|
bird food bathtub posted:Kinda feels like a symptom of the wider diagnosis of "People don't trust poo poo coming from those in power anymore". A few decades of skull loving anyone south of the 1% for an extra dollar has effects like that on a society. If there was a reservoir of trust from previous actions to draw on, individual events like this could be smoothed over and dealt with appropriately by those who do have a good understanding of environmental science. But that's not the society we live in. We live in "gently caress You Got Mine" given mortal form, and the people making these decisions like buying bottled water are doing the best they can with what is available to them. This is kind of a long-standing problem with handling large-scale disasters where the population might need to temporarily change their behavior in a way that disrupts their lives. From the POV of pure public health and safety, if you're not really sure whether something needs a response or not, you'd probably want to opt on the safe side and warn people that a response is likely necessary. In theory, anyway. But in practice, there's a big worry that people will hate it if things turn out lucky and said response ended up being unnecessary. It's a big dilemma in severe weather forecasting, for example. If forecasters predict a severe storm is coming and urge the populace to take precautions, and then the winds change and the storm doesn't hit there or is a lot weaker than expected, people take that as meaning that the weather forecasting is unreliable. And the bigger the disruption is, the more reluctant officials can be to recommend that disruption. Nobody wants to recommend an evacuation only for the hurricane to turn on a dime and completely miss the area, but at the same time, a last-minute evacuation recommendation is useless.
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2023 14:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
It's less grim if you go look at the actual results. The shift was generally from "Very Important" to "Somewhat Important", it's not like everyone's out there saying "gently caress community" all of a sudden. And while "tolerance for others" may have dropped in importance compared to four years ago, it still had the second-most people ranking it very important. It really just seems like people are less likely to say "very important" in general. It's still worth noting due to the change from previous polls, but as the very end of the article (briefly!) notes, there's also a methodology change to be aware of. The 1998 and 2019 polls used live interviewers to call people, while the 2023 poll was an online poll, which the article generously says "might account for a small portion of the reported decline in importance of the American values tested". It doesn't link the previous polls, or the detailed crosstabs of this poll, so all we can really do is rely on what the writer cherrypicked anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2023 16:40
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:So if the people that chuds don't like both start arming themselves for self defense and also committing mass shootings I wonder if chuds will change their stance on gun control from 100% against to gun control for only certain types of people. That's already their stance. The GOP's been increasingly determined to portray gun violence as a mental health issue rather than a gun availability issue, and there's plenty of them who regard "being trans" as a mental health issue. I'm sure they'd eagerly connect those two together and sign a bill banning gun ownership by trans people, while also using the mass shootings as an excuse to crack down even further on trans people in general. Not that they need to pass a law saying that explicitly. After all, minorities are already disproportionately disenfranchised of their 2nd Amendment rights, because they're disproportionately likely to be convicted of a felony (which renders it illegal for them to possess a firearm).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2023 03:16
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I know it's really horrific for the families, but I feel like there really needs to be an Emmett Till level photo. But that is a Hurclean task for anyone. Everybody already agrees that school mass shootings are bad. The disagreement isn't on "should we prevent school shootings", it's on "how do we prevent school shootings". Gruesome photos of dead kids are unlikely to have an impact on that conversation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2023 04:50
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Yes, but the original poll did ask about a lot more categories. They just didn't include them all in the tweet graphic. They are described and listed in the article underneath that was copy and pasted. It's worth noting that the demographics of this poll are somewhat skewed. It seemed suspicious practically at first glance, given that the "assistance to big cities" line looks a bit odd considering how much of the US population lives in urban areas. And sure enough, the sample had more people who lived in rural areas than it had people living in urban areas:  That's substantially overrepresenting rural voters, who make up roughly 14% of the population. Unsurprisingly, the poll also overrepresents "old people", "people who don't have college degrees", and "homeowners". I'm not sure how these line up with the general population, but their sample seems to lean conservative and wealthy too.   As for the overall numbers, it's worth noting that it's not "Americans think we spend too little on anything", it's "Democrats think we spend too little on some things and Republicans think we spend too little on other things". When they break it out by political affiliation, it gives a much different picture:  Republicans want to cut spending on childcare and science, and use those savings to increase spending on law enforcement and border security. Democrats want to cut spending on law enforcement and border security, and use those savings to increase spending on childcare and science.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2023 17:19
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:https://www.vice.com/en/article/5d9ppz/nashville-shooting-marjorie-taylor-greene-matt-walsh-anti-trans It's both, but mostly the latter. They're trying to paint trans folks as "bad people" with fundamentally evil intentions and thus morally bankrupt, deserving of all sorts of discrimination, etc. Same as how they paint trans people as rapists and child molesters. At the same time, it's consistent with their desire to respond to school shootings by talking about basically anything besides guns.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2023 20:53
|
|
|
Farchanter posted:I'm curious if DeSantis is even going to care. He gets to put "put Woke Disney in their place" on his campaign ads, the actual implementation probably doesn't bother him one bit. The people he put on that board sure care. The only reason we even know about what Disney did is because the board is publicly making a huge deal about it, and the DeSantis administration is publicly backing the board. So either he cares, or they're prioritizing their culture-war poo poo over DeSantis' personal political interests. And their tantrum over it has spawned headlines like Newsweek's "Ron DeSantis' Board Rages Against Disney World After Legal Humiliation", so it's a lot less likely that he'll be able to keep claiming that he "put Woke Disney in their place" while simultaneously continuing to fight Disney over it. It's also not just empty lip service, because the board has hired several law firms to examine the agreement and look for grounds to challenge it in court. The firms they've retained all seem to be politically connected and have ties to DeSantis' people, so there's probably some element of grift, but they can't keep insisting they've already won if they decide to pick this fight. If DeSantis were the uncontested nominee and had right-wing media fully in his corner, maybe he could get away with it, but that's not happening unless he gets lucky enough for something to knock Trump out of the race.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
Doctor Yiff posted:The point isn't to reason with them, it's to demonstrate to onlookers that they're full of poo poo. It's self-evidently full of poo poo. Nobody seriously thinks trans people are shooting up schools for the sake of "gender ideology". It very clearly doesn't make any sort of sense. In any case, the far right is happy to dismiss mass shooters' manifestos, websites, social media profiles, and any other evidence that doesn't fit their narrative. For example, Dylann Roof not only wrote a white supremacist manifesto, but left extensive evidence of his racist beliefs online, and many of his acquaintances said his racism was well-known. Yet Fox and Friends suggested that it was ridiculous to call the Charleston church shooting a hate crime, and Alex Jones suggested that the whole thing was a "set-up" and that Roof had been acting at the behest of federal agents seeking to create an excuse for a total federal takeover.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2023 21:12
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:it's incredibly trivial to craft a narrative that makes absolute sense, what are you talking about? That narrative doesn't make sense. If a hypothetical trans person were violently lashing out against legislative oppression, they'd probably target a lobbyist group, not an elementary school. As someone else said a bit earlier in the thread, there is no good and plausible reason to shoot up a class of elementary schoolers that makes any sort of sense.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2023 21:26
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:we already know that the shooter in this case has ties to the school and apparently attended. "christians" are also some of the most outspoken anti trans people. If she shot up the school because they abused her for being trans, then she didn't shoot up the school due to "gender ideology", she shot it up because she was abused. Yeah, it's easy to come up with a motive that's plausible to people who are actively trying to buy into right-wing framing, but there's not really a whole lot that can be done about that. When it comes to the Nashville case, the issue is that even though the authorities have her manifesto and all of her other writings and planning materials, they're dripfeeding out info of dubious credibility over a period of days, so that rather than getting a clear and accurate picture out in the first place, they're leaving people to speculate with incomplete facts. For example, cops quickly stated that the shooter was trans and a former student at the school, and didn't take long to claim that the attack was "planned and targeted". But we learned yesterday evening that the shooter had originally targeted public non-Christian schools, but settled on Covenant because it had less security. Moreover, we also learned that police think the shooter had also been planning to shoot up a local mall and kill "certain family members". quote:Nashville Council Member Robert Swope told The New York Post that the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit (BAU) is working with the Metro Nashville Police Department (MNPD) to carry out “a very in-depth analysis” of both the manifesto and “certain aspects of the shooter’s life” as they investigate what led up to the horrific mass murder. Moreover, we also know that the suspect was receiving mental health treatment, and that the suspect's family had been pressuring them to sell their guns because the family "felt that she should not own weapons". quote:Prior to Monday’s massacre, Hale had been able to legally purchase seven firearms – despite receiving mental health treatment at the time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2023 22:07
|
|
|
XboxPants posted:Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable that so many people are referring to Hale as being a transman, while at the same time, using "she" to refer to him? Sorry, my mistake. When I first started writing that post, I was consciously trying to focus on using "the shooter" and gender-neutral pronouns because the authorities have been very unclear about the specifics of that (which, by itself, is another issue with the dripfeeding - they confirmed the shooter being trans right away, but it took days for a consensus to emerge on whether "Audrey" was the deadname or the real name). However, I rewrote basically the entire post a couple times while digging through sources and trying to settle on an argument to pursue, and apparently I totally forgot about the prononus while revising stuff and accidentally slipped into the framing the authorities have been using. My bad.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2023 22:53
|
|
|
 This is such a great example of the DeSantis dilemma - he wants to run against Trump, but he has to do stuff like this, either because the voters love Trump so much or because he doesn't dare to go against Trump. Neither option bodes well for his chances. Framboise posted:So does this actually amount to anything, or is it another badge he gets to wear on his martyr sash like his impeachments? It'd be nice to see an actual, real, tangible, life-affecting consequence. It's an indictment. That means he is being Officially charged with a crime.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 01:06
|
|
|
PT6A posted:So I take it that with language like "Soros-backed" DeSantis has not typically been relying on the support of Jewish voters in FL? The Jewish right has pretty much fully adopted and embraced the anti-Soros stuff, eagerly casting him as a sinister anti-Semitic villain who seeks to destroy Jews. Even AIPAC and Israeli government officials have parroted anti-Soros stuff. At this point, I suspect it won't put off any American Jews who already lean Republican. https://twitter.com/AIPAC/status/1562496370241851396
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 01:28
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Mike Pence is somehow unable to answer a question about abortion and wobbling around. I have no idea if he is nervous, surprised, or trying to seem to moderate. But, he's coming off incredibly bad and it is bizarre to see Mike Pence of all people hedge on abortion. Is it that surprising? I feel like "yes, but you and I both know I'll never be president if I admit it on camera, so can we please pretend my answer is something else" is a common enough response from anti-abortion politicians above the House. FlamingLiberal posted:You know, I used to think that Ted Cruz bending the knee for Trump in 2016 was the most pathetic thing I've seen in politics, but this weird Pence defense of Trump has to be worse It's understandable. If he turns against Trump now, spending four whole years as Trump's VP was for nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 05:16
|
|
|
It's gonna get buried in the Trump stuff now, but the FBI released their investigative report about Stephen Paddock, the Las Vegas mass shooter from 2017, for whom no motive was ever conclusively determined. The whole thing's like three hundred pages and unsearchable, so I'm just gonna rely on a press report to summarize the results, though I'm going to add my own emphasis to a couple of points that seem important yet were never publicly mentioned before. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/30/us/las-vegas-shooting-gunman.html quote:The man who fatally shot 60 people at an outdoor music festival in Las Vegas in 2017 had been angry over what he saw as casinos scaling back on perks for V.I.P. gamblers like himself, according to an account provided to the F.B.I. As far as I can tell, this is the first time that any hint of his political leanings have been revealed, and woof, it sure is a doozy. Guess we'll just never know why the guy who admired McVeigh and Hitler shot a bunch of people! 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 05:36
|
|
Mr. Paddock had been fascinated by the Oklahoma City bombing that killed 168 people in 1995 and “thought ADOLF HITLER was a good man.”
|
Discendo Vox posted:Can you find an actual link to the document set? I've not immediately had any luck. It's here, split into two parts: https://vault.fbi.gov/stephen-paddock Utter pain in the rear end to go through, though. 600+ pages combined, heavily redacted, it's not OCRed so it can't be searched easily, and stuff like webpage printouts and evidence spreadsheets are mixed in haphazardly with the rest of the report.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 06:02
|
|
|
Cpt. Mahatma Gandhi posted:Jesus, these peoples still believe that all the opposition to DJT comes from elites at the top of gov't and media and that all normal Americans are actually still totally on their side but are just being silenced/cowed. AKA, the Silent MajorityTM. They just cannot wrap their heads around the idea that the majority of Americans just do not like Trump or, at the very least, don't care about him. The leader of the NYC Young Republicans is a true believer, a TPUSA guy and Babylon Bee VP who frequently writes articles for right-wing media. As a reference for where he stands, he thinks Matt Gaetz is a "model leader" and a MAGA hero. Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I don't think that is entirely off-base. The problem is that only about a quarter of mass shooters kill themselves. Another quarter are killed by police and about half are subdued in some way. Their life's over regardless. Even if they don't shoot themselves and aren't shot by cops, someone who shoots up an elementary school is going to prison forever. Several prominent researchers of mass shootings, like Jillian Peterson and James Densley, have taken the position that large-scale* mass shootings are fundamentally acts of murder-suicide. And yeah, these researchers are generally quite skeptical of the effectiveness of punishment. The Violence Project sums it up well in their analysis of mass shooters:  *the definition of "mass shooting" is a little fuzzy, so I'm arbitrarily throwing on "large-scale" to clearly distinguish poo poo like school shootings and nightclub shootings. Many mass shooting databases use more expansive definitions that include stuff like gang violence, drive-bys, and family murders, which makes sense from a "counting the impact of gun violence" perspective but doesn't really fall into the same category as someone who spends an hour walking the halls of an elementary school looking for kids to kill.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:This got me to thinking. I was having an argument the other day whereby somebody tried to argue that drag shows are like strip clubs in that they are an event and therefore subject to zoning laws and other kinds of local legislation; but I countered that public nudity is generally illegal and a strip club is a space where it isn't illegal, so it makes sense that you'd need to have districting for it. Wearing a wig and a dress isn't illegal anywhere - you'd have to outlaw certain kinds of theater while you're at it. The text of the Tennessee law is pretty straightforward, and very short: quote:BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE: So it targets "male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest". In theory, it only applies to drag that appeals to a "prurient interest". But what does "prurient interest" mean in this context? It's left vague and not defined here, but elsewhere in Tennessee law it refers to "shameful or morbid interest in sex". Which is still pretty vague. I think it translates to normal English as "some real freaky pervert poo poo", except that the people setting the bar for that are cops and judges in Tennessee, so you never know where the local authorities will draw the line. Especially given that the far right is actively trying to portray all trans people as groomers and rapists. It's an intentionally subjective standard that lets local chud authorities apply an "I know it when I see it" standard.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2023 06:03
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Post-indictment poll: Trump surges to largest-ever lead over DeSantis They're loyal to him because he doesn't give a poo poo about any rules or traditions or policies that get in the way of doing what they want, something people of basically any political stripe can relate to. He's willing to openly blast the courts if they make rulings that get in the way of his policies, and he's willing to loudly pretend that he'd defy the courts (though in practice, he has little choice but to obey). The far right aren't the only people who'd get hype for a politician who does that sort of stuff. On top of that, even his opponents don't have the guts to go against him at times like this. Remember DeSantis declaring that he'd order Florida officials to refuse to cooperate with the indictment? Of course he'd lose ground to Trump. If his campaign tactic is to fully buy into Trump's rhetoric and position himself as a wholehearted supporter of Trump, he isn't doing a very good job of explaining why anyone should vote for him over Trump.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Far right control is already an inevitability, the system itself is designed to ensure that. Mellow Seas posted:The problem is that there is no revolution that is going to eliminate the fact that some percentage of people seem to be, for the lack of a better term, immutably pro-suffering. I think these are some pretty wild assertions to throw out there without any further specifics. Not only are they rather inflammatory and extreme, but they're also so vague that it's difficult to read them as specific claims rather than vague ideological throwaways. And personally, I think they're both copouts. The American left is far too eager to find anyone or anything else to pin the blame on for its own weakness. Whether it's claiming that the system is somehow rigged in favor of fascism, or insisting that voters are too "pro-suffering" to support leftism, or claiming that voters are simply voting against their own interests...it all seems to boil down simply declaring leftism to be functionally impossible to attain (whether in America or worldwide), and absolving the left of its responsibility to convince other people to support leftist policies.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2023 17:50
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:So how is this supposed to work? Coach fingers everyone’s puss before the big game? The problem with getting news from "some rando who posts about politics on Twitter all day" is that occasionally they exaggerate things somewhat. The bill doesn't actually say anything about genital inspections or anything like that. It legally defines trans women as "male" without regard for their gender identity, bans women's sports teams from having any members legally defined as male, protects trans-exclusionary sports teams from any potential "adverse action" by accrediting orgs or athletics organizations, and creates a private cause of action for students to sue schools that may have allowed a trans woman onto a sports team.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
Class3KillStorm posted:In a way, wasn't that how Biden ended up winning last time, though? Sanders was way ahead on delegate count and everything in the early states, until Super Tuesday, when the more conservative Dems rallied around Biden and the number of delegates flooding his way ended up totally upending that race. Super Tuesday is pretty early - there's only four states before that. The article says DeSantis is betting on losing Super Tuesday, and making up for it by winning states that'll be holding their primaries weeks later, like California, New York, and Pennsylvania. It's an utterly terrible idea. DeSantis desperately needs to show he's a credible candidate who has a shot against Trump, or else all his money and support will abandon him. If he blows off all the Feb and March races figuring he can make up the points later, it'll be impossible for him to scrub off the stench of a loser.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2023 21:29
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I feel like the feds need to start getting involved with this poo poo I can't really think of any legal justification for the federal government to get involved. This poo poo is stupid and petty, but it's not a federal crime.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2023 01:16
|
|
|
Kith posted:nobody told the new crop that they're supposed to be pretending Making those empty promises for so long without ever intending to actually fulfill them is exactly what sowed the seeds of this new crop in the first place. They weren't pretending to be anti-abortion just for the fun of it, they were pretending because there was a diehard segment of their electorate who genuinely wanted to ban abortion. But pretending only works for so long. Eventually, that diehard base rose up and started running their own candidates, and by then the GOP had driven out so many other groups that the anti-abortion diehards were a substantial force in the primaries. Their overdependence on making empty promises to fringe groups came back to bite them when the fringe groups started demanding their own seat at the table.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2023 06:16
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The issue is that both parties as they are now divvied up their their factional issues and priorities post Carter, and haven't really changed much since Clinton. The calcification of which groups and ideologies align with each party naturally led to position homogeneity of the parties. While the GOP is still an unholy alliance of Bible Trumpeters, Libertarians, Racists, Fascists, and the Chamber of Commerce, decades of alliance and proximity have lead all the groups to largely believe the same things. The end result is that instead of throwing sops and platitudes to disparate groups, they're throwing sops and platitudes to a single group. I wouldn't say that. There's still clearly different factions with different interests in the GOP. The problem is that they've all been convinced by right-wing media that the Democrats are literally pure evil, and therefore they all have no choice but to tolerate the extreme ideologies of their fellow Republicans. The "just cut my taxes and deregulate my business, I don't care about literally anything else" faction may not be on board with the extreme anti-abortion stuff, but Fox News has informed them that the Democrats are literally communists who plan to raise taxes through the roof and ban private business, so they feel they need to support the Dems' opposition no matter what. Even if the extreme anti-abortion types aren't on board with the racism and tax cuts, Fox has informed them that the Dems plan to make baby murder mandatory, so they have no choice but to support the other party no matter what. And so on. Quixzlizx posted:Does DeSantis making individual people (specifically kids) cry and suffer play well outside of dementia and lead-ridden boomers and other deplorables? I feel like a grown man bullying specific children as individuals still doesn't play that well, even for people who are fine with making an abstract class of people suffer. I don't even remember Trump doing that too often. DeSantis' supporters would say that he's not bullying the kids, he's rescuing them from woke brainwashing, and any tears and suffering are caused exclusively by the brainwashers.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Satanic Panic started in the 80s, so figure the concerned parents tended to be 30-50 years old (usually parents start freaking out about these things when their kids are a bit older and they feel like they're losing control over them, so somewhere around 6-16 depending on the family.) That means they would've been mostly born between the early 30s and mid-50s, so boomers definitely got in on that action, yeah. This isn't true at all, though. The core of the Satanic Panic focused heavily on daycares and preschools. It was driven by a rising awareness of child abuse, encouraged by a little industry of self-proclaimed abuse experts pushing into the relatively new and untested field of social work with extremely dubious theories and techniques, and played out against the backdrop of the new right-wing fundamentalist movement that had come together in the late 70s as a backlash against the progressivism of the era. This is the problem with boiling things down to simple "well, each generation had a boogeyman" talk. It may seem true when you're looking at things with about as much analysis and accuracy as a Cracked Dot Com article, but each of these movements emerged in response to specific cultural trends and shifts, not just each generation looking for one and only one thing to hate.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
Oxyclean posted:I don't think the implication was that it was equivalent, just which groups could become another cultural punching bag for a moral panic. It's not like we haven't seen republicans try with that whole litterbox thing. Is it "sex bad" or is it "I personally am not comfortable with the level of sexual talk going on in these spaces"? I would personally recommend being very suspicious of those kinds of vague anecdotal reports, because comfort and consent are very important, and I have definitely encountered people who used sex-positivity as an excuse to ignore other people's boundaries and comfort levels in a social space. And as far as I know, "tenderqueer" is mostly used to describe people in queer communities who use social justice language to disguise their own toxic or manipulative behavior. For example, someone who openly talks about their sexual encounters or what makes them horny in great detail, without regard for the social circumstances, and then responds to any pushback by accusing the other person of not being sex-positive.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2023 23:22
|
|
|
Clarste posted:I don't understand this idea that the GOP cares about precedent. If "just ignore court rulings you don't like" was an effective tactic that the GOP would happily take without a second thought, then Roe wouldn't have been important in the first place, because the GOP would have just ignored it. Even as recently as the Trump presidency, the GOP begrudgingly obeyed court rulings that went against the administration, even when they had a government trifecta. koolkal posted:https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/texas-judge-halts-fda-approval-of-abortion-pill-mifepristone Did you mean to paste a different link? This article doesn't say anywhere that the FDA could simply choose to ignore the ruling.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2023 21:41
|
|
|
Dull Fork posted:I mean... sure you won't make the nutters open their eyes. But you're not publicizing it for those who will never change their mind no matter the evidence, and for those who aren't nuts, now they have actual evidence to use as a counter argument to those conspiracy theories. Really seems like the superior way to handle manifestos. Scrambling to hide anything a shooter has said or done will just result in a Streisand effect imo. This seems a bit inconsistent here. You say that the people who believe the conspiracy theories are "nutters" who "will never change their mind no matter the evidence", but then you suggest that the evidence is needed as a counterargument to those conspiracy theories. But if the only people who believe the conspiracy theories are unconvinceable, then there's not really any point in lining up counterarguments. And the Streisand Effect is what happens when someone tries to hide information that's already publicly available.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
Dull Fork posted:Its only inconsistent if you think that every person who has a mild distrust for what the govt tells them is a conspiracy theorist who is incapable of changing their mind. You're comparing "the cops said the killer mostly wrote about idolizing previous school shooters" to MKUltra coverups. That seems absolutely unreasonable to me. The thing is that "distrust" is not a blank check to just reject everything. You still have to ask questions like "is the government's position implausible" or "what motive would they have to lie about it" or "is there something important that could be hidden by lying about it". But none of those really have satisfactory answers - after all, it doesn't really matter what the shooter wrote down in the first place. As was pointed out last time this conversation happened, there is no good or valid reason for someone to shoot up an elementary school. And regardless of this particular shooter's ideology, it's just one of numerous mass shootings committed for all sorts of different reasons over the past few years; hyperfocusing on the circumstances of any individual event just draws attention away from the systemic issues. Quoting the Wikipedia article on "Streisand Effect" and taking one line out of context doesn't change the fact that the Streisand Effect is mostly relevant to information that was already out there. There's tons of cases where information is hidden just fine, completely successfully. Streisand herself, and most other Streisand Effect victims, sought to remove information that was already publicly available.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2023 22:31
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:If they replaced growing almonds with other kinds of agricultural activity, I don’t think it would meaningfully use more water on a water used/kcal of crop basis. Per kcal is a weird measure to use, since there's more to a food than just its calorie value. According to Popular Science (yeah, I know, but most more reputable water use resources are measuring water per kg rather than water per kcal), almonds use 59 liters per 100 calories. It doesn't look as bad by this metric, because despite being notoriously water-hungry, almonds are fairly calorie-dense, so that ends up being only slightly more than wheat flour (55 liters per 100 calories). That doesn't mean there aren't other crops we could use that require a lot less water, though! Corn requires 33 liters per 100 calories (a bit more than half of what almonds need), and broccoli needs just 10 liters per 100 calories (just over 1/6th of almonds' water usage per kcal). But kcals don't tell the full story. Here's an infographic from Business Insider, based on this study of crop water footprints:  Pay particular attention to the units here. The "almond" entry on this chart isn't one almond tree or one pound of almonds, it's one single almond. Each individual almond requires an entire gallon of water, and five almonds require more water than an entire head of broccoli, even though the latter is more filling.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2023 23:17
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:This is such a bizarre tack to take for the "100% pro-life" people. Especially since people like DeSantis and others are okaying 6-week limits. Mike Pence of all people being not sure if he would support a 15-week limit is a wild choice in particular. Is there a group out there who were huge Mike Pence fans until they heard he wanted to limit abortion? I can maybe, maybe, see someone like Scott (who 99% of people aren't familiar with) trying to pull something like this and thinking it is a good idea, but still such a weird strategic decision. All of them seem to be blindsided when asked a follow-up question about abortion too. There's some portion of "pro-life" people for whom "pro-life" means "keep the bad people from doing abortions at bad times for bad reasons", not "ban all abortions". It's worth referring to the classic article, The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion, which collects anecdotes from abortion doctors who saw pro-life people show up at the clinic for an abortion. There's also the fact that actually banning abortion outright is generally unpopular. Tim Scott doesn't want to speak against a national abortion bans because doing so would doom him in a primary, but he doesn't want to speak for one either because it'll be a very painful weight to carry into a general election. So he insists that he's "100% pro-life" in an attempt to convince the anti-abortion lobby that he aligns with them, but refuses to comment on any specific policies because he's only paying lip service to them and doesn't want to get nailed down on anything that might hurt him in the general.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2023 03:12
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:It's not weird at all. It's a very good figure of merit, if the (ostensible) concern is trying to feed people as efficiently as possible, right? People when they control their diets usually set calorie goals, not 'total mass of food consumed' goals. Low-calorie high-mass foods are important to many diets, because eating lots of calories is fairly easy in modern society - the hard part is stopping at a given calorie level. When people are controlling their diets, the calorie goal is generally more of a calorie limit. High-calorie low-mass foods don't physically fill your stomach, and are therefore easier to overeat. Now, nutrition and weight gain are complicated and there's much that we don't necessarily know for sure, but there's definitely more to food production than just maximizing calories. And like I said, almonds and wheat flour use twice as much water per kcal as corn, and six times as much water per kcal as broccoli. By this one measure alone, they're not ultra efficient.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2023 15:40
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The other ruling said the FDA can't pull the drug from the market. That's not quite right. The other ruling barred the FDA from "altering the status quo and rights as it relates to the availability of Mifepristone". The 5th Circuit's changes may not be a full ban, but they still alter the status quo and therefore conflict with that order. As for how the two orders interact, I think that's up to SCOTUS. The 5th Circuit's ruling doesn't go into effect until Saturday, and the case has already been emergency appealed to SCOTUS, which will probably put a longer stay on one of those orders.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2023 18:04
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Ron needs to respond with a Don impersonator cramming his face with McDonalds. Cpt. Mahatma Gandhi posted:It should be Trump dipping his well done steak in ketchup. I hope these are just copy-pastes from #Resistance Twitter or something, because thinking that people are going to be repulsed by photos of a guy eating Big Macs or overcooked steak feels very ivory tower liberal. A lot of people eat Big Macs and overcooked steak, it's normal and accepted in a way that eating pudding with your hands definitely fuckin ain't.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2023 16:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Tim Scott is trying to rebound from his strange response to the question of what he would do about abortion. It's not really a bad answer until someone else who's running gives a better one. It's pretty clear he doesn't have a very specific position on abortion policy and is just trying to pander to the anti abortion lobby without pissing anyone else off, but he's hardly alone in that. And as long as he signs their bills, they don't really have any reason to be mad at that. It's not like Trump has staked out a position on exactly how an abortion ban should be written either.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2023 19:28
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:He introduced and sponsored a bill two years ago that would ban abortion entirely nationwide - except for cases of rape and incest. It's not even ancient history. Are you talking about the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act of 2021, which outright banned abortions after 20 weeks nationally? It was introduced by Lindsey Graham seven days after the Dems took control of the Senate in 2021, and co-sponsored by 45 of the 50 GOP senators at the time. Also, Roe was still in effect at the time. The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Acts of 2013, 2015, 2017, 2018, and 2019 all shared those same properties of "co-sponsored by almost all the GOP senators", "don't have enough votes to actually pass" (only one of them even made it to the Senate floor, where it was filibustered), and "Roe hasn't been overturned yet". Class3KillStorm posted:Trump doesn't have an explicit position, true, but hasn't he been out there blasting Republicans for being too draconian* in the laws that they're creating and signing at the state level post-Dobbs? Scott, while trying to avoid a specific number, is claiming he'll sign the most Conservative bill that lands on his desk, while Trump is basically saying that the law should be more lenient and have more allowances for rape and incest. Not really, no. On the campaign trail in 2016, he was super anti-abortion, but didn't commit to specific policies beyond overturning Roe and suggesting that women who get abortions should be punished (which he quickly walked back). After the GOP did poorly in 2022, he did complain on Truth Social that the "abortion issue" was "poorly handled" by the GOP. But in the very same post, he also blamed anti-abortion activists for not showing up to the polls, and implied that they'd selfishly abandoned the GOP after getting what they wanted. And as he's spun up his 2024 campaign, he's pointedly refused to take a clear position on abortion policy. When the AP asked him last month whether he supported a federal abortion ban, he dodged the question and tried to talk about "radical-left lunatics" instead.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2023 20:08
|
|
|
cr0y posted:How in the loving gently caress do you justify firing a gun for shoplifting He followed them out to their car and went right up to them, so they maced him, and he panicked and pulled his gun and immediately started shooting
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2023 01:20
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Missouri's a castle doctrine state, so there's room for any proceeding to go very badly. Even without castle doctrine, there's plenty of room for things to go badly. This reminds me a lot of the killing of Yoshihiro Hattori in the 90s, where a jury didn't convict despite a very similar set of facts: quote:Hattori and Haymaker walked to the house's front door and rang the doorbell. Nobody came to the front door, but Bonnie Peairs opened the side door leading to the carport and saw Haymaker standing a few yards away. Haymaker was wearing a neck brace due to a recent injury and bandages as part of a Halloween costume. He attempted to address Bonnie Peairs, but she later testified that she panicked when Hattori appeared from around the corner and moved briskly towards her. She slammed the door and told her husband Rodney to get his gun.[2] quote:Peairs's defense was his claim that Hattori had an "extremely unusual manner of moving" that any reasonable person would find "scary". It emphasized that Peairs was an "average Joe", a man just like the jury members' neighbors, a man who "liked sugar in his grits".[11]
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2023 05:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Honestly it's kind of silly that representatives have to be physically present in the capitol to vote. Seems like maybe our government should consider taking this newfangled invention of instantaneous global communication into account. Filibusters would probably be even worse than they already are if senators could do them from the comfort of their own homes. Forcing legislators to go through the inconvenience of having to actually travel to the Capitol to vote in person makes it more inconvenient to go loving around and playing games with votes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2023 14:22
|
|