|
Can someone good at math explain what federal fiscal budgets have to do with consumer price inflation.
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2022 02:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
DeSantis looks moderate compared to Trump. That's it, that's the whole thing. By making open mocking racism a pillar of the new Republican party they've made it real easy to pull the whole country right. It's terrifying.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
I mean we already have weight classes in wrestling and boxing right? It seems obvious you could build classes around other qualifiers relevant to the sport. And like yeah, if your sports mostly cater to the physical advantages of men and men's sports are the only ones anybody cares about, and we only care about the absolute optimum pinnacle of sports achievement, that feels like the thing that is causing the gender problems. A trans woman having a slight advantage at the Olympic level is a result of the structure that makes that an advantage, it isn't caused by a trans woman existing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2022 08:35
|
|
|
The police are not helpful. I have a hard time imagining what pro-police people think the police in their current incarnations actually do. Because police rarely stop crime in progress or recovery lost property and those are the two things people imagine them doing the most. What things are police helping with, I am genuinely curious.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2022 00:39
|
|
|
Crime "in progress" meaning a crime that is still happening. Like if you own a business and somebody robs you, and you call the police, what do you suppose the odds are that they turn up in the middle of the robbery and arrest the robber? I should think this doesn't require statistics - it's fairly logical that you cannot conjure a police officer whenever you need them and yet the most enduring question surrounding changing the police seems to be "how do we stop crime without police." The police should be a largely administrative and psychological department and yet we treat and arm them like their job is to intervene, which it isn't.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2022 03:22
|
|
|
Squibbles posted:If you can't conjure a cop out of thin air this is clearly an argument for raising police budgets until you can. Whether the cops will actually DO anything when conjured is a separate matter (that also can be solved with a higher budget maybe? Better try it and see). I mean if we just make everybody a police officer it would stop all crime! But yeah whether or not the cops do their job is a whole other question I was avoiding because I don't want to post statistics to prove something that everybody can tell from looking which is cops don't do anything when you ask unless you're rich.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2022 03:31
|
|
|
I'm so tired of feeling like there's a war on in this country but the side I'm supposed to be fighting for just refuses to admit it. They downplayed the possibility of a Roe overturn and now they'll fundraise off of it. They'll downplay the overturn of LGBTQ+ rights, too, until they're gone. They'll keep negotiating with Republicans, they'll keep worrying about optics and election cycles until the Democrats are legislated out of existence. This should be a red line in the sand. This should be a call to war. Instead it'll be a chance to raise those funds. It's absurd. Something should burn for a decision like this and I don't care how dangerous it is for our precious system to galvanize.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2022 20:01
|
|
|
Framboise posted:Unless Democrats act on their words as well as Republicans do... not really, in my perspective. I think the sad truth is Americans - maybe all people, I can't say - are very adaptable, psychologically speaking. And I think people have gotten extremely used to one shocking regression after another. In the wake of an event like this there is a brief window where many people will be unmoored and looking for leadership, where they will be open to change and willing to join a cause. Who steps into that void in the next several weeks will basically decide what sort of hope we have. Because if we're supposed to just swallow this and live with existential dread until November with nothing but photoshopped revolutionary quotes posted on Twitter from Dems to show for it I think there's little to no hope. Edit: Basically the "do something" mentality is short hand for "please do something before this becomes normal." Because if the President isn't making headlines weekly about his next attempt to stop anti-choice freaks, it's going to become normal. It doesn't matter what he's allowed to do, he's supposed to fight. A warrior is not stymied by procedure. This is the most important attack on American rights in most of our lifetimes. It shouldn't be approached with the same gravity as tax reform. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 01:50 on Jun 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2022 01:45
|
|
|
If progressive dems want to do what the tea party did for the Republicans it's going to be a lot of work. Democratic voters are generally more educated and fragmented than Republicans and, completely anecdotally, seem to have less spare time. So endless spamming on Facebook and sit-ins at Democratic strong holds wouldn't hurt but it would not be as simple. An aggressive information campaign would be required but paradoxically I think the target audience tends to be demotivated by information spamming as opposed to Republicans. It might work but I'm not sure the exact same tactics apply.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2022 16:49
|
|
|
The dems are losing people. There are people in this thread who have been lost. This is a consequence of dems sucking and the material conditions getting worse. I know it's tempting to try to argue people back into the fold but the reality is SA is a microcosm. Even if you successfully argue with every SA poster into voting blue, you won't make a dent in the overall trend among leftists and progressives across the country. It may be satisfying to vent your frustration against that mindset but it is probably more useful to consider how to win those people back nationally. And before someone says lol just debating on the D&D forum there are probably better ideas to argue because if you want people to vote blue in a quantity that matters this is a losing strategy.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2022 21:14
|
|
|
As a 90s kid, the prevailing feeling around Roe was (I think) that codifying it was polticially untenable because Dems were terrified of being sadled with a "baby killer bill". I think that's still bullshit but moral cowardice was a typical feature of Clintonites so that seems plausible to me. And now we reap the rewards.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2022 01:42
|
|
|
Flying-PCP posted:The SCOTUS decision was only 'called shot' if you believe a conservative staffer leaked the draft. I know that's not the main point of the post, but also this isn't twitter and I think it's good for us to all strive for factual accuracy here. I think you're dwelling on the metaphor a little too deeply, I think OP was just saying that the Dems knew what the SCOTUS was going to do in advance and did nothing to stop them, not that the conservatives were literally the ones to make the announcement.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2022 06:31
|
|
|
quote:Is a woman who has an ectopic pregnancy really at risk now because of Roe v. Wade, or is that some hysterical fearmongering. "Hysterical fearmongering" is a bit of a yikes phrasing here but I'm sure you didn't mean it that way. There is no inappropriate anxieties about this situation. Most of the states with bans have not really considered the legal ramifications of what they are doing. In most cases the legal process itself refines and shapes the law, using court cases to smooth out vagaries in the laws. So while we exist in this awful new world where nobody is sure of anything, we're going to see a lot of legal tests. My prediction is that most states with bans will be slow to prosecute flippantly unless they think they can slam dunk it but I also think there are several states in a race to the bottom and I'm sure something horrific will absolutely arise from them.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2022 03:48
|
|
|
America Inc. posted:Is it fair to say that the Republicans are conservatives that want to go back to 1950, and the Democrats are conservatives that want to go back to 1990? Republicans want to bring American back to a 1950 that never actually existed, I think honestly they want to visit an alternate timeline where Civil Rights never happened. Democrats don't want to go back to 1990 but many of them seem to actively believe it is 1990.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2022 19:28
|
|
|
"but do what now?" needs to haunt the democrats for yearrrrs it's such a hilarious anti-rally.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2022 05:20
|
|
|
Papercut posted:Why would they even let her go on TV if she's this unprepared to answer possibly the most burning question on the topic? Two possibilities. Either she had an answer but decided that was the better one. Or two, that is the answer: we can't do anything.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2022 07:54
|
|
|
B B posted:https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1542142703491850241 Let's examine this for a second. First it frames the Roe overturn as a Trump thing as opposed to a Supreme Court thing. Obviously those are his appointees but they're as much the darlings of the conservative Congress as they are 'Trump's picks.' More importantly, Biden is saying that women's rights are in danger, the rights of half the population, which is about as close to an absolute existential crisis as you can get. Realistically the President should be using every tool in his arsenal to protect that - leading marches, joining sit ins, organizing groups, spending his not inconsiderable influence to protect and embolden civilian groups, etc. And yet Harris, a matter of hours ago, basically said, 'But do what now' as if to say their hands are tied and there can be no further action. The next good president needs to be prepared to do something legally questionable and bad for their career to protect the rights of the people in this country because we are rapidly reaching the point where good political leaders need to be revolutionaries.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2022 17:25
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:The neoliberal doctrine Dem leadership adheres to makes it very clear that, because American Democracy Is The Greatest System In The World, an entire branch of government can't possibly be suborned by ideologues. Even if it's staring them directly in the face. Yeah. One thing the Republicans have been very successful about since the Tea Party is polarizing the very idea of resistance and conflict. So the policies being maintained are somehow no longer of importance to the Dems, strong political action of any sort becomes inherently 'radical' even if that strong political action is 'trying to enshrine a 50 year old statute'.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2022 18:14
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:"yes, last time we said if you gave us 50 votes we'd give you $2000 checks, voting rights laws, an end to covid, and a big stimulus bill, but no, really, THIS time we're good for it. pinky swear." Even if the Dems somehow summoned up the requisite 60 senators to form a majority, Sinema and Manchin would still be there, and with the added senators almost certainly several more would be weird gloryhounds so the new angle would just be, 'well we have 60 votes but we just don't have a caucus on this so we need more senators' and then the line becomes we need like 67 senators to get anything accomplished and I don't even know if that's mathematically possible before you consider things like voter disenfranchisement or the GOP just straight up stealing elections.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Don't they just need 51 to make carveouts in the filibuster? Assuming Democrats will votes as a bloc in a world where that theory has never been tested is a pretty suspect assumption. Like Manchin might say he would do carveouts but I'll believe it when I see him do it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2022 19:24
|
|
|
Rigel posted:No one is counting on Manchin for poo poo. The idea is about making Manchin and Sinema irrelevant after the election if the Dems win a couple seats. I would like to believe two Dems who aren't the Terrible Two would actually overturn the filibuster but again I am going to remain skeptical on that until somebody actually does it. "Irrelevant" is a strong word. I want to believe there is nobody else in the whole Dem caucus, tenured or not, who would not use the opportunity to dictate terms to the entire government but only time can tell me that. History has so far not been kind on whether or not Dems have changed as a party, there's no evidence of it yet. You don't need to convince me to vote, I will, but I do not trust the Dems to do poo poo even if we hand them 5 senators. Also if we lose the House and gain the Senate just puts us right back where we started legislatively.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2022 19:47
|
|
|
Mitch McConnell: "If you do the thing I don't like, I'll filibuster all your bills!" Democrats: "Weren't you going to do that anyway?" Mitch: "Yes". Dems: "poo poo what can we do to appease you?"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2022 21:10
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:Washington And yet we still have no income tax and one of the worst sets of sales taxes impacting the poor. We are a land of contrasts. I AM GRANDO posted:Was anybody excited about Biden in 2020? In my circle it was grim resignation all the way. Even in this thread, was there anyone during the primary or after who thought Biden was best or who had enthusiasm for him? I'm sure there was? I mean there were people unironically excited about Hilary and I'm sure some of that energy plus strong feelings on Obama must have energized... somebody, but I struggle to find a real world example.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2022 00:06
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Even California has stupid retro poo poo like Medicaid clawback for 55+, "fetal protection" laws, and Prop. 13 for businesses. Right. What I'm saying is "farthest left state government" is a bar buried somewhere in the ocean.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2022 00:15
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Northeastern voters seem to have this weird attitude of "We shouldn't ever let those Republican assholes run everything.... buuuut you need a check in there somewhere so that the Democrats don't just go crazy with the budget". There always seems to be some random Republican governors somewhere in the northeast that you normally think shouldn't be there. IMHO, having been born, raised, and lived 2/3 of my life in the NE, I think this is close, but it's not so much 'balance' is something akin to blue-collar gumption. There is something like a union sentiment that still exists in the NE and it doesn't fit neatly into the political spectrum. You get some people who are of the 'socially progressive, fiscally conservative' opinion, you get genuine socialists, you get unionists with nasty racists streaks, and a whole bunch of other stuff. It's a weird pot that could really be pushed in either direction and I think a lot of people in MA, in particular, take it for granted that they live in a blue stronghold and don't really examine why or what that means, and it makes it potentially vulnerable to a particular flavor of populist that thankfully has not yet arisen but easily could.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2022 00:57
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:The sad thing is that 'slimy opportunistic used car salesman' is probably a genuine step up from the shoddy decorum golems with slavish loyalty to the Party instead of critical thinking skills. Well yeah slimy used car salesman politician implies they want to actually sell you on something as opposed to "what am I supposed to do, help?"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2022 03:19
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:You're right but somehow it still feels different. More mean spirited and dumb. I think what you're describing is a result of generational shift. Politicians in the 80s and 90s were forced to code language and subdue their goals. At the same time material conditions were good which meant most disagreements among politicians were ideological rather than existential. Now obviously, in the real world, many things were just as bad as they were today - this was the era of Rodney King after all - but much of that was successfully hidden from the white, middle class electorate who were not at all ready to hear just how bad things were for people in the margins. Today, conditions are far worse and information is much cheaper to acquire. Conflicts are now both ideological and existential, as people want a more just world and also are in increasingly desperate positions. This is true on the right as it is on the left; they are also angry about an entire generation of politicians unwilling to speak openly and act decisively, it's just that the right sees "open racism" as the solution to their ills. They're true believers, basically, not just cynical capitalists taking the shortest distance to their goals. In this way, Democrats are a full generation behind their Republican counterparts.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2022 01:10
|
|
|
People ITT making generalizations about impeachment, a process that has been rarely implemented and under wildly differing circumstances. And no former president has been prosecuted before. I think it's fair to say trying to draw conclusions about how the voters respond to impeachment or the political climate surrounding them is short sighted. What is happening right now has never happened in America before. You can be cynical about that, you can be optimistic about that, both are reasonable responses, but pretending the arc of history bends toward any particular outcome is soothsaying.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2022 21:17
|
|
|
"Employment rate" is not a good indicator of economic health in a world where minimum wage is increasingly below the required standard of living. An index of expendable income would be much better, and especially if that index was compared to rate of activity versus rate of hoarding. And if you broke it out by tax bracket. Sooner or later this country will have to contend with the idea that one or more classes are in a recession while others are not. Mass averages are lovely.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2022 00:15
|
|
|
People can also be both stupid and brilliant because intelligence is not real.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2022 02:00
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Intelligence is real, it's just not an easily quantified D&D stat. In the sense that it describes many barely related or totally unrelated skills, sure. Like diction and subject knowledge are part of a layman's idea of intelligence. Spacial reasoning, inference, perceptiveness, critical thinking, and more. The fact that a person who can eloquently debate on the fly and someone who can crunch numbers in their head both conform to somebody's idea of intelligence tells me all I need to know about the concept. Intelligence is just an impression of competence. And whether or not we value the field of competence determines whether or not we call it intelligence. I'm not a scientist or a doctor so I can't speak to more clinical definitions but I would still be very skeptical.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2022 08:43
|
|
|
I mean to put this in perspective, I went the high school in the late 90s, significantly after the height of what we would consider the AIDs crisis. I remember having a conversation with my mother around that time where we talked about AIDs and she said she was relieved I was straight because it couldn't be transmitted from 'straight' sex. I told her I was pretty sure that wasn't true, and left my mother with the uncomfortable revelation that anal sex was not a synonym for gay sex, which is what she had previously believed. Messaging with this poo poo is extremely important because even well-meaning-but-ignorant people hear the first thing and then they just stop paying attention, they aren't plugged in to the news and they don't hear the redactions, clarifications and statistics even if you know enough to revisit the topic later. This was why Trump was able to capture so many people about masks - because Fauci changed his mind about masks, which is a totally reasonable thing for a scientist to do but also people are collectively idiots and cannot pay attention to changing facts, particularly rapidly changing facts.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2022 05:40
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Well, no offense, but everyone here is acting like half the US is the "and then they EAT THE POO POO!" guy, and there's no loving getting around that with messaging if they are. Even putting aside the absolutely absurd level of homophobia present in astonishingly large segments of the US population, I tried to offer an alternative example. My mother is not someone I would call an extreme homophobe; she's quite accepting for a woman her age really but she is just so totally, unabashedly clueless about the concept that it has to has to be spoon fed to her for her to make heads or tails of it. So yeah, the awful people will make hay out of nothing of course but there's a big gap between the "eat the poo poo guy" and say, the average poster ITT.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2022 16:03
|
|
|
To be clear, the issue is the homophobes, not the messaging, but we're talking about a discrete event in which a single afternoon rewriting the speech can have a tangible affect on real people where as 'dealing' with our homophobia is not really in the scope of a 45 minute job for a speech writer at the CDC.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2022 17:18
|
|
|
Also pardoning four officers involved in a racially motivated murder is likely to have uh, consequences. I'm not saying the fascists ghouls wouldn't do that kind of thing but forcing the fascists to fash isn't a reason not to pursue justice if that's the best avenue.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2022 18:31
|
|
|
Random law question: how in the hell would jury selection work if Trump ever wound up in an actual trial? Like where on earth can you find 13 people who don't have some kind of pre-existing bias?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2022 17:33
|
|
|
I'm trying to imagine what records where worth taking but not destroying and its hard to imagine stuff that isn't either sellable national secrets, aliens, or... what? I guess it's possible Trump just stashed the Kennedy documents in a locker because he felt entitled to them.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2022 20:06
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:That's the really confusing part. But he has no motivation to keep those. It has to be like, damming stuff on political enemies or stuff he can sell, or something aggrandizing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2022 20:12
|
|
|
I think it's possible the only unredacted bit we will see is "documents related to national security" or "documents about international relations" which substantially broadens the scope. But I'm rooting for "aliens."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2022 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
Barron really likes the pictures so he took them. Or They were planted by the FBI. Wholesome father or victim of police overreach. Maybe both!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2022 01:19
|
|