@Jayde
Because progress in one direction while allowing other things to rot is just building on pillars of sand, and no one has the exact same concept of what progress should mean.
Many people in the left now expect too much, too fast, and they allow their emotions to get the better of them.
I will often see pushes for grand, sweeping reforms, but when the unpleasant business of actually dealing with the negative affects of that rapid progress come up, often far less attention is paid to planning for it.
We say "down with the oil companies"!  But we often can't give more than vague uneducated platitudes when it comes to issues like how we'll pay for all the things that oil drilling rites often do in a community (education, sports, new roads), or how we'll replace those jobs fast enough when their is a lack of trained workers for green tech, or how we'll pay for the vast infrastructure overhaul necessary for variable power generation when we've just gotten rid of a huge economic resource, or how we'll replace plastics fast enough when so much relies on them, or how we'll deal with the problem of infrasonic sound from windmills and sun glare from solar panel installations that can harm animals...
People are scared, we're talking about their  livelihoods and kid's futures here.  We can't afford to not find reasons they could agree with when now is comfortable if not perfect, while the future is uncertain and getting scarier every day.  These people need stability, not vague promises and (to them) radical ideas.

Liberals can be short sided and self absorbed, often because they tend to be younger, urban, and have less life experience to consider.  Wile pushes like minimum wage and basic income are great, there seems to be a basic lack of respect for blue collar workers in the left and the simple, hard working people who act as a backbone for actually getting things done.  The older people at the top might not present this attitude (since they are older) but it's not hard to see when you look beyond the surface.
There is an arrogant sense of looking down on one's elders because of there mistakes, while not considering those choices contextually or self reflecting about mistakes in the current generation.

Leftists often allow the loudest and most unstable voices to speak for them, simply because they have been wronged and have the right in the group's estimation.  But this causes damage to the very social movements those people are championing.  We see that this can lead to hostile pockets of outrage culture where even someone clearly trying to do the right thing and adapt quickly to the mob's demands can't ever seem to do enough to please, simply because of their career path, skin color, age or gender, and the worst thing is how few liberals are able to see that hypocrisy.
This group mentality is bad for everyone, and now that social media is so interlinked with the real world, and waves of viral anger and condemnation can spread much faster than context or more thoughtful argument does, they give right wing or centrist influencers the ammunition they need to cause people to paint the whole left with one brush.

I get it, I know all the counter arguments to what I just said and many of them have merit , but that doesn't change the perception.  We need to get our priorities straight, work within the bounds of reality, and clean house if we want to get things done.

Defender, believe it or not I agree with most of what you said in your last post. I'm a leftist who gets it, mostly. I don't have hard answers to all the questions you pose, but I agree that we need to actually provide answers instead of just pushing for idealism.

What bugs me is the reflexive, flinching, brain-numbing, paralytic fear I see from non-progressives. The sort of logic which sounds like, "But how do you pay for it? You don't, because if you did you'd blow everything up and we'd all die. Therefore leave things as they are, you leftist idiot". I'm obviously parodying for effect here, but I hope I've proved my point. The assumption seems to be that 1. leftists want to destroy everything, and 2. because there are hard questions to answer, there -are no answers so things should be left as is.

Look. The reality is that we -never have all the answers. We never have and we never will. We do something that has a good chance of working. It fucks up. We fix it. This is progress in its barest sense, and has pretty much been the norm since day 1. If you expect that change must only happen when absolutely all eventualities are planned and accounted for and covered, then change will never happen. I sometimes feel like people on the right adopt this strategy because they can't stand any changes to the status quo.

I feel like both sides need to argue on good faith here. People on the left absolutely must listen when credible problems are brought up, and shouldn't proceed in the face of strong evidence just...because. When presented with a logistical problem, a really good response is, "Oh okay. This is a problem. How can we fix this? How can we minimize damage? We still want to enact this change, but we obviously want to do the least harm possible.". But people on the right, knowing that this change is ultimately necessary, should be working just as hard to solve those problems, and I don't think they are. Rather than looking for excuses to say no, why not look for reasons to work with those you disagree with. Okay, so you're afraid to stop subsidizing fossil fuels because it's providing money for infrastructure. I get it. So what other solutions exist? We didn't even have fossil fuels a hundred and fifty years ago, not really. Change is constant. This isn't a brick wall. What about closing loopholes in the tax system so corporations actually have to pay their share? What about higher taxes on the rich which *gasp!* actually get enforced? That alone creates a whole lot of money, which the government can then use responsibly (key word there) in a transition. That transition does have to happen - it's non-negotiable in the long term - but that doesn't mean it has to happen in eighteen months. You can't possibly avoid -all harm, but it would be best to minimize it.

And guys? To be clear, when I said I was curious about what folks like Ironcross and co. thought after hearing that Biden has been projected to win, that was not and is not intended as a challenge. I'm honestly curious. There are probably a lot of really disillusioned people out there right now, and it can't be easy knowing that your guy lost (this doesn't apply so much to Ironcross, because he said he couldn't vote for Trump or Biden either). That wasn't me saying, "So, guys, where are you now, huh? How does it feel to lose, eh?" I'm not trying to goad anyone. That's not my way.

Chris,

You're done here. I guess this conveniently absents you from having to explain your stance, but I'd be curious about your answers to the following questions.

1. On whose word were the doors locked while 400k ballots were counted? Is there, say, camera footage or testimony from a credible source which proves that this took place?
2. Flip this on its ear. Let's say I came forward and said that four hundred thousand Trump votes were counted in Florida on Tuesday night behind locked doors, and Biden should've taken Florida without a problem. How would you feel, and how would you react?
3. I've been watching the New York Times tick slowly, slowly upward. Do you know how long it takes to count 400000 votes? Do you know how much of a shitstorm there would be if this were provably true?

When you've got ten minutes to spare, check out this link:

https://www.newsguardtech.com/election- … n-tracker/

All but four or so of the sources quoted there are right-leaning, and have been highlighted as having published provably false info about elections. In most cases, they make a claim that gets smashed. In most of those cases, they are hostile to correction or simply refuse to comment. I don't believe I saw even one of them essentially say "yeah, guys, our bad. We'll fix that".
The left is not by any means guiltless on this score, but the skew is pretty one-sided, IMO.
So why did I post that link? It's to show you the hill you've got to climb, Chris. Republicans have been making silly claims about this election, and a whole lot of other things, for months. Most of them lack any merit. I can't find a single source that supports the claim your own source puts forth. It's not true just because Rudi said so.

Also, another link smashing voter-fraud claims:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fact-check … -watchers/

There have been things done that aren't ideal. For instance, the claim that people have been denied access to counting places before eventually being let in? Not great, though it's only happened to a few people. And the idea that...oh no wait, I've got nothing else. That's about the most credible claim.
And I'm not even touching the other side. The bit where armed Trump supporters stood outside counting places screaming and protesting to either "count the vote" (Arizona) or "stop the count" (Michigan, Pennsylvania). The bit where two armed men approached a counting place with illegal firearms on their persons and in their vehicle. The bit where a Georgia ballot worker's personal info was put onto social media and he was issued death threats, action which drove him to stop counting ballots, leave his home and stay with friends. The man's afraid to drive his own car or be in his own home at the risk of being attacked. Or the bit where three hundred thousand ostensibly missing ballots are just kind of being ignored because they got lost in the mail. Or the bit where republicans have been doing everything they could to suppress votes and cast doubt on those which arrived.
Um...I don't know about you, but a few small indiscretions, stacked up against all that, is a drop of water compared to the ocean, bro. Perspective. You don't have it.

let me clarify this for you.
Republicans have intimidated, bullied, cheated, manipulated the law, slowed the postal service, ignored court orders, issued death threats in order to contest the validity of this election. Donald Trump urged republicans to vote in person, not by mail, and republicans fixed it so that in places like Pennsylvania, mail-in ballots received by the legally approved time would still be counted later. In other words, it was all set up to make the case against mail-in ballots look like Biden "stole" the election. And you bought it.
Republicans rigged the system, managed to lose in spite of that, and are now furious about it, so much so that they're baselessly accusing democrats of something, anything that might work. And you support this? Dude, any respect I had for your character is done. Wrecked.

But hey, if you want to go and actually answer my questions, I'll listen. If you don't, well, that's your business of course. But it sounds to me like you're not interested in truth. You're interested in a narrative that suits your agenda. And I'll be honest with you. I'm not really surprised. You're the dude whose Manamon 2 stream I had to stop watching because of the way you were laughing at the Sangora plot line and demonizing her for the mess she was in. No consideration for how Norman left her alone, despite claiming to love her; apparently his manamon journey was more important than his love. And far more importantly, no discussion at all (not that I heard, anyway) of the dude who knew he was ill, and seduced Sangora and made her sick. For you, it was all about how silly it was that she'd put herself in that position. For me, it was about three people, all of whom made mistakes, some of them bigger than others.
But wait, I hear you ask. What has this got to do with supporting Trump?
Here, I'll explain. It's pretty simple, actually. A person with that base level of contempt for women is probably more apt to follow the guidance of a misogynist, in my experience. It fits the puzzle, is what I'm saying. Not all Trump supporters feel this way, by any means, but most people who harbour this level of contempt aren't terribly interested in things like equality, truth, transparency and ethics. But hey, maybe I'm wrong, and you've actually got credible reason to say what you say and do what you do. And maybe there's a good reason you haven't provided it yet. It's possible. Almost anything is possible.

And I tell you what. For the sake of full ownership of my position, if it turns out your crazy story ends up beating the odds and being true, I'll apologize. I'll admit I was wrong, without any ambiguity. My bad. But I also challenge you to hold the same standards. When this claim gets thrown out, goes nowhere, results in nothing but a lot of flag-waving and shouting and incoherent mumbling from the right, I would love to hear an apology for the fact that you bought this bullshit at all. I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong, when it's demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt. Can you say the same?

Defender, I'm prepared for it. In fact, I wish you hadn't said anything because I'm...sort of counting on it. I set traps when I argue.

Ignoring the vitriol for a second.
My lady and I have been tense the last few days. We're amazingly relieved about the result, and rather pleased that my lady's vote in Pa actually counted for something, but we're both extremely worried about what might happen next given said vitriol, and Trump's own attitude, which I believe posts in this topic have pretty much shown.

Sadly, it doesn't seem we're out of the woods yet, we really appreciated Biden's remarks about healing divisions, though whether the people that need to take note of those remarks will  do so is another question.

This is the kind of stuff I see scrolling across my twitter timeline. The link is to a far-right news site, obviously, and because they're the only ones pushing this stuff. Also, 800000 votes? Who comes up with these numbers?

"There Are Facts of Fraud" - Rudy Giuliani: Trump Team to File Lawsuits against on Pennsylvania on Monday for Violating Federal Law  -- 800,000 Votes COMPLETELY INVALID! (Video) via @gatewaypundit https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/1 … ingbuttons

@Jayde thanks it was but my family is also split between parties so that helped. Besides Trump's awful personality and handling the pandemic poorly I think 1 of the key things that really decided it for me was environmental issues. Such as Trump's wall messing up ecosystems, dropping protection for the Pasific temperate rain forest, and pulling out of the Paris agreement. I know some hardcore Trump supporters that if they knew would want me to explain why and to them that would be beyond their comprehension.

Personally, what bugs me beyond belief is that everyone who I normally would have never voted against, from my mother to pastors I've agreed with on many subjects, to friends who I've willingly supported in their arguments, are all willing to throw in the towel now and declare that I'm no Christian, that I'm no conservative, that I don't care about life or life's values, that I no longer ascribe any worth to humanity, all because I supported and was outspoken about the other guy, the guy that was democratic, the guy that was not the guy they all wanted me to vote for because republicans don't vote against each other and bla bla bla.  Honestly?  I'm sad.  I see no love, no affection, no compassion and no respect in the republican party anymore, and that hurts deeper than I ever could have imagined, not because of ties to any party in particular, but because my family is still my family, whatever they may say or do to me.  I've heard it all though, from "Christians don't vote democrat..." to "Your wife and kids will be cursed by your actions and the fact that you're going to be hit by a hurricane in the next 24 hours is precisely what God had coming to you!  Be ashamed!"
I tell you all plainly that there are things I absolutely hate which some if not all democrats stand for, from the legalization of abortion which to me feels a lot like sanctioning murder, to the idea of fixed universal income/healthcare, which I just don't see working out for a myriad of reasons.  That having been said, so many things are broken right now and we really doo need a change to fix these things that if we don't fix them right now what we'll in essence be doing is straight up killing ourselves by ignoring these issues now, which gives noone, from unborn babies on up to the elderly, a serious chance at a good life.

I just ran some statistical calculations using empirical probability to determine how likely voter fraud was. According to dictionary.com, there have been approximately 250 million votes submitted by mail in the past 20 years. Out of those 250 million votes, 1,285 votes were ruled as fraudulent, and 1,100 of those voters were charged with a crime. Therefore, empirical probability says that:
1285/250000000=257/50000000=0.00000514=0.000514 percent probability that a vote will be fraudulent.
1100/1285=220/257=0.8560=85.60 percent probability that a fraudulent voter will be charged with voter fraud.
Source: https://www.dictionary.com/e/absentee-b … -in-ballot
Therefore, for anyone who still believes that voter fraud occurred this election, let the math show that the probability of such a thing happening is so low as to be improbable with the data at my disposal. Obviously, I don't have exact numbers, so the probability may be slightly higher or lower, but its around 0.000514 percent, and even if either number (number of fraudulent votes legally proven to be fraudulent and total number of votes cast by mail) were to raise the probability would not change much because there's a certain point where numbers like this begin to level out and very little change is observed.
Apologies if this post doesn't make sense to some. I posted the math here if anyone wants to verify my claims. I might be wrong and if I am, I'll freely admit that, because I don't have exact numbers nor can I prove that this data is reliable.

One thing that annoys me is people thinking that if you agree with a single thing that comes out of someone's mouth you have to vote for them. No, actually. There are certainly things I agree with republicans on, too. I have mostly democratic views/beliefs (actually, I would cast myself as more an independant), but what a lot of people now seem to think is that if you agree with a single thing a certain party says, you MUST! Vote for them. And I always try to explain to people that "No, that's not how that works. Just because I agree *more* with another party, doesn't mean that I cannot see eye to eye with the other on certain issues.

ok on the subject of progress. The people who say, wait, we shouldn't do x because of y are typically republicans  and centrist democrats their argument goes something like, we  will have these problems, therefore we should let everything remain as is and pretend problems aren't there. The main thing they use as a talking point is how people will pay for it. But bring up bailing out airlines, blanket imunity for corperations, corporate bailouts, and  tax cuts, they will  not ask that question. Trump rammed through one of the most significant tax cuts in 2017, and republicans were really happy to support him for it, that bill mainly benefited the rich, and  fucked over military families and students by counting the benefits they received as income, and drastically taxing them more. Noone was overly concerned then, on what effect  decreasing tax revenue so significantly would have on the functioning of the government.  Move on to 2020, and suddenly said republicans are very concerned on where money is to come for more stimulus, after giving 8.5 trillion in interest free money out to banks, corperations and airlines.   The fact is, change must happen, but most people realize there should be a process to follow to implement them. Noone is proposing instant sweeping changes, because that wouldn't be possible.
Oh and defender, I love it  how you accuse me of making sweeping generalizations, and then go on to do that yourself, by  lumping all liberals as people with no life experience, and no respect for elders or  working people.  Fact is, respect is earned, not given automatically. We shouldn't blindly defend the choices people before us made because they happen to be alot older, And if some of them were fucked up or selfish, I will say so.
As for minimum wage. that federal minimum wage of 7.50 an hour hasn't been raised since 2008, and the only places you will see it unchanged is states with boneheaded republican majorities who are absolutely against doing it. As for universal income, that will likely have to be a thing in the future,  as robotics and automation will replace a huge majority of low skill jobs, and even some high skill ones.
Also on oil companies, the fact that oil provides revenue to the government and jobs doesn't change the fact that its a limited resource, and that drilling and fracing destroys ecosystems, and pollutes groundwater.  Fact is,  more emphasis should be placed on moving to a more sustainable energy source that doesn't cause the same level of environmental distruction.  I suspect nuclear fusion reactors would be the solution mostly when they become  viable, though likely there will have to be a solution to some degree before then.

That is interesting Jayde.  Seems Biden is basicly republican light in a way and was even more to the right than I thought. I would've expected that he at least repeal the tax cuts and jobs act, and put ccorprat taxes back to 37%, which is what they were before trump cut them down to 22%, which is a gigantic cut.