MSC

I appreciate you standing up for others, but I'm polemically turning up the heat with a reasonable intent as to why. Can't say much more than that at the moment. As far as I'm concerned, unless Michelle Obama does a full 180 and suddenly becomes keen to replace Biden, I just see Unity behind Biden as the best way to beat Trump now and right now by engaging in this debate about Bidens mental competency, we are playing into Trumps hands, this is what he wants. This is what he does. When his competency, cognitive, mental and moral competency are far worse than Bidens every day of the week, here we are discussing Bidens way too late in the game.

Oh I definitely have a personal bias, towards reality and pragmatism. 5 months away from an election. Your analysis isn't objective because it's only dealing with the candidates, not the circumstances and context the candidates are in nor does it fall in line with a win contribution strategy because you're only encouraging doubt in the person we need to beat Trump in a time where it will do no good. Basically none of your criticisms are going to be constructive and this thread should have went up months ago or even a year ago in order for us to consider it an objectively viable alternative.

The line between excuse and explanation resides in whether it is false/irrelevant or true.

It occurs to me; what the hell happened to high crimes and misdemeanors? Literally a whole set of crimes that can only be carried out by people in a position of authority and now Trump just can't be charged with any of them? I guess I'm still reeling from the court decision and still struggling to come to terms with this ridiculous notion the Supreme court tried to put in everyones head about protecting future presidents from criminal prosecution, not whether or not a crime was actually committed. As far as I am concerned, if every subsequent president is stupid enough to use their position to commit crimes then yeah, I do want each and every single one of them brought to justice. What does more damage? Replacing the boss every few years( which we do anyway!) or everytime they do something wrong, or having a boss who flouts the law and is harming the people he swore to help? Why was simple truth as a legal concept so far from the doors of the court? How can they so stupidly and brazenly turn into a clearly political entity and not a judicial one in front of everyone rejecting call after call to recuse and destroying the credibility of the court and for what? Trump? Fascism? This idea that only a select group must be allowed to vote for democracy to thrive? What was it for? That Piggy guy? I don't know. Also curious.

You're forgetting a crucial detail, pollsters themselves haven't caught up with shifting demographics, as evidenced by how off the marked result they have been in recent years and there is no poll that tells you what tomorrows poll will say. Polls can change a fair number of times and there are still 5 months before the election. 5 months is a long time in politics. Personally I don't trust polls as far as I can kick them until we are a month out and people start actually tuning in to voter mentality in earnest. Psychologically we are still a few months away from that point but political awareness will gradually increase now, but so too will propaganda like the crap you're spinning. Personally I don't care how Biden came off in one debate when Trumps threat is so dire. Trust me, film me everyday for a year and the day you catch me without having had my morning coffee is the day you accuse me of showing signs of cognitive decline. If the presidential job was just debating I'd say Biden is in trouble... but that's not what the job is at all and it's primarily the job of decision maker and management. He's not expected to be in the Senate arguing for his own bills and as president and not a campaigner, he doesn't debate opponents on stage. So why care about how well he does in a debate when his agendas and plans are laid out and transparent in other places anyway and again, it's one debate and people are allowed to have an off day. Honestly, the jumping to conclusions based on one TV appearance isn't even something medical professionals tend to do either, so if they aren't, on what basis do you claim to have the right to be taken seriously here? In the end, Biden is the sort of President who will surround himself with people who are there to aid him and would actually step down if he needed to. Trump isn't that sort of president. Ultimately some people can be of the opinion that going with Biden would be akin to the democrats shooting themselves in the foot. Fair enough, it's a close race. Honestly though, so is dropping him and going for a new candidate so close to the Election. Where is the better choice between shooting yourself in either your right or left foot? Honestly though if you want someone to blame for not having a better democrat candidate; look no further than the news media. Who barely said a word or gave any coverage to the democratic primaries as it was all saturated with the lost cause republican primaries when everyone knew the base was gonna blindly follow Trump over a cliff and win the primary for him. The primary that actually could have mattered, was barely covered. I read the news a fair amount and I can't tell you a single name of any democrat challenger to Biden at all. Why? Seriously why? What the fuck were they thinking?

With the Supreme court deciding that checks and balances don't work unless you can avoid checks and balances... Can Biden just... take care of TFG now? But you know... officially? A blacked out CIA hit with the presidential seal on the heavily redacted documents should count right? National security and whatnot. Also do we all know where this is going now? Once the lower courts rerule and defines the difference between an official and a private act, Trumps legal team is just gonna cry foul on that one too and demand the Supreme court delivers it's own definitions and rulings on that also, after it sits in the damn docket until it has at least an inch or so of dust on the damn thing and it requires a professional museum level document restoration treatment. Honestly if this Hitleruesque slow coup the Republicans are encouraging doesn't go their way and they lose, the democrats when next in majority will stack that court and rebalance it ASAP. They should really quit while they are ahead. Personally, I'm of the opinion that their has to be some recognition within the highest offices of all the branches of government of the strict need for term limits on the basis that incredible power corrupts incredibly well. Presidents, speakers, SCJs, two terms. No more than that. Enough is enough, it's true of the presidency and at this point a logical move applied in one way, inconsistently applied in the same way again for the same scenario, is madness. It's like watching a toddler put the square peg into the square hole one time and then failing to do it again for weeks. Like come on? You had this?! What the hell happened? Seriously though, why was it never implemented before once they implemented term limits for presidents? Seems like just a half complete job.

I find it ironic that an ongoing war pulled LBJs popularity down while pulling out of Afghanistan brought down Bidens.

Lol I stand corrected. Yeah my external view of American politics didn't really clock in to anyone other than primary winners until I moved here in 2018. Forgive my ignorance. That said, I do think if he did have trouble maintaining his mental acuity at any point for age related reasons over the next four years, he'd step down and have the VP step in. Which strategically would be the best move to beat the Trump movement in 2028. It will mean KH or some other VP (I'm assuming he's sticking with Harris for his running mate this time around too?) Will have the incumbent advantage in 2028 but won't be close to their 2 term maximum either.

Agreed. Biden is at 9 out of 13 keys and one of those is incumbancy. I also take issue with I disagree. Biden has way more than just one thing going for him, unfortunately what he doesn't have going for him, is a competent news media industry capable of actually spreading just how successful his track record as president has actually been in terms of commitment to promises and advertised agenda being achieved. That infrastructure investment wasn't nothing, the economy improved as much as it could after Trumps economy wrecking policies and a pandemic. Honestly, if we weren't living in such polarized times, peoples view of Biden would be far different. People also forget, Biden didn't want to be president. If he had, he would have ran in 2016. Duty made him run, not ambition. Duty to protect the democracy he has worked in tirelessly for decades from Trump and his ilk. Here is the thing that really separates Biden and Trump; Trump could be demented and still wouldn't quit. He would endanger so many people by egoicly gripping onto power in his mental decline. As for Joe Biden, while finding a new candidate isn't impossible, finding one who can spread and share their vision/plan, with only a short campaign, enough to convince a very polarised group of voters to actually win? That's a long and steep uphill battle so late in the game under pre-internet conditions. But you know that whomever runs against Trump is going to be dragged through the mud and will be immediately hated by every echo chamber dwelling trump obsessed moron there is and even by democrats. With the way the internet is now, if most people can't even articulate what Joe Bidens achievements are because the press don't cover it well enough to break through the personal filters of most peoples news access, how is a new person going to fare any better?

I am a native English speaker. Let me know what you had trouble with and I'll try my best to help you understand.

I really do sympathise with where you're coming from, I really do. Unfortunately, Putin has more than just Russia brainwashed when it comes to the realities of nuclear war. For example, I'm not sure if Putin would ever really use them unless attacked first but he has a lot of people convinced he absolutely would including many different heads of state. However keeping in mind that one mans nuclear deterrent is another mans nuclear blackmail and at the international level this is important; if a nuclear armed member of Nato, openly adopts more aggressive/provocative forein nuclear policy or give any nuclear associated deadlines (For example; Putin take your trips from Ukraine within 60 days or face nuclear annihilation) it will be met with very mixed reactions and will walk into some of Putins claims about NATO intimidation. I do have one question for you; How sure are you that Putin 1. Cares for the Russian peoples opinions more than his own agenda? 2. How sure are you that his reaction wouldn't just be to stamp down on Russian civilians with more brutality if he feels his power is threatened by the mob? Where in Russia are you from? My boss is from St Petersburg.

Ngl Phi I'm getting dissociative psychosis vibes from him at this point. Just based on the randomness of the tangents, it's like he's replying to how he pervieved peoples responses and their content rather than saw them and half responding to his own thoughts like he's fallen back on using himself as a sounding board. It's all been a bit much for him.

I understand what you are saying; that nuclear deterrents don't work unless you broadcast a plan to use them. There is one issue with symmetrical response though. With the nature of missile warfare being what it is, missile defense systems are far too sophisticated to be overwhelmed by a 1 for 1 tit for tat strike plan. For both NATO and Russia, in order to overwhelm missile defense systems, they need to fire multiple active warheads at the same target in order to ensure the targets destruction, firing at more than one target to spread thin defensive capabilities, reduce the firing range via strategic placement of nuclear armed submarines and other more mobile methods of payload delivery, and make use of hypersonic missile technology. These strategies could also be mitigated if both sides have secretly working PDL systems and it is assumed that both sides have been working on this within highly classified R&D efforts. Simply put, due to the existence of missile defense technology, what nuclear warfare will actually look like is far more terrifying than what people think it will look like. In a nuclear war, major cities and strategic targets will likely be hit by more than one warhead. It won't be a case of one for Moscow and one for Washington, each target is going to be targeted with clusters of nuclear weapons.

You're not a hero and the world doesn't revolve around you. Have you ever accompanied a stranger to the hospital? Have you rushed to help them in a storm? Have you given up home and family to help someone? Have you sacrificed everything just to be close to your child? Have you ever uprooted yourself and moved multiple times so the mother of your child can continue to have a relationship with her first who isn't even yours? Have you ever even changed a diaper or been responsible for keeping a little human alive everyday? Have you ever sacrificed your own wants and desires purely for another person on a consistent basis? Heroes don't exist. Just flawed people. I am flawed, you are flawed. The difference between is I can accept outside perspectives on my flaws to constructively improve myself, nomatter the format those outside perspectives are delivered in, even if unfair.

If Spirit animals were in any way scientific, John Oliver would be mine. Yeah this is terrifying. I can't even begin to fathom just how many areas of life and society in the US and abroad this could impact and in so many different ways. Especially when it comes to judicial civil servants and anything that touches law enforcement or the checks and balances apparatus that is supposed to define the very need for a 3 body government. Lets say Trump wins the election this year, inputs schedule F, in the next election, they could dismantle election integrity down to nothing, disenfranchisement on a mass scale, a supreme court supermajority ready to smack down challenges from Democrats and give the presidency to a Trump lackey ready to start dismantling the 2 term presidency rule.

No, we are taking the time to write substantive posts with nuanced detail and you're painting all of us here a certain way because we aren't overly sympathetic to the plights of the involuntary celibate because it is usually a problem the involuntary celibibates themselves are responsible for? Wtf do you want us to do? Give women a hard time for saying no to certain people? Fat chance. That's called encouraging rape. Nobody here is gaslighting you either we just refuse to play sycophant to OP and their messed up way of thinking about things. Yes, because people who point out when we are wrong can only be jerks? It's never the person saying stupid sounding stuff that is a jerk... People have already said this is a false equivalency. For countless reasons. The plight of the homeless is so not the same as what incels experience and the fact that you think they are equivalent betrays the objectification incels put women through. You can buy a house, you can rent a house. You can't legally buy or rent a women (you can rent a women in places where prositution is legal but it isn't in most places, the legality of prositution would be OT however.) When you commit to live in a house, you have to enter into negotiations with the owner about how that will work. Women, don't have owners. Homeless people by not having a home are at constant risk of death by exposure to extreme weather conditions or victimisation on the streets. Incels by not having sex, are not having sex. At most they are touch starved, which is a real physiological issue, however the cure to touch starvation isn't sex, it's touch. Hugging a friend or family member achieves this. Improving the quality of the platonic relationships you have is key to this. Here is my observation; Friends, real friends, set each other up romantically. If this isn't happening, then it makes me wonder; Is OP also inept at cultivating healthy platonic relationships with people? Orgo, stop comparing homelessness to involuntary celibacy. They are not the same. Instead of inadequately trying to defend implicit demands from us telling him to get help, maybe you can actually show you care enough about him to honestly show him a bit of tough love. I'm sorry we aren't sugercoating things enough for you, but you can't suger coat bitter truths.

Here is the difference between me and you, we both can find a way to empathise with OPs plight but whereas you assume things about him, I go off the content of his character based on what I know about how he writes and his choice of words and ultimately just remembering things he's said. He said he is unapologetically selfish for example just a few pages back. Well, I'm doing him a favour by saying if you're like that, finding someone is going to be a lot harder and it seems like whomever that someone is will need to be a masochist to some degree because I don't think OP in his current mental state is capable of treating a partner with respect consistently enough to not abuse them out of callousness. And again, the fix to that is going to a therapist or someone who can help, honestly saying "I'm really selfish, it's stopping me from forming relationships. How can I be less selfish?" And just going from there.

Just pulling this quote out here. But who knows, maybe if incels keep telling women that they arent identifying what is subjectively attractive correctly, they'll get somewhere... Maybe if they get right up in a womens face and scream "My favourite colour is red, like me because it means I'm powerful!" They'll swoon? Or maybe, women with moral compasses aren't into men who sound like they just got out of the Sith Academy on Korriban...

And to add to this @orgotude; the people best equipped to deal with this, aren't here. We aren't professional therapists able to detach from our own feelings on things to listen to others for hours on end. There has been plenty of compassion and offers of help thrown at OP. OP doesn't trust therapists or the people best trained to legitimately help him improve his life and you can only vent about things that bother you for so long before you're not venting, you're obsessing and dosing yourself with the same stress cocktail you had before you started venting. It's a bad cycle to get into. OP feels like he is a victim in some way and that not having sexual partners is some kind of trauma done purposefully by other people when really it's just people exercising their free will to say no verbally and non verbally. If he continues to just not move forward and start focussing on what he can control, himself and who he chooses to be, instead of wishing he could control the women he wants into sleeping with him or for someone to arrange a relationship for him when he hasn't proven himself capable of handling one, then social deterrents and consequences are going to come out. This is human nature.

Wanting to be paired doesn't fix the issue that in this particular case; women find @ImplicitDemandsthreatening and emotionally insecure. Therefore dangerous to pair with or have children with. I'm not saying some incels might just be unlucky with the women around them in general but in this case, I think it's a case that social cues to avoid him, are being thrown out by OP. Let me ask you this; would you opt in to being a matchmaker for someone you believed might physically attack their partner? People who want to be "paired" for the sake of being in a relationship or just having someone to have sex with, honestly aren't ready for the commitment it takes to make one work as anyone who comes near will only be seen as a means to an end and women can pick up on these things far better than men can.

A little better is better than nothing and I think you underestimate the power of endocrinology over time too, take adrenaline for example, massively profound, oxytocin, massively profound. Should a cancer patient not seek treatment because there is no known treatment that works in minutes? Should a person not visit a dentist because the dentist can't magic the bad tooth away in minutes and make sure there is zero hole that needs to heal afterward? Suck it up. Medical workers can work wonders but patients have to commit time and... patience! A better question is why you think any of it is relevent to whether or not you see a psychiatrist before you hurt someone?

You know they say narcissism is the inability to move along from an earlier stage of development, usually either toddlerhood or teenage years. This would explain why you need to boil everything down to a simple colour model and have a strangely subjective animosity towards certain colours while putting others on a pedestal for arbitrary reasons. It's hexagons are the bestagons all over again. Who tf cares what your favourite colour is or why you hate purple and green. Literally your weird charts are so subjective I could come up with a reasonably logical explanation for why every colour is either good or bad. Who cares. Take care of yo mental health.

Depends on the psychiatrist. It's not a philosophically cut and dry profession. Yes you have your drug pushers but in a capitalist market you just gotta do your due dilligence and find the ones that aren't drug pushers if that is what you want, however some medications have scientific backing in helping with the sort of symptoms that make socialising more difficult, like irritability. Ask anyone here for example what I'm like unmedicated + Stressed tf out, a few of them know. I certainly do. Psychiatrists first and foremost are medical doctors. They aren't going to judge you as inferior for having medical problems or call your manhood into question for some potential hormonal imbalance or chemical brain imbalance that could be caused by anything from lack of certain nutrients or lack of bodies ability to create certain proteins or enzymes. I mean don't get me wrong, I do have some szaszian perspectives when it comes to psychiatry and do prefer a symptom management based approach when it comes to my autism diagnosis, over seeking some cure model that would fundamentally change who I am or also a strict definition model where my symptomology or traits are boxed into any type of psychiactric label if it won't be useful for helping me resolve an issue that gets in the way of having a consistent good quality of life. Narcissism itself isn't always a bad thing so long as you know when to switch it off. Most of us have that switch as a means of survival and there are situations where narcissists would survive where others wouldn't but the inverse is true too. Aren't you just the least bit curious what psychiatrists might have to say? There is even a psychiatry section here on this forum and other forums for it. What have you got to lose? It's not like you even have to tell anyone about it either it's all protected medical information and you can basically say anything to them and they'll keep it secret unless you tell them you're going to harm someone or yourself.

Dude, do you hear yourself? You're complaining about negative reps but at the same time complaining you didn't get the most. That is Narcissism right there. That is malignant self love and genuinely, it makes you weak and much less likely to procreate or survive calamities because you'd be a liability.

Red is much more associated with danger in most peoples eyes. But then I imagine it would be the favourite colour of a walking, talking, breathing red flag. Uhm... what? Are you claiming you were raped or have raped? I'm confused. Or are you claiming you've been raped emotionally? Maybe just speak a bit plainer. Sometimes less is more.