2024 Republican Primary

[Lexi Darling]

There isn't a single parent on the planet that would willingly have their kid be subjected to years of medication and other things if they know they can just align their sex and gender with a treatment or two early on.

As I said, in my experience, having had unnamed feelings in my brain that my gender was different since I was around 8 years old, or even earlier, in order for this "alignment of sex and gender" to work you would have to fundamentally mess with a kid's brain and alter their feelings and self-perception. Regardless of whether conversion therapy is pseudoscience or not, it would be immoral and abusive even if it worked. And the same goes for this supposed procedure.

For the record, I would say the exact same thing about a procedure to get rid of my ADHD. My gender identity and my ADHD are part of who I am, and frankly I'm insulted that you would think that my parents would ever force me to change who I am. That they would value societal norms like being cisgender or neurotypical over my own self, my own agency and my own worth as the person I am.

Of course I'm not naive, I know technology might head there. Doesn't mean it's a positive direction to head in.

[Nimbly9]

As I said, in my experience, having had unnamed feelings in my brain that my gender was different since I was around 8 years old, or ever earlier, in order for this "alignment of sex and gender" to work you would have to fundamentally mess with a kid's brain and alter their feelings and self-perception. Regardless of whether conversion therapy is pseudoscience or not, it would be immoral and abusive even if it worked. And the same goes for this supposed procedure.

For the record, I would say the exact same thing about a procedure to get rid of my ADHD. My gender identity and my ADHD are part of who I am, and frankly I'm insulted that you would think that my parents would ever force me to change who I am. That they would value societal norms like being cisgender or neurotypical over my own self, my own agency and my own worth as the person I am.

Of course I'm not naive, I know technology might head there. Doesn't mean it's a positive direction to head in.

Fair enough.  You and I have a different perspective on what constitutes identity and how important those things are and other factors.  I don't know whether you are right or wrong, but I appreciate you sharing.

[SGR]

Trump creates spectacle with debate guessing game

A GOP Debate Without Trump Is the Definition of Pointlessness

If I was Trump's advisor, I'd tell him to skip the debate. He has nothing to gain - and only stands to lose from participating. Without Trump there, I expect Vivek Ramaswamy to be the only candidate who gets a boost - unless Chris Christie can pull out another "Marco Rubio" debate trick on either Pence or DeSantis.

[Jwb]

You told me to think about the LGBT question so I was merely expanding upon that for you.

I did start a paragraph with "Let's look at the lgbt question" and i related it directly to the argument we were having about whether people should just move out of conservative areas if they are lgbt. It wasn't an invitation to change the topic completely to specifically debating the science behind puberty blockers or gender affirming care. 

If you think the science is going to end up on the conservative side of those issues, that is a different argument from saying the solution is to let people vote with their feet.  If the science comes down strongly on one side or the other, that should be the determining factor.  Not people's feelings or politics.  Which coincides perfectly with my original argument.

You didn't "destroy" anything.  I already made my point about the viability of moving and I still say it is the best option considering people have done some version of it for the entirety of human history.  The convenience or lack thereof of such a process isn't really all that relevant in the face of that truth.

I get that announcing to someone you destroyed their argument seems obnoxious, but from my perspective you didn't really respond to the bulk of my post.  You just went on a tangent about your beliefs on the trans issue specifically. Which i might have tolerated as an aside, but when it's your entire post i feel like i have to point out you have made a pivot.

even here you are just reiterating your original stance on people's ability to just move, not addressing any of the problems i pointed out with that solution.

It is always going to be a way more viable option to move somewhere else than expecting massive status quo shifts in the socioeconomics or politics of the region you live in. Your only here on this planet for a relatively short period of time anyway - is there really anyone out there who wants to spend all their time fighting uphill battles in a place they really don't want to be in? Aspiration and inspiration are very different things.

There's no reason to presume this sentiment would not have applied just as much to black people in the jim crow south.  In fact, it's actually more pragmatic in a way to ethnically cleanse an area than it is to rid the same area of gay people, for the reason i mentioned before. You can't predict which households will produce a gay kid. 

So if all we're thinking about is less hassle, I've yet to hear why this logic wouldn't apply.  You just keep saying generically that race and gender are different, which is true but is incomplete as a counter argument. 

You need to get specific about what the difference is that makes it so your logic does apply to something like lgbt issues but not to racial segregation.

I've given you an example of a difference that actually works against your argument.  IE the fact that race being an immutable characteristic that is also directly heritable actually makes it much easier to segregate by race than to rid a conservative area of gays.  I've yet to hear an example of a difference that you believe works in favor of your argument.

Trans issues and race issues strike me a very different things in the context of greater society.  Based on the sheer amount of conflict those discussions cause in regards to people's personal and/or spiritual beliefs, I think its more like abortion in that it will always be something with no middle ground.  I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that you will have way better luck trying to make a Klansman change his or her views on African-Americans than you would trying to get your typical conservative Muslim or someone from Liberia to accept that gender is fluid. 

i mean that might even be true but why did you have to invoke Liberia? apply the same question to your average white southerner that opposed integration in the 50s and 60s vs your average conservative who is animated over trans issues today.

My observations are not "incoherent".  I can tell blue states all day to go look at Sweden or tell the red states to chill out and they will never compromise because both sides believe that they are morally correct, not just ideologically correct.  Can the federal government figure it out? That's a tough one.

i didn't say "your observations are incoherent," i said there's an inherit incoherence on display in the type of federalism that would allow murder in one state but not in another, based on local politics.  There is a limit to how far the values of different sectors of a society can depart from one another before it becomes destabilizing.

[Jwb]

That stuff about "reversing gender dysphoria" is so horrifying to me as a prospect and I certainly hope it never comes to be. You do realize you're basically describing conversion therapy, right? Imagine hating trans identity so much that you want to rewire someone's mind to get rid of it.

In my experience, my dysphoria was so inextricably tied to my personality and my sense of self. Getting rid of my feeling that I was a girl wouldn't make me feel any more comfortable in male spaces and male identity, and if it did, then that just feels like creepy mind control shit.

I just want to know what is so terrible about someone identifying as a different gender that it would warrant that as a "solution".

it sounded more like futurst hype than conversion therapy to me.  That's why i asked him to expand on it cause i actually am curious about the claim that we're "within 10 years of getting rid of aging."

That stuff about "reversing gender dysphoria" is so horrifying to me as a prospect and I certainly hope it never comes to be. You do realize you're basically describing conversion therapy, right? Imagine hating trans identity so much that you want to rewire someone's mind to get rid of it.

In my experience, my dysphoria was so inextricably tied to my personality and my sense of self. Getting rid of my feeling that I was a girl wouldn't make me feel any more comfortable in male spaces and male identity, and if it did, then that just feels like creepy mind control shit.

I just want to know what is so terrible about someone identifying as a different gender that it would warrant that as a "solution".

i mean if they could just reverse the dysphoria using neuro magic i have to say it doesn't make much sense to say that gender dysphoria is so bad that it's worth going through transition but not worth just getting rid of, if it were simple to do so.

You're thinking conversion therapy like clockwork orange style, he's think about future magic science that is going to make us all jacked cyborgs with 10 inch dicks who live forever. 

I am just talking shit to be clear, i don't know much about the current state of medicine.  But i do know that the futurists in 2012 talked a big game about what the year 2020 would be like, and boy did they miss the mark.  I'm not saying it can't happen but I'll believe it when i see it.

[Nimbly9]

it sounded more like futurst hype than conversion therapy to me.  That's why i asked him to expand on it cause i actually am curious about the claim that we're "within 10 years of getting rid of aging."

Oh we definitely are.  The rich will be the guinea pigs, but billions of dollars of investment appear to be paying off.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20230712/Researchers-develop-a-chemical-approach-to-reverse-aging.aspx

[Nimbly9]

Getting back on topic...I'll be watching the debate later this month out of curiosity.  Trump is saying he isn't going to show up for it, but I bet he'll find some way to crash the party.

[DJChameleon]

Getting back on topic...I'll be watching the debate later this month out of curiosity.  Trump is saying he isn't going to show up for it, but I bet he'll find some way to crash the party.

Trump is definitely not showing up. I think his lawyers are advising against it. He does want to try to do an interview though with someone. Forgot the guy's name.

[Psy-Fi]

CBS News poll finds Trump's big lead grows, as GOP voters dismiss indictments

Well, there's no debate about this: Right now, the Republican Party would easily re-nominate Donald Trump for 2024. And it's not close.

[Jwb]

It's weird. Trump not showing up to the debates in this context is actually kind of an alpha move in the sense that he's the clear front runner and stands to gain nothing by giving a platform to his clear non competitors. Even though the convention is obviously you have a primary when you are running against the opposition's incumbent.  And you skip the primary if your guy is the incumbent.  But that doesn't benefit him and his followers don't care, so fuck it.

That's the kind of spine that nobody else in the GOP has, which is why none of them will replace him.  His main biggest competition are all scared to say a word against him.  The only guy willing to go ham on Trump is Christie and that's cause of personal beef since Trump completely backstabbed Christie in 16, after recruiting him as a sycophant. That's why i wouldve liked to see them go at it, cause Christie is on a kamikaze mission with nothing to lose.  Which is always fun to see.  But Trump is probably smart to avoid it.

[DJChameleon]

First Primary debate is tonight at 9pm est I believe or maybe 8pm will find out for sure.

Edit: yep 9pm Est.

Trump is like smart to avoid it. His legal team forced him not to. He still wanted to. You give him too much credit jwb.

He is still doing some kind of interview thing after the debate but its a one on one thing with a Fox News pundit.

[DJChameleon]

Oh we definitely are.  The rich will be the guinea pigs, but billions of dollars of investment appear to be paying off.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20230712/Researchers-develop-a-chemical-approach-to-reverse-aging.aspx

Reverse aging is NOT even anywhere to being close. This idiot is attempting it and he looks worse than when he started

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/bryan-johnson-tech-entrepreneur-spends-124752370.html

[Nimbly9]

Reverse aging is NOT even anywhere to being close. This idiot is attempting it and he looks worse than when he started

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/bryan-johnson-tech-entrepreneur-spends-124752370.html

That dude isn't doing anything related to what I'm talking about or what I linked to.  He's just spending tons of money in an extreme way on stuff people already try to do with dieting and conventional measures.  He's going to have to wait another decade if he wants the good stuff.

[SGR]

I expect to see Ron DeSantis try and defend Trump whenever that opportunity arises to court Trump voters. Vivek might have a similar tact, but I'm guessing it won't be as strong as DeSantis is trying repair his image, particularly with Trump voters. If Trump drops out of the race, for whatever reason, these candidates are going to need to position themselves in a way where they can recoup those Trump voters. Christie, as critical of Trump as he is, has no shot of doing so. That said, he can be entertaining in debates. I'm really hoping he can trap DeSantis in a moment similar to what he did with Marco Rubio years ago.

I expect Mike Pence, Tim Scott, Doug Burgum, and Asa Hutchinson to be complete non-factors in the debate and viewers will forget what they said by the next day. The only one of those four that might be interesting is Pence, as I'm sure the moderators will try and force him to take a strong position against Trump for January 6th, but I'm guessing with that question, as with many others, he'll revert to typical politician mode and give a non-answer about his faith in God and his faith in this great nation. But if any of the other candidates want to take a shot at Trump's failings in office, they've got his former VP right there to direct the vitriol at - which would, if they do it right, force Pence to either defend the actions of the administration or blame the failings on Trump or other officials.

Nikki Haley is a bit of a wildcard - she could be a non-factor or she might have a clippable moment like Kamala did in her first DNC debate (when she implied Biden was a racist).

I think Vivek is going to be the smartest guy on that stage, but I haven't seen him in a debate like this. Some candidates in debates like this get short-changed just by virtue of the smaller amount of questions they get asked by the moderators - so if that happens with Vivek, will he have the balls to interject and assert himself while others are speaking, even to the chagrin and chiding of the moderators? For Vivek, this is his 'first impressions' moment on the big stage,  so the stakes are particularly high for him. If he does it right, I think we'll continue to see Vivek's poll numbers rise after the debate and DeSantis's numbers fall.

Trump made the right call in not attending the debate. It will be hilarious if he tells Tucker he's very excited to watch the debate later and future debates to decide who's most suited to being his VP.

[Nimbly9]

^ Pretty much how I think it's all going to go down also.

Vivek is basically a young Trump without the "daddy gave me a million dollars" story and the bankruptcies, plus he speaks in complete sentences lol.  He's going to say that Trump was good but he's too old now and somebody young needs to pick up that mantle. DeSantis can't sell that kind of message as easily because he's an introverted misanthrope and has the charisma of a hippo's backside.

Michael Bloomberg tried to pull his own kind of "outsider" approach during the Democrat primaries before but he fell flat on his face in an actual debate because he's not used to talking to other living human beings outside the billionaire class.  Vivek might screw up, but his chances of gaffing himself out of existence like Bloomberg are fairly low.  Vivek does like 100+ media appearances a month and does tons of long-form interviews and podcasts where he has to respond to criticisms or difficult questions.