@freemo Most of what you're describing happened before half the electorate graduated from high school, so I kind of doubt it was a major factor.
But, yeah, I think a lot of the reason why he was considered a moderate was because he had mostly extremely mainline liberal views but "moderated" them with a few extreme right-wing views.
Doc Freemo 
Moderate doesnt mean taking radical views from both sides and having a mix and match of radicalism... You dont become moderate because you support slavery AND communism at the same time. Moderates are people where all their views are balanced and well reasoned, considering nuance and argument from both sides, and generally means your stance is one that is in disagreement with both sides, finding the non-radical moderate reasonable solutions down the line.
One thing i realize about this discussion, and I may do a write up, is how people, most people in fact, cant really see the world in absolute terms, only in relative terms. Like if the democrats were acting this way 20 years ago when republicans were actually acting somewhat rational I bet even your most staunch democrat would say the democrats have went completely radical and were acting like lunatics. But when it sits next tot he republicans who are just as loony they seem reasonable and normal.
The fact that most people base what is acceptable based on relativity to the norm, rather than an absolute sense of reason is scary, and perhaps one of our biggest flaws.
(note: no offense to Louis, while he may have resembled some of that here generally he is a pretty reasonable and respectable feller).
For sure, but I think its more than that, even if you had the experience to have been here 20 years ago to see it and had that experience you still are unlikely to agree with me. Its in your historic experience but still doesn't inform you to normalcy. In a sense its not our totality of experiences, it is just where we are in the moment for most of us that we use to judge what is acceptable.
@freemo @amerika I mean, I grew up in a Republican household. I voted for both parties through to the Obama era while donating to libertarian policy groups. I only finally registered as a Dem on January 7th 2021.
So, I definitely see what you're talking about, in general. I just see the dems as being only like 20-30% as radicalized as their opposition, and their radicalization is mostly oppositional. Remove the dictator and give him proper due process and dems will de-radicalize naturally.
Well no you can argue against it. When you gas the poor, since being poor is not unlinked from the environment you arent producing less poor people since society changes.
For example someone might be poor int he USA but that same person if they were in europe might not be poor, because the kind of person they are would thrive in one environment but not the other.
One could just as easily (and wrongly) argue that if you gas all the rich you will make society better because the poor people would now be able to thrive and become the rich themselves, and create an environment where poor people thrive and thus are eliminated.
The truth is, breeding doesnt work like that. You can breed specific traits that are easily measures (like height) but complex things like being poor you cant just breed out by directly killing the poor, you'd have to understand the underlying problems and fix those, which are unlikely to be genetic in nature.
> No, they're likely genetic in nature. Poor = dumber, generally.
No basis in reality for that what soever. People with low IQ generally can learn all sorts of high skilled labour jobs and make money just fine. The vast majority of the poor tend to be veterans who have severe mental health issues arrising from lack of mental health access combined with abuse expiernced during their service. Again something you wont see in countries that treat their people better and provide good vet services and mental health access.
Im not saying you should be concerned with europe. The point is societies change, and american can change in ways that would stop poor people from being an issue because it isnt a genetic problem to begin with but a societal one.
Its like sitting there punching people in the face and then when they start to flinch trying to blame genetic and then thinking if you kill off all the people that flinch then you wont have people flinching anymore.
Frankly, its a pretty idiotic viewpoint.
> We have scientific proof of the genetic basis of intelligence.
At no point did I suggest there is no genetic basis to intelligence. I stated there is no genetic basis for being poor, and that poor is not determined primarily by intelligence.
Considering your response suggests low intelligence, as you didnt understand what I said, sounds like you need to be gassed. I'm willing to use you as the test subject for your proposed solution.
This is like a living relic, it's so rare to see left and right wing people inhabit the same spaces on the internet nowadays.
I dont think so. Who is the democrat here and who is the republican? I am staunchly anti-democrat and anti-republican party and while their current lunacy makes that divide particularly far even 20 years ago I would have opposed either party, albeit less so. Im generally centrist with a very slight left lean. No party would be a close fit to my ideals but you had to describe it I'm something like 40% libertarian 20% old-democrat, 10% old republican, 30% views contrary to all parties.
To be fair I may not be a righty, but as far as democrats are concerned (usually) even a centrist is a nazi. So I think your assessment still has some truth to it.
@freemo @ceo_of_monoeye_dating I disagree with that characterization. To most democrats, the current line for being a Nazi is being a Trump apologist. Which, yeah, some centrists are, but not most.
Nothing to be sorry for, just wasnt sure who you might have meant. Havent been mistaken for a republican or democrat in a long time, but I can see why you might see it that way.
In my bio i list a bunch of bullet points on my stance on various issues, should give a pretty accurate picture of where I am ont he spectrum.
Not only are there **lots** of other plausible causes (of just one I gave you), you havent even explained the direction of causation.
A very simple explanation (again among many possible ones) is that being poor causes low intelligence rather than low intelligence causing one to be poor. If you are poor you wont get proper nutrition or education, both of which results in lower intelligence.
That said youre extremely low-intelligence answers are doing a remarkably good job at convincing me we should exterminate you at least, so you are least making a convincing argument, even if it isnt the argument you intended to make.
No, this is an obvious lie, since intelligence cannot be changed.
Here, let us put some sources out there:
https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1998generalintelligencefactor.pdf
https://gwern.net/doc/iq/ses/2003-gottfredson.pdf
https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/2004schools&g.pdf
https://ia803201.us.archive.org/29/items/5113-2-iq-and-the-wealth-of-nations-by-richard-lynn-tatu-vanhanen/%235113_2_IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations_by_Richard_Lynn%2C_Tatu_Vanhanen.pdf
https://archive.org/details/bell_curve-epub
Your reasoning is typical Leftism: reject biology and Darwinism, embrace the assumption of egalitarianism and argue inverted causality as a result.
"people, most people in fact, cant really see the world in absolute terms, only in relative terms."
1. Frame of reference, overton window
2. Basic human inflexibility, fiction-absolute
Most humans operate only to feel positive sensations about their past choices. This is why they go crazier as they age.
In politics, they accept certain precedents as necessary and defend them. Only when they perish, like the dying hippies, do we move forward :)
@freemo @amerika I agree with most of that. We're all a product of our history and experiences. Most of Europe would describe your definition of "moderate" to be "conservative", while in Texas, you'd be a commie, so it's all about frame of context.