|
haveblue posted:My congratulations to President Noem Hey she can't even reliably kill a goat from point blank, and the goat can't even shoot back
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 22:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 04:10 |
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:A lot will depend on where Aslobrooks stands on Israel, and whether AIPAC sees a dog in this fight, as well as the extent to which Democrats can brand Hogan as MAGA-adjacent. (eta: both per the wapo story) Well no, Aslobrook's stance on israel, aipac, etc none of these things are at all likely to matter in a state with a 20+ Partisan lean. The Republican candidate can literally be pro-Communism and still win his race in a deep enough red state with a similar partisan lean, because the issues for the most part don't matter. Hogan's approval rating as its been said to you before literally doesn't matter, its absolutely not going to at all be a close race. The polling is already seems to be indicating that Hogan stands no chance, this isn't one of those situations where more polling is going to suddenly reveal Hogan has a shot; that's just implausible and we shouldn't pretend at this point that it is. Like that's the thing people were trying to tell you back a couple of months ago, you were just wrong in your interpretation of those polls; they weren't ultimately of any value. Those polls were obviously nonsense, and the recent polling ended up proving that fact; it isn't that "Dems are doing better", the Dems were always going to win Maryland and the polling wasn't at the time reflecting the actual likely on the ground reality of the state.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 22:36
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:There was that story about someone challenging Lincoln to a duel, he chose swords as the weapon, then the other guy realized Lincoln's tall rear end armed with a sword would get him hilariously killed and backed out Roll under slash and thrust. Skill issue imo.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 22:37
|
|
|
Gordon Wood was a speaker at my university on the topic of Lincoln and told that story. He said that Lincoln chose wood axes, which may be the most metal story of all time.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 22:40
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:Gordon Wood was a speaker at my university on the topic of Lincoln and told that story. He said that Lincoln chose wood axes, which may be the most metal story of all time. That sounds more like the mythology of Lincoln. Dude even fought vampires with a wood axe.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 22:45
|
|
|
Yeah, the version I read was that Lincoln really didn't want a duel but couldn't find a way to avoid it without looking like a coward under the dumbassed code of honor. As the one who was challenged, he had choice of weapon and selected broadswords. When they got to the site Lincoln took his sword and casually lopped off a tree branch like 13 feet off the ground. This had— as you observed— the intended effect of immediately defusing the whole situation. Lincoln was reportedly deeply embarrassed about the whole thing. A White House caller once asked him about it and he took him into a separate room and said "never, ever mention this again". E: here's the Lincoln Presidential Library piece about it, including a detail I didn't know: Lincoln tried to make the other man into a Major General during the war after he, a Unionist Democrat, was wounded. https://presidentlincoln.illinois.gov/Blog/Posts/141/Abraham-Lincoln/2021/8/Lincolns-avoided-duel/blog-post/ Farchanter fucked around with this message at 23:01 on May 17, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 22:54
|
|
|
There's a dichotomy there: Jackson was famous for getting into duels and was such a crazy bastard. Lincoln is famous for the one duel that he defused because he would obviously win as a half giant.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 22:58
|
|
|
Morrow posted:There's a dichotomy there: Jackson was famous for getting into duels and was such a crazy bastard. Lincoln is famous for the one duel that he defused because he would obviously win as a half giant. Clearly he should have defused the US civil war by challenging all confederate leaders to personal duels
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 23:02
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:There was that story about someone challenging Lincoln to a duel, he chose swords as the weapon, then the other guy realized Lincoln's tall rear end armed with a sword would get him hilariously killed and backed out I would buy the DLC and play the hell out of this boss fight.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 23:09
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Clearly he should have defused the US civil war by challenging all confederate leaders to personal duels Confederates were notorious for wimping out of challenges when their bluff was called.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 23:14
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Well no, Aslobrook's stance on israel, aipac, etc none of these things are at all likely to matter in a state with a 20+ Partisan lean. The Republican candidate can literally be pro-Communism and still win his race in a deep enough red state with a similar partisan lean, because the issues for the most part don't matter. Hogan's approval rating as its been said to you before literally doesn't matter, its absolutely not going to at all be a close race. This is the g.e. polling for the Maryland Senate race over the last six months:  As you can see, the trend is in the Democrats' favor at this point but that wasn't always the case--even among the same pollsters, like Emerson. The recent polling is showing a trend in favor of Democrats (but not an absolute), as future polling will continue to show trends. I said that I think the Democrats will likely win but that Hogan's approvals among Democrats & his stance on Israel could affect it--opinions validated by and taken from the people who know better than me via the WaPo piece I posted earlier today. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 23:35 on May 17, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 23:27
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:This is the g.e. polling for the Maryland Senate race over the last six months: But the polls where it wasn't the case was from before there was a clear Dem candidate, which essentially given the historical data makes those polls a clear outlier; this was pointed out to you then; which means that there isn't really a trend line and you're trying to extrapolate data that isn't appropriate to extrapolate. I'm not misrepresenting your posting; this was by you: Willa Rogers posted:Forget about Democrats taking GOP Senate seats; the real nail-biters will be Dem incumbents and open seats: This was a fairly absurd thing to state at the time, as Xombie basically says: Xombie posted:This is just the numbers you posted the other day, and the same problems with it remain. Hogan is still winning on name recognition ahead of the Democratic primary. "Independent-minded" helps someone running for governor, but doesn't help when he might hand power in the Senate to the GOP just by having "R" next to his name. Hogan has only won elections in non-presidential election years and he'd have to split off Biden voters by double digits. For context this was your follow up post: Willa Rogers posted:I posted the Baltimore Sun story today bc it was a deep dive into the numbers; all I posted the other day were the margins by which Hogan was winning. Posters like Xombie pointed out the flaws with what you were saying, and you absolutely stated that you thought that not only that he would win, or might win, that he was in your words a shoe in to win, pointing to these polls and prior approval ratings despite posters like Xombie explaining why this was a dubious thing to assume. So you were definitely wrong, and I'm being quite specific and what I'm pushing back against. There's frankly going to be cases where the polling isn't likely to be capturing the realities of the race, and that there might not be use in assuming that there's a any kind of trend of attitudes over time being at all accurately reflected in that data.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 23:45
|
|
|
I've changed my mind over the last month because of recent polling & Alsobrooks' win and I no longer believe Hogan's a lock.  I pretty much agree with the views represented across the WaPo piece, which I thought was well-balanced and looked at the race from all angles.See, that's the thing about polls: They change over time, just like people's opinions. edit: And now that there's a Democratic nominee, it'll be all the more interesting to see what the trends will be, particularly among larger samples and particularly among likely voters. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 00:02 on May 18, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 23:48
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I've changed my mind over the last month because of recent polling & Alsobrooks' win and I no longer believe Hogan's a lock. Then maybe say that instead of accusing people of misrepresenting you? 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:01
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:Then maybe say that instead of accusing people of misrepresenting you? My posts earlier today represented my views just fine compared to posts I made a month ago. Especially this one: quote:A lot will depend on where Aslobrooks stands on Israel, and whether AIPAC sees a dog in this fight, as well as the extent to which Democrats can brand Hogan as MAGA-adjacent. (eta: both per the wapo story)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:04
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I've changed my mind over the last month because of recent polling & Alsobrooks' win and I no longer believe Hogan's a lock. But it wasn't to be clear, a matter of polls "changing over time", it wasn't the case that the race was actually in Hogan's favour at the time; the race didn't tighten or shift to favor the Dems, the fundamentals of the state was that the Dem candidate was always favoured to win. There were clear warning signs about the data you were presenting. I think similarly you're off base when you say things like: quote:What has changed in the state to turn it from true-blue to vivid purple this cycle? Any Minnesotans who can explain this? And when you say things like that it is at I think contradictory purposes to your statements about polls having utility because of trends or tracking voter sentiment overtime, because its always these snapshots of recent polls where you make these sort of statements. If there had been a consistent only merely +2 Biden lead in Minesota for the past six months, maybe that would in that context make sense to wonder if Minesota has in fact turned purple, but no, Biden has a +8 poll back in March. I don't think Minesota went from a "true blue" to "vivid purple" state in 2ish months; a state which Biden won by +8; if the next poll released goes back to another +8 that isn't hypothetically "polls changing over time", its just a poll that's more likely to be accurate in capturing conditions on the ground. Willa Rogers posted:My posts earlier today represented my views just fine compared to posts I made a month ago. See what I said above, the issue isn't posting polls with the understanding that they aren't likely to be accurate at any given point in time, and just trying to make sense of how demos might be shifting; its that you often pair them with a framing that's not backed up when the data and context is scrutinized. Specifically the line "(and better than they were doing a couple months ago)" which I specifically pointed out when I said ' it isn't that "Dems are doing better"'.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:12
|
|
|
Farchanter posted:Yeah, the version I read was that Lincoln really didn't want a duel but couldn't find a way to avoid it without looking like a coward under the dumbassed code of honor. The other fun one that I enjoyed reading about is after Charles Sumner's caning, Anson Burlingame baited Preston Brooks into either being embarrassed and then assassinated in a duel or turning it down and being shamed as a coward: quote:Not knowing when to leave well enough alone, Brooks then proceeded to challenge Burlingame to a duel. Burlingame not only expected to be challenged, but he had hoped that Brooks would take the bait. And so he happily accepted, much to Brook’s surprise. https://kellyandgeoff.com/2019/05/30/the-caning-of-charles-sumner-and-the-response-by-anson-burlingame/ The best best dueling stories don't involve actually dueling, IMO.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:22
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Well no, Aslobrook's stance on israel, aipac, etc none of these things are at all likely to matter in a state with a 20+ Partisan lean. The Republican candidate can literally be pro-Communism and still win his race in a deep enough red state with a similar partisan lean, because the issues for the most part don't matter. Hogan's approval rating as its been said to you before literally doesn't matter, its absolutely not going to at all be a close race. I'm not gonna say that Hogan is going to win or even likely to win, or that Alsobrooks isn't in the lead. But it's not unprecedented for a popular state figure to wildly outperform the performance expected by someone from their party. Manchin being probably the most notable example. In 2018, Manchin won by about 3 percent (49-46). In 2016, West Virginia went to Trump 68-26. In 2020, West Virginia went to Trump 69-29. So about R+40 in the presidential elections, and D+3 in the senate election in between.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:22
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:As you can see, the trend is in the Democrats' favor at this point but that wasn't always the case--even among the same pollsters, like Emerson. The recent polling is showing a trend in favor of Democrats (but not an absolute), as future polling will continue to show trends. Unless polls are hilariously (like 30-40%+) in favor of 1 candidate over and over again by multiple different pollsters across a broad spectrum of time polls should be ignored pre-primary for any race. The reason why is pre-primary they're effectively acting as more of a barometer of people's reactions to whatever hot button issue that is popping up on the news or social media, or perhaps even just name recognition, rather than a actual opinion of the candidate. When the polls are taken within 90 days of the election, 30 or less is best of course, is when they tend to get fairly accurate.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:31
|
|
|
I agree that polling will be more important & informational now that a Democratic nominee has been chosen, as I've said. But I do think there's value in tracking trends over time, particularly from the same pollster, as I've also said, especially among larger samples and among likely voters. For those reasons, as well as given its polling history for this race, I'm particularly interested in further OpinionWorks polling results.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:34
|
|
|
Gully Foyle posted:I'm not gonna say that Hogan is going to win or even likely to win, or that Alsobrooks isn't in the lead. I think that aside from West Virginia being an entirely different state with very specific conditions that let Manchin go on to win office there for as long as he had, he nonetheless still in the end is being forced to retire because he could only do that for so long as the country as a whole gets increasingly polarized. So the takeaway here is that these occurrences don't suggest "It could happen!" but they instead reinforce the fact of how rare and unlikely it is in the context of 2024 USA.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:36
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I think that aside from West Virginia being an entirely different state with very specific conditions that let Manchin go on to win office there for as long as he had, he nonetheless still in the end is being forced to retire because he could only do that for so long as the country as a whole gets increasingly polarized. It's not particularly rare or unlikely at all. There are plenty of cases of particular candidates managing to significantly outperform their party in their particular district or state. It's almost as if each race is its own unique thing with its own unique candidates and its own unique circumstances. While it's becoming less common as American politics radicalizes, it's still perfectly reasonable to expect that the guy who won a Maryland statewide election in 2018 might still have a real chance of winning one in 2024.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 00:58
|
|
|
Morrow posted:There's a dichotomy there: Jackson was famous for getting into duels and was such a crazy bastard. Lincoln is famous for the one duel that he defused because he would obviously win as a half giant. He was like 6'4 and a string bean. Washington and Jefferson were both 6'2 and lived almost a century earlier, and while notably tall, weren't considered half giants. People were shorter and smaller back then, but it's not like Lincoln was walking around with the Big Show's entrance music playing (though he should have, with Civil War instrumentation, of course).
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 02:35
|
|
|
Smeef posted:He was like 6'4 and a string bean. Washington and Jefferson were both 6'2 and lived almost a century earlier, and while notably tall, weren't considered half giants. People were shorter and smaller back then, but it's not like Lincoln was walking around with the Big Show's entrance music playing (though he should have, with Civil War instrumentation, of course). Uh, Lincoln was plenty strong, skinny or no. quote:Lincoln was uncommonly strong ... Once, as the presidential party lounged on the deck, Lincoln playfully demonstrated that in "muscular power he was one in a thousand," possessing "the strength of a giant." He picked up an ax and "held it at arm's length at the extremity of the [handle] with his thumb and forefinger, continuing to hold it there for a number of minutes. The most powerful sailors on board tried in vain to imitate him." quote:You couldn't be in the frontier and not do hard labor. Lincoln took on odd jobs from ferryman to woodcutter before becoming a store clerk. He also volunteered in Illinois's Black Hawk War of 1832 (Black Hawk refers to the leader in charge of the Sac and Fox Indians, who crossed the Mississippi River to plant corn). He didn't fight Indians, but he did have his famous wrestling match with some rambunctious local boys. While eyewitness accounts conflict, the then-23-year-old tangled with one Jack Armstrong of New Salem, whom Lincoln would describe as "strong as a Russian bear." Neither could get the best of the other, and they would later become great friends. Whatever the actual outcome, Lincoln's first law partner called the match a "turning point." Oracle fucked around with this message at 02:46 on May 18, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 02:44
|
|
|
I could take him
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 02:54
|
|
|
Reminds me of the drunk history episode on Lincoln where the one guy just keeps describing Abe as some kind of ape...man
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 03:03
|
|
|
Smeef posted:He was like 6'4 and a string bean. Washington and Jefferson were both 6'2 and lived almost a century earlier, and while notably tall, weren't considered half giants. People were shorter and smaller back then, but it's not like Lincoln was walking around with the Big Show's entrance music playing (though he should have, with Civil War instrumentation, of course). Lincoln was a frontier boy who leaned into it by showing off how strong he was and wearing extra tall hats. Washington and Jefferson were pathetic American Blue Bloods who wore short bitch hats and were the very model of plantation fucks.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 03:36
|
|
|
Jefferson missed his era by not being in an early 2000s ohio emo-pop band.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 05:11
|
|
|
the funniest us history dueling story is, after preston brooks caned charlees sumner, some other congressman who was an expert shot goaded brooks into challenging a duel by calling him a bitch, then chose rifles and for the duel to be in canada (where dueling was legal). the guy extremely good at shooting rifles challenging him to a duel using rifles spooked brooks so much that he backed out. thus proving himself to be, a lifetime bitch.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 05:41
|
|
|
lobster shirt posted:the funniest us history dueling story is, after preston brooks caned charlees sumner, some other congressman who was an expert shot goaded brooks into challenging a duel by calling him a bitch, then chose rifles and for the duel to be in canada (where dueling was legal). the guy extremely good at shooting rifles challenging him to a duel using rifles spooked brooks so much that he backed out. thus proving himself to be, a lifetime bitch. ?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 10:29
|
|
|
That's how Japan won their war with Russia in 1905. Canada rifles. World famous stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 10:37
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Lincoln was a frontier boy who leaned into it by showing off how strong he was and wearing extra tall hats. Washington and Jefferson were pathetic American Blue Bloods who wore short bitch hats and were the very model of plantation fucks. what kind of short bitch hat are you referring to, a tricorner?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 11:40
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Well no, Aslobrook's stance on israel, aipac, etc none of these things are at all likely to matter in a state with a 20+ Partisan lean. The Republican candidate can literally be pro-Communism and still win his race in a deep enough red state with a similar partisan lean, because the issues for the most part don't matter. Hogan's approval rating as its been said to you before literally doesn't matter, its absolutely not going to at all be a close race. Being in a state with a comparable Dem lean people love crossing the aisle for memorable names. Hogan has been a force that Dems have flocked to, despite, or perhaps because, of his conservative economic stances while voicing liberal values. We'll see in Nov.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 11:51
|
|
|
That was Massachusetts Representative Anson Burlingame. After Brooks attacked Sumner (who was stuck in a bolted down desk so completely unable to defend himself, and Brooks's friend held everyone at gunpoint so Brooks could sucker cane the poo poo out Sumner) Burlingame went to the New York Times and gave a speech calling Brooks a slave dealing chickenshit and basically ended it by saying if Brooks is actually hard he'd do something about me. Brooks challenged Burlingame to a duel. Burlingame says  and as the one challenged he got to pick the place and weapons. Burlingame picks Canada (as noted, dueling was still legal there, but was outlawed in most of the US) and rifles. Burlingame was famously a sharpshooter with rifles, so Brooks stammered out some excuses about how he feared for his safety on the journey north and backed out, thus proving Burlingame right that Brooks was, in fact, a slave dealing chickenshit.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 12:44
|
|
|
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4671685-glenn-youngkin-vetoes-contraceptive-rights-bill-virginia/quote:“This includes legislation related to contraception. Let me be crystal clear: I support access to contraception. However, we cannot trample on the religious freedoms of Virginians,” he added. Yes, the famous religious freedom to impose your bullshit on someone that doesn't believe in your brand of your imaginary friend. You will be shocked to hear that the reporter did not ask for clarification of how quote:“a person shall have the right to obtain contraceptives and to engage in contraception” and that the right “shall not be infringed upon by any law, regulation, or policy that expressly or effectively limits, delays, or impedes access to contraceptives or information related to contraception.” infringes religious freedoms. 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 13:51
|
|
|
WebDO posted:https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4671685-glenn-youngkin-vetoes-contraceptive-rights-bill-virginia/ another classic case of how both parties are the same and voting doesn't matter (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 15:29
|
|
|
Tatsuta Age posted:another classic case of how both parties are the same and voting doesn't matter As a former Virginia resident I find it neat that you need to email the governor's office and ask them nicely to give you access to three paperwork to initiate a recall petition against the governor, that would never be something they just ignore no sirree
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 15:55
|
|
|
Dopilsya posted:That was Massachusetts Representative Anson Burlingame. After Brooks attacked Sumner (who was stuck in a bolted down desk so completely unable to defend himself, and Brooks's friend held everyone at gunpoint so Brooks could sucker cane the poo poo out Sumner) Burlingame went to the New York Times and gave a speech calling Brooks a slave dealing chickenshit and basically ended it by saying if Brooks is actually hard he'd do something about me. Brooks challenged Burlingame to a duel. Burlingame says All true, but it needs to be emphasized Brooks inhabited a world that universally hailed him as a hero until his dying breath. He was re-elected in an explicit endorsement of the Senate beating. No one in the South gave a poo poo about him dodging a northern duel any more then they were bothered by him beating a defenseless man, they had a different concept of honour.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 17:00
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:All true, but it needs to be emphasized Brooks inhabited a world that universally hailed him as a hero until his dying breath. He was re-elected in an explicit endorsement of the Senate beating. No one in the South gave a poo poo about him dodging a northern duel any more then they were bothered by him beating a defenseless man, they had a different concept of honour. Brooks sucks and all, but not going to a duel is the right move because duels are dumb as poo poo. Not traveling to a different country so some guy can try and shoot him to death is probably the only smart thing Brooks ever did. Edit: Seriously, if someone says "I demand you come to a place where I am legally allowed to kill you so I can try to kill you with a weapon I'm really good at killing things with" the correct response is "No, I won't be doing that." Duels were a scam designed to keep angry idiots from bothering the rest of the population and give rich people a legal way to murder their lessers. Not wanting to participate in a duel shows you have the bare minimum amount of intelligence required to function in society, you may be a total idiot in every other way but you've figured out "hm, if I let someone try to kill me I might end up dead" which is the very low bar you needed to clear for survival. Space Cadet Omoly fucked around with this message at 17:33 on May 18, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 04:10 |
|
|
So I don't know where else to bitch about this, but it seems like Elon finally managed to gently caress Twitter into an unusable state a couple days ago. I think it was just Thursday my feed started getting inundated with no-name right-wingers, mostly bluechecks, and I've spent a day or two going through and hitting "Not interested > Show less posts from this user" on every third tweet. And they still keep coming. I gotta think this is just what he intended all along, for every couple posts to be like "*retweets any black person doing anything wrong* and that's why DEI doesn't work" or "im gonna piss a lot of people off but Jan 6 was a huge hoax." It's just such a distinct change that it's hard to believe that it isn't intentional. I don't follow many accounts on Twitter, I mostly use it to see news and reactions from a handful of mostly left-leaning accounts, but this might actually get me to stop using it entirely. For the best, probably. Curious if anyone else has seen the same thing, especially since stuff like "the algorithm" is so vague and random sometimes.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2024 17:24
|
|
