|
Bullshit probation (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 21:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 06:43 |
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Bullshit probation (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 21:52
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Bullshit probation (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 21:57
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Bullshit probation (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:00
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Bullshit probation (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:00
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:
(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:02
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Bullshit probation Anyway, speaking of some actual news: https://twitter.com/LailaAlarian/status/1785725466998964654 Also the house is about to vote on the Antisemitism Awareness Act which among other things seeks to change the definition of antisemitism to include quote:Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/01/politics/house-vote-antisemitism-awareness-act/index.html Progressive members and the ACLU are railing against it, so wonder how many Dems vote for it (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:02
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Bullshit probation (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:02
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Anyway, speaking of some actual news: Something tells me this is going to pass, and will be used by university administrators and legal authorties to further crackdown on protests. Edit: Of loving Course https://twitter.com/jacobkornbluh/status/1785775817353507053 133 Democrats voted yay. Good to see the party is still worse than useless. Nucleic Acids fucked around with this message at 22:08 on May 1, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:05
|
|
|
did anyone actually watch the clip? it's biased and spun in a way im pretty sure noone here agrees with, but it is judiciously clear of misinformation or lies. like when she talks about it being 'unclear how many protestors are students', the subtitle refers to many of those arrested not being from Columbia but rather from City university and possible elsewhere. it's incredibly easy to dunk on the pro-israel lobby and university admins and counterprotestors and news coverage. I dont know why people keep having to post unsupported bullshit and then act like its fascism to try to have an accurate discussion based on facts. e: thanks for the av. it can help raise awareness about the crimes being committed in Palestine, unlike posting bullshit and then getting aggro. TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 22:16 on May 1, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:12
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:It doesn't seem to be doing that at all. At no point does it implicate the pro-peace protesters as the sole or primary source of violence. In fact, it describes several incidents of the police using physical force against protesters, without any indication that the protesters used violence or did anything in particular to provoke the police response. The only direct attribution of violence it includes is a mention of a single fight between pro-Israeli protesters and pro-Palestinian protesters with people throwing large objects at each other (with no mention of who started it, yes, but I wouldn't expect them to say because it's unlikely that they have hard evidence either way!). It carefully avoids accusing the protesters of doing anything more than making people uncomfortable. quote:"Destruction, violence and hate overtake college campuses across the country with Jewish students feeling unsafe at their own schools. It is unacceptable, and harkening back to the 1930s in Europe." That statement seems to pretty strongly link the protestors with "destruction" and "violence" and, again, references Hitler. Also declares this "unacceptable" so it's not even a particularly neutral stance.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:21
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:The problem is that you seem to have accepted a basically false framing of what happened. What's the false framing?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:26
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:What's the false framing? I think the false framing was that Destruction, violence and hate overtake college campuses across the country with Jewish students feeling unsafe at their own schools. As well as it harkening back to the 1930s in Europe, which is a bit asinine.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:32
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:Something tells me this is going to pass, and will be used by university administrators and legal authorties to further crackdown on protests. The Democratic Party, as a whole, showing that simply voting for Democrats does not necessarily mean good outcomes. I have no faith in them fighting against fascism when they do poo poo like this
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:39
|
|
|
Guys it's totally not misinformation to say that college campuses today are just like 1930s Germany and are being overrun by violence and hatred towards Jews Not a lie at all! It's totally true! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:50
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:did anyone actually watch the clip? Without commenting on the video in question, this is a false distinction; I believe bias and spin are both classifiable as "misinformation." True statements that tell only partial or incomplete truths are information but also "mis-".
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:58
|
|
|
koolkal posted:That statement seems to pretty strongly link the protestors with "destruction" and "violence" and, again, references Hitler. Also declares this "unacceptable" so it's not even a particularly neutral stance. In the quoted post, I was talking about the video, not the tweet. But my overall conclusion remains true here too: "It carefully avoids accusing the protesters of doing anything more than making people uncomfortable". If you were already predisposed to think that the protesters are bad and violent, would you read it as something that confirms your preexisting biases even though it doesn't actually say any of those things? Probably. That doesn't mean it's disinformation, though, that just means it's vague. And tweets are often vague, due to the wordcount limitation that makes it impractical to describe things in great detail. Is it neutral? Of loving course not. The video makes sure to remind the viewer that the war started when "Hamas terrorists brutally murdered more than a thousand people", to use their exact words, and then goes on to announce an interview with the relatives of a hostage and smugly adds "you don't hear the pro-Palestinian protesters talking about that" (referring to the plight of the hostages). I deliberately held off on mentioning those details before, because I wanted to see if any of the people complaining about the clip were actually going to watch it - the anchor makes no secret of her biases, at all! Does that somehow mean that all claims of misinformation are non-credible, as Nucleic Acids appears to have suggested? Not unless you have some preexisting biases of your own you're looking for confirmation for.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 23:06
|
|
|
It is always so weird to watch so many supposedly intelligent and thoughtful people rush in, practically tripping over themselves to go, "weeeeeeellll actually it wasn't technically a lie as you'll see here on my pocket sized chart of acceptable propaganda." (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 23:08
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:In the quoted post, I was talking about the video, not the tweet. But my overall conclusion remains true here too: "It carefully avoids accusing the protesters of doing anything more than making people uncomfortable". The problem with the tweet isn't its vagueness; it's that it specifically compares the protesters to the Nazis in 1930s Germany. e: and, of course, you can't really disentangle the tweet from the video so neatly, since a lot of people are going to access that clip via twitter and other social media. So if that's the first impression they're getting of the video, they're already going into it thinking, "These protesters are like the Nazis in the 1930s; the summary tweet says so." e2: this is the sort of poo poo CNN is pulling: https://twitter.com/lalarian/status/1785723683819884796 You can read about the case of Dr. Sami Al-Arian (the poster's father) on the Human Rights Watch page. Majorian fucked around with this message at 23:50 on May 1, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 23:22
|
|
|
https://vxtwitter.com/mattbinder/status/1785778592967766297 This is completely unhinged. Cutting a propaganda video about arresting peaceful protesters is wild, but, again, expected
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 23:52
|
|
|
In a piece of good news for a change, the Arizona legislature has voted to overturn the state's 1864 abortion ban: https://twitter.com/AP/status/1785757601839431964 The repeal passed the AZ Senate 16-14, with two Republicans flipping and voting with the Dems to overturn the ban. That means Arizona will revert to the more recent 15-week abortion ban when the bill takes effect in a couple of months. Other Republicans made their support for the ban quite clear during the debate, with one of them going so far as to compare the repeal to the Holocaust. The GOP certainly seems to be splitting quite a bit over abortion.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 23:59
|
|
|
I do appreciate that there's one thing that can bring both sides together https://twitter.com/MavenNavarro1/status/1785785576571994299
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 00:38
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:As I said, it was a guess. Which is why this chart is kind of suspect. And what kinds of assumptions are being made by the chart, anyway? That Republican states will eventually all expand Medicaid? That they won't? Perhaps the most striking assumption is that this Trump health plan would have been passed at all. I mean, even the most braindead obvious basic infrastructure legislation couldn't get passed by a Republican trifecta. Are we to seriously believe that a phantom health insurance law that purports to upend health insurance coverage in the United States would have gotten passed? Willa Rogers posted:The 2026 numbers, as with the other years, are cumulative deaths, not deaths per year. The projected ACA total deaths thru 2026 look to be around 320k, while the projected AHCA total deaths thru 2026 appear to be around 540k. That is not a factor of two, but yes: 20 percent or w/e more deaths per year does accumulate over time. It's still hundreds of thousands of people dying under either plan because of being uninsured or underinsured. I realize that the deaths are cumulative. This is why the divergence is getting larger over time: the cumulative health effects of not having insurance or shittier insurance. And yes, the difference is nearly a factor of 2 by 2026 and will surpass that given the trajectory of those lines; pointing out that Republicans would kill 69% more people and not 100% is not a serious counterargument to the vast difference between Obamacare and whatever Trump vomited out. And again, no one is claiming that the ACA is some kind of perfect health insurance. Everyone here wants M4A because it's superior in every way. But the comparison needs to be to the alternative, which never passed under Republicans, and the difference between Democratic and Republican states re Medicaid expansion based on the law that we do have. Willa Rogers posted:Funny you should mention the pandemic & Medicaid, bc one of the pandemic-relief programs started under Trump was no-questions-asked/no-income-verification-required Medicaid that led to record numbers of enrollment--but that's now been phased out by most states through a combination of low income threshold for means-testing and administrative snafus (people moving or not filling out the paperwork properly). The no-questions-asked Medicaid that was "started under Trump" is a red herring and irrelevant to what we're discussing. But I'll bite: the largest disenrollment numbers happened--surprise, surprise!--in Republican states, proving our good friend After The War correct yet again. There is only 1 truly Republican state in the top 10 highest renewals on that list (and only 3 in the top 20). After The War posted:Reminder that people are dying every day because of states refusing the Medicare extensions in the ACA, leading to hospital closure. They have no problems loving over their own citizens. And I'm positive that many of those provisions that you like in the 2020 Families First Coronavirus Response Act only happened because we had a Democratic House that demanded them. But again - red herring. Whether or not the people who got enrolled during the pandemic due to temporary new rules are getting disenrolled now does not change the original math of Medicaid expansion. I'm not sure if your implying that the ACA Medicaid expansion portion was drafted in such a way as to eventually get it killed in the court. If not, I agree - it's not a perfect bill and there were obvious fuckups in it. koolkal posted:It's going to be interesting in that the most likely outcome given polling is that the Dems take back the House, lose the Senate, and lose the Presidency. There are a number of polls showing states with a noticeable gap between the Senate race and the Presidential. Highly unlikely, especially since the latest redistricting made the maps fairer and more representative. Can you give me an example of a nominee losing the presidential bid but having his party capture the House in the last 30 years?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 01:12
|
|
|
koolkal posted:It's going to be interesting in that the most likely outcome given polling is that the Dems take back the House, lose the Senate, and lose the Presidency. There are a number of polls showing states with a noticeable gap between the Senate race and the Presidential. If Dems only take back the House and Nate Silver's polling aggregate is actually accurate I'll be shocked. Every election from 2018 to just yesterday, from New York to Alabama, has been examples of Dems over-performing results compared to what polling has expected. To me, it seems like a serious case of Herding is going on and the posters themselves are just consistently weighting Trump/Repub chances as better because everyone else is and they don't want to be outliers. That, and they still rely on landline telephone calls where chuds only pick up the phone to shout "TRUMP!!" and hangup.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 01:43
|
|
|
small butter posted:Which is why this chart is kind of suspect. And what kinds of assumptions are being made by the chart, anyway? That Republican states will eventually all expand Medicaid? That they won't? Perhaps the most striking assumption is that this Trump health plan would have been passed at all. I mean, even the most braindead obvious basic infrastructure legislation couldn't get passed by a Republican trifecta. Are we to seriously believe that a phantom health insurance law that purports to upend health insurance coverage in the United States would have gotten passed? As I've said, I don't know the source of the chart's data & could only guess that that was the no. Sanders cited during his campaign of 80k people/year dying bc of being uninsured or underinsured, likely based on KFF stats since it's the leading researcher for that sector. I am not asking you to seriously believe anything, nor am I averring anything in particular about Republicans or Democrats; I was discussing the topic of Medicaid expansion in context of the thread's conversation at that point with other posters like Beetus, and in context of why people feel their economic situations are precarious even though they may be working & satisfied with their own situations. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 02:23 on May 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 01:52
|
|
|
Pleasant Friend posted:If Dems only take back the House and Nate Silver's polling aggregate is actually accurate I'll be shocked. Every election from 2018 to just yesterday, from New York to Alabama, has been examples of Dems over-performing results compared to what polling has expected. To me, it seems like a serious case of Herding is going on and the posters themselves are just consistently weighting Trump/Repub chances as better because everyone else is and they don't want to be outliers. That, and they still rely on landline telephone calls where chuds only pick up the phone to shout "TRUMP!!" and hangup. https://emersoncollegepolling.com/trump-holds-edge-over-biden-in-seven-key-swing-state-polls/ So the reason I think there's a strong chance Biden underperforms the party is that these polls were conducted asking the same person about both the Senate race AND the Presidential. So even if you end up with some crazy dude screaming TRUMP they apparently also screamed GALLEGO along with it. And the Dems overperforming in special elections is an indication that they'll take the House but it's a bit of an extrapolation to say that Biden will also enjoy the same success when he's doing worse than Senate races in 6 out of 7 swing states (Georgia having no Senate race being the exception). small butter posted:Can you give me an example of a nominee losing the presidential bid but having his party capture the House in the last 30 years? 2012.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:01
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:In a piece of good news for a change, the Arizona legislature has voted to overturn the state's 1864 abortion ban: was this that poo poo where the conservatives were all talking in tongues in religious reverence over the bill being passed or was that a different set of theocratic nutbags
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:02
|
|
|
koolkal posted:2012. Republicans already held the house after 2010
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:04
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Republicans already held the house after 2010 So an election in the last 30 years where the party that did not control the House in the preceding midterms wins control of the House while the Presidential candidate in the same party loses? That's a lot of stipulations! The "student loan debt forgiveness program for Pell Grant recipients who start a business that operates for three years in disadvantaged communities" of elections. If that many qualifiers are needed for it to be unique, it doesn't seem like it's making a strong argument that it's particularly exceptional.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:16
|
|
|
republicans lost 8 house seats in 2012 and thanks to gerrymandering and the vagaries of district by district results actually lost the total votes cast in all house races 47.7% to 48.8% to the dems. if the dems have a similar performance to the 2012 republican house they will definitely not regain the house
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/seattletimes/status/1785808009563623727 Another Boeing whistleblower has died suddenly, doesn't seem to be foul play but it sure seems to be happening a lot lately.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:35
|
|
|
Pleasant Friend posted:If Dems only take back the House and Nate Silver's polling aggregate is actually accurate I'll be shocked. Every election from 2018 to just yesterday, from New York to Alabama, has been examples of Dems over-performing results compared to what polling has expected. To me, it seems like a serious case of Herding is going on and the posters themselves are just consistently weighting Trump/Repub chances as better because everyone else is and they don't want to be outliers. That, and they still rely on landline telephone calls where chuds only pick up the phone to shout "TRUMP!!" and hangup. Well it's great that it seems that way to you, but your point here amounts to: "I have faith that all the polls are wrong!" Which is, in effect, the same sort of copium-huffing that prevailed in GOP circles in 2020. In the real world, Biden is currently behind Trump in every swing state, has the lowest average job approval on record, and is doing so poorly among young voters that, depending on the likely voter screen used, might be losing that demographic to Trump. It doesn't seem very likely that recent events will cause him to recover the youth vote. Aside from the polls, I think you're straight up delusional if you believe that Biden isn't facing a massive enthusiasm problem that is going to result in diminished democratic voter turnout. While it's true that most voters don't prioritize foreign policy as their most important issue, voters (especially younger voters & especially democrats) tend to place a lot of importance on a candidate sharing their values. So (e.g.) even if Gaza isn't someone's most important issue, Biden's pro-genocide position very clearly marks a massive difference between his values and the values of democratic base voters. It's hard to get enthusiastic about "protecting democracy" when "democracy" seems to mean "rich pro-Israel donors get to overrule the position of a majority of democratic voters". And of course, even if you ignore the genocide, more voters trust Trump on the economy. While I realize that this thread has a habit of scolding the plebs for not understanding that the economic data actually says things are amazing - and while y'all may be technically correct, for all that matters - it's pretty doubtful that's a winning message. I guess you could be right, but the inference from "democrats overperformed since 2018" to "Joe Biden surely will overperform in 2024" is incredibly weak. Joe Biden was only on the ballot for one of those elections, and there are strong intuitive and objective reasons to believe that the possibility of Biden overperforming the polls is a lot lower than you're claiming.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:36
|
|
|
Bellmaker posted:https://twitter.com/seattletimes/status/1785808009563623727 Who knew "quality engineer" was such a dangerous job.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:37
|
|
|
Bellmaker posted:https://twitter.com/seattletimes/status/1785808009563623727 i guess if you have enough deadly corporate malfeasance, eventually you'll have enough whistleblowers that statistically some of them will be dying on a frequent basis
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:38
|
|
|
It is a tragedy that occurs to thousands every year. Antibiotic resistance is a serious and growing problem. In 2017, there were more than 20,000 MRSA-associated deaths in the United States. But things might get better, as the Biden administration has undertaken an historic role in fighting back -- in 2022, the White House announced that the Department of Health and Human Services would invest $40 million to expand the role of biomanufacturing in antibiotics. We can only hope continued "moon shot" efforts, in particular private-public partnerships to encourage innovative approaches to drug development, can bring a halt to these deaths.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:46
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:In the real world, Biden is currently behind Trump in every swing state, has the lowest average job approval on record, and is doing so poorly among young voters that, depending on the likely voter screen used, might be losing that demographic to Trump. It doesn't seem very likely that recent events will cause him to recover the youth vote. Those are all polls. Special elections (where people are actually voting on ballots) suggest a different environment. Also, even if Biden loses in November (~50% chance) he is not going to lose the 18-29 demographic lmao. If you believe the polls where Biden is doing poorly with young voters, it's because of standard Republican issues like immigration and "the economy", not Gaza. Gaza isn't going to be a major issue in the presidential election. Even if the election is so close that people voting because of Gaza might have decided it, there will be other issues voters ranked as more important. Biden's policy on Israel is bad on its own merits, there's no need for a largely imaginary story about how it will cost him reelection. Trump, meanwhile, lost 17% of the vote to Nikki Haley in the Pennsylvania primary last week (closed primary in a key swing state Trump likely needs to win the election), 80 years after Haley suspended her campaign. edit Republicans are also broke and Trump is scamming their donors to pay his lawyers while Democrats have unlimited money James Garfield fucked around with this message at 02:59 on May 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 02:51
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:It is a tragedy that occurs to thousands every year. Antibiotic resistance is a serious and growing problem. In 2017, there were more than 20,000 MRSA-associated deaths in the United States. 40 million dollars, glad to know the we're ready to commit the opening weekend box office of the failed Aquaman sequel to handling an existential crisis.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 03:10
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:Those are all polls. Special elections (where people are actually voting on ballots) suggest a different environment. Also, even if Biden loses in November (~50% chance) he is not going to lose the 18-29 demographic lmao. So... you got any objective data or evidence to back any of that up? Or is it just an imaginary story of your own?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 03:27
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:So... you got any objective data or evidence to back any of that up? Or is it just an imaginary story of your own? Gaza/the Middle East/really any foreign policy at all is basically no one's most important issue (net 6-8% for all three put together), although I disagree with James Garfield about the size of the effect it may still have as turmoil. https://news.gallup.com/file/poll/644591/2024_04_30_Most%20Important%20Problem.pdf
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 03:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 06:43 |
|
|
***edit*** Sorry, Painframe, didn't see your followup on this page before I posted this. Main Paineframe posted:If you're mad about disinformation or lies, then point to the misinformation and lies so we can talk about it, instead of just assuming that everyone already agrees with you that the mainstream media are constantly lying and can't ever be trusted. I don't know about disinformation, but there is a very strong position being taken in the video. After an uncritical show of Eric Adam's self-admittedly baseless accusations of outside agitators being the source of unrest, there is this monologue: quote:Many of these protests started peacefully, with legitimate questions about the war. But in many cases, they lost the plot. They're calling for a ceasefire, well there was a ceasefire on October 6th the day before Hamas terrorists brutally murdered more than a thousand people inside Israel, and took hundreds more as hostages. Main Paineframe posted:In the quoted post, I was talking about the video, not the tweet. But my overall conclusion remains true here too: "It carefully avoids accusing the protesters of doing anything more than making people uncomfortable". Technically true I guess, but that conclusion elides the gross bias displayed towards the Zionists and the open and utterly unjustifiably conflation of pro-Palestinian protestors and Nazis. Stringent fucked around with this message at 03:38 on May 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 03:35
|
|
