|
Aliquid posted:i just spent the evening with a room full of my chronological peers but the average family size was like seven and i'm still hyperventilating I didn't know clowns voted Republican. Unless they are suicidal, the Republicans will have to shift their message eventually. When they do this I order to get younger voters and how much of a rear end pounding they get until things get better is the question. And those young people become old, jaded assholes too. Apple doesn't fall far from the tree after all.
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:58 |
|
|
I remember when Gore won the Presidency, that was great. Don't start making bets yet people, we don't even know who is running.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
Pohl posted:I remember when Gore won the Presidency, that was great. Hillary is running, and will be President.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Hillary is running, and will be President. I agree. I'm also going to guarantee that Biden will not win the Presidency. I love the man but he is not loving electable to the office. I was rooting for him for years before he became vice president. The man is just not going to win the presidency and I wish people would stop talking about it. It is not going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
Pohl posted:I remember when Gore won the Presidency, that was great. Unless they wheel out Jeb or some other relative safe choice to balance out the current batshit field within the next couple of months, I feel comfortable anticipating a Hillary-v-Whoever drubbing. Presumably they will, though. The party establishment has got to have Pence or Heineman or some other boring-rear end uncontroversial governor waiting in the wings for if Jeb doesn't want to run. Anyway, until someone legitimately challenges Teddy and Rand, why not have fun speculating about the ridiculous theatre that would be Hillary-v-Teddy or Hillary-v-Rand
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Hillary is running, and will be President. Yep, just like how Rudy won the election in 2008.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:35
|
|
|
I believe the main wake-up call should have been that black voters turned out better than white voters in 2012, and Serious People talked about demographic outreach. But that's all been poo poo and the grand strategy has once again reverted to driving up racist white turnout which has been fairly reliable since 1968. Eventually, it's just not going to work. Because of our strong-president FPTP two-party sytem, you'll see the presidential elections swing first (which we're obviously in the middle of), then statewide elections, and finally congressional and state legislative districts. A massive swing in favor of one party takes years, and when it happens it causes chaos in both parties. I've been twitchy over a party realignment for a decade, and historically we're overdue for one. With our rapid demographic changes, we're as dynamic a political society as we have been since 1908-1912 imo. I'm loving the strong [I] senatorial runs this cycle, just for the sake of political chaos and increased voter awareness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:38
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Hillary is running, and will be President. Nope.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Nope. Do you think the Dem nominee will be Hillary, a Clinton-ally, or neither?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Hillary is running, and will be President. I'm not as confident. Folks said the same thing in 2006/2007 and it didn't turn out well. I'm rooting for the underdog in the race, and would gladly walk turf if Emmanuel endorsed Biden. E: Aliquid posted:Do you think the Dem nominee will be Hillary, a Clinton-ally, or neither? I'd give 50/50 on this
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
McAlister posted:It works for all out groups. Self-hating Jew, self hating gay, self hating minority. Back when left handedness was widely reviled as indicating a sinister nature there were probably self hating left handed people. This is the explanation I needed for Auspol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'd give 50/50 on this Well, there are three choices, Dan
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:Well, there are three choices, Dan Sentimentality is a tool for use with the emotionally weak.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Sentimentality is a tool for use with the emotionally weak. ilu btw, haters gon' hate
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
Lycus posted:Whoa, Roberts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 10:33
|
|
|
I think Roberts is worried about his legacy to some extent, and thus he will allow some batshit things to happen, but will put his foot down when he thinks things are about to go off the right-wing cliff. Although to be fair, we already fell off that cliff in Citizens United or that time Scalia quoted 24 as if Jack Bauer actually existed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:The more cases I see him try, the more I think that John Roberts is, politically, extremely shrewd and calculating, that he's fully aware of the power he wields as Chief Justice, and that he uses it primarily in an attempt to force the Republican Party to stay relevant going into the future. He knows precisely which wedge issues are losing their utility to the party, and he's willing to break with popular party dogma to rule against them it means the Republicans are forced to modernize. I find this... Neeksy posted:I think Roberts is worried about his legacy to some extent, and thus he will allow some batshit things to happen, but will put his foot down when he thinks things are about to go off the right-wing cliff. Although to be fair, we already fell off that cliff in Citizens United or that time Scalia quoted 24 as if Jack Bauer actually existed. ...holds more weight than this. Legacy is a sentimental issue. Neither Roberts, nor Obama, are sentimental individuals.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 10:50
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I find this... I'll take it you gleaned this from the long hours you've spent conversing with each man personally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 10:56
|
|
|
Agents are GO! posted:This, right here. Yup. Thanks to everyone who contributed to it. EDIT; Albinator, eh, whatever. I hope you're not one of those people that hate wearing the same dress. Shageletic fucked around with this message at 12:35 on Oct 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 12:04
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:And I was just reading today about how there is a huge glut of post docs in math and hard sciences who are graduating and can't find jobs. Yesterday on the radio they were talking about the supposed STEM shortage and all the companies complaining that they can't find qualified STEM people to fill their STEM jobs. Halfway through they finally said that, at least regionally here, a full 80% of the vacant STEM positions are actually IT. Nobody's begging for new biology or chemistry or physics or math majors (or postdocs). They want IT professionals with 5 years of experiences and several certs who are willing to work for entry level wages, and then complaining that nobody is applying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
You can always get a degree in accounting. We'll probably stay in demand until capitalism takes it's last breath.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 13:41
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:They want IT professionals with 5 years of experiences and several certs who are willing to work for entry level wages, and then complaining that nobody is applying. Can confirm, as someone who recently conducted a job search as a software engineer and was shown many of these jobs by recruiters who didn't know any better. The market hasn't quite caught up to how lovely IT work/pay is for the amount of qualifications it requires. loquacius fucked around with this message at 13:54 on Oct 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 13:44
|
|
|
I thought that was all just a scam so they could claim there were no U.S citizen applicants and thus allowing them to hire people on Visas from outside the country.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
Radish posted:I thought that was all just a scam so they could claim there were no U.S citizen applicants and thus allowing them to hire people on Visas from outside the country. Well there's that too. But in my opinion, combine the earlier thing someone posted about dividends and buybacks being at an all time high and investment in fixed assets is at an all time low with the "we can't find qualified people" whining and you get a situation where corporations are funneling profits to investors and then demanding that the government use tax dollars to train workers for them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Can confirm. The market hasn't quite caught up to how lovely IT work/pay is for the amount of qualifications it requires. You say that as though that it is a bug, not a feature. Radish posted:I thought that was all just a scam so they could claim there were no U.S citizen applicants and thus allowing them to hire people on Visas from outside the country. That's the idea but honestly, it isn't so much for the pay but more like they can work them like dogs and they can't do a thing about it. They can't exactly quit easily since that requires jumping through hoops or get deported.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
This is a terrible slog of an article written by the most sheltered individual I've ever even heard of. "Oh, you don't really care about anyone who is actually oppressed, you're really just trying to score "Blue Team" Points". "Conservatives aren't really racist, misogynist, creationist, islamophobic, homophobic assholes, they just don't like the "Blue Team" those people are aligned with". "Intolerance of my intolerance is intolerance." 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:This is a terrible slog of an article written by the most sheltered individual I've ever even heard of. "Oh, you don't really care about anyone who is actually oppressed, you're really just trying to score "Blue Team" Points". "Conservatives aren't really racist, misogynist, creationist, islamophobic, homophobic assholes, they just don't like the "Blue Team" those people are aligned with". "Intolerance of my intolerance is intolerance." Funny that he predicted all of those responses and even said "I'm doing the same thing because I'm not criticizing my actual in group (Jews, in this case)".
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Nope. Hillary Clinton will be sworn in as the next President of the United States. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:08
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Hillary Clinton will be sworn in as the next President of the United States. What up 2 year out toxx buddy
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Funny that he predicted all of those responses and even said "I'm doing the same thing because I'm not criticizing my actual in group (Jews, in this case)". Predicting responses doesn't invalidate anything. My "In group" is my goddamn family. I grew up and became an rear end in a top hat of a Republican until about 2006. So yes, I'm aware of what and how they think and I can be embarrassed at the racist, homophobic and worst of all woefully wrong chain letter bullshit that they will believe from just about any source. When it's people you care about saying these things, yes, it does effect you. But your smug "hah ha, take that liberals" bullshit is just that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
Remember that drunken brawl the Palin clan was in? The police reports are out Almost a very weak heartbeat away from nuclear weapons
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:The more cases I see him try, the more I think that John Roberts is, politically, extremely shrewd and calculating, that he's fully aware of the power he wields as Chief Justice, and that he uses it primarily in an attempt to force the Republican Party to stay relevant going into the future. He knows precisely which wedge issues are losing their utility to the party, and he's willing to break with popular party dogma to rule against them it means the Republicans are forced to modernize. I'm with you about halfway in this, my disagreement being "force the Republican Party to stay relevant". What he has done is forced them to avoid populism. Citizen's United destroyed any chance of change with the GOP. Obama destroyed them in small donations in 2008, it's where his funding edge came from. The GOP had nothing like that machine in operation, and was years behind. To make individual donations a force you need lots of individuals, which strips power from the elite. CU blew that out of the water. His rulings since on a number of issues have further reigned in the possibility of mass action having an impact through stripping voting rights and rulings against protestors and organizing tactics. He has kept the GOP from needing to adjust its agenda to meet the wants and needs of most of the electorate, and kept it firmly where it was under Bush.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:But your smug "hah ha, take that liberals" bullshit is just that. I don't think you actually understood the article. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
Finally, an expert weighs in on climate changequote:The "I'm not a scientist" chorus has found a dissenter. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/10/09/3577919/benishek-is-a-scientist/ Shageletic fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Oct 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:Predicting responses doesn't invalidate anything. My "In group" is my goddamn family. I grew up and became an rear end in a top hat of a Republican until about 2006. So yes, I'm aware of what and how they think and I can be embarrassed at the racist, homophobic and worst of all woefully wrong chain letter bullshit that they will believe from just about any source. When it's people you care about saying these things, yes, it does effect you. But your smug "hah ha, take that liberals" bullshit is just that. You are more the exception that proves the rule, though - most people in the "Blue Tribe" do not come from conservative backgrounds or families. There are geographical isolations (e.g., living in a city versus a rural environment) but also social ones such as your choice of church (or lack thereof) or which social circles you choose to permeate. Even in a majority conservative area (like a red state) it's fairly easy to isolate yourself from the vast majority of influence that the other tribe has, at least in local matters. Additionally, your in-group may be your family, and what you feel is indeed what he touches on with confronting the problems of your in-group (blood boiling at the thought, etc), but that doesn't extend to any random member of the "Red Tribe". You said it yourself - you're "embarrassed at the woefully wrong...bullshit" your family says, but if random Joe Conservative says it, you'll openly mock them and call them an idiot (at least as "openly" as the internet allows). This is fine, and in most cases probably what should happen, but it shows that you don't really associate yourself with those sorts of people. The main issue, I think, is the definition of "in-group". You're using it in the "150 people you care about" sense, whereas the author is using it in the "larger social group you identify with" sense. With the latter case in mind, it's clear you identify as being "liberal" in the American sense (i.e., not conservative). It's criticism of this group that provokes a hostile response - the idea that liberals have some tolerance issue (especially relating to class signifiers) is incredibly offensive to the point of you just wanting to shut down the conversation with "intolerance of my intolerance is intolerance" memes. Ultimately, the issue is due to a false dichotomy - "Good" people (i.e., those I identify with) must be entirely good, if they're not then they must be on the Bad Team (this is especially true in modern American liberal thought - The Catholic Church being supportive of the poor and not supportive of Gay Marriage is Bad, and equally so is the neoliberal "Gays are okay but let's make everyone poor" theory). Ultimately what you have to do is confront the issues with your team/tribe/whatever and move beyond it. That's very very hard for a wide variety of reasons, and I don't blame you for not trying, true self criticism is very demeaning, and takes a long time to build off of, especially if you don't have a relevant role model to follow. And I'll be perfectly honest - I have no idea what my in-group (the social class) is but I would probably do what you did if it was actually confronted. computer parts fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Oct 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 15:01
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Finally, an expert weighs in on climate change Using his criteria, anyone holding a BA/BS in the sciences is a scientist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Yup. Thanks to everyone who contributed to it. Nah, I'm good with it if you are. If you're not, let me know, it was kind of cold of me (in my defense, I was quite drunk). The more Biden-themed AVs out there the better, IMO. Forever the VP of my heart.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 15:47
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Remember that drunken brawl the Palin clan was in? The police reports are out That is actually better than anything I imagined.  420DD Butts posted:Using his criteria, anyone holding a BA/BS in the sciences is a scientist. Awesome, I'm a loving scientist!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Finally, an expert weighs in on climate change Why is it always doctors who say dumb poo poo like this? Maybe doctors become politicians more than other science types?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:58 |
|
|
I think their crushing student loans turn them into republicans.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 16:03
|
|
