|
Miss Nomer posted:Summer break Our school just had a student post an angry message about bias because his teacher told him he couldn't make a presentation about how raising the minimum wage would hurt the working class just because he didn't have any evidence
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 01:28
|
|
which ends next week 
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
Miss Nomer posted:Summer break I remember knowing that George W. Bush was a dumbass during his time in office (mostly after 9/11), which was when I was 10-12, so I think they just pick up on common threads and not the intricacies. So probably your average kid (adjusting for how liberal/conservative their parents/hometown are) knows that Trump's a racist loudmouth and that Clinton is a boring maybe-liar. Mel Mudkiper posted:Our school just had a student post an angry message about bias because his teacher told him he couldn't make a presentation about how raising the minimum wage would hurt the working class just because he didn't have any evidence Why is Paul Ryan at your school?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:I remember knowing that George W. Bush was a dumbass during his time in office (mostly after 9/11), which was when I was 10-12, so I think they just pick up on common threads and not the intricacies. So probably your average kid (adjusting for how liberal/conservative their parents/hometown are) knows that Trump's a racist loudmouth and that Clinton is a boring maybe-liar. Say what you want, kids listen to their parents, too. An awesome moment during the Brexit mess was when some reporter went to a school and talked to a kid who couldn't have been older than 11. When asked why he supported Brexit, the kid said because we have to kick out all of the foreigners. Odds are that kid didn't come to his decision after weighing his options and hearing both sides. He heard it from his parents, and that was enough for him to trust that side of the argument. I genuinely am curious to see what happens to politics and voting once the Boomers start dying off. All but one person in my family (cousins and such included) is voting age, and I think it was around 2010 when a relative asked me why people claim to be Muslims if they weren't terrorists. Apparently, my aunt told her "Muslim" was the Arabic word for "terrorist" and believed it wholeheartedly. It sounded about right since my aunt refers to Info Wars as "the news." Then the relative ended up with these two Iranian kids working for her that she adored and wondered why such sweet kids wanted to call themselves terrorists, I guess thinking it was akin to someone calling themselves a "Nazi" these days. She's kind of coming to terms with stuff lately and is a shitload easier to talk to, but it shows what happens when you distill echo chambers enough, as the right is learning with Trump, the Bundies, etc. these days.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:I remember knowing that George W. Bush was a dumbass during his time in office (mostly after 9/11), which was when I was 10-12, so I think they just pick up on common threads and not the intricacies. So probably your average kid (adjusting for how liberal/conservative their parents/hometown are) knows that Trump's a racist loudmouth and that Clinton is a boring maybe-liar. Similiar age goon chiming in. I remember actually liking Bush because my father would sell me on how good Reagan had been for him (and by proxy? Our family) then would continue to espouse the virtues of trickle down. I was kinda brainwashed for the longest time. I didn't think much of the Iraq war, and would actually accept the Fox News view of it. I can remember my father justifying Katrina (because, democrats) and just a whole number of other things. You know what really helps shatter your view on republican politics? Witnessing an entire political party throw a tantrum because they got beat by a black dude. Also it wears thin on you after you've been rejected by the 16000th job you tried applying for, only to come home to find people like Neil Cavuto screaming at you for being "lazy, entitled" and that "Bootstraps" will solve everything. When you remove their economic policy (that wound up failing the middle class, and a great number of fellow millennials?) You get what we've seen since 2009 or so. A bunch of loudmouth assholes that reject science, reject lgbt rights, reject everything that doesn't assist rich, white, christian, males. Why bother swallowing that bitter pill any more when their economic policies (which everyone again, used to insist helped everyone) when you don't agree with anything else any of these people espouse?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:It won't matter. Reality has a liberal bias. They could be link to the most esteemed per reviewed academic journals and they'd be accused of being ivory tower lib professors. then you ask them for specific criticisms of what you linked
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:Why is Paul Ryan at your school? My guess is because he is a literal child
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:Why is Paul Ryan at your school?  How do you do, fellow kids?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:
That's the face of a man trying to play it cool after having just poo poo his pants and is desperately hoping nobody noticed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:
as funny as this one is I always preferred back off bro this really heavy 
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
Who the gently caress thought that photo shoot was a good idea I mean I definitely think it was a good idea but for totally different reasons than Paul Ryan did I'm sure.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Those pictures never fail to crack me up. Where are they originally from, and why did Ryan think it was a good idea to take them?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Those pictures never fail to crack me up. Where are they originally from, and why did Ryan think it was a good idea to take them? When Mitt chose him for VP there was a big thing about him doing P90X. So they leaned into it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
The thing that cracks me up most are his little chicken legs. Like, I'm a 44 year old woman and I have more muscle mass/tone in my quads and calves.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:The thing that cracks me up most are his little chicken legs. Like, I'm a 44 year old woman and I have more muscle mass/tone in my quads and calves. Don't skip leg days.  Or be Ayn Randroid human garbage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:First, PACs, unions, and companies don't spend on campaigns. That restriction remains. Also, "speech"? Scare quotes aren't the best call here. Limiting political speech is not an acceptable means to pretty much anything-it's about as close to an absolute right as legal rights get in the US. It also doesn't achieve the desired effect. The effect of a limit specific to associations is to make it so that people with less money can't pool their resources for political communication purposes. That leaves big-money electioneering in the hands of the wealthiest, who don't need to set up PACs. It's part of why unions are usually one of the subjects of analysis for the question. While I agree with the general point about CU not actually being anything particularly bad (if bad at all), the idea that everything that could remotely be considered political speech should be protected is nonsense. If there were evidence that PAC spending gave disproportionate influence (which there doesn't seem to be), then it would absolutely be reasonable to be against it. It would be no different than being against any other kind of speech that causes harm (and I would consider giving people/organizations with more money more influence to be inherently bad/harmful). The idea that limiting the amount organizations can spend in politics is some slippery slope to people being unable to express their political views is laughable. Strict moral standards are only useful if they actually accomplish something good (and even then there's no real need to make them into a strict guideline instead of judging on a case by case basis). Just to reiterate, my opinion regarding CU specifically is actually the same as yours, but that's because of a seeming lack of evidence that CU/SuperPACs actually have any tangible negative effect. It has nothing to do with the moral stance that political speech should be unassailable under all circumstances. Regarding political spending in general, I think that the fact that direct political spending doesn't seem to have a strong connection to outcomes doesn't necessarily mean that spending has little impact on politics. It's virtually impossible to really look at the impact all sorts of indirect spending have. For example, someone making a popular movie that espouses anti-abortion views could indirectly benefit anti-abortion political candidates. Or movies/television with socialist antagonists could negatively impact left-wing politicians. Of course, there isn't really anything you can do about this, but I do feel like it's still worth pointing out that money probably does still have a very big impact on politics, but mostly because people's political views are influenced by many things that involve money other than explicit political advertising. Metapod posted:The issue with cc is not the standards it's the execution. Critical thinking and argumentation are both things that should taught heavily but trying to get everyone to do those things the same way is a fools errand because people don't think or process information the same way. This in turn can make it where parents have trouble helping their children learn the things they didn't quite get in the classroom because if the parents understand what is being taught but not in the way the school wants it to be taught the child is not getting credit for knowing how to do it so the parents can't actually help them. So unless they implement workshops, which not all parents would be able to attend anyway, to teach parents the lessons so they can explain it to their children this will continue to be a problem for a generation. Also with the all the end of the year testing that's also occurring there is a very real clock teachers are racing against because if they don't teach all this material by certain time their students will be at a disadvantage. This causes a whole other heap of issues like limits the amount of a lesson can be spent on, lack of creative fun projects, and even taking away recess. Wait, can't you make this same argument (parents having trouble helping their children due to changes in methodology) against literally any significant change in teaching standards? For a second-hand expert opinion, my mom is about as experienced as a teacher that it's possible to be; she recently retired (though she still teaches education courses through nearby universities) after teaching (mostly) first grade for over 40 years. According to her (and literally every other teacher she knows, without exception), Common Core is undeniably a significant improvement over the previous status quo. That being said, she does agree about testing being a big problem. But that was a big problem even before Common Core. SSNeoman posted:The real issue is that some CC questions become very badly worded, and end up sounding extremely stupid. That's what usually results in parental frustrations. Even this isn't really true. They sound strange taken out of context, but people are ignoring the fact that the child has already had that sort of question thoroughly explained to them in the classroom and knows what it's asking. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Aug 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
TBeats posted:Who the gently caress thought that photo shoot was a good idea Note relevant really, but I worked for a chef at a university-owned hotel who was well-regarded, but they always bugged him for new directory pictures. He finally gave in, but the photographer was supposedly a real cornball who wouldn't just let him take a simple picture without props or gimmicks. Chef finally gave in, picked a Rubik's Cube and held it up while smiling. The pictures were sent to H.R., who didn't hesitate to just throw the picture up on the directory of our chef looking like an embalmed smiling corpse limply holding up a child's puzzle toy, chef coat/hat and all. When he found out it was on the website, he stormed into H.R. and demanded it get taken down, but not before a bunch of us got it on USB sticks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
TBeats posted:Who the gently caress thought that photo shoot was a good idea Back before GBS took on its current form, there was a thread about some goons who got a news story about something or another they did with drones. (I don't remember the specifics very well.) The photographer for the story was the same one who took the Paul Ryan photos. According to the thread, the photographer's preferred method was to take a bunch of "fake" photos, then immediately snap the real ones once the subject thought it was over. Supposedly, it helped to get a more real take on the subject.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Keep in mind that those first time voters that went to Bernie in huge numbersare younger than the GOP's vendetta against the Clintons. I don't doubt there's a lot of Bernie or Bust people who have a hard time changing simply because they grew up only ever hearing about how loving evil Hilary is. The email server was probably her closest thing to a true scandal which is why the GOP was so livid when Comey threw the cold water of reality in their face and said it was dumb but not criminal. First time voters? I'm 29 and I can't remember Hillary not being public enemy no 1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 22:40
|
|
Eifert Posting posted:First time voters? I'm 29 and I can't remember Hillary not being public enemy no 1. A lot of 29 year olds probably are first time voters.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Eifert Posting posted:First time voters? I'm 29 and I can't remember Hillary not being public enemy no 1. Yep I'm 28 and 08 was the first presidential election I could vote in. Which means I was like 3/4 when Bill was elected. Most Bernie supporters aren't just first-time voters they're probably people who were brought into politics during the Obama years. Dexo fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Aug 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Double post
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Yep I'm 28 and 08 was the first presidential election I could vote in. Which means I was like 3/4 when Bill was elected. I missed 2004 by a month and am still salty. Was 18 for the entire presidency. Some bullshit right there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
I'm 31, and my grandparents hated the Clintons when I was growing up. My grandfather regularly read Drudge and listened to Limbaugh, that sort of thing. It must have worked on me by osmosis, because even in 2008 I was still in the mode of "I don't trust Hillary for ~*~reasons~*~". Her tenure as SoS and this election in particular have really made me reexamine my subconscious biases and realize just how much they came from growing up in that sort of media environment.Eifert Posting posted:Was 18 for the entire presidency.
Lord Hydronium fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Aug 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Eifert Posting posted:I missed 2004 by a month and am still salty. Was 18 for the entire presidency. Some bullshit right there. 2004 was my first election and I voted for Badnarik  Thank christ my state went blue or I would have hated myself forever
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
I'm 33, and I clearly remember coming home in like 2nd grade to my dad watching Rush on TV, with a caption of "America held hostage day xx" where xx is the current day of the Clinton administration. The Right wing hate machine is nothing if not consistent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
I'm 30 and I can pretty vividly remember some fat pill-popping moron saying vile poo poo about Chelsea Clinton.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
I'm 28 and voted in 2008 for Obama. Didn't vote in 2012 because I was busy losing my mind in Korea and didn't give a poo poo.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
I also remember my dad getting upset when I said I thought Bill Clinton was cool because he played the saxophone on Arsenio.  I never had a chance, I was indoctrinated into the evil liberal cult at a young age by Bill's sax jams.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Eifert Posting posted:I missed 2004 by a month and am still salty. Was 18 for the entire presidency. Some bullshit right there. I was two months shy of voting in 2000. I would have voted for Bush because I joined the military and Clinton was for cutting military spending. Like it would have mattered after I signed up anyways, haha. At least that vote never happened, thankfully.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
I first voted as a 19 year old in the 2008 election. I was still coming off a dumbass teenage libertarian streak so I voted for Bob Barr, and Norm Coleman. Oops. Obama and Franken both won so I at least didn't do any damage. A combination of growing up and Republican tantrums did away with the rest of that dumb thinking pretty quick. A few months into the presidency they were going after Michelle for daring to wear shorts when they took a trip somewhere hot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:I'm 31, and my grandparents hated the Clintons when I was growing up. My grandfather regularly read Drudge and listened to Limbaugh, that sort of thing. It must have worked on me by osmosis, because even in 2008 I was still in the mode of "I don't trust Hillary for ~*~reasons~*~". Her tenure as SoS and this election in particular have really made me reexamine my subconscious biases and realize just how much they came from growing up in that sort of media environment. Dirt posted:I'm 33, and I clearly remember coming home in like 2nd grade to my dad watching Rush on TV, with a caption of "America held hostage day xx" where xx is the current day of the Clinton administration.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
Talked with my dad today briefly about politics. It's bizarre how he blames the President on all the problems we've had economically. But I guess in his mind he can't possibly imagine Republicans, and Wall Street having led us down this path. I was honest with him though. I told him I felt that after 2009? The  dream that he had always told me about growing up? That was dead for now. It was depressing to hear him agree with me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
I only knew Bill Clinton for his affair for my entire life. I similarly only knew about Nixon for Watergate, though, so that's just public school- alternatively that no one liked Nixon at all-. by the time I was 18 I had already broken the Republican talking points out of my head, not out of any realization policy-wise, but rather because I found the whole thing about where he was born, or the fact his middle name was Hussein, to be kind of juvenile. I'm 23 from June so I think I voted for the first time in 2012 and went with Obama. Which is amazing because I'm the most childish person ever, and I was even worse at 18.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
Dirt posted:I also remember my dad getting upset when I said I thought Bill Clinton was cool because he played the saxophone on Arsenio.  The 8 years under W sure soured any hope of me ever being Republican (sorry mom and step-dad)
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
Bast Relief posted:So I'm not the only one! I am having THE stuuuuupidest argument with my bf right now. He claims the Hillary Hate machine has only been recent as of the last few years. He didn't even think it existed when she ran against Obama! When I bring up the 90s he just says I'm confused and it was Bill everyone was jumping on. The Rightwing noise machine loving burned an effigy of her for daring to be on the committee to determine the Health Care policies of her husband's administration.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
I'm old enough to remember The very first Clinton scandal. Seems so quaint now in hindsight.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Punch him in the dick for being that stupid. I like his dick tho...I'll just show him this: Edmund Lava posted:I'm old enough to remember The very first Clinton scandal. Seems so quaint now in hindsight. I tried telling him about how people were up in arms about Hillary's active role as first lady, but he said no major news source cared. Ha!
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:2004 was my first election and I voted for Badnarik I campaigned for Badnarik for about a month until a few conversations with my city's coodinator (New Orleans) made me realize I was working with... stupid people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
Bast Relief posted:So I'm not the only one! I am having THE stuuuuupidest argument with my bf right now. He claims the Hillary Hate machine has only been recent as of the last few years. He didn't even think it existed when she ran against Obama! When I bring up the 90s he just says I'm confused and it was Bill everyone was jumping on. No one cared about the First Lady. Now, he totally thinks the things said against her now are bonkers, and he's been a Hillary fan for this election the whole time. He swears I'm imagining things though. He has spent a few decades in Seattle though so maybe he's sheltered.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
Edmund Lava posted:I'm old enough to remember The very first Clinton scandal. Seems so quaint now in hindsight. You beat me to it. I'm 45. I was a teenager in a Republican household on Little Rock AFB during the last couple years of Bill Clinton's tenure as Governor. My parents and the conservative groups in Arkansas despised Hillary even then. So their attacks on her began in the mid 80s at least and continued through to the present. I think the scandal then had to do with her being a lawyer who worked at a firm that had business with the state.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 09:13
|
|
