|
also feel free to either relate the discussion on an entirely new justice system to state-level elections, or gently caress off to a different thread
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:When asked upthread what they meant by "reform" their answer was "fire the racist fuckheads and hire non-lovely people" which is a pretty good if hard to execute plan imo Except that we see people like Doug Jones or Kamala Harris fall pray to the same issues as other prosecutors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:When asked upthread what they meant by "reform" their answer was "fire the racist fuckheads and hire non-lovely people" which is a pretty good if hard to execute plan imo fair enough, post retraced. Trabisnikof posted:Except that we see people like Doug Jones or Kamala Harris fall pray to the same issues as other prosecutors. So what exactly is your argument then? axeil fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:I mean this seemed very straightforward. OK, what the poo poo does it have to do with anything, though how does it contradict what I was saying, that simply saying "a person was a prosecutor" is not an adequate critique
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Alyssa_Milano/status/940646174100541441
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
awesmoe posted:also feel free to either relate the discussion on an entirely new justice system to state-level elections, or gently caress off to a different thread Yeah, I won't post on the topic anymore. Sorry I let somebody drag me into a dumb slapfight
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:nah I feel pretty confident saying gently caress the justice system as a whole. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
This is beautiful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:OK, what the poo poo does it have to do with anything, though That's not what the tweet says. It says pandering to the "moderate repub" is working with the same regressive assholes who voted for Trump, while at the same time expecting the black vote to come out just because the dude is a dem. Let's not pretend "prosecuted church bombers" isn't in every single thing said about the guy, as if he has zero other prosecutorial accomplishments. It's a pretty standard progressive statement she is making, I don't understand why people are so offended by it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
What is this from? I want more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
hanales posted:That's not what the tweet says. It says pandering to the "moderate repub" is working with the same regressive assholes who voted for Trump, while at the same time expecting the black vote to come out just because the dude is a dem. You put "moderate repub" in quotes but I don't see it in the tweet, are we talking about the same tweet? https://twitter.com/elisabeth/status/940606122318278657
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
hanales posted:That's not what the tweet says. It says pandering to the "moderate repub" is working with the same regressive assholes who voted for Trump, while at the same time expecting the black vote to come out just because the dude is a dem. Let's not pretend "prosecuted church bombers" isn't in every single thing said about the guy, as if he has zero other prosecutorial accomplishments. for starters, people think what the actual thing the tweet says is stupid instead of a reinterpretation that you've come up with second, the idea that he "campaigns by appeasing LGBTQ-haters, courting misogynists & racists" is stupid because nobody can think of a single thing he's done that would support that statement. it appears to be aimed at the idea that he would hope to get the votes of republicans. but that's not what "appeasing" means: he's angling to get the votes of republicans by not disqualifying himself and pointing out their candidate did. if he's done any "appeasing", one would expect to have heard about it - but he's not. he hasn't even pandered to republicans by pretending to be pro-life. he's suggesting that regardless of their stupid opinions, they aren't quite stupid enough to vote moore and therefore perhaps they should do the right thing. it's not a "pretty standard progressive statement" it's a stupid thing, and stupidity is not actually a progressive value despite what some dead-enders think. evilweasel fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:What is this from? I want more. I could be wrong but I believe it's from Black Panthers: Vanguard of the Revolution.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
botany posted:prosecutors might be necessary, but adversarial systems are not. How does one achieve a “non-adversarial” criminal justice system? Most people don’t like getting caught for commtting crimes, admitting that they did them, or going to jail. There is plenty of room for reform in the justice system and our country’s overall criminal and civil legal setup, but given some of the responses to evilweasel’s points, I wonder if some of you guys have really thought this through.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
There has been a pretty rich tapestry of resume entries, policy proposals, and broad issue stances made by the Jones campaign and by Jones himself. The nature of the American political media, and of this Alabama-focused campaign, ensures that even generally well informed people like the ones in this thread are very unlikely to see most of that, and will instead see mostly the high points and big lines from each campaign. From Moore this has been a sort of gargling cackle from the blackest pit of hell seasoned with the screams of anyone who isn't exactly like Roy Moore. From Jones this has been prosecuted the KKK, good guy, stands up for civil rights, not an embarrassment. But there's a lot more to it than that, and not just in the "lol, look at my website" sense. Also there's no reason to dump the opinions of Twitter randos here, not least because Twitter is a trash fire of a medium with no way to meaningfully dissect questions like "how should the Democratic Party seek to serve the interested of underserved groups like people of color without pandering, and while also winning elections" in a way that doesn't strip out all nuance in favor of the most confrontational possible approach. Funny jokes and turnout anecdotes are fun though! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:for starters, people think what the actual thing the tweet says is stupid instead of a reinterpretation that you've come up with This is the bullshit hillary "anything but trump" stuff. And feel free to ignore the "Expect black people to vote dem" part which is also correct. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vLz9xs7af0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxesolipklc And believing that the dems don't care about black people is factual, not stupid. Because they don't give a poo poo about black people beyond a voting block.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:How does one achieve a “non-adversarial” criminal justice system? Most people don’t like getting caught for commtting crimes, admitting that they did them, or going to jail. yeah man it's definitely me who hasn't thought this through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisitorial_system
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:How does one achieve a “non-adversarial” criminal justice system? Most people don’t like getting caught for commtting crimes, admitting that they did them, or going to jail. Other countries have a non-adversarial system. Often this means the judge and the prosecutor roles are combined into someone who is tasked with determining the truth using the power of the court. Personally, I wouldn't trust America with a system like that...for now at least.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
What time do the AL polls close? 9 est?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:How does one achieve a “non-adversarial” criminal justice system? Most people don’t like getting caught for commtting crimes, admitting that they did them, or going to jail. he is referencing an inquisitorial system, where the judge also acts as an active factfinder (questions witnesses, orders searches). except the most prominent nation with an inquisitorial legal system is france which also has a prosecutor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:What time do the AL polls close? 9 est? 8 eastern for the majority of the state I believe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
hanales posted:This is the bullshit hillary "anything but trump" stuff. And feel free to ignore the "Expect black people to vote dem" part which is also correct. you appear to be an irredeemable moron, but here goes: the criticism that you appear to be referencing was of the hillary campaign and the criticism of their outreach of "better than trump because trump is bad" was ineffective, not pandering. it is completely irrelevant to an argument over if you should or should not vote for doug jones, merely an argument over what the most effective way to get people to vote is so good work, man who can definitely read and definitely has thoughts worth sharing
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
botany posted:yeah man it's definitely me who hasn't thought this through I know what an inquisitorial system is. What I was hoping for was a more detailed explanation of how that system would be fairer than what the US has now and how you would make sure that happened. Since you disn’t write more than a Wiki link, I guess I’m supposed to conclude that you think having American judges get more involved in both the prosecution of crimes and the overseeing of the adjudication process is going to lead to fairer outcomes. My issue with that is that you would likely have to change how you select the judges in this country because judicial bais is more likely to come through in this set-up. If you still have electsd judges who need to act tough on crime and appeal to racist voters with high conviction rates and tough sentences, you may be in for an unpleasant surprise on what happens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:I know what an inquisitorial system is. What I was hoping for was a more detailed explanation of how that system would be fairer than what the US has now and how you would make sure that happened. Since you disn’t write more than a Wiki link, I guess I’m supposed to conclude that you think having American judges get more involved in both the prosecution of crimes and the overseeing of the adjudication process is going to lead to fairer outcomes. this is going to blow your mind, but: stop electing judges. model the whole system after one of the foreign justice system that work better. also this is a massive derail that i'm done with now. if you want to make a thread talking about justice systems i'm all for it though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:you appear to be an irredeemable moron, but here goes: the criticism that you appear to be referencing was of the hillary campaign and the criticism of their outreach of "better than trump because trump is bad" was ineffective, not pandering. it is completely irrelevant to an argument over if you should or should not vote for doug jones, merely an argument over what the most effective way to get people to vote is Ok you condescending dickhead, that criticism is the same no matter who it applies to, do you understand? Those were doug jones ads vs. a trumpist candidate? You get that right? It didn't work last time, and instead of being a strong rebuke of republican ideals it's "I just can't stomach voting for this particular guy". I get why they run a non-progressive person in Alabama, because it's Alabama. And you are still ignoring the entire point of the tweet, which was "dems expect black people to vote for white guy because he once did something not terrible to black people".
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
botany posted:this is going to blow your mind, but: stop electing judges. model the whole system after one of the foreign justice system that work better. also this is a massive derail that i'm done with now. if you want to make a thread talking about justice systems i'm all for it though. My skull is still intact. I will read up on whether criminal law is less racist in France, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Polls have not been bearing out that there is a statistically relevant group of people mad at Jones for the reasons Twitter person is mad at Jones in Alabama. Dem turnout looks high so far, but we don't and can't know if it'll be enough until hours from now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
Quorum posted:Polls have not been bearing out that there is a statistically relevant group of people mad at Jones for the reasons Twitter person is mad at Jones in Alabama. Dem turnout looks high so far, but we don't and can't know if it'll be enough until hours from now. Are we seeing anything about Republican turnout it would be nice to hear that R areas are down, all I've seen is reports that Dem areas are up
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Are we seeing anything about Republican turnout Regular Nintendo posted:the weather is said to favor moore today
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
No results yet obviously but the NYT tracker is up. https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/alabama-senate-special-election-roy-moore-doug-jones
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
hanales posted:No results yet obviously but the NYT tracker is up. That needle gives me PTSD
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
axeil posted:That needle gives me PTSD It was a bad night for all of us, friend.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
hanales posted:No results yet obviously but the NYT tracker is up. Canceling my gym plans
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
hanales posted:No results yet obviously but the NYT tracker is up. God help Doug Jones and God help us all
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Exit poll data is not perfect, but a bright spot for Moore is that 45% think allegations against him are false. A potential bright spot for Jones is that his favorability is 49-49, which is basically on par with Trump who is at 48-48.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:Exit poll data is not perfect, but a bright spot for Moore is that 45% think allegations against him are false. A potential bright spot for Jones is that his favorability is 49-49, which is basically on par with Trump who is at 48-48. Well those are bad. I think Moore's gonna win 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
axeil posted:Well those are bad. Those aren't even bad
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
Do we have an idea of whether or not voters will consider Jones' role in "The Shape of Water" when they vote?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
Looking at the exit report and I'm seeing something surprising: https://twitter.com/senatorshoshana/status/940602614533804033 edit: in actual news, I just heard the electorate was 30% black. Is that good or bad for Alabama? https://twitter.com/FOX6Hardison/status/940711042346356741
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
axeil posted:edit: in actual news, I just heard the electorate was 30% black. Is that good or bad for Alabama? if that's accurate that's like crazy good, I was seeing analysis saying they'd be lucky to get 28%.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:45
|
|
