|
anthonypants posted:Free speech is good, writes the UW president, in a defense of an upcoming speech by a wildly unpopular fascist shitstain "Nonetheless, the right to free speech and expression is broad and allows for speech that is offensive and that most of us would consider disrespectful, and even sexist or racist. As a public university committed to the free exchange of ideas and free expression, we are obligated to uphold this right. We have reviewed this event with the State Attorney General’s office and there are not, at this time, sufficient grounds to ban him from speaking on our campus, although we continue to monitor what is going on as he speaks elsewhere." This seems like a good explanation
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 18:07 |
|
|
It's funny people complain about ec voters not picking clinton, when politicians breaking campaign pledges is such a regular occurrence we joke about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Seems like it would be more productive to let him speak and make your counter protest a bigger event than his speech. Basically a large scale version of this: https://mobile.twitter.com/paigebrittany/status/809563991315980289
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:Seems like it would be more productive to let him speak and make your counter protest a bigger event than his speech. Basically a large scale version of this:
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
What do you call a speech that no one listens to?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:What do you call a speech that no one listens to?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:What do you call a speech that no one listens to? There's a good joke here but I can't quite put my finger on it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
I set it up for you. Just do it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
The best I can come up with is 'The Response to the State of the Union' but that's not very funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
You are postal-working... No that's not it either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
In college they called it a lecture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:In college they called it a lecture. THERE WE GO! WE HAVE THE JOKE! Good job Relevant Tangent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
For twelve years, you have been asking: What do you call a speech that no one listens to? This is a speech that no one listens to. I am the man who loves his life. I am the man who does not sacrifice his love or his values. I am the man who has deprived you of victims and thus has destroyed your world, and if you wish to know why you are perishing -- you who dread knowledge -- I am the man who will now tell you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
apply rotten produce to Milo's face wherever he appears imo
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 00:20
|
|
precious
|
anthonypants posted:For twelve years, you have been asking: What do you call a speech that no one listens to? This is a speech that no one listens to. I am the man who loves his life. I am the man who does not sacrifice his love or his values. I am the man who has deprived you of victims and thus has destroyed your world, and if you wish to know why you are perishing -- you who dread knowledge -- I am the man who will now tell you. Ah darn I was just gonna say that
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
gently caress SNEEP posted:Ah darn I was just gonna say that
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/registerguard/status/811650666120630272 Good
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:What do you call a speech that no one listens to?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
For us old people who still watch tv sometimes, NWCN is being taken off the air January 6th.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 08:41
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:For us old people who still watch tv sometimes, NWCN is being taken off the air January 6th. What will the deli in my office building play now????
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
They had the best system of showing school snow closures, iirc. RIP snow
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
Whitefish, Montana has become an epicenter of a battle between neonazis and...the rest of us: http://missoulian.com/news/state-an...cda3a6ef9b.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
glowing-fish posted:Whitefish, Montana has become an epicenter of a battle between neonazis and...the rest of us: Is Montana trying to supplant Idaho as the #1 neo-Nazi state?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
CaptainSarcastic posted:Is Montana trying to supplant Idaho as the #1 neo-Nazi state? Montana is trying to do no such thing. Richard Spencer wasn't born in Montana. He doesn't mainly live in Montana. He lives in Northern Virginia. } Even with the neo-nazi takeover of Idaho, that was people coming in from outside. It wasn't really fueled by local people. Which reminds me...
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
Kind of Pacific Northwest related, and especially Western related: One thing I've been taking apart since the election is the narrative that Donald Trump's victory was about "rural" people against the "coastal elites". Looking through a lot of maps, and a lot of data, it seems to be a more involved story. One thing I decided to look at was how Trump performed versus Romney. Not his margin with Hillary Clinton, which was effected in placed by people going to third party candidates. (In Oregon, Clinton had a smaller margin over Trump than Obama had over Romney, even though Romney had a higher percentage of the vote than Trump.) I made a color coded map: tealish for areas where Romney outperformed Trump and orange (get it?) for areas where Trump outperformed Romney. Its a pretty telling map:  The upshot of this is that Trump outperformed Romney in the East, and Romney outperformed Trump in the West. Even though Idaho is still one of the most conservative states in the nation, the movement there was away from Trump. In Rhode Island, one of the most liberal, the movement was towards Trump. Partisan is still very powerful, but there does seem to be some type of underlying cultural attitudes that effected the election. Pretty uniformly in the West, Trump seems to be less popular than Romney. Probably a lot of this has to do with Mormon population, but I don't think all of it does. I am going to make another map like this specifically for Oregon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
glowing-fish posted:Kind of Pacific Northwest related, and especially Western related:
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
I'm starting to think that his name and charts are just a brilliant av+post troll combo
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 09:05
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:I'm starting to think that his name and charts are just a brilliant av+post troll combo What do you dislike about them? Are you tired of talking about the election? Do you think my selection of data is arbitrary? Do you think the graphic design is bad (a fair point!)? Do you think its aspergery how much I like charts and graphs? or... Do you have an ideological explanation for this election that isn't supported by data? Because there are a lot of people who seem to think that Trump's success is due to Poor Rural Whites, and then its kind of hard to explain why he did better than Romney in Connecticut. Although for the Oregon map, the data actually supports that theory. Romney did better than Trump in rich suburbs, but Trump did better in traditional logging/fishing areas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
glowing-fish posted:What do you dislike about them? Dude you are right now conflating your county map where you use the intimate yet uncited knowledge of every area's history and culture within Oregon to a map where you compare the entire country against itself and use a state's name as a label like a trite teenager trying to say "Its The Current Year, Don't Be X". You're really really bad at this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Gerund posted:Dude you are right now conflating your county map where you use the intimate yet uncited knowledge of every area's history and culture within Oregon to a map where you compare the entire country against itself and use a state's name as a label like a trite teenager trying to say "Its The Current Year, Don't Be X". What is it I am bad at? I don't even know what you think it is that I am bad at. Like, do you think I am bad at choosing the right data, at presenting the data, or at drawing conclusions? I haven't drawn many conclusions from this map so far, other than that Trump did generally better than Romney in the East, and vice-versa.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
You're using a microscope to see "same as it ever was" .
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Shifty Nipples posted:You're using a microscope to see "same as it ever was" . Could you be more clear? Is this your way of saying I am being too detail oriented at looking at specific numbers and slight shifts, when I should be looking at a larger narrative?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
The story isn't involved, folks capable of a line of thought I would consider delusional are capable of voting for donald trump.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
Shifty Nipples posted:The story isn't involved, folks capable of a line of thought I would consider delusional are capable of voting for donald trump. Ah, so you don't like my map because it tried to provide a more detailed explanation and pattern to voting than "folks capable of a line of thought I would consider delusional are capable of voting for donald trump." ?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
Why did this happen? Because there are a lot of stupid people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Shifty Nipples posted:Why did this happen? Because there are a lot of stupid people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moNHfeBJ81I&hd=1
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:This is really the best excuse because it can mean people who didn't vote the way you wanted, people who didn't vote at all, or the Hillary Clinton campaign team. Exactly
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
I wonder how that tracks Clinton's unfortunate allocations of campaign resources.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
glowing-fish posted:What do you dislike about them? For what it's worth, I've been finding your work interesting. I think the most reasonable criticism that's been raised here is just that what you're identifying may not be distinguishable from noise, but I don't know the data and I only know statistics well enough to know I can't figure that analysis myself.  By the wall, all: thanks for the ISP tips earlier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 18:07 |
|
|
Uh, I think you'll find that attempting to compile data in an effort to find some solid ground on which to base one's narrative understanding of the election results is 110% evil and an example of the only real bigotry in the entire universe: that of people who are comfortable extracting information from data vs people who are not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:08
|
|
