Print

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

[MrWillsauce]

pretty psyched that the puppet of the neoliberal cryptofascist plutocracy has a vagina this time. You guys?

[Egan_BW]

It's alright.

[Sheb]

I seem to have lost the point, somewhere. If your entire population votes for a critter and they don't win, the takeaway is probably that your candidate was a relatively poor one, not... whatever you're trying to say it was. At least insofar as this whole american election system goes, and by and large went previously.

If your entire population votes for a candidate and they don't win, the takeaway is that you don't get a say in the election system anymore, which, if you think the other populations dislike you, means you're fucked.

No, it means your population voted for a guy that no one else wanted to vote for. Plus, again, that's at most proximal. Sure, they were afraid of loosing influence in the Federal government. Because that mean it was possible slavery would end. Same for state's right: they care about them once it could be used to stop slavery, before that, they were perfectly okay with trampling the Northerner's right not to return escaped slaves.

[Sergarr]

I'm pretty sure that if Confederacy was for state rights and not for slavery, it wouldn't explicitly put slavery in its Constitution as something inviolable and above the local state's discretion:

Sec. 2. (I) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

(3) No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due.

(3) The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.

Seriously, the more you go there, the more it becomes clear that slavery was the main issue, and the Confederates weren't shy of trumping all over state's rights to enforce slavery.

Pretty much the only reason why Southern "Lost Cause" historical revisionism has hold out despite being blatantly contradictory to legal documents and speeches by high-ranking officials is because people really don't like to admit that their side was completely wrong and seek and support any explanation that would put them at least partially right.

[martinuzz]

Damn, I can´t even play a game anymore without being reminded of this thread.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Neonivek]

I know this is a bit off topic...

But does Prison Architect seriously not know the difference between consecutive and concurrent sentencing?

[Frumple]

If your entire population votes for a candidate and they don't win, the takeaway is that you don't get a say in the election system anymore, which, if you think the other populations dislike you, means you're fucked.

... there's more than one election cycle, mate. And more to the government than POTUS. If your takeaway from losing one presidential election is you've lost your say in the system forevermore, you may have some misunderstandings about how our election system works. Somewhat farcically massive ones. Same for being disliked by chunks of the country meaning you're just perpetually fucked, really.

Not going to put that possibility completely off the table considering the state of education (north and south) during the period, but... yeeaah.

[Neonivek]

I think we will need to wait until the next election before we pull the "America is dead!" card out.

To see if Trump's fear mongering racism... is used again by another politician... and is successful.

[RedKing]

If your entire population votes for a candidate and they don't win, the takeaway is that you don't get a say in the election system anymore, which, if you think the other populations dislike you, means you're fucked.

... there's more than one election cycle, mate. And more to the government than POTUS. If your takeaway from losing one presidential election is you've lost your say in the system forevermore, you may have some misunderstandings about how our election system works. Somewhat farcically massive ones. Same for being disliked by chunks of the country meaning you're just perpetually fucked, really.

Not going to put that possibility completely off the table considering the state of education (north and south) during the period, but... yeeaah.

Meh...at the time, we had less than 100 years under our belt as a democracy, and the early 1800's had all the political messiness of a banana republic.

We're a bit more mature now. A bit. A tiiiiny bit.

[Culise]

If your entire population votes for a candidate and they don't win, the takeaway is that you don't get a say in the election system anymore, which, if you think the other populations dislike you, means you're fucked.

... there's more than one election cycle, mate. And more to the government than POTUS. If your takeaway from losing one presidential election is you've lost your say in the system forevermore, you may have some misunderstandings about how our election system works. Somewhat farcically massive ones. Same for being disliked by chunks of the country meaning you're just perpetually fucked, really.

Not going to put that possibility completely off the table considering the state of education (north and south) during the period, but... yeeaah.

Meh...at the time, we had less than 100 years under our belt as a democracy, and the early 1800's had all the political messiness of a banana republic.

We're a bit more mature now. A bit. A tiiiiny bit.

Alternately, we're more jaded. Then again, I can think of at least one or two representatives or senators who could do with a good caning...

[Frumple]

Ahhh, last minute primary research. The time where you scramble for information on someone you've barely heard of and then go, "Oh hey, that one's got an F from the NRA. Let's go with that one." :V

... though to be fair, we're talking SAs, and all choices republican. It's a non-negligible indicator the guy's probably not in the gun lobby's pocket (fiscally or otherwise), which is good enough for an hour or so before going to the polls. Plus one of the public statements I could find from the other guy was laced with what looked suspiciously like dog whistles. Oddly enough also stuff that almost looked like a sane legal position, but coming out of a florida republican that's almost cause to be concerned in and of itself

Senate choices this time around seem really rather meh on the dem side, though. Least what I've been able to pick up refreshing the memory they all look roughly as undesirable. Well... except for murphy. Guy seems a bit thumpy, and not near impressive enough in other areas to make up for it.

[BorkBorkGoesTheCode]

Is there a correlation between the depiction of action heroes that use torture to gain information, and popular acceptance of torture?

[WealthyRadish]

Is there a correlation between the depiction of action heroes that use torture to gain information, and popular acceptance of torture?

Hard to speculate on. If it's a good person being tortured, of course they 100% of the time in every single freaking film never give up anything (implying torture doesn't work), but naturally the evil people will conveniently spill the beans before the our sensitive beefcake even has to get his hands dirty (implying at least the threat of torture does work). Rarely have I seen films portray it accurately, e.g. with faulty information under duress, less physically violent torture, or psychologically abusive interrogation.

[nenjin]

You need to ask these questions empirically. What constitutes torture? Is punching a guy in the face because he won't answer you torture? What about calling him names? What about leaving cat shit in his cell?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

We all know about the 24 Effect, though. The very existence of the "ticking bomb" scenario in the minds of people justifying torture is basically because of 24.

Therefore we must pass laws against this filth in the name of social responsibility.