This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Some commentator said that the Biden/Harris campaign can donate money to a PAC that could then """independently""" decide to run ads for whomever happens to be the Democratic nominee.
The other thing people aren’t aware of is large amounts of the money announced as raised isn’t going to the direct election fund. Even in the article that talks about 3.7 million raised between under 50 people. That doesn’t quite happen, it would be illegal. What happens is you cut a bundle check: you can give the individual max to the campaign, then again to the “primary” campaign, and then once again to each and every state DNC party. This means a single individual can give a total of a hundred thousand+ (forget the exact math), but crucially, only the ~5k or so is directly controlled by Biden-Harris.
More options
Context Copy link
I would expect Dr. Jiil and Hunter to take an "over my dead body" approach to any attempt to divert that money out of their personal control. If they allow Biden to withdraw from the campaign, I would imagine that a good portion of his campaign funds will stick to him like glue.
More options
Context Copy link
Isn’t there a difference between a PAC and a super PAC? I thought the former had contribution limits but maybe I’m mistaken.
More options
Context Copy link
I'm sure there are ways around it, but it seems like a potential minefield for future lawfare if Trump/Paxton can find one disgruntled donor.
Keep in mind this is probably a losing campaign regardless.
Wouldn’t they need to find a plaintiff who donated to Biden but who was willing to sign on to a Paxton/Trump-favorable campaign? Seems unlikely.
There is almost certainly an intern at the RNC/Trump campaign who donated $1 to the Biden campaign to get immediate access to emails sent to donors.
More options
Context Copy link
Besides the straw donor possibility already raised by Mr. Nybs, and it wouldn't surprise me if both campaigns routinely arranged to have friends or relations donate to each other in order to scout info and engage in QC efforts.
Biden had well over one million donors back in March. Out of a group that big, one of them is gonna be weird. It's inevitable. People are weird. Somewhere in that million will be someone who loves Biden but hates Gretchen Whitmer for reasons so confusing as to be incomprehensible to rationality.
More options
Context Copy link
They could have a shill donate right now to preserve the case.
What’s the legal argument for why the Biden-Harris campaign can’t donate all its funds to the DNC, as somebody above suggested?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
That commentator said doing this may start a legal battle. That isn't a fun or easy plan, but it may be possible.
I guess for me it's that Harris isn't a zero compared to Newsom or Whitmer. She's not, at this time, utterly unacceptable in the way Biden arguably is. So it's not, well we have to switch but there will be a legal battle but we have to. It's, well we can have Newsom who we rank a 54/100 or Harris who we rank a 48/100, but if we pick Newsom we might get shit about "passing over the woman/Negro/sitting veep" and we might get a bizarro lawsuit about the money and maybe we get an ugly/ier convention fight, so maybe we sand off those six points and stick with Harris. Especially given that they're probably going to lose, and probably going to face Ken Paxton in office with a mandate to settle scores.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link