Archinect
anchor

Politics Central

1374
x-jla

A warm place to keep all the political rants and debates...

 
Jun 27, 19 3:52 pm
Non Sequitur

come at me bro.

Jun 27, 19 4:17 pm  · 
2  · 
x-jla

Ahhh Canada, our copycat little brother. We beat everyone up for you, and then you brag to mom that your the “good one”. We are only keeping you guys around for the maple syrup and occasional musical genius...

 · 
tduds

Canada is great.

 · 
Non Sequitur

You're welcome to visit anytime Jla.

 · 
tduds

Need to renew my passport so I can go hang out in Vancouver.

 · 
Non Sequitur

Nah, don't just stop there, keep going!

 · 
tduds

If I ever have the time.

 · 
x-jla

I like Canada.

 · 
Non Sequitur

I vote that my t shirt post above be promoted to feature comment.

 · 
tduds

Thanks.

Warren 2020.

Jun 27, 19 4:46 pm  · 
 · 
citizen

It'd be awesome if the "Central" in the title might actually translate into the politicking. 

Jun 27, 19 6:33 pm  · 
 · 

Agreed, but such is the case with the two-party system. I'd love to see some type of meaningful plan put forth to get rid of it. I don't even have a problem with parties as long as there are more than two dominant ones.

 · 
citizen

Point taken. However, there have long been only two (main) parties but many more policies, with some folks willing to (sometimes awkwardly) navigate toward the center. That approach seems to be on life support.

 · 
tduds

I blame the death of local news. & I blame that on the internet. Still not sure how we start to undo that damage.

 · 

Thank Bill Clinton for deregulating the FCC. Now 5 corporations own just about all of it.

 · 

Running with the life support analogy (bear with me) ... only letting two doctors in the room who can barely stop arguing long enough to acknowledge there is a patient there doesn't seem to be doing much for the patient. But getting rid of a forced dichotomy and allowing some other doctors in to see the patient might have a better success rate. It doesn't guarantee they'll stop arguing long enough to get anything done, but it at least increases the probability that they'll find some common ground rather than needing to be instantly against the other's views.

 · 
x-jla

+EA

 · 
x-jla

can we all agree that Chuck Todd sucks at his job?

Jun 27, 19 10:12 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

Would be nice to revisit this thread after the elections in 2020, until then you kids have fun...

Jun 28, 19 4:19 am  · 
 · 
x-jla

Gabbard / Yang 2020 


Or even better


Gabbard / Paul 2020


She’s the only one who can sway republican and independent votes from trump.  Everyone loves her, even many on the right.  She has an energy that is refreshing and an integrity that the others are missing.  Doesn’t obsess over identity politics and being politically correct. You can disagree with her on specific policies and still like her and trust her in steering the boat because she listens to people and isn’t an ideologue or party first hack.  She’s economically left of me personally, but I don’t really care at this point.  She’s absolutely what this country needs. A unifier.  Got my vote!  Go Tulsi!  

Jun 28, 19 4:33 pm  · 
 · 
x-jla

I’ll even do Gabbard / Buttigieg. He’s not bad either...

 · 
x-jla

Would love her to do something unconventional though and team up with a libertarian like Johnson, but not gonna happen :(

 · 
tduds

lol (Jan 23 2020)

 · 
tduds

"She’s the only one who can sway republican and independent votes from trump."

I still don't understand why this is a priority given that the president is historically unpopular, lost the vote in 2016 against a similarly unpopular candidate, and maintains a quite literally cult-like following among the minority who still do support him.

Bottom line, nothing anyone does is going to endear Trump supporters to a Democrat. So stop trying and focus on turnout. It worked in 2018.

Jul 1, 19 12:35 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Also really damn sick of this one-sided game of "You should reach out to the opposition" while Republicans are openly, proudly disdainful of liberals. Why should I bother to respect a bunch of people who are more than happy to see me suffer just because I have different ideas?

  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/21/why-arent-trump-republicans-pilloried-failing-reach-out/?

 · 
mightyaa

A democrat can't win with just the Democrat vote thanks to the electorate and gerrymandering districts. They'll have to swing Independants and make traction into the Republican moderates. Those two groups aren't liking the polarized partisan politics going on. So they might go for someone who can unify and is willing to negotiate; Hillary didn't give that impression, nor do several of the mainstream candidate front runners.

 · 
x-jla

^exactly. Also, the dem party has lost support of many with all of this pc identity politics socialism talk. Many people who voted for obama, went on to vote for trump, or didn’t vote at all. I can’t overstate how many are turned off by political correctness. It’s incredibly annoying for most people to have other adults telling them how to act and speak. The natural instinct kicks in and just wants to piss them off and defy them. Especially true when asshats in Hollywood join in. It’s like when your mother or teacher told you not to do something and it made you want to do it more. This is the effect. We need a candidate brave enough to not play that game.

 · 
x-jla

The presidents poll numbers where very low pre 2016 also. All the polls showed Hillary easily winning. I wouldn’t trust the polls. The media is probably manipulating them to make supporters feel like outsiders or weirdos. None of the more left candidates will beat him.

 · 
tduds

The right is obsessed with this 'PC identity politics socialism" narrative that's entirely blown out of proportion. It's a bad faith argument, where anything they want to portray as negative can be labeled Socialism or Identity Politics. Sadly, it works.

 · 
tduds

mightyaa: My point is that the independents are already anti-Trump (look at his underwater polls) and the Republicans are never going to be convinced to ditch him (because the GOP is a cult). So there's really no point in playing to a "middle" that's actually quite skewed to the right.

 · 
tduds

.

 · 
x-jla

Castro’s claim that we should pay for trans women getting pretend abortions from their non-existent uteruses is not going to get anyone out to vote. That’s identity politics and it’s annoying to the vast majority of Americans...not just the “right”.

 · 
x-jla

Not only is it annoying, but it shows fake ness in the candidate. Say anything to win. Beto speaking Spanish was hilarious too. Identity politics is not overblown, it’s the entire platform of the Dems and left.

 · 
x-jla

This makes people want to vote in a way that makes Alyssa Milano mad because she’s an annoying person who pretends to have moral authority over the “depolorables” because she was in a few crappy movies and an 80s sitcom.

 · 
x-jla

Seriously though. This crap really annoys people to the point of wanting to vote in a way that annoys it back.

 · 
tduds

From 1961: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bejdhs3jGyw They've been playing this game for a long time and the dumb electorate keeps falling for it.

 · 
x-jla

“It's a bad faith argument, where anything they want to portray as negative can be labeled Socialism or Identity Politics. Sadly, it works.“

Yeah, same can be said for the left. Anything they want to portray as negative can be labeled far-right or fascist.

 · 
x-jla

Or racist, sexist, privilege, etc etc etc.

 · 
tduds

Can be, but rarely is.

 · 
tduds

More importantly, you hear these kinds of appeals to racism, fascism, privilege, etc. mostly from the so-called "extremely online" left and various small time activists, with the occasional politician wading into the rhetoric. Conversely, the bad-faith accusations have been standard campaign rhetoric for the Republican establishment since Lee Atwater dredged up Willie Horton to scare the racists into voting for Bush. Yes, there is bad faith on both sides. But it's important to look at *who* is doing the talking.

 · 
x-jla

Regardless, perception is reality when it comes to voting. We need someone who will unite people. The country is too divided, and both trump and the more leftist candidates will further exacerbate the problem. We need a good level headed canidate that is above the bullshit.

 · 
x-jla

I like Yang, but he’s really dry. I can’t see him getting too far.

 · 
tduds

Perception is reality and one group has been disproportionately shaping perception through misinformation and lies. I don't think the way to fix this is by meeting in the middle. 

How about unity for education? Unity against propaganda? 

Why does being "above the bullshit" only seem to skew in one direction? The bullshit is not evenly distributed, and yet there seems to be a constant insistence that it be evenly called out. Which only hurts the less-bullshitty party, since the bullshitters aren't even pretending anymore.

 · 
tduds

Really what we need more than a politician who will do this is a united media voice that's willing to hold the GOP accountable for their bullshit. Not that the Democrats don't engage in bullshit, but when they do they're largely taken to task for it. The Republican party gets away with everything because no one will call them out. Start calling them out if we ever want to recover from this insanity.

 · 
x-jla

Whaaat? The left msm is even worse. I don’t know how you can be so blind to that. The Dem party is super corrupt and they basically own the media. This all became obvious during the HRC campaign. The left is now spreading lies on all the bells and whistles that they are promising...regardless of how unrealistic, unconstitutional, or plain unworkable those things may be. Essentially snake oil salesmen. That’s how I see them anyway. To say the republicans get away with everything??? No way man. The left msm is a way way more pervasive and dangerous thing right now. During the bush and obama years I would have agreed with you. Things have changed though. The left msm is completely full of shit most of the time.

 · 
x-jla

“Can be, but rarely is.” Lollololol. They call everything they disagree with one of those labels. there are too many examples...it’s overwhelming...Covington was in the top 10 greatest hits of the year though...

 · 
tduds

What would you consider "Left MSM"? I'm also not sure what you're referring to when you say " Covington"

 · 
tduds

*sigh* 

That Kavanaugh was confirmed and Roy Moore is still in public while Al Franken resigned is evidence of this double standard. That Ilhan Omar can't open her mouth without a shitstorm of anti-semitism accusations while those same accusers equivocate on protesters who chant "Jews will not replace us" is evidence of this double standard. That the media is losing their minds over Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez' "socialism" while heaping praise on a president who is putting all kinds of state influence on the economy through tarriffs and targeted subsidies is evidence of the double standard. That Mitch McConnell can whine about "the left’s never-ending judicial war" while being personally responsible for more than 50% of the judicial filibusters in the country's history is evidence of this double standard. I could go on. 

 [From the op-ed I posted above] "How do we explain this double standard? One explanation: Republicans don’t even bother to pretend that they care about the votes of liberal Americans, or even about their fate. Democrats try to get health insurance for people in red states and write environmental plans that include help for coal communities, but Republicans don’t ask how their policy choices might hurt people who don’t vote for them — unless it’s to figure out how they screw those voters even more. They don’t try to show “respect” for liberals, and they don’t publicly agonize about their inability to “connect” with them. 

 After a while, it stops even occurring to people in the media to ask whether Republicans need to do more “reaching out,” and they don’t chastise those Republicans for not doing it. Democrats, on the other hand, act like they have a responsibility to represent all Americans, so they're constantly told that they're falling short in fulfilling that responsibility."

 · 
tduds

Just for absolute clarity I want to emphasize that I'm not saying the Mainstream Media is *good*, I'm saying that it's not *leftist*

 · 
x-jla

CNN, MSNBC, etc are exactly as left biased as FOX is right biased. That’s just tv msm, then you have VOX, buzzfeed, etc...

 · 
x-jla

I’m not saying republicans are better, just saying that both parties equally suck, and the Dems are currently outdoing them on the looney metric.

 · 

I've often wondered, and have found little to try to explain it (though admittedly I haven't tried very hard), why Fox gets a pass on being mainstream when the mainstream media gets brought up. 

Also curious to hear both of you discuss the media bias chart by Vanessa Otero ... https://www.adfontesmedia.com/

 · 
tduds

"CNN, MSNBC, etc are exactly as left biased as FOX is right biased. " No they aren't.

 · 
tduds

I think the chart is a very good starting point. I could argue some things are slightly out of place (a little to the left here, a little down there) but for the most part it is a correct assessment. 

Of course, the echoed refrain of anyone who disagrees is to claim the chart itself from being biased. Which, at that point, just give up because you're never going reach common ground with that person.

 · 

That's basically my take on it as well. You might argue a little movement here or there, but overall a good starting point. But yeah, it only works as an assessment if people can agree that it is close to accurate.

 · 

The other thing I like about the chart that I think get's lost in most of the rhetoric as left vs. right is the overall news quality represented by the Y-axis.

 · 
x-jla

Lmfao. CNN literally gave Hillary the questions! Get out of your bubble. CNN and MSNBC are exactly as fake as Fox News. 100% party propaganda.

 · 

Wildly misleading, ignores vast majority of media ownership by 5 corporations. Knowledge of the results of the Church Committee hearings is also helpful in understanding media. 

Required viewing, films on media: Orwell Rolls in His Grave and Spin by Brian Springer. Required reading: George Seldes.

 · 
tduds

FWIW - television cable news is a complete wasteland. If you're getting the majority of your information from television, you're simply not informed. That said - only one of the major cable networks gleefully employs white nationalists and has inspired terrorism.

 · 
tduds

jla stop telling us to get out of our bubble when your talking points are suspiciously in alignment with Fox.

 · 
tduds

Hillary Clinton is politically indistinguishable from a 1960s Republican. I mean if we're going to talk about the rightward tilt of *all* of the US - media included - let's not lose sight of that.

 · 
x-jla

It’s all Biased towards the deep state. All of it. Left/right illusion is simply the mode of acquiring more power and Keeping us in fighting. Unity between “sides” which doesn’t really exist, especially in the name of peace, is the ultimate threat. Preaching peace is about as dangerous as you can get. Can’t have that shit getting in the way of the military industrial complex and John Bolton’s wet dreams of destruction.

 · 
x-jla

Those debates were complete garbage.

 · 
tduds

Lose the tinfoil hat & maybe we can talk.

 · 
x-jla

True story. Watch the debate and it will be obvious who they are steering towards the win.

 · 
tduds

You're not wrong in assuming all media outlets have a bias and a preference. Where you're wrong is assuming there is a single "they"

 · 
x-jla

“They” refers to the DNC marketing machine.

 · 
Volunteer

Tulsi Gabbard wouldn't be bad. Getting tired of the oil wars that George Bush started, Obama kept them going, and Trump hasn't figured out how to stop them or won't stop them. These are occurring on Europe's doorstep and if they don't care why should we? 4,000 dead US servicemen and women killed to date and absolutely nothing to show for it. Pull the troops out and send in Bush, Cheney, Obama, Trump, and John Bolton with camo gear and automatic rifles to show us how it is done. 

Jul 1, 19 2:08 pm  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

You do know that Gabbard is the most hawkish of these, right?

 · 
proto

What exactly does Tulsi offer beyond "war experience"?

 · 
x-jla

She’s authentic. I don’t vote for policy, because policy is mostly bs. I vote for people who are genuine.

 · 
x-jla

That’s a rare thing. What I mean is that Policy is not decided by the president alone. We have process. Checks and balances. I don’t necessarily agree with all of her policies,

 · 
tduds

Gabbard comes off as very well-spoken and compassionate in this interview. My biggest take-away, though, is how annoying Van Jones is. 

All that said, I take a very different view in policy vs. character. For better or worse I value people who understand systems and propose solutions, not platitudes. Here she offers mostly platitudes. Good platitudes, but kind of a simple feel-goodery nonetheless.

 · 
tduds

sameolddoctor - In what way is she hawkish? One of the few substantive things she said in that interview was that she's totally opposed to regime change wars. Might be her biggest plus, to me. I've got a lot to research, though, and lots of time to do it.

 · 
SneakyPete

The level of maturity on the right in the discourse is exemplified by the refusal of morons to put the 'ic' on the word "Democratic". It's childish, yet they continue to do it because it functions to serve the only work they really, truly love: trolling the libs.

Jul 1, 19 2:17 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

YES! I've noticed this recently - the subtle shift from saying "Democratic Party" (i.e. a group of ideas) to saying "Democrat Party" (i.e. a group of people). I first noticed it with Trump, but now I hear it from all over the right.

I wasn't sure if I was just over-analyzing. I might be, but there's definitely something telling in this simple re-branding.

 · 
Volunteer

Gee, that is as bad as not having fourteen different kinds of school restrooms for the fourteen different genders.

 · 
tduds

I would think a thing that is happening is more important than a thing that isn't happening.

 · 
SneakyPete

My ignore list is tingling.

 · 
SneakyPete

tduds, it's a tactic that is not new, but (surprise, surprise) gained a new resurgence via Tadpole Gingrich and Rush "The Human Opioid" Limbaugh.

 · 
tduds

It's funny to me how the people who are absolutely obsessed with making political affiliation into an immutable identity are also obsessed with complaining about "identity politics"

 · 
tduds

Just to fan the flames a little more.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/opinion/republicans-trump-democracy.html

Jul 1, 19 5:59 pm  · 
 · 
proto

not that it has anything to do with the American center per se, but this was an interesting attempt at defining the range of politics by what each party writes about themselves (NYT only illustrated data from The Manifesto Project) :

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/opinion/sunday/republican-platform-far-right.html?searchResultPosition=1

Jul 1, 19 7:45 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

This is a neat graphic. Thanks.

 · 
sameolddoctor

Why doesnt Archinect have a "verbal diarrhea filter" for people that cannot be bothered to write one post instead of multiple?


Jul 1, 19 10:08 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

The reply function really incentivizes this by using "return" to post instead of making a paragraph break.

 · 
x-jla

Yes, posting from iPhone makes it difficult to write in one post, because I can’t scroll up to read what I wrote if it gets too long. Also can’t do paragraph breaks in phone :(

 · 
x-jla

I thought of a way to improve those migrant detention centers.  They should be required to have live feed video of the entire facilities at all times.  make the video feed publicly accessible.  We ought to be able to see what’s going on in these places and hold the facilities accountable being that we are paying for this bs with our tax dollars.  Maybe time to write some letters...



Jul 2, 19 12:36 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I thought of a cheaper way: shut them down.

 · 
x-jla

I agree. Until then, they should at least have some level of transparency.

 · 
x-jla

That position is easy for me though, as a libertarian, with a self regulating economy. How does a proponent of a welfare state do math? How can open borders exist in the same space as unlimited entitlements?

 · 
x-jla

That only works if we have unlimited resources, which we know isn’t the case. All welfare states or socialist states are nationalist. Can you give me an example of a functional open border welfare state with substantial population and migration?

 · 
tduds

Borders are not "open" or "closed" and entitlements are not "nothing" or "unlimited." The foundational bedrock of my entire life philosophy is to reject binaries. Nothing is a silo, everything is a bell-curve. 

Somewhere between totalitarian immigration enforcement and no borders exists a sensible solution that allows immigrants seeking a better life or escaping persecution to succeed while screening for (admittedly rare) criminal elements, trafficking, and smuggling. 

Similarly, somewhere between a libertarian free market and a wholesale Maoist state exists a level of social safety net that provides those of us most in need the resources and help to remain in society. 

Do I know specifically where those solutions are? No. If I ever run for office maybe I'll get around to formulating a more specific opinion. Until then, my criteria for evaluating politicians is "Do I think this person intends to move society along the spectrum closer to or further away from a society I think is just?" It's wishy washy and circumstantial, I know. But systems are complicated, and I can be so informed before I need to make a choice.

 · 
tduds

To bring it back to the topic at hand (you sure love abstracting), I don't believe immigrant concentration camps are necessary to ensure a "secure" border. In fact, I think they're detrimental to our national security in the longer term.

"Abolish ICE" doesn't mean "Open the border." It means Abolish fucking ICE.

 · 
x-jla

But what about the criminals? There are criminals at the border. The mostly people even are not coming over solo. They are being trafficked by criminals who are brutal and dangerous. Eliminating ICE is not the answer. We need border security, and also good immigration policies so that any reasonable non criminal person would legally and easily cross at a port of entry. that said, if we have free college, housing, and health care for all, we can’t have unlimited amounts of people coming over or the resources get drained. That’s common sense. This isn’t binary thinking, it’s a huge flaw in the rhetoric of the current Dem candidates. No one dares to define the line you speak of. Without the line, the math is all make believe....I’m having a pizza party...everyone deserves free pizza...but we don’t know how many pies or how many people will come...doesn’t sound like a plan, sounds like a snake oil pitch.

 · 
x-jla

A libertarian free market system is self regulating. The resource space is in flux with the population and migration...like an ecosystem.

 · 
x-jla

Now that’s not to say that entitlements cannot be part of that. They just need to be in flux with the flux of the market...example: a billion in federal sales tax = a billion in equally distributed entitlements in form of UBI. When that number goes up or down so does the UBI. We need to create a self regulating system to have anything remotely like an open or highly permeable border. We kinda already do have that in a sense. When our economy tanked in 08 immigration fell to net zero.

 · 
tduds

But what about the criminals?!? 

There are criminals *inside* the United States. An overwhelming majority of them, in fact, were born in the United States. We have laws in place to handle criminals inside the United States. There's no need to criminalize additional behavior in an attempt to catch would-be criminals before they commit real crimes, especially when that added enforcement catches well-intended asylum seekers who merely seek opportunity in a new land. And *ESPECIALLY* when study after study indicates immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than US citizens.

I'll be honest I didn't read past the first sentence of your first reply. 

 · 
tduds

I have trouble following your lines of argument because you switch between asking me what I think and telling me what people running for the Democratic nomination are saying, as if the difference between those things makes me wrong. I'm answering for myself and myself only.

 · 
tduds

Rejecting your "Unlimited people" argument out of hand because people are by definition finite. And because - the current humanitarian crisis aside - immigration into the US has been on a pretty consistent down-trend for the last 25 years. Immigration restriction is a solution in search of a problem (because racial quotas are out of fashion this century)

 · 
x-jla

Eliminate ICE is a stupid “solution” to the problem. We need comprehensive reform. We need to make immigration cheap, easy, and fast so that no reasonable innocent person would try to cross or enter illegally. Then, the few crossing the border illegally would be obviouse criminals looking to smuggle something in or evade detection. To deny that there are actual serious criminals coming over the border, possible terrorists, human traffickers, etc is completely ridiculous. It’s also ridiculous to criminalize jaywalking and then have a crosswalk every 50 miles. That’s going to make normal people cross illegally. If there is a crosswalk every block, and someone still jaywalks, I have less sympathy. We are creating criminals by making the process near impossible.

 · 
x-jla

The line of thinking that you are pretending to not follow is the contradiction between limitless immigration, and endless entitlements. The Dem candidates like Warren and Sanders are frivolously over promising things that they cannot deliver on. In architecture, that would be considered fraud or malpractice. How can you promise a plethora of specific entitlements without putting a quota on population? They are selling a fake system that has never existed. One that has the mathematical reality of a perpetual motion machine. There has never been a socialist state that has open or permeable borders. They are all highly nationalist and closed off. Bernie essentially wants to have govt run health care. He wants it for “undocumented” people. What will stop people from coming here to have medical procedures and then return home? A welfare state and liberal border policy is incompatible. My point is, the current top runners in the party are selling bullshit.

 · 
x-jla

I am 100% for highly permeable borders as I stated above...but that works fine with a market economy with low-no entitlements. It’s self regulating.

 · 
randomised

Ah yes, self regulation...if only the US didn’t interfere in local politics south of the border those countries would be much better off and people would have no reason whatsoever to leave...first the US destroys their democracy and economy and then they’re surprised people need to leave.

 · 
tduds

"The line of thinking that you are pretending to not follow is the contradiction between limitless immigration, and endless entitlements." 

...no I explained in my very first reply that the ideas of "limitless" and "endless" in this context are incorrect, and any opinions drawn from those ideas are therefore incorrect. I could recount the number of other ways you've (deliberately or otherwise) mis-stated what I said back to me and then discredited what I didn't say (in this response alone!), but who has the time?

 · 
tduds

The idea that eliminating ICE is impossible conveniently ignores the fact that ICE was only created 16 years ago.

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Imagine this, laxative has all the time in the world to concoct a coherent world view, and still comes up with nada. These "political" ramblings are basic as fuck, and lack the consistency of diaper doo.

 · 
x-jla

Another boring post by b3. Probably home reading a gender theory book because 4th of July is sexist or something.

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Ouch. I guess I touch a Randian nerve? Proves I'm correct of course. You're a one hit wonder.

 · 
x-jla

What’s inconsistent?

 · 
x-jla

Inconsistent with your narrow view of anyone who disagrees with you maybe.

 · 
tduds

The pivot to insult when you run out of cogent responses is weak.

 · 
x-jla

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O51yryBeNuY


If you have a couple hours to waste while marinating your bbq

Jul 3, 19 7:24 pm  · 
 · 
x-jla

holy shit, this is hilarious!


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/572212/

Jul 5, 19 12:29 pm  · 
 · 
x-jla

^an interview with them if
interested...lololol

 · 
x-jla

Wish someone did an architecture version of this :)

 · 
x-jla

Lol. True

 · 
tduds

I think I've pointed this out before but for the record in this thread - my incessant replies are not intended to change jla-x's mind but to provide a reasonable counterpoint to any persuadable bystander who might see his points unchallenged and assume they're good.


Jul 9, 19 6:11 pm  · 
 · 
x-jla

I’m doing the same. Tduds is a reasonable guy refusing to disassociate with an unreasonable philosophy- Marxism.

 · 

tduds, assuming of course that anyone besides you is actually reading his dribblings. maybe if you stopped feeding it ...

 · 
x-jla

miles wanders in a thread started by me named “politics central”....and claims to not read my posts...

 · 
tduds

I'm going to be offline a lot between now and October. We'll see if the well dries up in my absence.

 · 
tduds

I'm also not a Marxist.

 · 
SneakyPete

Feels so nice in here..

Jul 19, 19 12:26 pm  · 
 · 

I’m kinda surprised that this thread hasn’t been resurrected in the past couple of months. Not really even sure I want to do it now. However, I’m just here to say that listening to and reaching the news this morning made me realize that we don’t have three separate and equal branches of government in the US. We have the Democratic Party branch and the Republican Party branch. 

Dec 13, 19 10:51 am  · 
 · 
Chad Miller

Yup. It's rather sad.

 · 
SneakyPete

What happened this morning specifically to cause that thought?

 · 

I hadn't read that article specifically, but it pretty much outlines the reasoning behind my thoughts. To offset the left bias in the Esquire piece you could also add a bunch of things the Democrats have done too ... Each majority party in congress, tasked with oversight, looks the other way when it's their own guy in the oval.

 · 
proto

this where I am too...just came from reading The Hill reporting on how Mcconnell says the senate is "in lock step" with the WH & how Trump is having the GOP Senate Judiciary committee members over for a private event...HOW THE F*CK IS THIS REASONABLE FROM THE PARTY THAT IS COMPLAINING THERES BEEN A LACK OF DUE PROCESS?!?

 · 
tduds

One thing that drives me absolutely mad is the way the media has run with this framing. It's not "the House is impeaching the President" (which is technically true & how the government works) but "The Democrats are impeaching The Republican" (which frames this as a political maneuver and not a constitutionally-mandated exercise of oversight). The House is doing it's job, the Republicans in the House are not doing their job.

 · 
SneakyPete

Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said: "Rather than help Americans move into the future with confidence, Democrats are attempting to knee-cap our democracy. They're telling millions of voters that Democrats will work to overturn the will of the people whenever it conflicts with the will of liberal elites."


Right, Doug. That's why the Democrats tried to impeach Reagan, Bush, and Shrub. Oh, wait...

 · 
tduds

I could never buy the argument that impeachment is somehow overturning the will of the voters. It's like they don't realize that people also vote to elect their representatives in Congress.

 · 

As if congress is answerable to "the people" ...

 · 

In an ideal scenario, the more public support a bill has, the more of a chance it should have of being passed by congress. I don't recall where, but I read that studies have found that increasing public support of legislation basically has zero effect on that legislation actually getting passed.

 · 
SneakyPete

Miles, you're sounding like my parents. They're not left, but they commonly make the same arguments you are. It's tiresome, my friend.

 · 

Here it is ... and some excerpts: 

"When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.

...

"Overall, net interest-group alignments are not significantly related to the preferences of average citizens. The net alignments of the most influential, business-oriented groups are negatively related to the average citizen’s wishes. So existing interest groups do not serve effectively as transmission belts for the wishes of the populace as a whole.

...

"In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.

...

"Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts."

 · 

There is really only one party. We’re not invited even though we’re paying for it.

Dec 13, 19 12:07 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

I'm particularly fond of the bottom 3 points in the bi-partisan section

 · 

Miles, I almost included a 3rd branch (as a H/T to you) ... the "career politician branch" where the goal is to do the things outlined in the Venn diagram above.

 · 
tduds

I have my beef with the old-guard Democratic establishment, but the Republicans are essentially proto-fascist at this point. They really aren't similar.

 · 
SneakyPete

Yeah, the "pox on both their houses" sounds remarkably similar to "There were very fine people on both sides" to me.

 · 
tduds

.

 · 

REPs and DEMs in the House overwhelmingly passed the largest military spending bill ever: $738b.

  • no repeal of AUMF that gives the cedes congressional responsibility for war to the president
  • authorizes creation of US Space Force
  • bans US withdrawal from NATO
  • provides money to research low-yield nuclear weapons
  • prohibits military cooperation with Russia
  • sanctions businesses and people involved in the NordStream Piepline

41 DEMs voted against.

 · 
tduds

Admitting the GOP is significantly more corrupt does not imply the Democratic Party is *good* ...that's the only point I was making.

 · 

Beware of cognitive bias.

 · 
tduds

Back at ya.

 · 
SneakyPete

Dans ses écrits, un sage Italien Dit que le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

 · 
Non Sequitur

^classic french throwback.

 · 
x-jla

The one thing that we won’t tolerate is an anti war or isolationist president...can’t have that...it’s like having a vegan CEO of McDonald’s...Mike Pence would be a much better president than Trump...just let the guy put up a cross wherever we invade and he’ll be a happy fella...the military industrial complex approves this message...

Dec 21, 19 5:45 pm  · 
 · 

How many of you are following Trump's trial during the day? I'm really only catching bits of it during my evening commute, and then reading the news about it in the morning. I recall back in high school Clinton's trial was on the TVs in a few history/US government classrooms when it was happening. Anyone streaming this at their desks? Office watch parties?

Jan 23, 20 4:21 pm  · 
 · 
Chad Miller

I wish. The parts I do hear are infuriating though .

 · 
tduds

I catch whatever happens to be on NPR on my way home in the evening. Schiff is presenting a very clear narrative that should result in overwhelming consensus that Trump is guilty, but will persuade exactly no one.

 · 

tduds, I think about the only defense the republicans have is "sure he did what the house is saying he did, but it's not that bad." I was seeing comments from Trey Gowdy earlier questioning that if Biden wasn't running for president, would Trump's actions rise to the level of being impeachable. 

That doesn't sound like he needs to be convinced of what Trump did, he tacitly admits that the facts say he did it ... he needs to be convinced that it's impeachable, even though by the way he sets up his hypothetical he implies that it is worthy of impeachment. There's no need for a hypothetical where Biden's an ordinary american if you think Trump's actions are worthy of impeachment to begin with. Even then, the hypothetical has no bearing on the actual trial so it's simply something thrown out there to distract from the issues. 

I see no logical way that they can justify Trump's actions without simply drawing a line and saying "it's not bad enough to be worthy of removal from office." And if that's the answer ... I'm not sure what to expect in the next handful of elections.

 · 
liberty bell

I’m doing exactly what tduds is doing, listening when I can and feeling it’s really, really important but ultimately won’t be anything.

 · 
gwharton

ACQUITTED!

 · 
SneakyPete

Congratulations?

 · 
liberty bell

If anyone cares, I’m team Warren. I adore her ever since her first appearance on The Daily Show.

Jan 23, 20 7:39 pm  · 
 · 
liberty bell

<insert thumbs up emoji which I, as an Old, don’t know how to do from my phone>



Jan 23, 20 7:55 pm  · 
 · 

Whoa, did Interpol/wine caveman/Frac get banned from politics central, or just get their comments removed?

Jan 23, 20 9:07 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Now who am I going to half-assedly argue with?

 · 

jla-x is still around, no? Or is that more whole-assedly arguing?

 · 
tduds

I give him a good 3/4 ass most of the time.

 · 
Non Sequitur

Looks like Interpol's comments were also nuked from the Trump border wall news thread too.

 · 

While this is clearly not a democracy I vote for nuking the account.

 · 

Happy Iowa Caucus Day! The past three years have been building up to this, and we'll probably know less about who will take the Democratic Party nomination tomorrow morning. Maybe a little more about who won't take the nomination ... but probably still too early to tell. 

In other news, at least some republicans have chewed on enough calcium supplements to have something loosely resembling a spine, and have publicly stated that the House Democrats have made a convincing case that Trump did what he is accused of ... but that it's not worthy of removal from office. Anyone holding out hope for a censure for the president? I'm not. Can the minority party bring a censure vote to the floor if Mitch doesn't want it? 

Feb 3, 20 8:01 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

why is Iowa so important? I've never been, have no plans on ever going... yet it's in my news feed.

 · 
tduds

It's not important. It's just first.

 · 
Non Sequitur

great article. thanks.

 · 
tduds

Well this has been embarrassing.

Feb 4, 20 11:39 am  · 
 · 
threeohdoor

Utter incompetence. Why the Iowa Dems thought it necessary to shoehorn an app into the caucus is beyond me. All we had to do was count people in a room and then make a phone call. But no, we had to get some company named "Shadow Inc." (no joke) to build a half-assed vote reporting app and go ruin everything. There really is an app for everything.

 · 

Huge CF. I was following along for a little bit to 538's live blogging of the results and they were all getting pretty annoyed with this. They started saying journalists had headlines to write and deadlines to meet and the story was going to be about how much of a screw up the process was this time around rather than any meaningful results. Also with the State of the Union today, the impeachment trial vote to convict/acquit tomorrow, and New Hampshire's primary next week, the winner in Iowa expecting a bump was going to get lost in the news cycle. Huge CF.

 · 
tduds

"They started saying journalists had headlines to write and deadlines to meet.." This, to me, is the bigger problem. News cycles are hurting our ability to parse information.

 · 

That wasn't lost on them as well ... but that headline bites the hand that feeds them.

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Well, it was fun while it lasted. I'm ready for this shit show called human existence to end anyway. ELE where are you?!

 · 
tduds

That's a bit drastic don't ya think.

 · 

Here's around 5.5 minutes of video where Nate Silver is pretty visibly frustrated (use headphones if you're at work or around children): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0j7JTeyIlU 

Galen Druke had this comment as well...

GALEN DRUKE
11:09 PM

While most Americans probably aren’t holding their breath for results from Iowa, the people responsible for tomorrow’s media narrative — journalists — are. Based on a sample of about 30 people in our newsroom, journalists are getting increasingly annoyed. Those same journalists are going to be responsible for tomorrow’s narrative, and it’s growing increasingly likely that that narrative will be: SHITSHOW IN IOWA

Live Blog here for those with time to kill: https://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/iowa-caucus-2020-election-live/ 

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Of course it is, but we need to save the planet, dinosaurs, humans, next-generation evolutionary species will do better.

 · 
tduds

Never use an app for something that can be done without an app.

 · 
SneakyPete

*throws phone away*

 · 
threeohdoor

I'll give the digital benefit of the doubt and revise tduds statement: "Never us an app for something that can be done better without an app."


 · 

If you are looking for election meddling look

 · 

no further than the DNC. They’re doing it again because it worked so well last time.

 · 
tduds

No. They just screwed up.

 · 
tduds

I have zero patience for this idiot narrative in which the DNC is too incompetent to win elections and at the same time so competent that they secretly rig elections.

 · 
threeohdoor

Hanlon's Razor looms large here.

 · 

@ tduds Fantastic logic. "the DNC is too incompetent to win elections and at the same time so competent that they secretly rig elections." Elections that they lose. LOL

So Wasserman Schultz did not resign as DNC head over a leak of internal DNC emails that showed officials actively favoring Hillary Clinton during the presidential primary and plotting against Bernie Sanders?

The NYT today had a page on all the democratic candidates positions ... except Sanders. Whoops.

And DNC chair Tom Perez hasn't stacked the nominating committee with vocal opponents of Sanders?

Don't be surprised when the new caucus app is found to have been somewhat less than legitimate ...

 · 
tduds

There is no evidence — none, zero, zilch — to suggest the results of the Iowa Caucuses will be in any way inaccurate, and people suggesting otherwise are irresponsible. Did this take longer than everyone hoped? Yeah. But somehow faking the results of the caucus, when there are extensive paper trails, and when people LITERALLY CAST THEIR VOTES IN PUBLIC, is essentially impossible. https://twitter.com/Robillard/status/1224751886881951744

 · 
tduds

Anyway California has like 500 delegates, votes in less than a month, and Sanders is polling ahead so none of this is going to matter.

 · 
tduds

Also the page that doesn't exist was really easy to find https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/elections/bernie-sanders.html

 · 

NYT print edition. As to the app, it is a compromised system from the start, just like electronic voting machines that are susceptible to manipulation. Reference Clinton Curtis sworn testimony to congress. https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/4/21121903/iowa-results-delay-app-reporting

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

If Pete is cheating, at least he's trying. Go Liz!

 · 
atelier nobody

Hot off the press:

"The AIA is aware (and has been actively addressing this) that there is a draft executive order circulating for consideration by White House officials that would officially designate “classical” architecture as the preferred style for the following building types: federal courthouses, all federal public buildings in the Capital region, and all other federal public buildings whose cost exceed $50 million in modern dollars. The AIA strongly and unequivocally opposes this change in policy to promote any style of architecture over another for these types of federal buildings across the country. 

The draft executive order defines “classical architectural style” to mean architectural features derived from classical Greek and Roman architecture. There are some allowances for “traditional architectural style” which is defined to mean classical architecture along with Gothic, Romanesque, and Spanish colonial. The draft executive order specifically prohibits the use of Brutalist architecture, or its derivatives.

Except for Brutalism, there is some language in the draft executive order that would allow for other architectural styles to be used in cases where it could be conclusively proven that a different style is necessary. However, the high bar required to satisfy the process described within the executive order would all but restrict the ability to design the federal buildings under this order in anything but the preferred style. The process would include a personal written justification from the Administrator, which cannot be delegated to staff, and which is still subject to review by the White House..."

Feb 4, 20 7:40 pm  · 
 · 
atelier nobody

When he was elected, my first response was, "Please, whatever God or Gods are listening, don't let him get his tasteless, tiny hands on the 'Guiding Principals for Federal Architecture."

Apparently, no Gods were listening.

 · 

So Dictator is deciding what style is or isn't allowed to be used. This isn't hyperbole. Banning of an architectural style is on par with banning a religion.

 · 
JawkneeMusic

maybe trump owns a bunch of quarries

 · 
code

Its like when Stalin specified classical style after Corbu presented his design for the palace of supreme soviets


Feb 4, 20 8:09 pm  · 
 · 

It is a populist exec order. It's a popular leaning of conservative public to side with "stately" buildings representing power and grandness to impress and rule. I don't have any particular problems with so called classical style buildings of early last century and older when the construction technology was still widely embedded in bricks and mortar and a Greek column represented authority, trust, and guarantees in general to an average citizen. Now, it seems like a faked style representing lies.

This decree is interesting (see; Price Charles) in terms of using the powerful representational side of architecture. In a healthy society it can be a good debate that can create more interest and participation in the ideas of built environment and architecture. But, we don't debate things anymore, I shouldn't get my hopes up, because in today's political context this will turn into a fanatical fight about something else as intended and televised. 

Feb 4, 20 8:53 pm  · 
 · 
curtkram

it's like trump wants to be literal hitler. https://archinect.com/news/article/73841759/hitler-s-classical-architect

 · 
atelier nobody

curtkram - Also my first thought when I saw it. I wonder who will be Herr Drumpf's new Albert Speer...

 · 
midlander

For as much as people complain about trump i don't think there is widespread recognition just how dangerous he is. he is leading a movement that will break up America. Even the most energetic democratic opponents of Trumpism (and there are very few true ones) are ignoring this threat, possibly because the reality is too ugly to be nicely sorted out in a civil and undisruptive way. a lot of bad things arise due to the fear of disruption. for most of this this is a much more serious risk to our future than climate change, though certainly related.

Feb 5, 20 1:47 am  · 
 · 
midlander

bullshit, obviously. also, i can't vote for the senators and congress reps from other states. my state is great, not part of the problem.

 · 
midlander

my point being that the efforts of reasonable people to influence this will fail because they have no impact on the states dominated by unreasonable people.

 · 

Iowa precinct chair says the app got stuck on the last step

From CNN's Jeff Zeleny
A precinct chair in Iowa said the app got stuck on the last step when reporting results. It was uploading a picture of the precinct’s results.
The chair said they were finally able to upload, so they took a screenshot. The app then showed different numbers than what they had submitted as captured in their screenshot.

Feb 5, 20 9:20 am  · 
 · 

Throughout the caucus yesterday, Democratic officials reported widespread problems downloading the app and inconsistencies uploading caucus results, leading to the Iowa Democratic Party’s decision to take the unusual step of delaying the release of the results. This is the first year the app was used, and ahead of the caucuses, the Iowa Democratic Party asked that the app’s name be kept secret. The New York Times reported that “its creators had repeatedly questioned the need to keep it secret.”

The Iowa Democratic Party and the Nevada Democratic Party retained Shadow to develop its caucus app. Shadow has also been retained for digital services by Buttigieg’s and Biden’s campaigns.

A precinct captain for Sanders, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the press, confirmed that the rollout was rushed. “We didn’t know about the app until like a month ago. And we didn’t have access to the app until like three days ago,” the source said.

https://theintercept.com/2020/02/04/iowa-caucus-app-shadow-acronym/

The name of the company behind the app? Shadow Inc. Shadow was launched by former Hillary Clinton staff. 

A botched impeachment followed by election meddling. The DNC might as well be working for the Trump campaign. They are doing everything they can to reelect him. 

Feb 5, 20 9:33 am  · 
 · 
Chad Miller

Which former Hillary Clinton staff member? What we this staff members job while with HC?

 · 
JLC-1

Gerard Niemira. Hillary For America Total Duration1 yr 2 mos TitleDirector of Product Dates EmployedMar 2016 – Nov 2016 Employment Duration9 mos LocationBrooklyn, NY - Promoted during the campaign to lead the small but mighty team in charge of all of the campaign’s tools for field organizers and volunteers. - Created a platform for field organizers to contact voters and manage volunteers in their communities as efficiently as possible while opening up new avenues of data collection for the campaign. - Pioneered voter contact via SMS, resulting in the most efficient voter contact method ever on a presidential campaign (over 40 time as efficient as phone calls) used to reach tens of millions of voters. - Led a cross-functional team to scale our platform’s capacity to handle an over 4000% increase in usage during the critical “get out the vote” weekend before the election. … see more TitleSenior Product Manager Dates EmployedOct 2015 – Mar 2016 Employment Duration6 mos LocationBrooklyn, New York - Produced a suite of tools, used by millions of voters and supporters nationwide, for field teams to collect commitments to vote, share polling place information, and make voting plans. - Built an online call tool that resulted in millions of voters and volunteers contacted remotely by campaign volunteers by phone.

 · 
JLC-1

taken from linkedin

 · 
Chad Miller

Thanks for the info JLC-1!

 · 
threeohdoor

The DNC has little, if anything, to do with the Iowa Democratic Caucus. Separate entities. Pursuing the Hillary Clinton/DNC Boogieman path of inquiry is asinine and unproductive, however fun and thrilling in the near term. Leaning on weak conspiracy theories is foolish. Never presume malfeasance in place of good ol' incompetence.

 · 
SneakyPete

Focusing on this makes us useful idiots.

 · 

@3oh The Iowa Democratic Party and the Nevada Democratic Party retained Shadow to develop its caucus app.

@Pete ignoring this makes us useful idiots.

We have the very best government that money can buy and that money is terrified of Sanders. The corporate media blatantly sabotages him, the DNC is working against him, Hillary's foaming at the mouth over him is widely reported. There is a full court press by the establishment to derail his campaign. Watch what they do next, this is only going to get worse. I’m surprised that they have linked Bernie to Putin yet.

 · 
SneakyPete

Who really gives a flying shit who the nominee is? Hold your damn nose, pull the lever not marked Trump, then we can argue for four years about this all you like.

 · 
x-jla

The DNC is absolutely pathetic. Trump is a dick. Can we add a none of the above lever in the polls?

 · 
x-jla

I’ll probably vote for Klobuchar if she makes it. She’s cool.

 · 
x-jla

Warren is the definition of cringe. Bernie is nuts...Bloomberg is an asshole...Amy is looking like the best bet.

 · 
x-jla

I like Gabbard best, but running as an anti war canidate In the US is like trying to be a vegan ceo of McDonald’s

 · 
tduds

A vote for anyone other than the eventual Democratic nominee is a vote for Trump. There are many places to advocate for changes to the system, and many other ballot races to support minority party candidates. The presidential general election is not the place.

 · 

“A vote for anyone other than the eventual Democratic nominee is a vote for Trump.” Silly me, I thought voting was supposed to determine the nominee. Care to share your foreknowledge and save us all the trouble of voting?

 · 
SneakyPete

I read that more as eventually, when the nominee is selected, a vote for anyone else at that point is a vote for Trump.

 · 

Don't vote for what you believe in: vote for someone you hate as a vote against someone you hate even more. This largely explains why we inevitably end up with a choice between two detestables like Hillary and Trump.

 · 
SneakyPete

The mechanism for our elections is in need of repair. The mechanism for our elections is not broken in a method that allows you to vote your beliefs or conscience. Doing so doesn't make you smarter or better, It just makes you lose the election.

 · 
tduds

Change doesn't happen in the presidential general election. Change must already have happened for the presidential general election to contain a desirable candidate. I find the focus on The President, at the expense of focus on thousands of other elected officials and tens of thousands of policy initiatives, frankly annoying.

 · 
tduds

You have two choices: vote for the Democrat or vote for fascism. If you want to make change, start reading up on your county school boards.

 · 
tduds

You think Trump came out of nowhere? Trump's candidacy was the result of 45 years of subtle but deliberate action from the right. Same with Bush. Same with the Senate. Things accelerated post-2010 once the money shackles were off, but I tell you one thing they didn't start with the damn president.

 · 

Trump was put up by Hillary to insure her victory. The establishment media focused - at the behest of Clinton - on the most despicable Republicans (Ted Cruz!) and gave Trump billions in exposure. Trump thought he would get some delegates and trade them for something sweet at the Republican convention. Look at the election night video - when Trump is announced as the winner his entire family looks like deer caught in the headlights: WTF?! He wasn’t supposed to win. The Dems handed it to him, and they are poised to do it again. 

 · 
tduds

I give up... I can't compete with MIles' ability to read intent into every coincidence. It must be exhausting to think the world is that laden with sinister plots.

 · 
tduds

"The Dems handed it to him, and they are poised to do it again." You know how to stop that? Vote for the Democrat.

 · 
Chad Miller

I have an unflattering reasoning on why people buy into conspiracy theories.

 · 

The term "conspiracy theory" was invented by the CIA. Documented quote, CIA Director William Casey to President Ronald Reagan: "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."

 · 
tduds

Incredible.

 · 
SneakyPete

Uncredible.

 · 

Barbara Honegger is the source of the quote. Formerly a researcher at the Hoover Institution, Honegger was an assistant domestic policy advisor to Regan. She also disclosed the October Surprise (1980) where Reagan negotiated with Iran to delay the release of the hostages until after the election.

 · 
x-jla

Hillary was the worst candidate. She’s a deep State actor. Trump is hated because he’s so narcissistic that he actually thinks he runs the country. The deep state doesn’t like that. The presidency is only supposed to be a public front...

 · 

Actually it was the Reagan / Bush campaign. Bush senior had been CIA director under Gerald Ford.

 · 

This just keeps getting better. Acronym is a political dark money group (no financial reporting). It was started with money from Silicon Valley billionaire Reid Hoffman. Acronym has ballooned since its founding into a massive dark money operation, even launching a Super PAC dubbed Pacronym that has raked in money from hedge fund billionaires like Seth Klarman and Donald Sussman. Tara McGowan - who runs Acronym, which founded Shadow Inc., which created the app for the Iowa caucus - is married to a senior Buttieg advisor.

 · 
tduds

There is no deep state.

 · 
tduds

Here's a good thread about how the Iowa fiasco happened. Predictably, incompetence not malice. https://twitter.com/rabble/status/1224820389387223041?s=21

 · 
tduds

Chad: "I have an unflattering reasoning on why people buy into conspiracy theories." 

The terrifying reality that there is no one in charge but us and that the world is a chaotic, unpredictable, and cruel place is just too much for some. So they invent an omniscient overlord because evil control is preferable to neutral chaos.

 · 
x-jla

The deep state is an obvious reality whether it has an overlord or not. Do you not think the Iraq war had beneficiaries private and govt? That deep corruption and power is a “deep state”...

 · 
tduds

I think there are as many definitions of "deep state" as there are people talking about it. As a term, it's meaningless. Yes, there exists a bureaucracy of unelected career government employees. There also exists a money-fueled network of unaccountable power in our country. Both of these groups contain some corrupt individuals and some well-intentioned ones. Talking about these various and disparate groups as if they're a united cabal of "deep state" actors is delusional and unproductive and I have no patience for it.

 · 
threeohdoor

It's a convenient boogieman for those who are no longer able to publicly project previous versions of men of boogie: racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, jews, etc etc. When life is difficult, who do Americans typically blame? Yep, it's those you consider to be "below" you in status and those with whom you share little. It's 1984 Eurasia. I always laugh at first when I hear people cry about the Deep State, then I become sad.

 · 
x-jla

NSA not a deep state program? people deeply working within the state that are not accountable to the public and operate outside of their knowledge? Do get me started on the ufo stuff lol.

 · 
x-jla

Military industrial complex = deep state

 · 
threeohdoor

The NSA is accountable to House and Senate Intelligence Committees, among others. Just because we elect morally corrupt hooligans to these posts doesn't negate constitutional powers.

The military industrial complex is anything but deep. It employs hundreds of thousands of citizens in both public and private capacities. Contracts are public. Most of the companies are public and have their financials posted quarterly. Again, elect war-mongering idiots, get stupid government. 

Don't equate "hard to understand" or "complex" with the plans of nefarious government workers. If anything, we should be proud that our government is so inept such that it couldn't possibly create and maintain some "deep state". 

 · 
tduds

jla: Read what I said above. All of your examples fit into what I"m talking about. And please don't start on the UFOs

 · 

So Eisenhower was wrong, the NSA has never spied on American citizens and congress, CIA directors have never lied to congress, intelligence agencies are vigorously scrutinized by elected officials, whistle-blowers are always protected and never prosecuted, Wikileaks only publishes lies, the NSA does not operate a global ground-based, aerial, and orbital surveillance system run by the same contractors who supply the Pentagon, the CIA hasn't meddled in foreign elections around the globe since 1940, the Church Committee hearings were a hoax, the CIA never sold crack on the streets of LA, etc.

It is utterly impossible that there exists a Shadow Government of unelected, contractor-staffed, highly classified, black-budget intelligence agencies, and there have never been former intelligence officers, staffers, and contractors who have become whistle-blowers who were prosecuted and imprisoned for revealing crimes committed by such agencies, or that there exists, like in all power structures, groups competing for power and control of their common interests.

Good to know. I feel much better now.

 · 
Chad Miller

Might I suggest everyone take a minute and learn where the term 'deep state' came from.


https://www.npr.org/2019/11/06/776852841/the-man-who-popularized-the-deep-state-doesnt-like-the-way-its-used

 · 
Chad Miller

I find NPR more credible than some conspiracy theory website with click-bait banner adds.

 · 
tduds

Miles: none of that rant refutes or addresses my point. The term "Deep State" is meaningless. At worst, there are lots and lots of Deep States, all working in their own self interest and often in direct contradiction of each other. Most of it can be explained by scope creep and institutional inertia.

 · 
tduds

A large part of the dysfunction of our government - especially in the unelected portions - is due to a lack of cohesive direction, not a sinister direction.

 · 
x-jla

Ha, so your issue is with the term “deep state” but you admit that there is a corrupt shadowy intentional collaboration between Unelected govt officials, military, and private corporations to control us and profiteer against our interests ...call it whatever, sounds like a deep state to me.

 · 
x-jla

I’m with Miles on this one. A

 · 
tduds

I never said any of those things.

 · 
tduds

Dismantling the various systems of ineffective power and unaccountable inertia that contribute to government intransigence requires first admitting that there is not one element to dismantle, but dozens. There is no Deep State. There is no enemy, only various levels of apathy with a peppering of fraud.

 · 

The system is composed of multiple interests that both compete and cooperate with each other. Boeing and Lockheed (entrenched in both military and intelligence complexes) compete to sell military hardware but work together to create the ‘need’ for it. Reps and Dems vie for power via money from such interests, which both parties serve slavishly. These systems are highly effective at promoting their own interests and preventing accountability. Thus the Pentagon's inability to account for $37 trillion in spending or even complete a basic audit.

 · 
Chad Miller

When people start talking about the 'deep state' all I hear is the 'wa wa wa' from Charlie Brown cartoons.

 · 

Ignorance is its own reward.

 · 
Chad Miller

Sorry, but I have better things to do with my time. 

 · 

Ignorance is bliss, or so I am told.

 · 
code

Trump will be re-elected and then we will have a Ferdinand Marcos Philippine style dictator just as one of my co-workers at SOM predicted 12 years ago

Feb 5, 20 11:58 am  · 
 · 
Chad Miller

If Trump gets re-elected I'm stocking up on insulin, food, and ammo to fend off the Nazi shitheads who will become even more embolden .

 · 
threeohdoor

A fellow diabetic! Not so much of a gun person though...might have to move north and restart my hockey career.

 · 
x-jla

The hyperbole isn’t helping.

 · 
Chad Miller

What makes you think I'm not being serious jla-x?

 · 
Chad Miller

threeohdoor - just move back to northern Minnesota like I plan on doing. The state is rather liberal with great schools and healthcare. Also we're really close to Canada so the beer is good. Also it's too cold for Nazi's. Ever since the battle if Stalingrad those dipshits have been scared of the cold.


Oh and hokey is 'uge up north in Minnesota eh! 

 · 
x-jla

You have Almost zero chance of being attacked by nazis. Hyperbole

 · 
x-jla

They aren’t even leading in anti Semitic attacks...nazis are a small small threat. Most trump supporters are just middle age assholes who may call the cops on children selling lemonade if they are black. That’s about as dangerous as they come. The real wackos are few and far between.

 · 
Chad Miller

Depends on where you live. Also I include the alt-right, tiki torch carrying, women hating dipshits in the Nazi category .

 · 
x-jla

Then you are watering down the definition. Not helpful. Assholes are assholes, nazis are nazis.

 · 
x-jla

The tiki dipshits are also a small minority of the voter base though. I suspect 90% of the base just Wants to see annoying Dems lose.

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Hate to tell you Chad, but the Nazis are in St. Cloud, they busy banning immigrant settlements in their town.

 · 
Chad Miller

jlax-x, I'm not watering down the definition of a Nazi. If you have the same ideals and views as the Nazi's, then you're a Nazi and an asshole.

 · 
Chad Miller

b3t


 · 
threeohdoor

This map is hilarious. I'll make sure to stay clear of St. Cloud, Nazis, and jla-x when I migrate north.

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Yeah, but I hear Nazis portage and like walleye.

 · 
Chad Miller

Little known fact, Nazis are scared of loons. Just hearing their haunting cry makes them soil themselves.

 · 
x-jla

Chad, We’ve been over this. You’ll have to define those views clearly before classification. Nazi can’t mean anything you disagree with. Ben Shapiro (an Orthodox Jew) was being labeled a nazi. Recently joe Rogan was labled as alt-right, after endorsing aBernie Sanders, because he doesn’t think it’s right for trans people to fight in mma (former buff man pulverizing natural born women) because science and biology doesn’t care about being politically correct.

 · 
x-jla

Just saying, there is a danger of labeling people. Those tiki torch pricks are a bunch of racist cunts, but there is a big difference between being a racist and being an actually nazi. It’s tantamount to calling every small time crook a mobster. Not helpful. Not useful.

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

That's a well known fact, but only Northern Loons, not European Loons.

 · 
Chad Miller

Well obviously b3t.

 · 
tduds

Instead of 'Nazi' let's say 'Fascist' then.

 · 
Chad Miller

jla-x, as I said above if someone has the same ideals and views as the Nazi's then I'll classify and call them as such. If you need me to clarify, if someone believes that theirr race is better than all others and they want to physically harm or kill the other races because they don't consider them human then I'll call them a Nazi, along with other things.

Now I agree with your overall statement jla-x, you can't just throw around classifications willy-nilly.  That being said I do think the alt right and those affiliated with the group are Nazis.

 · 

I want to see more state maps like the one Chad posted.

 · 
Chad Miller

Here you go.


 · 
Non Sequitur

What's the deal with Glenwood Springs?

 · 
JLC-1

glenwood springs, and a couple of towns to the left and right of it, is where all the service and construction workers for aspen live, it's also where we shop in big boxes that aren't allowed in the rich man's landscape. It's a nice town, getting crowded by driving tourists that stop for a soak in the hot "springs". Lots of new construction going on, mainly multifamily.

 · 
Chad Miller

They like to be their own 'thing'. I think this is because they are the gateway to a few major ski areas to their south but don't have good skiing themselves. They're have a rather rugged sense if individualism.

 · 
tduds

I made this a bunch of years ago & it make the internet-rounds every so often:


 · 
threeohdoor

SE Mass is a wasteland too. Basically the 95/195/Bay zone.

 · 
Non Sequitur

.

 · 
Non Sequitur

Ya'll mericans are a funny bunch.  

Feb 5, 20 12:32 pm  · 
 · 
Chad Miller

You Canuks are just weird.

 · 
SneakyPete

Rest assured that the political operatives in Canada are paying close attention and will be adopting successful tactics in your elections soon.

 · 
x-jla

Every decade or so Canada produces an awesome band...only reason we haven’t invaded...they’ve been slacking lately.

 · 
Non Sequitur

Jla, I see you're a big Nickleback fan... maybe your definition of awesome band needs some re-evaluation.

 · 
tduds

Sick burn.

 · 
x-jla

Oh god no. Rush and Neil bought you years and years. Arcade fire is aight. Beiber and nickel back put you on defcon 4...one more shitty act and you’ll be eating real bacon and drinking dishwater beer.

 · 
x-jla

Neil Young that is....

 · 
Non Sequitur

Neil Young is the only god that has ever existed.

 · 
x-jla

He’s a beautiful man.

 · 
Non Sequitur

Indeed he is. His auto biography is filled with more info on model trains than music. Also, no Neil means no Pearl Jam... and we can't exist without PJ.

 · 
JLC-1

"He became a United States citizen, taking dual citizenship on January 22, 2020."

 · 
Chad Miller

I must say that Canada is lacking in the heavy metal department though. . . .

 · 
Non Sequitur

Chad, heavy-metal is not my scene (see Young and Pearl Jam notes above)... but we do have a Dave Mustaine and Unibroue colab. See here: https://www.unibroue.com/en/our-beers/a-tout-le-monde/10

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

I got turned on to Tragically Hip way too late. In my mind, way better than Rush.

 · 
Almosthip7

Chad - Check out a Band called The Headstones not heavy metal but they rock!

 · 
Chad Miller

Thanks for the band names!

 · 
Non Sequitur

Ahip7, I’ll be seeing headstones (along with tea party, moist, big wreck) in Ottawa this summer. Going to be a great throw back concert day.

 · 
Almosthip7

I saw them last year and the year before at a small bar in my town. I’m going to the same tour just down in Edmonton. I have the headstone logo tattoo’d on me

 · 
Almosthip7

Seen them New Year’s Eve 1992 at The Volcano Clud in Kitchener. And I was hooked ...been about 10 times after that till now.

 · 
atelier nobody

My favorite Canadian band...https://youtu.be/bBBDCwZECLQ

 · 
Non Sequitur

Great Big Sea is Canadian fucking royalty.
Ahip, it’ll be my first time seeing them.

 · 
x-jla

Yang is still in the race?  I’ve been out of the loop.  How’d that happen?  I like him, but very surprised he’s still in it.  

Feb 6, 20 11:45 am  · 
 · 
threeohdoor

I believe he's qualified for the next debate, so perhaps he's going to try for a (donation) surge. He's not polling in any meaningful way in the next 3 states (NH, NV, SC) so I would imagine he'd start thinking of dropping out soon-ish.

Also, although he's wealthy, he can't compete with Bloomberg and Steyer when it comes to self-financing. At a certain point, the money dries up and the campaign can't buy ads, pay staffers, etc.

 · 
tduds

Buttigieg and Klobuchar out.

So I guess we're doubling down on people born in the 1940s for yet another cycle. 

Friggin' boomers.

Mar 2, 20 7:20 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I'm 34 years old. In my lifetime - including 2020, unless Trump dies - there will have been two presidential elections in which neither nominee was born between 1946-48 - 1988 and 2008. For a presidential election where no "serious" candidate (that is, a candidate who earned a significant number of primary delegates) was a 1940s baby you have to go back to 1984. We're approaching 40 years of one small group in power. I'd contend that's too long. 

There has not been a president born in the 1930s (there almost definitely won't be). There might not be a president born in the 1950's (in 2024 people born in 1960 will be 64...above average age for a president). The only other decade with 0 presidential birth years is 1810-1820. 

 In 2024 the eldest Millennials will be in our mid-40s, right around the age that Obama, Clinton, Kennedy & Roosevelt were when first elected. The next-next-president could very well be an 80s baby. 

 All this to say that 40's Baby Boomers siezed power ahead of expectations and held on to it well past expectations. Anyway, sorry Gen-X. As usual you got skipped.

 · 
atelier nobody

Strictly speaking, neither Joe nor Bernie is a Boomer. Their generation is almost as forgotten as Gen X - if either one of them wins, he will certainly be the only President from their generation.

I predict Gen X will be totally skipped by the US Presidency.

 · 
tduds

They're boomers to me.

 · 
Chad Miller

Don't care if they are boomers, just as long as it's not Trump.

 · 
Non Sequitur

I was told I was gen X growing up in the mid 90s... now they tell me I'm millennial. I chose to identify as a lampshade.

 · 
SneakyPete

if only generational labels qualified as identity.

 · 
tduds

Gen X has been absorbed by Millenials + Boomers because our easily-digestible-narrative-obsessed media insists everything be described as one of two sides only. Sorry.

 · 
tduds

" Thanks to TV and for the convenience of TV, you can only be one of two kinds of human beings, either a liberal or a conservative."

 · 
tduds

Strong disagree with all of that.

 · 

Any of you get to vote today? My state's primary isn't until later so not me. 

Depending on how things go today, I may or may not vote in the primary. I'm not a member of either party and could still participate in the open primary as an independent as long as I'm ok giving my information to the Democractic Party. 

Usually the nomination is pretty much decided by the time we get to vote so ... meh? Hard to get jazzed for a participation trophy, and I'm getting too old to get excited about a protest vote. Feel free to try and convince me otherwise though ... I haven't really decided whether it's worth it or not.

Mar 3, 20 5:58 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

Open primaries just create an environment primed for garbage gamesmanship. I voted.

 · 
axonapoplectic

I think the people scared of Medicare for all are only really worried about losing private supplemental coverage. People like to feel like they are in control and I think the problem with Sanders is that he fails to understand this. Provide enough support so that everyone is covered, but let the people customize and buy extra private insurance for perks like house calls or a hot towel when you visit the dentist, or Greg Lynn’s new line of custom suppositories. 

Mar 4, 20 10:44 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Guess I'm voting for Bernie now.

Mar 5, 20 12:43 pm  · 
 · 
atelier nobody

Luckily for me, I don't hate Joe or Bernie - I would've strongly preferred Liz, but those two have been my 2nd & 3rd picks since Kamala dropped out.

 · 

Any speculation on who Bernie and Biden have on their short lists for veep. I don’t necessarily think Warren is hoping for the job, but the decision to not endorse anyone is interesting. I do think she’s keeping her options open to work in either administration though.

Mar 6, 20 12:25 am  · 
 · 
gibbost

A Stacey Abrams or Kamala Harris pick for Biden would nearly seal the deal. Optics alone says avoid the 'old white dude' ticket--which is what the race is now down to--on either side.

 · 
tduds

In modern history the VP pick is a ticket balancer. Biden needs someone younger, more liberal, ideally a woman, a person of color, or better a woman of color (Abrams?). Bernie needs the same but more moderate (Booker?, Harris?).

 · 
atelier nobody

I'm guessing it'll be some serious back-room dealing over which one of them gets Liz.

 · 
proto

i hate to say it, but bernie just doesn't have the capacity to turn out the voters. youth aren't showing up at the primaries. and women, esp women of color, don't seem to be excited about him. this translates to he'll be bad for candidates down ballot too as the hysteria ramps to create a backstop to "socialism"

we're headed for a lesser of two evils election again, except this time there is no voting your conscience if you think Trump is awful...deep breath & get excited to vote for whoever the dem candidate will be

Mar 6, 20 5:45 pm  · 
 · 
revolutionary poet

.


Mar 6, 20 11:19 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Learn to post.

 · 
( o Y o )

.

Mar 10, 20 8:44 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

This is an absurd chart.

 · 
Dokuser

Bernie Sanders > Joe Biden by a longshot

Mar 11, 20 2:26 am  · 
 · 
liberty bell

At this point I will hold my nose and vote for whomever the Democratic nominee is. My main question, and I would love serious responses, is who truly has a better chance of beating Trump? I guess it depends, a lot, on who they pick for VP.

Mar 11, 20 8:47 am  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Julian?

 · 
atelier nobody

Either one of them should be able to beat Trump easily, assuming all of us do our jobs (voting, convincing others to vote, NOT voting for 3rd party or independent candidates).

 · 
Volunteer

Tulsi Gabbard could get more total votes against Trump than either Biden or Sanders but probably not enough to win. She would get a lot of independent voters and not a few Republician voters. She would be a good base for the future. The Dems seem hell-bent on flying their Kamikaze plane straight down into a concrete parking lot. Enjoy.  

Mar 11, 20 10:45 am  · 
 · 
threeohdoor

Re: Tulsi - This is ludicrous. You'd think she'd manage to get more than a few thousand votes in the primaries...Your point about Dems being incompetent/corrupt is correct though.

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Tulsi couldn't get more tics, if you threw her dumb ass into a vat deer piss.

 · 
Volunteer

Enjoy your flight.

 · 
threeohdoor

In all seriousness, I'd love to hear your rationale for 1) Why Tulsi hasn't garnered nearly any votes during the primaries and 2) Why the answer to (1) gives you confidence that she could do better against Trump. Seems like sour grapes honestly.

 · 
threeohdoor

And don't cop out and blame the media or Hillary Clinton - give actual reasons.

 · 
threeohdoor

I'm waiting...Coronavirus hitting the city means work is slow, so I got time to play politics.

 · 
tduds

If Tulsi could have gotten more votes she already would have.

 · 
threeohdoor

^ That's a bingo!

 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

of course volunteer is right, they know everything, Pizzagate, Q-Anon, and how silver prevents Corona. Enjoy your vote for Tulsi.

Mar 11, 20 11:17 am  · 
 · 
Volunteer

Tulsi singlehandedly destroyed Kamala Harris's campaign with one debate response. The Dem establishment doesn't want her anywhere near senile Biden while they figure out a way to dispose of the 1950's socialist Bernie. 

Mar 11, 20 12:28 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

You could make your points without giving everyone Trumpy nicknames. The tendency to insult just makes people take you less seriously.

 · 
proto

Tulsi has done nothing of substance except tease a bunch of conservatives with media-ready anti-dem barbs that have zero policy weight...empty suit posturing at best

the resulting success in the primaries demonstrates her lack of political chops

 · 
tduds

Tulsi is 7th in delegate count and 8th in popular vote among the 3 candidates still running so that should tell you something.

 · 
tduds

Warren, Bloomberg, Klobuchar, and Buttigieg got more votes yesterday and they dropped out already.

 · 
Volunteer

But Tulsi is a woman so it would seem that bubbling vat of acidic bile, Tom Perez, DNC chairman, would want to include her for appearances' sake. They have changed the debate rules several times to keep Tulsi out while changing the rules again to let billionaire Bloomberg in. Nice little party you have there.

 · 
tduds

I won't defend the party I'm just here to make the case that I don't think inclusion in the debates would help Gabbard. She's unpopular all on her own.

 · 
tduds

"They have changed the debate rules several times to keep Tulsi out while changing the rules again to let billionaire Bloomberg in." This is simply not true. The rules for each debate are individually crafted prior to that specific debate. You can argue the rules aren't fair but it's a lie to suggest there were rules that were "changed." You can't change what didn't exist.

 · 
tduds

& finally, back to the Kamala Harris comment. The aftermath of Harris' campaign suggests that, even if Gabbard's debate performance negatively affected Harris, she did nothing to boost her own campaign. Harris supporters mostly migrated to Buttigieg & Biden. Gabbards poll numbers have been pretty consistently between 1% and 1.5% even after debates that she did participate in. She's simply not a viable candidate, not because of a conspiracy on the DNC, but because people aren't voting for her.

 · 
x-jla

The one thing I like about trump are the funny names he has for everyone. It’s so NY.

 · 
( o Y o )

Stolen Election in Massachusetts: Mismatch Between Exit Polls and Reported Vote Count

Election results from the computerized vote counts differed significantly from the results projected by the exit poll conducted by Edison Research and published by CNN at poll’s closing.

Presidential candidates Biden’s and Bloomberg’s vote counts exhibited the largest disparity from their exit poll projections. Biden’s unobservable computer-generated vote totals represented a 15.7% increase of his projected exit poll share.

Exit polls are widely recognized—such as by, for example, the United States Agency for International Development  (USAID)—as a means for checking the validity of vote counts. The U.S. has financed exit polls in other countries to “ensure free and fair” elections […]

South Carolina Primary Vote Tampering? Exit Poll/Vote Count Discrepancy

The United States remains one of the few major democracies in the world that continue to allow computerized vote counting—not observable by the public—to determine the results of its elections.[ii] Countries such as GermanyNorwayNetherlandsFrance,[iii] Canada,[iv] United KingdomIrelandSpainPortugalItalyDenmarkSwedenFinland and many other countries protect the integrity of their elections with publicly observable hand-counting of paper ballots.[v]

Mar 11, 20 1:07 pm  · 
 · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: