this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
16 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15914 readers
18 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's not what you would expect.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Haven't gotten around to trying to really read this article in full but it looks like you've got a pretty serious misquote.

That last paragraph you quote, which is at the end of the article, is followed by a single sentence given its own paragraph. So it actually reads as follows:

The promise of an end to the drama might be enough to elect Kamala. I want it to be true.

But it is a lie.

Emphasis mine.

So he's not saying it'll actually happen. Of all things he's rejecting the "40k Ork logic" that you're trying to pin on him. It sounds more like he's lamenting that 'If Democrats weren't lying, maybe Kamala Harris winning would lead to better circumstances, but they are lying.'

Cutrone has had some completely garbage takes (e.g. Palestine) but we don't need to stoop to the level of misreading him so carelessly. That benefits no one.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That's a fair point, but that's the article as I understand it. Maybe I read it wrong, but he spends the entire time acknowledging it to be a lie, that's why I said he admits Kamala is lying. He is at one step rejecting it, and the other embracing it. I think the issue here is a disconnect on what I meant and how you interpreted it, I probably could have worded my point better. Thank you for pointing that out.

So he's not saying it'll actually happen. Of all things he's rejecting the "40k Ork logic" that you're trying to pin on him. It sounds more like he's lamenting that 'If Democrats weren't lying, maybe Kamala Harris winning would lead to better circumstances, but they are lying.'

Emphasis mine.

This is more or less what I'm saying. He writes this as he wishes it to be, he says he wants Kamala to win so he's no longer a target and hopes everything gets better, even if he knows better. That's the 40k Ork logic at work.

That being said, I'll add the final "but it is a lie." I left it out because I believed it to be redundant, but for transparency I'll include it.