My #Walkaway Story (Former Evergreen Student).

[Excon]

Prove that? He was right about everything he said about "the captain",

Clearly you are confused. I commented on your reply of; "/thread".

 

[markjs]

Clearly you are confused. I commented on your reply of; "/thread".

Well it's anonsense Rusian troll inspired crap story nobody cares about anyway except a bunch of conservatives wanting to suk each other off and pat each other on the back about how smart they are. I am from Washington and familliar with Evergreeen and yeah a lot of that idiocy turned a lot of folks off, but to suggest this is some new thing is laughable. It didn't change the things people believe in and it didn't spawn anyu actual movement. Enjoy your loony fantasies though.:roll:

 

[Greenbeard]

We’re still humoring #walkaway when 61 million people just turned out to vote for the Dems in a midterm? Folks, that isn’t something that happens in this country. No party gets presidential-level turnout in midterms to crush the governing party by 8-9 points, it’s unheard of.

But yeah okay, a YouTube video.

 

[RetiredUSN]

I was a Democrat before I was a Republican, and then I walked away from both parties.

I will rarely vote in the future unless there is some one running who has earned my respect........ Kinda like Elaine Luria this year.

 

[Fishking]

Typical. Not interested enough in the subject to actually view it and then present an informed response...just interested in coming in to make a negative, uninformed statement.

Just more examples of what this young man left the Left for. :coffeepap:

The zombies are among us.

 

[Fishking]

Yes, I was thinking the same thing, about how often Russian propaganda tends to make it into your posts.

Braaaaaaiiinnsssss….Braaaaaaiiiiinnnsss…..*shuffles around*

You are 100% correct, I have absolutely zero interest in what one random unknown person out of 300+ million in this country has to say (if we could even believe him in the first place). I guess the question then becomes how come you care so much about what this ONE person, who has absolutely no claim to fame and not even 7,000 views, has to say.

You're on a message board, which is full of some random people from among the over 300+ million (for the most part) yet...here you are responding, seeming to care. The lack of self-awareness from someone able to type words is astounding.

 

[Fishking]

Strange, I haven't seen a single "factcheck" organ confirming this is Russian Propaganda. I have seen CNN using that "Hamilton68" site pushing that narrative, despite all the actual video evidence to the contrary.

Yet you come in to dismiss a video you admit you did not view...to what end? Derail a thread simply because you disagree with it despite not even reviewing the material presented?

Strangely, that is one of the points made by the young man concerning typical radical-left tactics in the video. Those who view it will realize your response is proof of his personal experience. :coffeepap:

He's not going to be honest. We know this.

 

[Slyfox696]

Strange, I haven't seen a single "factcheck" organ confirming this is Russian Propaganda.

:lol:

Okay. Just like anyone pushing Russian propaganda would say.

Yet you come in to dismiss a video you admit you did not view...to what end?

To point out you are pushing Russian propaganda by presenting a video made by one random person no one knows. Like I said.

Do you really not read posts before you reply to them?

Those who view it will realize your response is proof of his personal experience. :coffeepap:

Oh? People who watch the video will realize that listening to one random person nobody knows, whose truthfulness cannot in any way be determined, is a stupid way to make a point as you push Russian propaganda?

*crosses fingers* Well, let's hope!

So weird that you would think people leaving your party = Russian propaganda.

I don't have a party. Unlike you, I prefer to think for myself.

However, it has been well-established #walkaway was a narrative pushed by Russian propaganda. Look it up. If you need to.

Also funny how you see 1 news article of #walkaway being run by Russian bots and you instantly dismiss the thousands of #walkaway's popping up candidly.

Yes, how odd it would be that #walkaway shows up, is immediately pushed by Russian bots and suddenly people tend not to take it seriously, especially after a HUGE Democratic wave in the midterm election.

Funny that. :roll:

I think this whole walk away thing is gonna become MUCH BIGGER before 2020.

Yeah, that's what they said about the 2018 election and the Democrats dominated the 2018 election.

Keep pushing that Russian propaganda, like usual.

This is an opinion video....

An opinion video of some random person, whose honesty cannot be verified, with less than 7000 views. And yet, somehow, the OP found the video and posted it, similar to how we know Russian propaganda works.

Strange that...

And yet, you'll hang on every word you hear from the talking potato heads on those mainstream media opinion shows.

A) No I don't.
B) Those are people whose beliefs and opinions can be verified against other existing video evidence. Watching one video where someone CLAIMS to have been one thing but then uses inflammatory language consistent with far right viewpoints is a hard sell.

If you are someone who claims have been been on the far end of one political spectrum but now uses language consistent with those on far end of the other side of the spectrum, you're either crazy, stupid or dishonest. My guess is dishonest.

Because the networks have made them and THEIR opinions seem more important?

No, because they have bona fide credentials. Because they have served in government or have journalism degrees. Because they are held to a certain level of honesty in their reporting.

If you don't see the difference, that's on you.

You would be well served by broadening your information base.

Like Conservative Treehouse, as you read when you post lies? Like random YouTube videos with less than 7000 views?

No, I prefer to get my information from sources which have credibility and can source their information, not from random YouTube videos with people no one has never heard of.

We’re still humoring #walkaway when 61 million people just turned out to vote for the Dems in a midterm? Folks, that isn’t something that happens in this country. No party gets presidential-level turnout in midterms to crush the governing party by 8-9 points, it’s unheard of.

But yeah okay, a YouTube video.

Exactly. The whole #walkaway was supposedly a response to the blue wave of the 2018 election. It didn't work. Democrats dominated in the mid-term election. #Walkaway was a flop, pushed by Russian propaganda. Not surprising to see some of the people in this thread defend it.

You're on a message board

Exactly. There is a recorded history of people's points of views that can be consulted, unlike some random YouTube video. For example, I can go back and look at all your posts and find the stupid ones, the funny ones, the relatively rare intelligent ones and come to a conclusion about your levels of honesty, integrity, political views, etc. I can challenge you on your opinions, read your responses and determine your ability to source what you say.

You cannot do that with one random YouTube video of someone nobody knows. See the difference?

The lack of self-awareness from someone able to type words is astounding.

It's not a lack of self-awareness on my part if you failed to comprehend the point. It just means you failed to comprehend the rather obvious point.

 

[calamity]

Exactly, you were never a Democrat or even within 10 political miles of it, so your "walk away" OP is completely pointless. You can not expect us to watch 10 minutes of hyperpartisan garbage before we criticize you for posting this hyperpartisan garbage.

In over two years I have not once seen you criticize or even refuse to defend Trump for anything. You even support and defend him on things he does that are dramatically anti-libertarian. You do not come across as someone with strong beliefs or morals when you refuse to defend those beliefs against Trump. So surely you can imagine why we'd dismiss criticism of the Dems by someone as partisan as yourself....

They all do, which is why I do not trust the word of anyone who backs the Trumpet and also claims to be libertarian.


"B...b'''but judges!"

Uh, no. Brett Kavanaugh is a political hack who can be seen with the other political hacks sitting behind Ken Starr in the Clinton impeachment hearings. Libertarians do not go on a witch hunt to ferret out peccadilloes.

 

[KevinKohler]

This is why conservatism is becoming the new political correctness.

Having the right to peacefully burn the flag or kneel during our national anthem, are the very rights that make our country unique. If you bully people into expressing themselves the way YOU want to express yourself, then those rights become meaningless, and pretty soon they and other rights will be taken away permanently.

And you're obviously a Republican, since you campaign for them, so pretend to be a centrist.

I don't agree with you a lot, but you're dead on here.

 

[Excon]

Well it's anonsense Rusian troll inspired crap story ...

1. You can't prove that.
2. That is nothing more than your biased opinion about it.

... nobody cares about anyway except a bunch of conservatives wanting to suk each other off and pat each other on the back about how smart they are.

Your personal beliefs are clearly biased bs.
Obviously people care, like the guy who posted it.
So enjoy your loony fantasy.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Wait, Is "equal redistribution of wealth" a progressive goal?

I just started watching and he says this in the first minute. I don't feel like wasting my time watching this if that's the quality of thought I should expect here.

Anyway, I'll watch it during lunch.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

I watched more and see the same logical error.

He talks about "The Left." He then chooses to most extreme examples on the left to create a giant straw man to beat up on. He and I assme the OP is the same way, fails to realize that you can do the same thing with "The Right." I can point to the Westboro Baptist Church as an example of "The Right."

And the absurdity that "The Right" (whatever that is) wants to rationally discuss issues is laughable considering they elected Donald Trump someone who constantly lies and said he wanted a ban on Muslims.

 

[Carjosse]

Leave the radical left groupthink to go join the radical right groupthink instead.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Leave the radical left groupthink to go join the radical right groupthink instead.

Bingo.

The OP and those like him don't seem to understand that Bernie Sanders, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton don't have a single unified ideology. It seems like the OP and the guy in the video have a very simplistic view of the world where they can't distinguish these differences in political beliefs. In their minds, there's no difference between Obama and Marx because they have such an unsophisticated understanding of political ideology.

For them Obama and Antifa are the same but they decry those on the left who insist that Trump and Neo-Nazis are the same.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Random popup thread of a hashtag which has been widely proven as Russian propaganda.

Interesting...

All of the #walkaway threads I've seen on these forums (or anywhere, for that matter) have been started by right-wing Trump supporters. I was hoping they would drop this ploy after the midterms, but it looks like they're attempting a reboot.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Leave the radical left groupthink to go join the radical right groupthink instead.

I #walkaway from radicals. That includes Trumpists and whacky SJW's. Extremes are just that.

 

[calamity]

I see the kid not embracing Trump, so much as walking away from the hate he had seen.
I did the same thing.
I am still a conservative Democrat, but am politically homeless right now.
When I managed the local Republican Headquarters during the mid-terms, many of my volunteers were also homeless conservative Democrats.

We stand for the national anthem, love the United States, and respect the flag.
Few current Democrats have this as an official stance.
...and even fewer have the balls to say so in public.
The party left us with its sharp left turn and hate of almost everything uniquely American.

Not burning the flag would be a good start.
Too many current Democrats are good with it.

Standing for the national anthem and worshiping a flag is hardly a good foundation on which to base a political claim. Why do you care who stands, sits or kneels during a ****ing song? And, **** the flag. It's a piece of cloth made in China, for god's ****ing sake.

 

[Phys251]

This is why conservatism is becoming the new political correctness.

Having the right to peacefully burn the flag or kneel during our national anthem, are the very rights that make our country unique. If you bully people into expressing themselves the way YOU want to express yourself, then those rights become meaningless, and pretty soon they and other rights will be taken away permanently.

Truer words have never been spoken. :thumbs:

 

[Xelor]

Part I of III

Mr. Roth's remarks and my comments (second and lower level bullet points) on them:

• Roth perceives "Democratic" and "progressive" as synonymous.
  • They are not.
• 0:30 -- He thinks equal distribution of wealth is a progressive view.
  • It is not.
• ~1:15 -- Roth depicts the Day of Absence as a Blacks-only event that requires whites to leave campus.
  • It's not. Moreover, it's a voluntary activity.
  • It didn't require whites to do anything. The Day of Absence entailed non-whites voluntarily gathering off campus for a bunch of seminars and activities.
    • "For many years, minority students and faculty members have observed a Day of Absence in which they met off campus to discuss campus issues and how to make the college more supportive of all students."
• ~2:20 -- Roth equates the cognition and behavior of a bunch of college students on his campus with "the left."
  • Having had four college students and observed myself, my siblings and other peers as such, it's clear to me that college students are hardly the most well informed and sagacious thinkers one might encounter, even as, by being in college, they are endeavoring to boost their knowledge base and analytical adroitness. The incompleteness of the intellectual and experiential learning period makes rash and imprudent Roth's inferring that students' behavior is representationally faithful to the sentiments and dogma of "the left." Students are unquestionably loud, strident and strong, but often enough, also wrong.
    
    This point is particularly puissant and germane for Evergreen which is hardly a selective institution, accepting pretty much anyone who applies. The "brightest lights in the candelabra" aren't the kids at Evergreen. Rather it is an institution comprised of mediocrities and low performers....Not exactly the student crowd from whom one is well advised to accept insights about world writ large.
    • Evergreen State Academics -- Notice that the average GPA is below 3.5, which is informs one that, on average, students there earn fewer As than non-A marks. (3.5 indicates one has earned more As than non-As because that's the only way to get a 3.5 or higher GPA.) The school appears to lack general ed/core curriculum requirements, which means students must necessarily be taking only classes that capture their fancy, and still they aren't even "entry level" high performers. Exacerbating that is the extent of indebtedness Evergreen students bear upon graduating.
    • University of Washington, Seattle Academics
• ~3:00 -- Roth obtained education about conservative notions from Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson.
  • I'm not particularly familiar with Shapiro, but I'm well acquainted with Peterson's numinous nonsense, pseudoscience, and other noetic numbskullery. Peterson shows us that despite one's having a reasonable level of academic accomplishment, one can disregard and/or debase the acumen/abilities thus obtained and, in turn, exhibit but benighted "prescience" and "perspicacity."
    
    Roth has fallen prey to the notion that simply because there are opposing POVs, they are equally rational and well conceived. In other words, he's allowed himself to trust, but not soberly evaluate, to say nothing of verify, the aptness of the methodology by which those opposing POVs arrive at their conclusions.

(continued due to character limit)

 

[Xelor]

Part II of III

• ~3:00 - 3:30 -- Roth contrasts what appears to him as civil discourse among conservatives with what he calls the left's intolerance.
  • Liberals and conservatives alike are able, within their respective "echo chambers," to civilly converse.
  • Roth is apparently unaware that "the right's" most restive members, unlike "the left's," account for the vast majority, not of excited enmity in the face of opponents, but willful terrorism/homicides in the US derives from "the right."
    
    It's not that "lefties" perpetrate no violence for they do. What's relevant is the nature, extent and timing/frequency of politically motivated violence perpetrated by the left and right, and in that regard, the right "out-violences" all others,[SUP]1[/SUP] even though animus is evenly apportioned among both major party's members.
    • GAO Report to Congress on Countering Terrorism
    • Homicide Events by Ideology
    • Why Does the Far Right Hold a Near-Monopoly on Political Violence?
    • FACT CHECK: Is Left-Wing Violence Rising?
    • The Alt-Right is Killing People
    • The far-right was responsible for the majority of America’s extremist killings in 2017
      
      
      
  • While I credit Roth for seeking other POVs and will even acknowledge the comparatively constrained extent of liberal forbearance of absurd lines conservative pontificators proffer, it's clear Roth has ignored that liberal outrage results from frustration with the logical launae abounding in conservative rhetoric and policy proposals. After all, liberals and conservatives seek the same goals; however, they apply different means to those ends.

• ~5:10 -- Roth introduces the sophistry of the Democratic party having been the party of slavery.
  • Prefacing his exposition on this canard, Roth had the gall to remark upon, what strikes him as conservatives' willingness to discuss issues logically, yet any logical comparison of Republican and Democrat parties requires that one acknowledge the full scope of each's dynamism. Logic dissuades one form deigning to present a line that in part or wholly predicates as temporally, ideologically and qualitatively monolithic the nature of either party, yet that's exactly a premise Roth declares as "one of the biggest reasons" for his departure from "the left." That his erudition re: the nature of the Democratic party of 20+ years ago and before, rather than the party extant now, leads him to disapprobation testifies resoundingly to his assay's vapidly cantled character.
    
    To wit, he invokes the trope regarding Margaret Sanger's alleged aim to exterminate Blacks. Roth notes he wasn't aware of Sanger's remark; however, his willingness to cite it and offer it as evidence of 21st century Democrats' pro-life impetus illustrates his jejune examination of the matters -- the evolution of the Democratic party and of the pro-life movement.
    • Did Margaret Sanger believe African-Americans "should be eliminated"?
    • What Margaret Sanger Really Said About Eugenics and Race

It's fine, apt even, that Roth added that pearl about Sanger to his body of knowledge. It is intellectually indolent and ignorant of him to decontextualize and construe that single remark as temporally and pivotally germane to the drivers of present-day Democracy or pro-life-ism. Roth cites that remark as "a small part" of history of he was never aware.

Indeed, there's a lot of which he's not aware that were he to make himself aware, he'd realize that such notions as eugenics no longer hold sway in the Democratic party. Sadly, however, Roth is relying not on rigorous research but rather on circumstantially obtained anecdotal information rather than on cogently constructed analysis based on the preponderance of available information. But then that is what many conservatives, Trump and his devotees, in particular, do, so perhaps it's apropos that he has forsworn the Democratic party, for Mr. Roth is right about one thing: Democrats aren't particularly forgiving of ill-/under-informed folks who proselytize without portfolio.​

(continued due to character limit)

 

[Xelor]

Part III of III


Note:
Let's here preempt the inevitable whataboutism -- attempts to change the conversation that wouldn’t happen among well informed intelligent discussants, but that one invariably must suffer or ignore when conversing with many conservatives, most notably Trumpkins.

Yes, far-left violence is bad -- See how easy it is to write that? There’s no need to caveat violent extremists of any flag as "very fine people" -- but over the last decade, left wing groups have committed 3% of extremist killings in the US, a fraction of the 71% American right-wing extremists and 26% Islamic extremists performed. Those figures are the ADL’s, which documents them case by case.

Disliking the ADL’s categorization, one can use the data gathered the New America Foundation, which avail LEOs' statements to determine motivation in the various attacks. That dataset shows that attacks by right wing extremists outnumber those by left wing groups by > 17:1. Moreover, one may harken to research the SPLC compiled evincing, since the rise of the “alt-right” in 2014, over 100 instances "alt-right" proximate terrorist killings/injuries...before Parkland.

In short, from a standpoint of scale, trends, and impact, we have a problem that shouldn’t require whataboutism or "ostriching" the problem. Whereas the "alt-left"/"violent left" isn't a viable political movement and hasn't diffused to the broader mainstream of Democratic party politics and key media outlets, nor held multiple armed standoffs after seizing government facilities, nor even paralyzed entire American cities in fear, the alt-right has and moreover has made ascended to the White House and dwells furthermore amidst the majority in Congress.


End of post series.

 

[Acadia]

Yeah, looks like that walkaway failed.
Maybe it's time to give up that astro-turf.

You sound a bit defensive and I wonder why we always get this scripted response when it comes to #walkaway. You want to see astroturfed? Look at the "March for our Lives". That's astroturfed out the wazoo.
#walkaway is real and I love hearing the stories of people whose eyes have been opened. This very response is typified in the YouTube video. It's always about shutting down the opinions of others and to me, it's telling.
You fear this movement because heaven forbid your identity politics and socialist agenda be challenged.

 

[Acadia]

We’re still humoring #walkaway when 61 million people just turned out to vote for the Dems in a midterm? Folks, that isn’t something that happens in this country. No party gets presidential-level turnout in midterms to crush the governing party by 8-9 points, it’s unheard of.

But yeah okay, a YouTube video.

Yeah, we know your Soros-funded agenda doesn't look like #walkaway. For all your turnout, you picked up JACK in the Senate.

 

[Acadia]

Part III of III


Note:
Let's here preempt the inevitable whataboutism -- attempts to change the conversation that wouldn’t happen among well informed intelligent discussants, but that one invariably must suffer or ignore when conversing with many conservatives, most notably Trumpkins.

Yes, far-left violence is bad -- See how easy it is to write that? There’s no need to caveat violent extremists of any flag as "very fine people" -- but over the last decade, left wing groups have committed 3% of extremist killings in the US, a fraction of the 71% American right-wing extremists and 26% Islamic extremists performed. Those figures are the ADL’s, which documents them case by case.

Disliking the ADL’s categorization, one can use the data gathered the New America Foundation, which avail LEOs' statements to determine motivation in the various attacks. That dataset shows that attacks by right wing extremists outnumber those by left wing groups by > 17:1. Moreover, one may harken to research the SPLC compiled evincing, since the rise of the “alt-right” in 2014, over 100 instances "alt-right" proximate terrorist killings/injuries...before Parkland.

In short, from a standpoint of scale, trends, and impact, we have a problem that shouldn’t require whataboutism or "ostriching" the problem. Whereas the "alt-left"/"violent left" isn't a viable political movement and hasn't diffused to the broader mainstream of Democratic party politics and key media outlets, nor held multiple armed standoffs after seizing government facilities, nor even paralyzed entire American cities in fear, the alt-right has and moreover has made ascended to the White House and dwells furthermore amidst the majority in Congress.


End of post series.

"Very fine people". The Left continues their gaslighting to anyone willing to swallow their b.s.