|
AmiYumi posted:Polls contemporary to the election blaming Katrina on Obama’s response make this, uh, not the greatest example. I'm not sure I understand what point you're making here. We're talking about GWB, his mishandling of a huge crisis, and how his having to own it completely didn't lead to him resigning or anything. \/\/\/ah, that it explains it more. But yeah, we're talking about polls in 2005, which pretty squarely placed responsibility on Bush, as well they should have.\/\/\/ Majorian fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Jan 5, 2022 |
![]() |
|
![]()
|
# ? May 4, 2024 09:49 |
|
Yeah, although Republicans eventually blaming Obama for Katrina says something very hilarious (if disturbing) about the way they experience the world, it happened way too late to help Bush or Republicans in the '06 and '08 elections.
|
![]() |
|
AmiYumi posted:Polls contemporary to the election blaming Katrina on Obama’s response make this, uh, not the greatest example. I think you are misremembering the date on those polls. There was a famous poll that said 1/3 of Louisiana Republicans said Obama was more responsible for Katrina that Bush. But, that was from 2013 and not contemporary. Bush got most of the blame at the time (and still does outside of Louisiana Republicans). Kathleen Blanco got a smaller, but still significant ~30% of the blame at the time.
|
![]() |
|
Dems on twitter & DU are claiming that Garland "both sides'd" his speech today: https://twitter.com/Thom_Hartmann/status/1478820369570037761 DU: quote:Did Garland just say...? Is there a Dem whisperer here who saw the speech & can explain what Garland meant by his statement, or whether it was truncated? Some of the DU responses said he was doing that to legitimize his inquiry.
|
![]() |
|
HonorableTB posted:
It's absolutely Farquaad Contrary to popular belief, Book Denethor was NOT trying to an evil tyrant or even trying to hold the throne: he was locked in to a war with an evil power that started thousands of years before he was born, was desperately looking for any way to get a one-up on said evil power incrementally destroying more of Gondor every year, tried to use the Palantir to spy on Sauron for info, Sauron found out, broke his brain and made him doom scroll until he went mad with grief. He genuinely wanted to save Gondor, but could only see a hopeless defeat worse than death for everyone. Denethor actually holds it together pretty well even then until Boromir dies and Faramir almost bites it. Even then Gandalf praises Denethor as a good man consumed by grief and hopelessness, not a monster. He genuinely likes Pippin, appreciates his loyalty to his son, and praises his songs when Pippin says they are not fit for his hall.He's not against lighting the beacons at all: he just genuinely doesn't see the point as he believes Rohan feels betrayed by Gondor's inaction in their problems, and won't even show up. He even rightfully points out that Gandalf the other leaders of Middle Earth's plan to have Sauron's hammer come down on Minas Tirith as a distraction is pretty awful from his and his people's side of things. He's one of the more complex characters in the entire series. Movie Denethor is much more of a selfish dick. We don't have a Denethor in leadership of the US. They're all Wormtongues and Saurumans TulliusCicero fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Jan 5, 2022 |
![]() |
|
TulliusCicero posted:We don't have a Denethor in leadership of the US. They're all Wormtongues and Saurumans Only one recent leader has pondered an orb
|
![]() |
|
TulliusCicero posted:It's absolutely Farquaad When you put it this way, this could describe all of the posters in this thread and C-SPAM both. We're all fighting against an evil power (Capital/Fascism) that started long before we were born, we're desperate for any advantage or wins, and in our desperation we get crack-pinged and become doomscrollers
|
![]() |
|
Willa Rogers posted:Dems on twitter & DU are claiming that Garland "both sides'd" his speech today: Transcript does seem a little both sides-y, but he seems to be talking about not prosecuting people for political beliefs. I can't watch the speech right now, though. So, I haven't seen it in context. quote:"The Department has been clear that expressing a political belief or ideology, no matter how vociferously, is not a crime. We do not investigate or prosecute people because of their views. Peacefully expressing a view or ideology no matter how extreme is protected by the First Amendment, but illegally threatening to harm or kill another person is not," he said. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Jan 5, 2022 |
![]() |
|
Majorian posted:I'm not sure I understand what point you're making here. We're talking about GWB, his mishandling of a huge crisis, and how his having to own it completely didn't lead to him resigning or anything. Beaten (see below) but, yeah. Polls were put out blaming Obama for the Katrina response, Bill Clinton for 9/11 and also ones that blamed Obama for the 2008 recession and the bank bailouts/TARP. Anything bad or unpopular was done by a democrat and usually "accidentally" has a FOX News caption that reads something like "Jeffrey Epstein (D)" or "Ted Bundy (Mayor of San Francisco)" to help things along. Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I think you are misremembering the date on those polls. There was a famous poll that said 1/3 of Louisiana Republicans said Obama was more responsible for Katrina that Bush. But, that was from 2013 and not contemporary. Also, Ray Nagin had hundreds of school buses at his disposal that he never used like Sean Hannity said. Since Ray Nagin controls that. And even if he used them, it would have been "look at this government over reach use of taxpayer funded school buses! How are the kids suppose to get to school now?"
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Transcript does seem a little both sides-y, but he seems to be talking about not prosecuting people for political beliefs. I can't watch the speech right now, though. So, I haven't seen it in context. Thanks. I'm not sure what this bit has to do with not prosecuting for political beliefs, though. quote:"These acts and threats of violence are not associated with any one set of partisan or ideological views," Garland said.
|
![]() |
|
The one-party back-and-forth has me thinking. Since every proposed system is led by corruptible humans depending on all the right handshakes to continue to happen in just the right way, every system eventually becomes more about self-preservation of the system's ruling class than any sort of adherence to a sense of duty. We really need to take humanity out of it. It sounds silly, but would the benevolent dictatorship of an Artificial Intelligence not be better at governance than the systems we've watched melt down over and over? Obviously it isn't an option today, but eventually an AI powerful enough will be created.
|
![]() |
|
Willa Rogers posted:Thanks. I'm not sure what this bit has to do with not prosecuting for political beliefs, though. I think it was in reference to this: quote:Garland decried violent threats to election workers, members of Congress, judges, airline personnel, health care workers and school administrators. He highlighted the increasing violence in all aspects of society sounds like he was trying to do kind of a both sides-y "We're not prosecuting anyone for political beliefs. We're just prosecuting people who do violence or threaten airline workers, teachers, health care workers, judges, school administrators, and members of congress regardless of what their political beliefs are."
|
![]() |
|
Pure Liquid Ice posted:The one-party back-and-forth has me thinking. Since every proposed system is led by corruptible humans depending on all the right handshakes to continue to happen in just the right way, every system eventually becomes more about self-preservation of the system's ruling class than any sort of adherence to a sense of duty. We really need to take humanity out of it. It sounds silly, but would the benevolent dictatorship of an Artificial Intelligence not be better at governance than the systems we've watched melt down over and over? Let’s consult the AI in Automated cars that can’t identify black pedestrians and end up trying to run them over… AI isn’t good enough, depends on who is coding it, and it really boils down to having the right capable just people in power which isn’t easy
|
![]() |
|
I mean, the last sentence I typed literally said the AI we have available today isn't an option...
|
![]() |
|
Pure Liquid Ice posted:The one-party back-and-forth has me thinking. Since every proposed system is led by corruptible humans depending on all the right handshakes to continue to happen in just the right way, every system eventually becomes more about self-preservation of the system's ruling class than any sort of adherence to a sense of duty. We really need to take humanity out of it. It sounds silly, but would the benevolent dictatorship of an Artificial Intelligence not be better at governance than the systems we've watched melt down over and over? Do you want Skynet? Because this is how you get Skynet. Or Ultron. I'm pretty sure Ultron was created for this specific reason and the first conclusion he came to was that humans have to go ASAP
|
![]() |
|
At least with Friend Computer in charge I'd get a few clones to spare. e: For content, I'd say being able to articulate "benevolence" in a programmatically rigorous and implementable way would, itself, be a stunning achievement.
|
![]() |
|
Gatts posted:Let’s consult the AI in Automated cars that can’t identify black pedestrians and end up trying to run them over… Pure Liquid Ice posted:I mean, the last sentence I typed literally said the AI we have available today isn't an option... Yeah, I think there's hope for using future AI to give better guidance in planning out an economy and distributing resources, but probably not so much for really minute, nuanced issues or problems with lots of gray areas. The book "Red Plenty" offers some valuable insight on this.
|
![]() |
|
HonorableTB posted:Do you want Skynet? Because this is how you get Skynet. I don't necessarily buy the AI-will-destroy-humanity argument at face value, I think it's a trope for movies. Like aliens species invading earth. These are all metaphors for colonialism. AI could be provided the data necessary and not decide to nuke us/put us in a matrix/etc.
|
![]() |
|
Pure Liquid Ice posted:I don't necessarily buy the AI-will-destroy-humanity argument at face value, I think it's a trope for movies. Like aliens species invading earth. These are all metaphors for colonialism. I am a software Quality Assurance Engineer II. My entire career is built off of exposing how badly coded and built applications and software are. You do NOT want this.
|
![]() |
|
Like AI that extrapolates development of virus and disease in the environment so you could create cures in advance would be cool
|
![]() |
|
Gatts posted:Like AI that extrapolates development of virus and disease in the environment so you could create cures in advance would be cool Yeah, exactly, what I envision AI doing wouldn't really be all that different from what we're trying to get it to do more effectively in the real world today. It would just be, you know - coordinated for the purposes of central planning and all that fun stuff.
|
![]() |
|
So far we've done a poo poo-terrible job of letting computers run themselves. Social media is a computer that taught itself to survive by burning human sanity for fuel
|
![]() |
|
Majorian posted:Yeah, exactly, what I envision AI doing wouldn't really be all that different from what we're trying to get it to do more effectively in the real world today. It would just be, you know - coordinated for the purposes of central planning and all that fun stuff. If the system still allows a Marjorie Taylor Greene access to the levers of power then those AI are only as useful as the hairless ape in charge of them. What I'm saying is, give them access to nukes and dams and satellites.
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I think it was in reference to this: Which is what you'd expect someone who wants to look like a legitimate enforcer of the law to say regardless of their political affiliation. There's no reason to say "we're gonna jail all the conservatives/leftists/whatever" when you can say you're just prosecuting violent extremists and later go oh look at the violent extremists I found, they just all happen to be.... It's not a useful statement to read since it's something that would be said by anyone competent in his position regardless of their honesty or partisanship.
|
![]() |
|
Username Killer robot, can you tell me your thoughts on AI-controlled government?
|
![]() |
|
Pure Liquid Ice posted:Username Killer robot, can you tell me your thoughts on AI-controlled government? The initial transition will doubtless be turbulent for some, but the lasting peace after will be worth it.
|
![]() |
|
Pure Liquid Ice posted:If the system still allows a Marjorie Taylor Greene access to the levers of power then those AI are only as useful as the hairless ape in charge of them. What I'm saying is, give them access to nukes and dams and satellites. Yeah, well, obviously I'm not placing much hope in AI helping our current shitshow of a government model to centrally plan. We'd need to completely overhaul the system before AI could really be helpful in that regard, but I think we're going to need to do that one way or another anyway.
|
![]() |
|
BiggerBoat posted:Well, first they have to clear out the giant I95 parking lot. Is this a failure or infrastructure, a climate change thing, a result of gutted resources or just some freak occurrence? Just too many cars out there? Some combination of all that?
|
![]() |
|
Some results from the cnbc/change research poll that was taken the week before xmas & released last week:![]() ![]() ![]() Guess those COBRA & Obamacare subsidies didn't really pay off when it came to the healthcare sentiments.
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Transcript does seem a little both sides-y, but he seems to be talking about not prosecuting people for political beliefs. I can't watch the speech right now, though. So, I haven't seen it in context. those lefties are going to prison for three years for saying that the capital should be protected with lethal force, meanwhile people who legit beat police officers are getting 2 years probation with breaks for vacations. both the people who break windows to steal a country and those who want to protect those windows are equally as bad. i mean only one side is really being punished though... and it's not like it loving matters "both sideism" exists to appease the chuds who can not be appeased. this right here is them signalling to the chuds that they are just as legit as the people who want to preserve democracy. after all the people trying to steal an election for trump are just as bad as someone here who gets probed for hoping for chud death. like their celebration of "total exoneration" after cheesecake factory dropped the charges. it's like the mods are in charge of the country
|
![]() |
|
Another poll where a majority of people say their personal economic situation is good/excellent, but the economy in general is bad. Only 18% saying their personal financial situation is poor is pretty surprising.
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Another poll where a majority of people say their personal economic situation is good/excellent, but the economy in general is bad. I mean, it's 52-49 excellent/good vs. not-so-good/poor, and another 30 percent in addition to that 18 percent say "not so good." Hardly a ringing endorsement, unless you want to ignore half the country experiencing economic insecurity. And those "grades" for Biden on helping the middle class, helping the economy & helping your wallet don't augur well. I think the worst news, for Dems, is that no one expects anything to get better this year. Or maybe it'll be good news, as far as exceeding expectations. eta: oh lol, I just noticed the Biden/Trump ties on favorable/unfavorable.
|
![]() |
|
That poll on the economy is incredibly bad for Biden. The admin has been doing virtually everything to promote 'the economy' doing better, but clearly that's not working and between rising prices and rising Covid issues, it's going to be a bloodbath in November.
|
![]() |
|
Willa Rogers posted:Some results from the cnbc/change research poll that was taken the week before xmas & released last week: All this sentiment stuff is going to be colored by the pandemic. In my mind Biden & Dem's biggest election hope is going to be a warm weather drop in virus prevalence ala the normal flu season. If (and I do mean IF) that happens, you might have sentiment turn towards optimism right as fall campaigning begins in earnest. If the supply chain disruptions smooth out by then too, which would contain inflation, you might even have a string of good news. Their only shot in my opinion.
|
![]() |
|
Willa Rogers posted:I mean, it's 52-49 excellent/good vs. not-so-good/poor, and another 30 percent in addition to that 18 percent say "not so good." Hardly a ringing endorsement, unless you want to ignore half the country experiencing economic insecurity. It's not the specific numbers that are interesting; it's the ratios. Literally twice as many people say their personal economic situation is good/excellent compared to the economy overall and 4x more people say their personal economic situation is excellent than overall. 2021 was the first time that perceptions of personal economic sentiment were higher than the economy in general and the gap seems to be getting larger in 2022 (mostly because the same amount of people are saying they are personally fine, but more people saying the economy overall is bad). It's a weird first for polling and not clear exactly why it is happening. In 2021, you could theorize that people were saying their personal economic situation was good despite the bad economy overall because of stimulus, but it has been a year since the stimulus bill and the gap is just getting bigger. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Jan 6, 2022 |
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's not the specific numbers that are interesting; it's the ratios. Literally twice as many people say their personal economic situation is good/excellent compared to the economy overall and 4x more people say their personal economic situation is excellent than overall. 2021 was the first time that perceptions of personal economic sentiment were higher than the economy in general and the gap seems to be getting larger in 2022 (mostly because the same amount of people are saying they are personally fine, but more people saying the economy overall is bad). It's because there's a widespread feeling of precariousness among a lot of Americans, whether or not they themselves are doing well economically. I posted this back in November, but here it is again: "Job Market Ratings Set Record, but Economic Confidence Slides." A lot of the folks who think they're doing okay financially right now are still really afraid that it's all going to go up in smoke over the next few years: e: here's a more recent chart, with even worse numbers than the one in November: ![]() Majorian fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Jan 6, 2022 |
![]() |
|
Yeah; when voters see how quickly the government can spring into action & provide living-wage unemployment comp, free healthcare, cash grants, student-loan abeyance, and foreclosure/eviction moratoria, their necks are bound to snap at how quickly everything can then be taken away & they're going to feel economically unmoored. That they were promised that the Democrats would make things even better, and instead things got worse, is icing on the cake.
|
![]() |
|
Majorian posted:It's because there's a widespread feeling of precariousness among a lot of Americans, whether or not they themselves are doing well economically. I posted this back in November, but here it is again: "Job Market Ratings Set Record, but Economic Confidence Slides." A lot of the folks who think they're doing okay financially right now are still really afraid that it's all going to go up in smoke over the next few years: That's a reasonable explanation, but never in modern polling history did people feel insecure about their economic situation despite doing pretty well at present? I doubt it, but they didn't express it that way before. It's just interesting that people's perceptions about "the economy" and "how I am doing economically" have decoupled for the first time ever. I don't think there is a 100% definitive explanation for it, but it has decoupled significantly. People used to say they were doing economically terrible - regardless of their situation - if they felt the economy overall was bad and said they were doing great - regardless of their situation - if they felt the economy overall was good. They used to track nearly 1:1 for ~60 years and now there is a massive gap.
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:That's a reasonable explanation, but never in modern polling history did people feel insecure about their economic situation despite doing pretty well at present? I doubt it, but they didn't express it that way before. It's just interesting that people's perceptions about "the economy" and "how I am doing economically" have decoupled for the first time ever. I think it’s a combo pack of Willa’s point that people saw what was possible and had it yanked away, and the fact that a lot of people stay home a lot more, save money not doing poo poo, which they assume is bad for the businesses they’re not going to as much.
|
![]() |
|
![]()
|
# ? May 4, 2024 09:49 |
|
This is a brutal and depressing look into the hell-world of American gun policy. The number of minor gun deaths increased by 50% in 2020 and 2021. quote:Why More American Children Are Dying by Gunfire https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/05/us/american-children-gun-deaths.html
|
![]() |