Monday, August 24, 2020

"The Democrats absolutely have no intention of winning."

I think the Dems do, however, intend to cheat and to claim that the election is invalid. As all the pundits are saying these days, we will not know the election results the night of November 3rd—or for weeks after. Expect lawsuit after lawsuit, and plenty of confusion. Expect recounts, and possibly even re-votes. Unless someone lays down the law beforehand and says all voting will only be in-person voting done on paper ballots after ID verification, no one will trust the election results. Peaceful transfers of power are among the most important indicators of a country's health. I think America is pretty close to failing that metric. I expect explosive violence in the form of rioting, and there may be conservative elements who will finally have had enough, and who will respond to this violence with the sort of violence that results in a definitive victory. I sincerely hope it doesn't come to this, but with the left loudly, constantly, stupidly pushing its twisted agenda, enough may soon be enough.

Tim Pool's video, below, focuses on Sleepy Joe's plagiarism (including self-plagiarism as he recycles old speeches), but Pool starts off with the sentiment that, from his perch, it looks as though the Dems have given up. Victory by cheating is now the only victory possible for a party that has exhausted all its options after making a long, long series of stupid decisions, all while remaining unmoored from reality. Poor bastards.


The Maximum Leader said...

Can you self-plagiarize?

Kevin Kim said...

I guess it depends on how widely or narrowly you define "plagiarism." A narrow definition would say that plagiarism is a duplicitous act involving the work (or intellectual property) of someone else. A wider definition, which allows for self-plagiarism, can be found here, among dozens of other sites. So I'd say yes, self-plagiarism is possible. In academe, self-plagiarism is a frequent problem; we see it a lot here in Korea with certain shady academics who make the news for all the wrong reasons. In Joe Biden's case, reusing an old speech that he's passing off as a new speech at the very least meets the criterion of duplicitous use of a work (or of intellectual property). And given how forgetful Biden has become, he may as well be stealing ideas from someone else!

Per the cited article:

"Self-plagiarism is commonly described as recycling or reusing one’s own specific words from previously published texts. While it doesn’t cross the line of true theft of others’ ideas, it nonetheless can create issues in the scholarly publishing world. Beyond verbatim sections of text, self-plagiarism can also refer to the publication of identical papers in two places (sometimes called “duplicate publication”). Moreover, it is best practice to cite your previous work thoroughly, even if you are simply revisiting an old idea or a previously published observation."

So if Biden is passing off a past speech as something new and fresh, then I'd say he's self-plagiarizing.

An interesting essay over at Inside Higher Ed is here.

John Mac said...

Even voting in person with ID is considered voter suppression by the left. I agree, they know they have to cheat to win. A large majority of Americans simply reject their insane agenda.