Print

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

[McTraveller]

Gerrymandering is a symptom of a much more fundamental problem - namely it's basically mathematically impossible to have a fair representation of ideology simultaneously with a fair representation of geography, because ideology and geography are not in general compatibly arranged.

Pesky humans.

I mean, it's basically the electoral college thing, but at a state representative level.  The difference is that we don't redraw state lines every 10 years when the census numbers come out so you can't gerrymander it (you have to do other things like "play the electoral college game, not the popular vote game" instead).

[smjjames]

Nobody's (except maybe a few on the fringes) asking for an absolutely perfect representation, just as fair as possible. It should be pretty obvious when one side is clearly biased towards one side or the other, which is why the ruling is what it is.

[SalmonGod]

Well it's started, I started seeing people on Facebook claiming that toxic masculinity is the reason that "male leftists" are saying Oprah isn't a good choice. Unfollowed that person too, as I tend to unfollow people who have extreme views quite a bit. I don't need that sort of stress.

However, that argument is undermined by the fact that her association with unscrupulous men has been the main argument against her candidacy.

For me however, the fact that she's peddled clear pseudoscience on her show is the big sticking point. she pushed The Secret, and one person who found it through her show decided not to take chemotherapy for cancer, and died. Oprah still stuck by "The Secret" after that, even while trying to convince the woman to have the chemo. Which is just a confusing position all around.

FWIW, the most obnoxiously feminist person I know (has something to say about toxic masculinity every single day) posted on Facebook that she doesn't trust Oprah.

[EnigmaticHat]

I don’t know much about Oprah but like... we hated when Republicans elected Trump.  I don’t doubt Oprah can stitch a sentence together, or that she’s not a traitor.  She’s probably smarter and more educated than most people.   But like, maybe don’t look at the failed celebrity president and be like “now its the left’s turn!”

On the other hand, don’t let this turn you against Oprah.  The Russians are still using social media to sow discord, and FB’s algorithms are still shit.  This is the same website where a few years back you could pay a few cents and have an ad be shown to exactly ONE person.  FB was a playground for Putin in 2016 and that hasn’t changed; a while back FB’s VP specifically refused a congressman’s request that they not accept ads paid for in Russian currency.  Hilariously he also refused to deny payments from NK.  For all we know Putin is starting early with Oprah just in case.

Remember: FB’s algorithms are shit.  FB’s ads are shit.  FB’s groups are shit.  FB’s sponsored content is shit.  News linked from FB is probably shit.  Trust nothing from that website, at least not until they make a good show of fixing their everything.

[smjjames]

Until she actually declares a run, it's just rumors all the way down. When she starts making political moves that look like a run, then she'll actually be on the list.

I recall she was on the 'are they gonna run for year XXXX?' list at least two or three times.

When she actually runs, puts out a policy plan, etc, and do a debate or two, then we start judging.

[Reelya]

This is the same website where a few years back you could pay a few cents and have an ad be shown to exactly ONE person.

But that made for some hilarious pranks.
http://ghostinfluence.com/the-ultimate-retaliation-pranking-my-roommate-with-targeted-facebook-ads/

While my roommate is a professional sword swallower who can down a 26” sword to the hilt, he gags every time he tries to swallow a pill – oh the irony. While he didn’t broadcast it publicly, it was the source of a great amusement to those close to him that knew it – especially me who saw him attempt to take vitamins every morning. For this placement the idea was to sell a fake product that helped people take pills without gagging … and have it speak only to sword swallowers.

[SalmonGod]

I don’t know much about Oprah but like... we hated when Republicans elected Trump.  I don’t doubt Oprah can stitch a sentence together, or that she’s not a traitor.  She’s probably smarter and more educated than most people.   But like, maybe don’t look at the failed celebrity president and be like “now its the left’s turn!”

On the other hand, don’t let this turn you against Oprah.  The Russians are still using social media to sow discord, and FB’s algorithms are still shit.  This is the same website where a few years back you could pay a few cents and have an ad be shown to exactly ONE person.  FB was a playground for Putin in 2016 and that hasn’t changed; a while back FB’s VP specifically refused a congressman’s request that they not accept ads paid for in Russian currency.  Hilariously he also refused to deny payments from NK.  For all we know Putin is starting early with Oprah just in case.

Remember: FB’s algorithms are shit.  FB’s ads are shit.  FB’s groups are shit.  FB’s sponsored content is shit.  News linked from FB is probably shit.  Trust nothing from that website, at least not until they make a good show of fixing their everything.

Agreed.  Just to clarify, I wasn't saying anything related to this.  Just relating the hand-typed words of a feminist acquaintance to Reelya's earlier comments.

[wierd]

Personally, I am loathe to suggest as a candidate for the presidency, a person who fell victim to a really bad internet meme run roughshod by 4chan.

To me, that speaks of pretty intense disconnection.  Not something I want the president to be. 

[Frumple]

RedKing is definetly going to be happy with this (I forget if he lives in SC or NC, but he'll be happy either way).

RK's in NC, yes. Least if he hasn't moved or been washed out to sea.

[PTTG??]

We really, really need an insider. Someone with a lot of connections and who really believes in diplomacy. We need somebody to steady the ship of state and bring her into dry dock.

That is definitely not Oprah.

[helmacon]

So yesterday someone online attacked me again for voting third party during the election, and it got me thinking. For all that people disparage and hate on our polarized two party system, it's exactly this sentiment that causes it. When you convince everyone that the only way to stop X group is for everyone who is not X to unite against it, eventually our boils down into just 2 parties. Sure, the system is set up to encourage that as well, and the whole winner take all policy in some states, but it starts at a more basic level. People say they don't want a two party system, but then classify everyone not in their party as the same. That's creating a two party system, and seriously, fuck those people. I'm so tired of being told that because I voted third party I voted fur trump. I did not. Trump was shit. So was your candidate. I'm not responsible for an outcome you don't like just because I'm not fighting alongside you.

On that matter, I've yet to see anyone who was a major Hillary supporter take any responsibility for the loss. To hear it from them, she ran a flawless campaign, and it was just bigotry and corruption that lost her the election. It's just childish.

[sluissa]

So yesterday someone online attacked me again for voting third party during the election, and it got me thinking. For all that people disparage and hate on our polarized two party system, it's exactly this sentiment that causes it. When you convince everyone that the only way to stop X group is for everyone who is not X to unite against it, eventually our boils down into just 2 parties. Sure, the system is set up to encourage that as well, and the whole winner take all policy in some states, but it starts at a more basic level. People say they don't want a two party system, but then classify everyone not in their party as the same. That's creating a two party system, and seriously, fuck those people. I'm so tired of being told that because I voted third party I voted fur trump. I did not. Trump was shit. So was your candidate. I'm not responsible for an outcome you don't like just because I'm not fighting alongside you.

On that matter, I've yet to see anyone who was a major Hillary supporter take any responsibility for the loss. To hear it from them, she ran a flawless campaign, and it was just bigotry and corruption that lost her the election. It's just childish.

I've had the opposite problem, just to add another anecdote. There's people I've talked to openly and honestly who still think I voted Hillary in the election and rag on me about it (because they're either Trump supporters... or at the very least "never Dem" conservatives) even though I've told them multiple times I voted third party. Hell, I voted Johnson, which would usually be closer to "conservative" values than Hillary anyway. It's just, "You didn't vote for Trump, so you must have voted for Hillary." It's frustrating when people don't even remember there are other options. I mean, I sort of get the thought process that leads to "Third Parties never win." But to just be willfully ignorant about their existence is ridiculous.

[smjjames]

So yesterday someone online attacked me again for voting third party during the election, and it got me thinking. For all that people disparage and hate on our polarized two party system, it's exactly this sentiment that causes it. When you convince everyone that the only way to stop X group is for everyone who is not X to unite against it, eventually our boils down into just 2 parties. Sure, the system is set up to encourage that as well, and the whole winner take all policy in some states, but it starts at a more basic level. People say they don't want a two party system, but then classify everyone not in their party as the same. That's creating a two party system, and seriously, fuck those people. I'm so tired of being told that because I voted third party I voted fur trump. I did not. Trump was shit. So was your candidate. I'm not responsible for an outcome you don't like just because I'm not fighting alongside you.

I think part of it is the spoiler effect since the same accusations got lobbed at third parties in the 2000 election. Then there is the whole hyperpartianship, tribalism and 'You're either with us or against us'.

The thing is that there is no way of asking every single voter who their second choice would have been or if they would have voted for either of the two main party candidates, or even have voted at all. Plus the fact that the two third parties would have been taking from both main parties and 4k votes for Johnson doesn't equal 4k votes for Clinton.

On that matter, I've yet to see anyone who was a major Hillary supporter take any responsibility for the loss. To hear it from them, she ran a flawless campaign, and it was just bigotry and corruption that lost her the election. It's just childish.

I agree that it's just childish and blinding themselves to mistakes that were made. Fortunately, the Democrats as a party seems to be trying to move past it, but, remains to be seen how successful they are.

Meanwhile, Clinton can't seem to let go of the fact that she lost and a good chunk of it was due to her own failings.

For the record, I supported Sanders during the primaries. I actually was going to vote Jill Stein (not that Clinton would have needed much help winning California), but she turned out to be a crappy candidate.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The big overarching problem is that the Democrats are in beigeout and refuse to stand for anything half the time. They are less interesting than the Republicans by far, and everyone knows it. Just take the two big memes of the Republican primary race: On one side, you've got crazy Donald Trump who just drops the dogwhistle for nearly everything and calls Mexicans rapists then posts himself eating Taco Bell on Cinco de Mayo, and on the other you've got Jeb!, heir to the Bush dynasty.

Trump triumphed over these other assholes in the primary because they were all to a greater or lesser extent Jeb!like, they were boring and conventional. Old news. It's the perfect environment for Trump's recursive hype.

Bland neoliberal corporate stasis isn't just a bad idea (and frankly, that's still Trump's real policy agenda even if he rails against it rhetorically), it does not engage voters and never will.

There's this really good quote about the Nazi Party that I can't find, but it amounted to "Hitler promised the people a rejection of the unbearably reasonable slow recovery of German power in exchange for absolute hatred and self-destruction, and they loved him for it". That same principle is why people are so often inexplicably Republican-by-Default, even people who don't seem to believe in the policies of the Republican party. It's not about the policies. It has never been about the policies.

Human beings view the world through a lens of narrative and storytelling, we have no "rational mind" so much as we can carefully curate our abstract feelings towards a practical goal, and that's basically a learned skill. Trump is a heel, and he knows it. Motherfucker actually did wrestling even if he was bad at it. But here's the thing, Clinton wasn't a face. She was nobody to the crowd of undifferentiated voters who split the difference between absolute victory and absolute defeat.

If there's anything to learn from the social dynamics of the Trump presidency it is that people prefer a villain to a bureaucrat. You need someone who is able to go beyond cynical memorization of facts and flaws in your opponent. You really, honestly need someone able to step into the narrative role of heroism if you want to split that difference and get people who don't give a shit about learning your website's fact checking on your side.

[Loud Whispers]

Don't you talk shit about guac boi. Slow and steady, Jeb! 2020