Support NeoGAF

[BlackClouds]

I'm tired of being the only grownup in the room (in general). Some wanted things to burn instead of working within the system, so they can be pushed to the forefront out of desperation but by then it'll be too late. The public acts like children when it come to politics and they are too immature for me to deal with.

So good luck with that unity developing from the burnt out carcass of the Democratic party that some believe will happen. Doesn't make logical sense but here we are.

 

[MIMIC]

What is the narrative you're talking about.

I honestly don't want to turn this thread into where I see this going, but since you asked: that Hillary is unstoppable and to criticize her is to commit an ultimate sin.

"Yes, Hillary is flawed"
*cites flaw*
"Well, that doesn't matter."
*cites flaw again*
"Why you keep bringing that up?"

Errr....because she's flawed.

*stop bringing it up* (gets quoted 20 times)

You can't discuss anything without having an ulterior motive. But you can say whatttteeeeeevvvveeeerrrr negative thing you want about Trump.

 

[Totakeke]

I honestly don't want to turn this thread into where I see this going, but since you asked: that Hillary is unstoppable and to criticize her is to commit an ultimate sin.

"Yes, Hillary is flawed"
*cites flaw*
"Well, that doesn't matter."
*cites flaw again*
"Why you keep bringing that up?"

Errr....because she's flawed.

*stop bringing it up* (gets quoted 20 times)

You can't discuss anything without having an ulterior motive. But you can say whatttteeeeeevvvveeeerrrr negative thing you want about Trump.

So people disagreed with your points, and many people can still now disagree with your points. Is it not an echo chamber as long people take your points for granted? I don't see how this works. Sometimes you just have to accept you hold a minority viewpoint within the group of people that's discussing with. If you're unable to convince other people maybe your points aren't convincing enough and repeating them incessantly doesn't make them any more valid.

 

[Goodstyle]

Man, Bill Clinton really had the right idea when he went over to rural white voters and said Obamacare was "the craziest" thing. He was onto something there, and we all shut him down. Bill should have been the campaign manager, not Mook.

So people disagreed with your points, and people many can still now disagree with your points. Is it not an echo chamber as long people take your points for granted? I don't see how this works. Sometimes you just have to accept you hold a minority viewpoint within the group of people that's discussing with. If you're unable to convince other people maybe your points aren't convincing enough and repeating them incessantly doesn't make them any more valid.

This, thank you.

 

[A Human Becoming]

Is there a projected date all the votes will have been counted?

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Man, Bill Clinton really had the right idea when he went over to rural white voters and said Obamacare was "the craziest" thing. He was onto something there, and we all shut him down. Bill should have been the campaign manager, not Mook.


This, thank you.

If Obamacare is so unpopular but single payer is apparently toxic, what do we run on? Just expanding our current single payer systems until we get universal coverage? Legislating drug prices?

I might be interning with a single payer advocacy group in Oregon this summer so maybe I'll find out.

 

[MIMIC]

So people disagreed with your points, and people many can still now disagree with your points. Is it not an echo chamber as long people take your points for granted? I don't see how this works. Sometimes you just have to accept you hold a minority viewpoint within the group of people that's discussing with. If you're unable to convince other people maybe your points aren't convincing enough and repeating them incessantly doesn't make them any more valid.

So are you denying that an echo chamber even existed? You understand that an echo chamber also consists of a perception, right? You can't argue perception: it is what it is. And once perception dominates, it almost carries equal weight as the truth or reality. It's not something palpable, but it's definitely recognizable. And it was surely the perception that one narrative was accepted, while another one wasn't.

Or maybe I'm just wrong. What is your definition of an echo chamber?

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

My Chinese girlfriend is in tears and is scared since she just read about all the hate crimes committed since Trump's victory.

These Nazis need to go back in a hole and die of heart disease.

 

[kirblar]

But we had to reach across the aisle and mend the country, etc, etc. You know, exactly what the GOP has not and will not ever do.

Then again, even if he did go ham and pass everything, which he finally did with EO, those are easily overturned as we will see starting in January.

FDR went HAM. Not all of it stuck but a hell of a lot of it did.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Obama needed to go HAM and didn't in his first term. Nuke the fillibuster, pass everything, etc.

How do people not realize this inherently leads to instability. Eventually your guy is no longer in control and the other can pass what they want just as easily as you did. Then what?

 

[VendettaRed07]

One thing I look to for comfort right now is that almost every notable Republican that was up for re-election this cycle distanced themselves from Trump, and suffered zero consequences for doing it.

In fact they almost all fought primary challenges from people who were completely in the tank with Trump, and they all got battered.

It really seems to me that Trump's comments just didn't effect him, but I still fully believe it hurts almost everyone else who makes the same comments. Even Republicans in far right states. For whatever reason people were willing to overlook anything he said that they find unacceptable coming from anyone else.

People have said they were afraid that people who voted for Obama voted for him when they just wanted something different, but really wanted white nationalism so went with Trump. If that was true, then why didn't the white nationalists running for seats do better? Just a thought.

 

[tmarg]

If Obamacare is so unpopular but single payer is apparently toxic, what do we run on? Just expanding our current single payer systems until we get universal coverage? Legislating drug prices?

I might be interning with a single payer advocacy group in Oregon this summer so maybe I'll find out.

There's a reason Trump is already backing off his promise to repeal Obamacare. It's far from perfect, but it's the best thing possible at the moment. Republicans used it to drum up anger among their base, but only because they believed that they would never be the ones to have to come up with a replacement. Now they are. The narrative will shift.

 

[Debirudog]

So are you denying that an echo chamber even existed? You understand that an echo chamber also consists of a perception, right? You can't argue perception: it is what it is. And once perception dominates, it almost carries equal weight as the truth or reality. It's not something palpable, but it's definitely recognizable. And it was surely the perception that one narrative was accepted, while another one wasn't.

Or maybe I'm just wrong. What is your definition of an echo chamber?

i want to say that Poligaf is a bubble of a bubble. That I can admit to. Now, what is your intention here? To just sling mud or actually discuss what you think? Hillary's lost and isn't going to be involved in politics again. What's your intention?

 

[kirblar]

How do people not realize this inherently leads to instability. Eventually your guy is no longer in control and the other can pass what they want just as easily as you did. Then what?

Rolling back social progress and programs without massive backlash is insanely difficult.

This is why the GOP tries so hard to make sure nothing new gets added in.

There's a reason Trump is already backing off his promise to repeal Obamacare. It's far from perfect, but it's the best thing possible at the moment. Republicans used it to drum up anger among their base, but only because they believed that they would never be the ones to have to come up with a replacement. Now they are. The narrative will shift.

See: exactly this.

 

[RastaMentality]

We can't let that happen. As Democrats we cannot continue to let Republicans create and control narratives.

The thing is, Republican narratives work even on a lot of liberals. the reverse doesn't happen as often. Far too many people getting complacent already.

 

[Kusagari]

Polls, for as much as they're worth at this point, still basically show the public split down the middle on Obamacare.

I think the Democrats have done a terrible job in term of messaging and blaming the Republicans for refusing to even try to mend the law.

 

[Totakeke]

So are you denying that an echo chamber even existed? You understand that an echo chamber also consists of a perception, right? You can't argue perception: it is what it is. And once perception dominates, it almost carries equal weight as the truth or reality. It's not something palpable, but it's definitely recognizable. And it was surely the perception that one narrative was accepted, while another one wasn't.

Or maybe I'm just wrong. What is your definition of an echo chamber?

I'm not going to read back old threads (I wasn't there) to prove or disprove the existence of an echo chamber. Of course there's a shared perception, you can't have meaningful discourse if people don't even agree about the basic things.

You keep saying narrative as if there's propaganda. In essence you can say that the whole liberal world was an echo chamber. Sure, what then? If you believe that you know something everyone else doesn't, then it's up to you to prove that and convince others. It's not up to others to take what you say as granted. If everyone immediately believed everything that contradicted their beliefs, aka absolutely no echo chamber, then everyone can just throw shit on the wall and see what sticks. And that's what pretty much the strategy of the right-wing propaganda nowadays. How do you get Obama as a socialist muslim Kenyan who is also a founder of ISIS?

 

[Incognito]

they cant repeal. thats obviously off the table. but trump's lip service to keeping pre-exisiting conditions and 26 y/o's on their parents coverage means nothing if the house/senate send up reconciliation gutting subsidies, medicaid, and the mandate. thats where rubber meets road. do you trust Trump? i have a hard time doing so, but we'll see.

 

[VendettaRed07]

i want to say that Poligaf is a bubble of a bubble. That I can admit to. Now, what is your intention here? To just sling mud or actually discuss what you think? Hillary's lost and isn't going to be involved in politics again. What's your intention?

I think I would generally agree with him that we can't fall into the same trap we fell in this election. We were far too defensive and ignored far too many issues.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

"Moderate" white dudes who encourage others to tolerate Nazis are cowards and I hope they are financially devastated by Trump's presidency.

I don't want to win these people back, I want them to crawl back, begging.

 

[Plinko]

"Moderate" white dudes who encourage others to tolerate Nazis are cowards and I hope they are financially devastated by Trump's presidency.

I don't want to win these people back, I want them to crawl back, begging.

I have yet to see anyone calling for "tolerating Nazis."

they cant repeal. thats obviously off the table. but trump's lip service to keeping pre-exisiting conditions and 26 y/o's on their parents coverage means nothing if the house/senate send up reconciliation gutting subsidies, medicaid, and the mandate. thats where rubber meets road. do you trust Trump? i have a hard time doing so, but we'll see.

As crazy as it sounds, I trust Trump exponentially more on this issue than Ryan/Pence.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

Polls, for as much as they're worth at this point, still basically show the public split down the middle on Obamacare.

I think the Democrats have done a terrible job in term of messaging and blaming the Republicans for refusing to even try to mend the law.

I agree with this, Democrats need some bite.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I have yet to see anyone calling for "tolerating Nazis."

In the OT, someone quit being friends with a Nazi because his Nazi friend said "I hate all Muslims."

There are a fuckton of "moderates" in that thread who say he should have stayed friends with this Nazi dude because saying "I hate Muslims" isn't that big of a deal.

 

[Pixieking]

"Trump voters aren't expecting him to keep his campaign pledges"

No quotes, because I can't stomach reading it based on the headline.

 

[Plinko]

Oh, OK. I've tried to stay away the last couple days. The stress of the increase in taxes and students loan payments if Ryan gets his way has been incredibly stressful.

 

[Wilsongt]

Oh, OK. I've tried to stay away the last couple days. The stress of the increase in taxes and students loan payments if Ryan gets his way has been incredibly stressful.

But Trump wants to cut taxes!*


*on his swamp friends

 

[faisal233]

they cant repeal. thats obviously off the table. but trump's lip service to keeping pre-exisiting conditions and 26 y/o's on their parents coverage means nothing if the house/senate send up reconciliation gutting subsidies, medicaid, and the mandate. thats where rubber meets road. do you trust Trump? i have a hard time doing so, but we'll see.

No, reconciliation means ACA is dead in all but name. They want to keep the name so all our healthcare woes can still be blamed on it.

Democrats need to accept that ACA is dead and allow the repeal to go to a vote even if the filibuster isnt nuked. No need to own a gutted ACA.

 

[Debirudog]

that's why I feel frustrated by supposedly white moderates who claim they aren't racist or bigoted. The fact that they aren't willing or actively calling out against nazis and other racists bullshit is just infuriating.

When they can't even try to call out and defend hate speech, no wonder minorities and white liberals kinda just want to call them out. Not racist, but number 1 with racists.

 

[HanShotFirst]

Don't know much about Ellison. From my understanding he is progressive but is he more of a pragmatic style progressive like Warren or Populist like Sanders?

 

[Wilsongt]

I've had to take a lawnmower to my news feed on Facebook since Wednesday. The nonsense attacking protestors and all of the other bullshit is just too much.

 

[Goodstyle]

If Obamacare is so unpopular but single payer is apparently toxic, what do we run on? Just expanding our current single payer systems until we get universal coverage? Legislating drug prices?

I might be interning with a single payer advocacy group in Oregon this summer so maybe I'll find out.

I'm not saying Bill was right to criticize Obamacare, I'm saying he was right to empathize and shoot the shit with white rural voters about things they care about. Doesn't have to be correct or make sense (God knows this election showed us that), he just has to seem like he's listening to them, and so did the Clinton campaign in general. Hillary should have busted out that Southern accent and toured the rustbelt and drilled in on how Trump was a scam artist who spent his life screwing over people like them. That he himself shipped jobs overseas. I have no fucking clue why that wasn't brought up ad nauseam.

 

[Incognito]

No, reconciliation means ACA is dead in all but name. They want to keep the name so all our healthcare woes can still be blamed on it.

i know, which is why i find trump saying he'll keep "parts of ACA" bemusing. it's like, thats nice and all, but those parts wont work without the other stuff you guys are proposing to get rid of.

 

[Wilsongt]

I'm not saying Bill was right to criticize Obamacare, I'm saying he was right to empathize and shoot the shit with white rural voters about things they care about. Doesn't have to be correct or make sense (God knows this election showed us that), he just has to seem like he's listening to them, and so did the Clinton campaign in general. Hillary should have busted out that Southern accent and toured the rustbelt and drilled in on how Trump was a scam artist who spent his life screwing over people like them. That he himself shipped jobs overseas. I have no fucking clue why that wasn't brought up ad nauseam.

Would it really have gotten any airtime when their were so many emails to go through?

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

I'm not saying Bill was right to criticize Obamacare, I'm saying he was right to empathize and shoot the shit with white rural voters about things they care about. Doesn't have to be correct or make sense (God knows this election showed us that), he just has to seem like he's listening to them, and so did the Clinton campaign in general. Hillary should have busted out that Southern accent and toured the rustbelt and drilled in on how Trump was a scam artist who spent his life screwing over people like him. That he himself shipped jobs overseas. I have no fucking clue why that wasn't brought up ad nauseum.

Sure, I'm not being rhetorical when I say "what do we run on?" Obamacare will probably not survive the next two years and the people it was largely targeted at helping don't usually vote. That doesn't mean we shouldn't help them or try to get universal coverage, because we 100% should, but we need much better messaging and popular ideas about health care. Maybe we should have just gone for the Medicaid expansion, since that was much more popular and easy to understand than the ACA and seems to have worked much better. I've heard a suggestion that we backdoor single payer in by just consistently expanding our current single payer programs we already have until coverage is universal. Do we run on setting drug prices? I honestly don't know, but I think the ACA has been a complete messaging disaster for Democrats when people don't really understand how it works or what its problems are.

 

[MIMIC]

I'm not going to read back old threads (I wasn't there) to prove or disprove the existence of an echo chamber. Of course there's a shared perception, you can't have meaningful discourse if people don't even agree about the basic things.

You keep saying narrative as if there's propaganda. In essence you can say that the whole liberal world was an echo chamber. Sure, what then? If you believe that you know something everyone else doesn't, then it's up to you to prove that and convince others. It's not up to others to take what you say as granted. If everyone immediately believed everything that contradicted their beliefs, aka absolutely no echo chamber, then everyone can just throw shit on the wall and see what sticks. And that's what pretty much the strategy of the right-wing propaganda nowadays. How do you get Obama as a socialist muslim Kenyan who is also a founder of ISIS?

People kept arguing that the DNC wasn't playing favorites and that no one had any proof of anything. Wikileaks (although one-sided) played myth buster and completely destroyed that argument. But then the narrative here went from "that never happened" to "it didn't matter." No one should have to explain why it mattered that the DNC was tipping the scales for one candidate over the other. No one should have to explain why that makes voters disillusioned. It's obvious.

But maybe my views on what is obvious aren't the same as what is obvious here. It mattered enough to play a fundamental role in the election, as seen by the results.

Another specific example: when it was revealed that Donna Brazile provided the Hillary campaign with town hall question, guess which thread was the first to report on it? Not this one. In fact, not a single person in PoliGAF even mentioned it. And I checked. Despite having its finger on the pulse of politics, that one little item went by without a single mention. Every little tweet about a poll in Nowhereville that had Hillary up by 10 points is prominently displayed, but this? Not a peep. As if it never happened. I thought that was hilarious. But I wasn't surprised. It's demonstrative of the type of the type of discussion that drives this thread.

A week went by before it was even brought up.....by me (I was banned at the time and couldn't talk about it then). I discussed it with one poster. We had a small exchange about it. And that was it.

That was no coincidence. Clearly one narrative is allowed to dominate while others are completely ignored or disallowed.

The Echo Chamber.

 

[Diablos]

i know, which is why i find trump saying he'll keep "parts of ACA" bemusing. it's like, thats nice and all, but those parts wont work without the other stuff you guys are proposing to get rid of.

Lawl Ryan said something about tax credits but I don't know how the fuck that's gonna work

I mean with the ACA isn't that basically how the subsidy already works

 

[faisal233]

i know, which is why i find trump saying he'll keep "parts of ACA" bemusing. it's like, thats nice and all, but those parts wont work without the other stuff you guys are proposing to get rid of.

I know what you were saying, I just don't want us holding a symbolic victory that will only hurt us long run.

The GOP promised it's base repeal for 6 years. If McConnell doesn't nuke the filibuster, it will be because he is afraid of what Ryans agenda (SS, ACA, Medicare) will do to the party. If McConnell can't pull the trigger then Senate Dems should be in full-fledged obstruction mode, except for the ACA repeal. Ryan has already demonstrated what he can do with reconciliation, we don't need that. Let the GOP repeal and own it.

If they do nuke the filibuster, not a whole lot we can do except try to slow down the senate to a crawl with parliamentary procedures. GOP will get everything they want, which I don't think will be very popular, and we have to make them own it.

 

[Totakeke]

People kept arguing that the DNC wasn't playing favorites and that no one had any proof of anything. Wikileaks (although one-sided) played myth buster and completely destroyed that argument. But then the narrative here went from "that never happened" to "it didn't matter." No one should have to explain why it mattered that the DNC was tipping the scales for one candidate over the other. No one should have to explain why that makes voters disillusioned. It's obvious.

But maybe my views on what is obvious aren't the same as what is obvious here. It mattered enough to play a fundamental role in the election, as seen by the results.

Another specific example: when it was revealed that Donna Brazile provided the Hillary campaign with town hall question, guess which thread was the first to report on it? Not this one. In fact, not a single person in PoliGAF even mentioned it. And I checked. Despite having its finger on the pulse of politics, that one little item went by without a single mention. Every little tweet about a poll in Nowhereville that had Hillary up by 10 points is prominently displayed, but this? Not a peep. As if it never happened. I thought that was hilarious. But I wasn't surprised. It's demonstrative of the type of the type of discussion that drives this thread.

A week went by before it was even brought up.....by me (I was banned at the time and couldn't talk about it then). I discussed it with one poster. We had a small exchange about it. And that was it.

That was no coincidence. Clearly one narrative is allowed to dominate while others are completely ignored or disallowed.

The Echo Chamber.

Again, you keep saying narrative if people aren't capable of rational thought. Look, if you think think the world is round but everyone else thought it's flat, the onus is on you to provide actual proof. Yelling it doesn't mean a single thing. So far all you've proven to me is that you're a one man echo chamber because nothing can get into you.

 

[Debirudog]

Another specific example: when it was revealed that Donna Brazile provided the Hillary campaign with town hall question, guess which thread was the first to report on it? Not this one. In fact, not a single person in PoliGAF even mentioned it. And I checked. Despite having its finger on the pulse of politics, that one little item went by without a single mention. Every little tweet about a poll in Nowhereville that had Hillary up by 10 points is prominently displayed, but this? Not a peep. As if it never happened. I thought that was hilarious. But I wasn't surprised. It's demonstrative of the type of the type of discussion that drives this thread.

i'm pretty sure people here called Donna out as being an idiot and one of the first chairs that need to get kicked out.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

There is definitely an echo chamber. I was on the discord when someone said they wished they could kill conservatives and no one batted an eye. In fact, someone said they shouldn't say that, not because it's abhorrent, but because they should be afraid of the FBI. I'm not on the poligaf discord anymore because of that. Pertaining to the thread, I don't feel like it's an area for open discussion, so I mostly read even though a lot of my values fall in line. I can't imagine how a more conservative person may feel about posting here.

 

[Totakeke]

There is definitely an echo chamber. I was on the discord when someone said they wished they could kill conservatives and no one batted an eye. In fact, someone said they shouldn't say that, not because it's abhorrent, but because they should be afraid of the FBI. I'm not on the poligaf discord anymore because of that. Pertaining to the thread, I don't feel like it's an area for open discussion, so I mostly read even though a lot of my values fall in line. I can't imagine how a more conservative person may feel about posting here.

I mean sure, if you're a conservative that strongly believe in anti-immigration and you're talking to a bunch of immigrants, why are we even talking about echo chambers? You're directly advocating against the rights of others. That's not an echo chamber, that's a fundamental disagreement. Saying that one group should accept the other argument doesn't even make sense.

 

[BlackClouds]

I honestly don't want to turn this thread into where I see this going, but since you asked: that Hillary is unstoppable and to criticize her is to commit an ultimate sin.

"Yes, Hillary is flawed"
*cites flaw*
"Well, that doesn't matter."
*cites flaw again*
"Why you keep bringing that up?"

Errr....because she's flawed.

*stop bringing it up* (gets quoted 20 times)

You can't discuss anything without having an ulterior motive. But you can say whatttteeeeeevvvveeeerrrr negative thing you want about Trump.

The reason why people were sensitive about criticism because much of the public will not turnout unless the candidate is perfect. Any talk of flaws therefore suppresses the vote, and especially on the democratic side. Of course I wasn't the one out there doing this, it's better to get on top of flaws and own them so they don't hurt down the line or at the last second.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

I mean sure, if you're a conservative that strongly believe in anti-immigration and you're talking to a bunch of immigrants, why are we even talking about echo chambers? You're directly advocating against the rights of others. That's not an echo chamber, that's a fundamental disagreement. Saying that one group should accept the other argument doesn't even make sense.

No one is saying you should accept an argument you disagree with.

 

[Pixieking]

Without wanting to spin echo chamber blah out further, Donna Brazille/emails is mentioned on this page: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=223423239 and the previous page of that thread. It was presumed that everyone knew what he meant, so it wasn't explicitly mentioned what it actually related to.

So, y'know, if you're talking about pushing narratives, maybe check yours better?

Edit: Reading this back, it's a little passive/aggressive. Not meant to be, just this seems to be pointless? No-ones shutting conversation down (accept for me trying to get us back to a conversation that doesn't boil down to "PoliGAF sucked and was basically HillGAF"). Which people can ignore if they want, but *shrugs* just seems counter-productive.

In any event, bed-times for me... WIll lurk on the thread for bit longer on MobileGAF, but see you all tomorrow. And, again, take care, and try not to get too worried. Anger is good, but stress isn't.

 

[Totakeke]

No one is saying you should accept an argument you disagree with.

Are we still calling one of the groups an echo chamber though?

 

[Wilsongt]

I'm getting a hint of diet racism in the deportation thread...

 

[royalan]

People kept arguing that the DNC wasn't playing favorites and that no one had any proof of anything. Wikileaks (although one-sided) played myth buster and completely destroyed that argument.

This did NOT happen. All that Wikileaks proved was that Donna Brazile is an idiot and a lot of people thought privately that Bernie Sanders is an asshole. Which, guess what, he is. Sorry about that.

There was no DNC-wide conspiracy to play favorites. And evoking the word "Wikileaks" isn't proof of that. SHOW. THE. PROOF.

A thread is not an echo chamber because your opinions are challenged. I've seen this go down with you more times than I can count this election. You present an poorly supported viewpoint, immediately get called out (and not just in this thread), double down, then run off when you get called out again. That's not an echo chamber. That's you not knowing how to argue a point.

 

[Maledict]

How do people not realize this inherently leads to instability. Eventually your guy is no longer in control and the other can pass what they want just as easily as you did. Then what?

Your government gravitates to the middle.

Seriously, I think the American system of checks and balances is the worse thing ever. Other western democracies don't work this way and manage just fine - France, or the UK, for example. the notion that the winning government gets to pass what it wants, and then gets judged at the ballot box for that, is infinitely preferable to the current system where you can just stonewall for 8 years and not suffer for it.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

Are we still calling one of the groups an echo chamber though?

Are you sure what is meant by an echo chamber, because I am confused by your question. The wikipedia entry on it seems apt at describing it, "An echo chamber is a metaphorical description of a situation in which information, ideas, or beliefs are amplified or reinforced by transmission and repetition inside an "enclosed" system, where different or competing views are censored, disallowed, or otherwise underrepresented." I am stating the thread/community is a bit of an echo chamber.

edit:
I am not saying that is a wrong thing. Poligaf can do what poligaf wants.

 

[Suikoguy]

People kept arguing that the DNC wasn't playing favorites and that no one had any proof of anything. Wikileaks (although one-sided) played myth buster and completely destroyed that argument. But then the narrative here went from "that never happened" to "it didn't matter." No one should have to explain why it mattered that the DNC was tipping the scales for one candidate over the other. No one should have to explain why that makes voters disillusioned. It's obvious.

You going to keep fucking this chicken?

How about you once and for all provide some examples of actions the DNC took that was 'playing favorites'.