Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

Still, I'd say that all of this calling for a recount is a bit ridiculous.

When the election results are this close AND with a minority victory it never hurts.

They did it with Al Gore as well.

The reason why Trump gets saddled with being a sore loser and not Hillary in this case is simple... Trump just constantly raves about how fixed the system is and how much Hillary is cheating and crooked...

While all Hillary did, indirectly, is go "Ok lets see those results again" without saying anything.

It would be like if I lose a neck and neck race... and then I went "Can I see the photo finish?" am I a sore loser? Now if the person who won suddenly went "NO NO NO!!! I won! You can't modify the photo you cheater" what would you say?

As well a recount has a secondary effect of actually calming people down so they don't give into paranoia about cheating (like say... Trump is doing )

[PTTG??]

Here's the thing I don't get:

Conservative: God told me that all my biases are correct.

Liberal: But I have evidence that you're wrong on climate change, economic policies, and social policies. My ethical philosophies focus on making a more just world for everyone, not just people like me.

Conservative: Wow, smug much? Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go do my plan to register everyone with a different religion as a possible terrorist, and shift the tax burden further away from the wealthy and onto the poor. You smug elitist.

*Yes these are straw men. Nonetheless, the liberals' message of equality, mutual respect, and social security is somehow branded as smug elitism, while the conservative's exclusionary, religious-reactionary corporate absolutism is somehow humble populism.

[Neonivek]

Ok REMEMBER... It wasn't Liberals who labeled themselves smug it was conservatives.

Remember what we said BEFORE Smug? Bleeding Heart.

So you can't see it from a neutral or liberal POV... Think of it from the Conservative one.

Here is a Liberal who constantly talks about how he is right and how you are in the stone age... About how the Church should be kicked out of all institutions no matter how nessisary and that their secularism is right. About how schools should be forced to teach their lessons at the exclusion of theirs.

That Liberals CLAIM to be there for everyone but really they don't know how to handle economic policy dooming everyone just to make themselves look good (Tinkle-Down Economics remember)

[Shadowlord]

Also "communist"

[Luke_The_Hungry]

Law is a bad example there, as it is highly employable outside of its vocational applications in things like business, secretarial and administrative work

Information is itself worth pursuing, but why? I hold the pursuit of knowledge and its retention, passing down to next generations and so on to be of inherent worth and paramount importance, but articulating why this is important is considerably more difficult. Then again, I think I answered my own question, passing down our information to the next generation and building upon that data is intrinsically valuable. Yeah, that seems right.

Also what is more of issue, the reality that time spent on a degree (a costly endeavor in time and resources) must provide return in employability or the life of the student in question is ruined - I am more concerned with students who do not develop practical skills, never learn practical trades, and far from developing into a well-rounded individual put all their eggs into one academic basket that closes too many doors at once. And good fucking god, government politics should be studied to ensure everyone who studied government politics does not become a politician, there is nothing more damaging than a wealthy child who lives in an insular academic world then graduates into leading a nation without ever having experienced what the real world is or how actual people live. I am of the view that politicians should be drawn from those who work; those who lead - not those whose families were wealthy enough to send their sons and daughters to prep school. I know that's not your intended point, so pardon the venting.

What would be interesting if there was more affordable education, so that in addition to gaining practical skills, high demand skills one could pursue academic interests without having to be wealthy

I can agree with most of that (and your venting is excused), but the caveats I would add is that even practical skills can become out of style. If someone is currently in a trade school to learn how to drive a 16 wheeler, and comes out to find they've been rubbed out by machines, then their life is just as ruined as someone who decided to go into psychology. And that those more esoteric can help to make someone well rounded. Someone who learn about older archtecture styles or history might appreciate the significants of older buildings or monuments where as someone who's just an engineer might just see them as ineffecient.

As for the politicians *shrug* I think all walks of life should be allowed to become politicans so that as many people as possible has someone to champion. If you make so that only people from group X are allowed political power, then only group X's needs will be met and everyone else will be at the mercy of group X.

Side question: Speaking of skills going out of style, when did that happen to philosophy? It seemed like a philosopher was a fairly respected vocation until very recently.

[PTTG??]

Getting back to the other issue.

There are no strong Democrats in position for a 2020 run. In fact, that's probably how we got where we are -- any non-Hillary establishment candidate would have handily won the primary, and a generic Democrat would have trounced Trump.

Here's the crop we have sub-60-year-old notables in the Democratic Party.

These aren't major names; some of them are city councilors. And this is the short list; if we had a comprehensive list we'd have to start listing dogcatchers.

What has been going on for the past twenty years in the Democratic party?

[martinuzz]

What has been going on for the past twenty years in the Democratic party?

Things involving cigars

[Rolepgeek]

If we define liberal as Democrat and conservative as Republican, there's been actual research into the whole shebang. Faculty as well as students. Faculty is much more 'biased' than students, however; ~60% is not what I'd call overwhelming despite what Harvard Political Review says (no idea if that's actually a good site, just did some cursory research, finals are next week). Faculty seems to be much more significant outnumbering.

And when you consider that partisan bias enters in hiring practices, plus pressures from louder parts of the student body on public and most non-religious private campuses, it's not necessarily hard to see why.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalěs]

If we define liberal as Democrat and conservative as Republican, there's been actual research into the whole shebang. Faculty as well as students. Faculty is much more 'biased' than students, however; ~60% is not what I'd call overwhelming despite what Harvard Political Review says (no idea if that's actually a good site, just did some cursory research, finals are next week). Faculty seems to be much more significant outnumbering.

And when you consider that partisan bias enters in hiring practices, plus pressures from louder parts of the student body on public and most non-religious private campuses, it's not necessarily hard to see why.

Oh yeah, partisan bias and pressure can also amplify existing trends, but we're trying to figure out why the trends exist in the first place.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalěs]

Your best bet is probably to look into existing research on the topic. If there's none, odds are you aren't going to find the reasons why here.

I know, I'm just speculating, it's fun to speculate. When I say "we" I really just mean "I", heh.

[Neonivek]

Man the more I learn about Trump and his cabinet... the more I see how doomed the US is...

Hopefully a miracle happens and he is ineffectual... but no... the US is doomed

[TheBiggerFish]

Man the more I learn about Trump and his cabinet... the more I see how doomed the US is...

Hopefully a miracle happens and he is ineffectual someone sane is elected... but no... the US is doomed

Yeah.

[Neonivek]

I mean sorry guys but you are doomed... I was like "Alright fine, wipe away all the election feedback and give Trump a Clean slate"

Sure... he might have a few controversies here and there but... Wait Trump... your not in office yet... Why are you doing something stupid... Trump stop! Wait what? noo NOOOO!!!

[Sergarr]

Getting back to the other issue.

There are no strong Democrats in position for a 2020 run. In fact, that's probably how we got where we are -- any non-Hillary establishment candidate would have handily won the primary, and a generic Democrat would have trounced Trump.

Here's the crop we have sub-60-year-old notables in the Democratic Party.

These aren't major names; some of them are city councilors. And this is the short list; if we had a comprehensive list we'd have to start listing dogcatchers.

What has been going on for the past twenty years in the Democratic party?

I guess there aren't any good social lifts there that would allow young charismatic and dedicated people, that form a basis of any real leadership, to rise in ranks within the structure of the Democrat party.

Or rather, maybe they exist, but due to some major deficiencies, they instead elevate low energy losers who only know how to toe the party line.

I think maybe the main reason for that is because Democrat party is too unified in its opposition to Republicans, there just isn't any space for internal debates, necessarily to select such people, to take place.

After all, if every meaningful question has already been answered by the Party with the One Correct True Democratic Answer™, then how can young people show their high initiative, in an environment like that?

[Neonivek]

Ohh also... Welcome to Canada-Style Internet USA.