's because you've always been deluded about it or it has been some kind of editing process you've made to soothe yourself is unclear.

straw man argument
do better

Do your homework and prove this claim.
Its all here for you to search through.

 

[Valcazar]

I say she lost the election over support for genocide. You admit there is no mathematical proof that this is correct or wrong, that the election is complex and people vote for a lot of reasons. So you have no more proof for your claim than I have for mine.

No, I have proof for my claim.
My claim is elections are complex and people vote for lots of reasons.
You are even now admitting that.
You have been very invested in pretending that my position is "The Gaza situation had no effect" which would be a completely batshit thing for me to believe.

Straw man argument.
do better

Straw man argument.
do better

Straw man argument
do better

I see we've reached the "stick my fingers in my ears" stage.
Ah well.
I guess that's the end of that.

Some people, apparently not you, have red lines in what they will or will not support. The way MAGA will back a pedo, fraud, rape allegations or attempted coup and the way you are willing to support genocide. If you are willing to vote to support genocide, that puts you in the same moral camp as MAGA, that we established.

Yes, your delusional view of voting is well documented.
And again, I will point out that many people share that delusion.
It's one of the most useful things enemies of democracy have to leverage.

No, you were wrong. Harris lost because she wouldn't change. During the election every time I suggested ways to change the system you would argue that dems owed their vote to Harris or that it was pragmatic to just accept voting to enable genocide.

I never once said dems - or anyone else - "owed their vote to Harris".
I talked about what could and could not be accomplished by voting in the system people were in.
You never proposed anything to change the system.

As you like to note, its all on record here. Go back and prove this claim. I say every time I suggested pushing for change you said it was not the right path.
The root of your problem is that it appears you just didn't think backing genocide was a problem in the first place.
Not once did you say it was wrong during the election or since.

Anyone who wants to go back and look over the threads is more than welcome to read them and draw their own conclusions.
For instance, the poll from January that you said showed that's why she lost.

https://terb.cc/xenforo/threads/harris-lost-because-of-support-for-israel.874459/

Its way too early to make this statement, it shouldn't be assessed until after the next election, at the earliest.

LOL! Wow.
Is this about Trump in general or just for Gaza?
If you're desperate enough to make this statement, I'd like to know exactly what you think you are claiming.

Cool story.
I only know what you post here, not what you pretend happens elsewhere.

And yet you are willing to make all kinds of nonsensical claims, even knowing that you can't know anything but what is posted here.
For instance, here you complain that I didn't post enough about Mamdami during the time I wasn't posting here.
You will not be shocked to find out that I was telling people voting for a third party as a protest was stupid and counter productive.

No, the country wide student protests against the Israeli genocide were magic.
They were a beautiful show of people standing up for what they believe in.
I seem to recall you thought they were pointless.

I see you recall erroneously, as usual.
And your answer about why they are magic does say a lot, doesn't it.

 

[Frankfooter]

No, I have proof for my claim.
My claim is elections are complex and people vote for lots of reasons.
You are even now admitting that.
You have been very invested in pretending that my position is "The Gaza situation had no effect" which would be a completely batshit thing for me to believe.

What a great thesis, 'elections are complex and people vote for a lot of reasons'.
Nice work, I'm sure it'll pull a good grade.

I see we've reached the "stick my fingers in my ears" stage.
Ah well.
I guess that's the end of that.

I do hope its the end of the straw man arguments and that you can try to debate more honestly.
You have stated that you are here to test out arguments and find 'gotcha' moments to use IRL.
You're just going to have to do better.

Yes, your delusional view of voting is well documented.
And again, I will point out that many people share that delusion.
It's one of the most useful things enemies of democracy have to leverage.

Oh great, we are back to you stating the supremacy of your views again.
Also another excellent tactic.
J Philippe Rushton was also very well educated, wasn't he?

I never once said dems - or anyone else - "owed their vote to Harris".
I talked about what could and could not be accomplished by voting in the system people were in.
You never proposed anything to change the system.

You most certainly did say that dems owed their votes to the party and Harris. Multiple times.
I repeatedly backed the student protests, party pressure, uncommitted and every possible option to get Harris to back the views of the 80% of dems who backed a ceasefire instead of Biden and AIPAC. You said dems owed the party their votes and it would be 'punishment' if they withheld them.

Anyone who wants to go back and look over the threads is more than welcome to read them and draw their own conclusions.
For instance, the poll from January that you said showed that's why she lost.

https://terb.cc/xenforo/threads/harris-lost-because-of-support-for-israel.874459/

Yes, its my opinion that Harris lost over the genocide.
Though, as you note, 'elections are complex and people vote for lots of reasons', making attempts to make it a mathematical prove pointless, as you have been want to do here.

LOL! Wow.
Is this about Trump in general or just for Gaza?
If you're desperate enough to make this statement, I'd like to know exactly what you think you are claiming.

Please tell us how much genocide Harris would have allowed compared to trump. Post your sources and not just your opinion.
Then state how voter support for the dems, AIPAC, and Israel would have changed with Harris.
Again, find sources and don't use just your opinion.

Go ahead, show us how clearly worse it is now under trump than Harris for Palestine, the dems and america.
Tell us what its going to be like in 5, 10 and 20 years in the future had Harris won while supporting the Israeli genocide.

And yet you are willing to make all kinds of nonsensical claims, even knowing that you can't know anything but what is posted here.
For instance, here you complain that I didn't post enough about Mamdami during the time I wasn't posting here.
You will not be shocked to find out that I was telling people voting for a third party as a protest was stupid and counter productive.

Of course not, you said voting 3rd party was a waste of vote during last year's election as well. You said it was a wasted vote if your party lost, the way Harris lost and wasted your vote. If you want to claim that you told everyone you know outside of terb to vote for Mamdani, go for it. All we know is what you post here.

I see you recall erroneously, as usual.
And your answer about why they are magic does say a lot, doesn't it.

Now that you've proved you can search terb history, feel free to back up all your claims.
Its right there, if you're so sure, find the quotes.