Message auto-removed

[Name removed]

[Celerity]

1. an hour or two old account posting hit pieces, and recc'ing them yourself, welcome to DU

enjoy your stay

[Celerity]

3. not if it is the truth

[NYC Liberal]

46. Where was the attack?

"an hour or two old account posting hit pieces, and recc'ing them yourself"

- You registered here at 6:08 PM.
- You posted this thread and then rec'd it yourself.

No other claims were made.

[Celerity]

53. logical fallacy contains a refernce to false, nothing I said was false

you are/were a couple hour old account, that was you first OP, you did rec it yourself, it is a hit piece on Pete, as I pointed out below, and I did welcome you to DU

no falsities, no fallacy

and

you went on right away to post another one

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128783028


as Pete just said in his CNN Townhall,


'I may not be a master fisherman, but I do know bait when I see it.'

[mr_lebowski]

56. Actually, no offense Celerity, but Fallacy doesn't require Falseness ...

It simply means, in the simplest sense, one is saying Y follows X, when in fact Y does not (necessarily) logically follow X.

Many fallacies are actually true (at least some % of the time) but generally-speaking, not always.

Simple Example:
Assertion: All Fish Live In The Sea
Assertion: This Creature Lives In The Sea
Conclusion: This Creature is a Fish

The Conclusion may or may not be true, but the argument still takes the form of a logical fallacy, regardless

Just making this point of fact, not saying this isn't ... ummm ... suspicious

I certainly wouldn't rush to post this crap here on DU as one of MY first actions, and ain't NO FALLACY involved in that assertion.

Gonna have 1.5 years of this kinda bullshit to look forward to

[Celerity]

57. oh, yes, i was trying to make a pun of 'false' (and obviously failed!)

The One True Scotsman fallacy is a another perfect example of a logical fallacy that is not necessarily false.

should have riffed off 'faulty'

[mr_lebowski]

58. I feel ya ... also made a few edits, if you're interested ...

[Celerity]

65. I am not a he, and don't be condescending towards me

[mr_lebowski]

66. Like I said ... doesn't mean S/He is wrong ...

Not really on your side here ... but I keep things real.

Enjoy your stay

[mr_lebowski]

70. I pointed out her minor mistake, that's not the same as 'being on your (personal) side'

Facts are facts, they don't really have a 'side'.

I appreciate adhering properly to logical constructs, but to be honest ... this is a social forum, and showing up like a bull in a china shop, being all 'Mr. Logic' ... isn't going to cause many to warm up to you much. Just my $.02, FWIW.

Anyone who joins and basically immediately begins posting divisive articles, whether they're 'right' or not, whether they're 'mainstream sources', or not? Doesn't much matter. It implies an intent, a 'mission' if you will.

There's only a few people the large majority of us 'trust' implicitly ... there's other members we KNOW here, some of these relationships going back almost 20 years now ... and it's people like Barack and Michelle, Hill and Bill, James Hansen, Noam Chomsky, Rachel, Lawrence O' Donnell, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert ... I'm sure there's many others, but I promise you ... 'random CNBC article writer' and 'Bilirubin' ... sure as shit ain't on the list.

Here's "logic" for you. It's not hard for a Writer to come up with a few friggin' people on the street who think "Man, That Mayor Ain't Done Nothing For Me!". And the fact you felt the need to join, and immediately post an article of this nature ... why, of COURSE, that doesn't mean YOU ARE a troll ... but it might.

ANd if you do something similar TWICE in a short period ... the numbers start stacking up against you. You're familiar with the concept of 'probabilities', right?

[namahage]

19. No, Color-of-shit, THIS is an ad-hom.

Where's MIRT when you need them?

[Renew Deal]

51. And they're always race based

[Mc Mike]

72. May it be a short one. Nt.

[PatSeg]

4. Not appropriate to post

hit pieces on Democratic candidates at DU. You're new, so perhaps you didn't understand that.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

5. Or, perhaps, did understand that!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Celerity]

6. +1

[Honeycombe8]

8. I don't think it's appropriate, either.But it's done a lot. I've seen two by Harris supporters...

recently.

One was by a Harris supporter against Biden (implying he'd said something he hadn't). Yesterday I think.
Now this one by a Harris supporter against Budegieg.

What's really unusual for new members of a forum is that they come out swinging. My experience in forums for a couple of decades is that new posters tiptoe in, until they learn the lay of the land. If they come in like experienced hitters (negatively), they are here for a single purpose.

[namahage]

13. What makes you think they are actually Harris supporters?

I would think your couple decades of experience would tip you off that trolls are rarely who they say they are.

[Honeycombe8]

17. Because they had the Harris supporter flag at the bottom, like you do. So does the above OP. nt

[floppyboo]

22. I sure hope Brock bots aren't back already. sigh

It got to a point that there were so many sock puppets here it became useless to have a discussion.

Let's hope this is just an over zealous newbie.

[PatSeg]

28. I avoided the Primaries forum

for the most part in 2016. Much too nasty for my taste and I knew quite a few long time Du'ers who left and never came back. It was much worse than 2004 and 2008, and now we know why. Hopefully, it will be more tolerable this time. Knowing what to expect and how to respond really makes a big difference.

[namahage]

27. "Like you do"? If you're trying to insinuate something,

just say it and have the courage of your convictions.

[Honeycombe8]

32. No. Why would you think that? Geez...I was describing the logo thingie. Like you have.

I don't have a Harris logo at bottom of my post, or I would have said "like I have."

[namahage]

35. And if you DID have a Harris logo,

what's the likelihood you would have said

But it's done a lot. I've seen two by Harris supporters...

recently.

One was by a Harris supporter against Biden (implying he'd said something he hadn't). Yesterday I think.
Now this one by a Harris supporter against Budegieg.

[Honeycombe8]

36. I know bait when I see it.

Move on. Stop criticizing the way I described the logo thingie. It's beginning to look like a personal attack.

[PatSeg]

23. We should have learned that from 2016

Many so-called Bernie supporters were often Russian trolls, who were trying to divide Democrats and often succeeded.

I remember as far back as 2004, there were some obnoxious Kucinich supporters, but they just disappeared once Kerry became the nominee. It is something we should expect at DU during primary season.

Meanwhile, I certainly wouldn't hold such posts against Harris. Doesn't sound like anything that she or her supporters would approve of.

[Honeycombe8]

33. I remember the Kucinich supporters. LOL.

Bless his heart, Kucinich was just so sure of himself, a ball of energy, and gave it his all. He didn't have a chance, but his supporters were absolutely 100% convinced he was going to win.

[PatSeg]

16. Yep

I was thinking the same thing. Not a terribly subtle debut. Ah, nothing quite like DU during the primaries. We'll see a bunch come and go!

[Honeycombe8]

21. yep yep yep...

[PatSeg]

24. Ha, ha, ha!!!

Oh that was perfect and I definitely laughed out loud!!!

[Honeycombe8]

38. :) nt

[Celerity]

60. I think some select a candidate that they do not like, then post tosh to associate that candidate

with the negativity.

Just my inner cynic coming to the fore. I have seen a poster who switched a couple times a day and then went in swinging. Wish there was an endorsement history view feature.

[msongs]

7. used ta live in Los Angeles. never met the mayor once in 4 yrs nt

[Blue_true]

12. I haven't met a city Mayor in my life.

I would not know what the current, confederate sympathetic Mayor looks like if I walked past his.

[Honeycombe8]

9. I live in a mid-sized city. I've never met the Mayor.

I'm sitting here looking at my smartphone...well, not a smartphone, since unlike the guy in the OP pic, a smartphone is too expensive for me...thinking how my Mayor has left me behind.

[Blue_true]

14. I live in a small Florida city. I have never met a city Mayor in my life.

I am a late cycle babyboomer.

[quickesst]

25. about that...

I know of at least two people who have sold their food stamps in order to buy minutes for their smartphones. My own phone is a Samsung Galaxy J-3 which does about everything you can ask of a smartphone. It cost me $79. A phone is really not a good judge oh how well-off someone is.

[Honeycombe8]

30. I think it is very telling. I have never spent even close to $79 fr a phone.

And I would never spend a monthly amount on one. I'm frugal. If I were poor, I would have the same phone.

I don't need a phone to do more than phone calls and text. So I have a touch cell phone, Tracfone (prepaid). I paid $15 for it years ago...it got so old tht Tracfone sent me an updated model for free. It costs me $100/yr. All my minutes roll forward forever.

I have a laptop at home for personal work and things.

I can't believe someone would sell food stamps for minutes. Unless that person needs the phone for work, sounds like he can't afford it, really. Food stamps are assistance for people who need assistance with food. Not assistance with phone minutes.

Although I can understand when you're poor, you just need to splurge on something once in a while, to feel more normal. I used to be poor. I didn't know about food assistance, so if I'd had the money to splurge when I was poor, I probably would have bought some meat. I couldn't afford meat. I ate a lot of canned green beans I bought on sale. I later got into a work field where I was able to make decent money, thank goodness.

[quickesst]

40. $79 is dirt cheap for a smartphone......

..... And kind of funny that you consider$79 to be expensive, especially when you consider there are phones that range from $500 to over a $1,000. Except for a little 8 inch tablet I keep around the house, my phone is my lifeline to the outside world, including Democratic Underground. I'm retired and on a fixed income, so it's not that I choose to be frugal, it's that I have to be frugal.

As far as going to extremes to make sure one's cell phone is active speaks to the addictive nature of social media, especially among the younger generation. I had a neighbor come by and try to sell me $30 worth of food stamps for $20 so he can have minutes on his phone to talk to his girlfriend. I declined, and it kind of pissed him off. Most of the younger ones have never been without that connection in their lives.

https://m.

[Honeycombe8]

43. I'm retired, too.

I think this might be the last year I keep this phone. I might upgrade. Not sure. But not a smartphone.

I did get an 8" tablet recently (android), so I can learn how to use something android. Hopefully to use coupons, and to have a decent mobile camera. Supposedly it has a gps thing, but I can't find it. Anyway, I don't know how to use it yet. So complicated.

I wouldn't use a smartphone for coupons or anything, because they're too small to read. A phone is just for phone calls and texting, for me. I rarely use it. I don't give the # out, and I tell people not to call me on it, if they want to reach me, because I don't turn it on often.

I don't like the tablet, so far. I'll see. I have a good laptop. They're expensive enough, and fully operable, easy to read, and small enough for me to take somewhere. Now I also have that tablet (that I don't know how to use). It runs on wifi only, so it's free to use at home.

Electronics are expensive and they don't last long. So I try to limit what electronics I buy. Although I love electronics. If I were wealthy, I'd have all sorts of fun gadgets.

[Honeycombe8]

10. The guy in the pic has a smartphone. Smartphones are pretty expensive. I don't have one.

And I am retired with a retirement account and own a nice middle class home.

[quickesst]

42. like I said in the other post....

.... I have a smartphone that cost me $79. I live in a trailer in a mobile home park, and I'm on a fixed income. Having a smartphone, once again, is not a good measuring stick for assessing wealth.

[Honeycombe8]

44. Yeah but the implication is....

that he's poor, disadvantage, with a pitiful expression. And then he's holding a smartphone. I think it's humorous. Whoever crafted that post is so used to electronics they missed the flaw of the smartphone. IMO.

[quickesst]

49. I'm a clean shaven individual....

....and I have some pretty nice clothes that I take very good care of. What you are suggesting is that if you saw a picture of me holding my $79 smartphone you would never guess that I lived a 20 year old mobile home in a mobile home park, on a fixed income, and automatically assume that I lived a nice comfortable middle-class life in a nice, comfortable middle-class home? When making that judgment, keep in mind that you know nothing about me. You don't know anything about my financial situation, you have no clue as to where and what I live in, and you have zero information as to what kind of life I lead, if I have a family, or if I'm single. All you have is a photo of me holding a cell phone. That's what you're going to judge me on?

[Glimmer of Hope]

11. I live in a smaller city and have never met my mayor. Wtf?

[Blue_true]

18. WTF? A reporter taking the word of a random person or two as gospel for a whole group. nt

[floppyboo]

15. I call my mayor all the time!

You should get to know your mayor!
Now he calls me! No shit!
edit: granted, he only called about issues he knew I was following and pushing. And I also live in a small municipality. But this is how ground up starts.

Why don't you know your mayor???

[Celerity]

20. How the Media Is Getting Mayor Pete's Gentrification Story Wrong

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/04/21/how-the-media-is-getting-mayor-petes-south-bend-gentrification-story-wrong/

South Bend, Indiana was a prosperous manufacturing town through much of the 20th century. It achieved a measure of fame for hosting the auto plant that built the Studebaker. But as the economy changed, so did the town’s fortunes. Between 1960 and 2010, its population plummeted by nearly 25 percent. Left in the wake of mass departure and economic stagnation was a rash of urban blight: thousands of homes and other buildings stood vacant, left to disrepair. With blight came decreased home values and a rise in crime.

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, now a Democratic presidential candidate, launched an initiative in February 2013 he called “1,000 Homes, 1,000 Days.” The goal: identify 1,000 vacant or abandoned homes (about a third of the total) and either demolish or repair them. By November 2015, 427 homes “were repaired, 569 were demolished, 10 were deconstructed, 6 were set aside for repair by community development corporations, and 110 were under contract for demolition,” according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which provided a block grant supporting the initiative. If Buttigieg’s reelection with 75 percent of the vote is anything to go by, South Bend’s citizens have signaled their approval. The city’s population has steadily increased since 2013.

Buttigieg has made the initiative’s success a centerpiece of his presidential campaign, so it should be no surprise that journalists have looked into it. But two remarkably similar stories published last week—in Buzzfeed and on CNN.com—said the initiative “smacked of gentrification.” That this odd phrase appeared verbatim in both stories is perhaps interesting. (Buzzfeed’s Henry Gomez, who published his piece first, should wonder where CNN’s Dan Merica and Vanessa Yurkevich got their inspiration.) What’s puzzling, however, is the decision to frame the demolition and rehabilitation of vacant and abandoned homes as akin to displacing minority communities. (Judging from 2011 and 2019 population estimates, no displacement appears to have occurred. What’s more, it’s hard to displace people from homes where no one was living.)

The two major challenges Buttigieg’s initiative faced were the town’s lackadaisical enforcement of building code violations and absentee owners of the targeted homes. One of the initiative’s biggest obstacles was determining if the blighted properties’ owners were both sufficiently willing and able to improve them. Both the Buzzfeed and CNN stories lean heavily on two sources: Stacey Odom and Regina Williams-Preston, two African American women who had purchased blighted properties. Odom purchased one, which she hoped to fix up and make her own home, without knowing that the initiative had already slated it for demolition. Williams-Preston had purchased three vacant homes “with plans to refurbish them and either sell them for a profit or create a business, like a day care for local kids,” CNN reported. Sadly, her husband fell seriously ill and money that would’ve gone toward their investment went toward health care instead.

Both stories strike a decidedly oppositional tone. Buzzfeed seemed particularly intent on framing the story as a conflict between a robotic, white, impersonal politician and a black community. (The word “data,” and the mayor’s abiding interest in it, somehow became grounds for opprobrium.) Ironically, both stories show Buttigieg to have been an exceptional leader. Odom struggled to get her property off the demo list, but then, as CNN reports, she had a chance encounter with Buttigieg. What happened next was governance par excellence:

snip




Stacey Odom and/or Regina Williams-Preston have been in almost every story trying to negative frame Buttigieg, this OP story above uses Williams-Preston yet again.

[Progressive2020]

26. Fake Post?

Maybe the OP is a Russian? Putin loves having a moronic orange lap dog narcissist in the White House. I am sure that he would hate to have a high IQ former Naval Intelligence Officer (Mayor Pete) in the White House instead. I can see the possibility of the Russians trying to drive a wedge between Democratic Candidates like Kamala Harris and Mayor Pete.

I strongly doubt the OP is real Dem who supports Harris. Maybe the OP is a Republican Troll trying to split the Kamala Harris and the Mayor Pete supporters here? We Dems are smarter than that. I am Undecided right now, but I think that a Pete/Kamala or Kamala/Pete might make an excellent ticket for 2020. Whoever the OP is, I don't think that he or she is anything other than some form of troll, not a real Dem.

[leftofcool]

29. I already alerted on this but I guess the rules have changed

Must be okay now to bash Democrats.

[Jarqui]

39. I was on the jury.

I think the article is kind of a hit piece.
8/10 folks they spoke with probably said nice things they ignored.
They spoke with 3 or 4 and quoted them.

But it seemed to fall outside of the question I was asked.
Maybe I missed something.

[LAS14]

31. When I see talk about "trolls," I often wonder how...

... people know. The "trolls" that are alerted when I'm on jury duty seem clearly (to me) to be just expressing opinions. But his post is so stupid that yeah, I can see how it could be a Russian or Russian bot trying to sow dissension.

[Celerity]

37. Here is an example of another poster (now banned) admitting to trolling against Buttigieg

I do not think they are Russian bots, IMHO, at all. Just people who support a certain candidate and have an axe to grind via sock-puppet trolling, again, IMHO.

[mr_lebowski]

69. Actually, by their logic, it's a POSSIBILITY they're all Russians ...

For a minute there, I thought you were good at logic

[crazytown]

34. The guys holding an $800 Apple iPhone 7/8 plus

Obviously not living in dire poverty.

[Celerity]

50. erm, maybe the APPLE on the back of the phone is a clue

iPhone 8 Plus

$849.00

https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-iphone/iphone-8/5.5-inch-display-256gb-silver-unlocked

[Celerity]

55. wrong, you said

I just showed you that it was that phone.

Apple only makes a few types of phones, that is the model the other poster said

you really need to go back and learn the actual meaning of the logical fallacies you try and slag others off with before you post

[Celerity]

61. done here, not giving your dodgy posts any more clicks

Enjoy your stay.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

41. I've lived in the same city for 40 years and I've never met any of its mayors.

Are mayors supposed to go door to door to meet all of the citizens or they aren't doing a good job?

[IndianaDave]

71. I see that you posted this earlier. Why do you keep posting it?

Because of a recent event I attended with our last mayor (whom I know because I taught him), I was made aware by my neighbors that they had never met him.

In a city of roughly comparable size to South Bend, it would not be unusual that most people have not met the mayor. Your repeated posts about this make me wonder if you're trying to inform or you have some other motivation.

And the two other posts I've noticed from you seem to be directed at casting Pete Buttigieg in a negative light. I don't want to be rude, but what is your rationale for joining DU, Bili?

[patricia92243]

73. How many people have seen their mayor except on tv - not most people.