|
lozzle posted:Okay fine, but what is your excuse for Jesse Ventura?
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:I read somewhere that it was only the 2000 election that "red state" and "blue state" became a thing, right? Like, they even used to alternate red and blue for republican and democrat, but there was a cultural meme about it after the 2000 election and so things stuck they were that time? it was more that the election maps were shown all the time during the florida recount process as a sort of "state of the race" snapshot to the point where commentators started talking about red states and blue states that the name ended up sticking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
I want Van Jones to get his own show on CNN with Glenn Beck as his co-host, like a Parker/Spitzer bad idea shitshow. Just because Van Jones is awesome, and him being on national television directly across a debate table from Glenn Beck would be Beck's own personal living hell given his epic freakouts over Jones while he was on Fox.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
TheGreatGnocchi posted:Not trying to derail this thread about the 2016 election, and I apologize if this isn't appropriate. But I was just looking back at the 1992 election with Clinton vs Bush. I am amazed that WV, KY, and TN went blue, but VA, FL, and NC all went red. What the hell changed in the demographics in the past 20 years that made the former become solid GOP and the latter become leaning Dem or toss ups? For most of the South and Appalachia, it isn't demographics changing as much as a single voting bloc changing - from 1932 to about 2000, white blue collar workers were generally staunch Democrats who saw the party as protecting their jobs through support to unions and support for protectionist policies. The Southern Strategy of Nixon and Reagan started to push against that, convincing white blue collar workers to identify more with a cultural identity than an economic one; a rift pulled apart by Clinton in the 1990's when he steered the Democrats away from unions and protectionism (thus dropping the economic benefits for blue collar whites) while embracing minorities (thus opposing the cultural identity blue collar whites had bought into). The 2000s saw this bloc become pretty much entirely Republican, which is why MO and KY are no longer swing states but GOP strongholds, and WV has completely flipped from being one of the most liberal states (voting for Carter in 1980 and Dukakis in 1988) to one of the most conservative. This is also why PA remains a GOP Holy Grail - they keep believing that the state will fall to those same pressures and flip any day now. For VA, NC, and FL, it is a demographic shift - VA and NC did great in the tech boom and attracted a lot of new residents who overwhelmingly brought liberal votes to what had previously been heavily blue-collar/farm states. Likewise, Florida brought in enough retirees and Latinxs to migrate into being a swing state.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
If Texas flips blue I doubt we'll have another Republican president in our lifetimes, which will contribute to the GOP becoming regional /splitting apart and disintegrating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:24
|
|
|
It's mostly just we were going to need a "party = color" system anyway really soon because as technology advanced, so did info saturation. If everybody and their mom has map predictions on their LiveJournal a standardized color code will develop, and the 2000 one was just the most recent and still QUITE FRESH in people's minds well into 2006
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:24
|
|
|
Kulkasha posted:I heard a rumor that Glen Beck & the Mormonati would attempt a Mittens spoiler run, forcing the presidential decision to go to Congress.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:24
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Yeah it's really fascinating that landslides are no longer common, and also that most people don't realise that's the case. I consider myself pretty politically aware but I think I only saw the Reagan maps during the 2012 election and was shocked by them. Or that if you go back to 1976 the South was all Democratic; I knew it used to be, but I didn't realise it was that recent. Yeah, the lack of landslides is largely due to the parties having done a really good job of sorting themselves into very distinct buckets and instilling a lot of discipline, so now if you want any chance of conservative policies being enacted, you HAVE to vote for whatever dumbass the GOP is selling. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, and especially before the Southern Strategy, you could vote for someone to be President because they were competent and assume that some policies you wanted would still happen - Reagan raising taxes and working for disarmament, Nixon standing up the EPA, etc. - because each party had people in it from all different sides on an issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:25
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:Likewise, Florida brought in enough retirees and Latinxs to migrate into being a swing state.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:27
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:This is a sickening butchering of the Spanish language. There is no need to be upset
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:28
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:This is a sickening butchering of the Spanish language. For the love of god, please use Latina or Latino, I don't care which. A few friends of mine run a monthly comedy show called Latinx. I think the word's on a steady rise. Might be easiest to get used to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/BuzzFeed/status/785321621741592576 The hoobastank one was fake but this one's close enough. Breitstreet boys?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/785311871960227840 I didn't watch the debate because I was tired and went to bed. This seems to sum things up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:34
|
|
|
Hydrocodone posted:A few friends of mine run a monthly comedy show called Latinx. I think the word's on a steady rise. Might be easiest to get used to it. Why not Latin@, though?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
Hydrocodone posted:A few friends of mine run a monthly comedy show called Latinx. I think the word's on a steady rise. Might be easiest to get used to it. I think that 425 million Spanish speakers will not agree.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:37
|
|
|
meristem posted:Why not Latin@, though? Not sure! I'd not heard latinx before their show began and I only saw latin@ after that. And I don't really know the implications of either term intimately. edit VVVV: I'll try to remember to ask next time I see them. Charlz Guybon posted:I think that 425 million Spanish speakers will not agree. Is that all of them worldwide? Because... Well, do they all agree on the rest of Spanish at this point? I mean, latinx wouldn't make the first rift in the group, right? Hydrocodone fucked around with this message at 10:51 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
Hydrocodone posted:Is that all of them worldwide? Because... Well, do they all agree on the rest of Spanish at this point? I mean, latinx wouldn't make the first rift in the group, right? I'm not sure all Spanish speakers even agree on the second person plural these days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:47
|
|
|
If you talk about "grabbing women by the pussy", you can NOT host the Today Show any longer... but hey, you can still run for President of the United States and millions of people will vote for you. It's the Twilight loving Zone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:48
|
|
|
Hydrocodone posted:Not sure! I'd not heard latinx before their show began and I only saw latin@ after that. And I don't really know the implications of either term intimately.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
meristem posted:Could you ask them? I started learning (European) Spanish back in... 2006, maybe? And the '@' thing was already pretty routine then on the Internet. Just as a signifier of people when gender wasn't important. So, you'd also write chic@ for 'guy or gal' and so on. The Latinx thing is new to me. Latinx is the choice of at least one Hispanic group at my university. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:00
|
|
|
On a different topic, I love how the Clinton thing that's been noted here about keeping your opponent behind you on the camera, so they get caught at all times while you're talking, appears to have worked extremely well; I've seen multiple articles mentioning Trump "lurking" behind Hillary, with at least two or three about that alone. It's just one more thing on top of the night of awful things for him, but it looks so bad, in both a metaphorical and very literal sense. It's fantastic. His refusal to sit down only magnified things, too.
Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 11:04 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:01
|
|
|
Also he totally hosed that chair.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:02
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:George P. endorsed him IIRC, so he's been tainted ISIS isnt even goddamn in Aleppo 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:05
|
|
|
Mulva posted:Also he totally hosed that chair. USPol Oct: The Vindication of Prester Jane By the Chairfucker Donald Trump
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:On a different topic, I love how the Clinton thing that's been noted here about keeping your opponent behind you on the camera, so they get caught at all times while you're talking, appears to have worked extremely well; I've seen multiple articles mentioning Trump "lurking" behind Hillary, with at least two or three about that alone. It's just one more thing on top of the night of awful things for him, but it looks so bad, in both a metaphorical and very literal sense. It's fantastic. It looks bad because he squints or completely closes his eyes. Looks like a deranged man sleeping/hibernating onstage. Probably tired cause of the frantic 48 hours he's had, wit the tape and all. And to think he could've been home watching Hillary and Zodiac Killer debating if he wasn't such a dumbass.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:I think that 425 million Spanish speakers will not agree. Why would we ask them? I'm pretty sure latinx is an English word.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:On a different topic, I love how the Clinton thing that's been noted here about keeping your opponent behind you on the camera, so they get caught at all times while you're talking, appears to have worked extremely well; I've seen multiple articles mentioning Trump "lurking" behind Hillary, with at least two or three about that alone. It's just one more thing on top of the night of awful things for him, but it looks so bad, in both a metaphorical and very literal sense. It's fantastic. I'm not sure I believe it was intentional. They had lots of cameras that they were swapping to and fro seemingly at random (one of which would do a super close up of Clinton before cutting out) so I doubt it was possible to be 100% certain Trump would be at an awkward angle. the reason he was so reliably awkwardly positioned compared to Clinton was because he just straight up was. The first question was the worst because he made sure to loom over her like 5 feet away and you can see him moving with her on the different angles, like he was going to make sure there wasn't any funny business and that she didn't have the audacity of ignoring him. Then of course there was the chair loving which nobody would blame him for, but the sticking the mic almost in his mouth and sniffing a lot, and the last 30 minutes were him pacing around like a goddamn crackhead Dude was a mess, and when he was speaking he jabbed is fingers at her to punctuate calling her the devil and having a tremendous amount of hate in her heart, which didn't help. GreyjoyBastard posted:ISIS isnt even goddamn in Aleppo Ding ding ding! He literally said Assad and Putin are doing a great job bombing civilians but he made sure to call them ISIS because all Muslims are ISIS terrorists to him, a point he made quite clear in his response to the Islamophobia uestion
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
"latinx" looks like the name of a lovely nu metal band.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:11
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:I'm not sure I believe it was intentional. They had lots of cameras that they were swapping to and fro seemingly at random (one of which would do a super close up of Clinton before cutting out) so I doubt it was possible to be 100% certain Trump would be at an awkward angle. Oh yeah, his jackassery definitely magnified it. If he had just stayed in his chair he'd have come off better, but his own dickery and unprofessionalism combined with her probably keeping him in the background deliberately (people have mentioned it's a trick her husband used as well, and I think she's clever enough to do something like that too) just made him look awful at almost all times. It magnified his already-terrible appearance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:11
|
|
|
Also @ and x both work at the end of Latin- but the latter is used far more frequently. It's tough to be objective because the Pulse shooting took place on Latinx night so that word had a couple days of saturation. X also has the advantage of pulling double duty as a variable in most peoples minds, whereas @ makes you wonder where the rest of the e-mail address went edit - Trump is a MESS 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:11
|
|
|
I think he was "loving" the chair cause his back was hurting (my back starts hurting when I stand for long periods of time and I'm not a 70 year old possibly obese man) and he couldn't sit for fear of looking like he doesn't have STA-MI-NA. Possibly why he looked "orgasmic", it relieved the pain. Or he was just hosed up on something (himself probably).
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:12
|
|
|
Avshalom posted:he shall be reborn in time as a small featureless skin cube No one else seems to say it but I liked your efforts, man.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:12
|
|
|
Barbe Rouge posted:I think he was "loving" the chair cause his back was hurting (my back starts hurting when I stand for long periods of time and I'm not a 70 year old possibly obese man) and he couldn't sit for fear of looking like he doesn't have STA-MI-NA. Possibly why he looked "orgasmic", it relieved the pain. UHHH HE'S NOT OBESE OKAY HIS BMI IS 29.8
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:14
|
|
|
Latinx is poo poo because the 90s happened and nothing cool ends in x because of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
Mulva posted:Also he totally hosed that chair. You call all Mexicans rapists, druglords and criminals and nobody bats an eye. You say all Muslims should be thrown out of the country and nothing. You gently caress ONE chair...
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
Where can I get no-bullshit factual information about the allegations that have been made against Bill Clinton over the years? I was born in '85 so I remember a bit but not much. Are they all lying? I take rape accusations pretty seriously but feel like the only information out there about this stuff comes from total cranks. That of course is pretty telling but I'd like to learn more about who these people are and what their situation/story is. I know Hitchens liked to call him a rapist but he was also aggressively and stubbornly wrong about more than a few things. It's near-irrelevant as he's not running for president and most of the people who are voting know all about this stuff. Really there's not much Trump can do to win over new voters, yeah? Maybe a terror attack would bump him a bit? But yeah the Trump candidacy and his behavior is absolutely wonderful and the Republicans won't win another national election for a generation. Now the democrats will win the white house and probably senate and maybe the house?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:Next time somebody wants to take us to task over Bachman managing to hold onto one lovely gerrymandered district for years just remember we told the Gipper to gently caress himself wheb no one else would. Minnesota almost voted for Reagan; Mondale only won by around 4000 votes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:25
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:32
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:and WV has completely flipped from being one of the most liberal states (voting for Carter in 1980 and Dukakis in 1988) to one of the most conservative. WV was reliably Democratic but I wouldn't say that it was liberal
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
Avian Pneumonia posted:Where can I get no-bullshit factual information about the allegations that have been made against Bill Clinton over the years? You basically can't. It boils down to a he said she said with various accusers and a just absolutely insane amount of partisan interference. He had sex while president with women who were not his wife. He may have said lewd things to others, but nothing on tape. I doubt he raped anyone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:37
|
|
