Print

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

[Reelya]

It sounds like pure marketing BS. If they bought things before the tariffs hit then the optimal strategy would be to wait until the prices rise then sell the stuff then. What they are doing is just using fear of the tariffs to drive short-term sales to clear their old stock, which makes sense since electronics become obsolete very quickly.

I think you're missing the point I was after - I know it's just marketing.

My point was that this illustrates how well awareness of the tariffs, and the idea that tariffs are Bad and Cost Me Money, currently are. The fact that fear of the tariffs is a useful marketing ploy is politically significant in and of itself.

I don't think that's a very revolutionary discovery. That just means that people are aware that tariffs are a tax, so they're reacting the same as they do to any other tax hike. I get your point, I'm just not sure how politically significant it is. Are people not supposed to realize that a tariff is just a tax?

If there was a new gun tax aimed at reducing gun sales then people would rush out to stock up on guns before the tax was implemented. That wouldn't mean that significant amounts of people oppose the new gun tax and think it's bad. Even the people who support the gun tax in general might join in the rush to get guns before the tax: everyone wants to own a gun but for everyone else to not own a gun, since from a personal standpoint, that's the optimal outcome.

The tariff is just a tax on imported electronics, so people are engaged in the exact same thinking here. They can support the tariffs in the belief that they will help local jobs, but still join in the rush to snap up pre-tariff electronics for themselves. Everyone wants everyone else to pay the tariffs but not to have to pay the tariff themselves.

[Lord Shonus]

Most of the support for the tariffs I've seen, both personally and in the media, is based on the assumption that "we make them foreigners pay, we start making the stuff in America and everybody saves munny". A lot of people, in my experience, cheered the tariffs in the expectation they would save money and get wonderful new jobs.

No new jobs, and higher prices, are really pissing people off, at least as far as I've seen.

[Hanslanda]

Most of the support for the tariffs I've seen, both personally and in the media, is based on the assumption that "we make them foreigners pay, we start making the stuff in America and everybody saves munny". A lot of people, in my experience, cheered the tariffs in the expectation they would save money and get wonderful new jobs.

No new jobs, and higher prices, are really pissing people off, at least as far as I've seen.

Excellent. *steeples his fingers*

[RedKing]

So...in case y'all missed it, Trump stated that the US military will consider thrown rocks equivalent to rifles, and return fire.
Why do I feel like this is just providing some thin semblance of cover for an impending massacre? 

[Trekkin]

So...in case y'all missed it, Trump stated that the US military will consider thrown rocks equivalent to rifles, and return fire.
Why do I feel like this is just providing some thin semblance of cover for an impending massacre? 

Because Stephen Miller's running out of ways to distract the white nationalists from the manifold failures of Trump-as-Führer. There's no Wall. Violent bigots are still being de-platformed. People still disagree with them.

This bloody fantasy of the military gunning down brown people en masse for daring to touch Our Soil is about all they've got left.

[Hanslanda]

And the military basically said, "Well... No. That's not how soldiers work..."

[RedKing]

Let's hope the military sticks to their RoE. I do feel like the armed forces have a bit better quality control on keeping white nationalists out of the ranks compared to say, civilian law enforcement. Or ICE, which might as well just have "Do You Hate Brown People? Do You Want To Chase Them Down All Day? Well We Have A Job For You!" as their recruiting pamphlet these days.


In horse-race news, chances of the Democrats taking the Senate is now down to about 1 in 7. Which, incidentally, is virtually the same chance that the Republican keep the House. So Congress is about to get way more dysfunctional. Which -- if Trump is smart -- could actually benefit him in the short run. He could cite Congressional inaction as the justification for ruling by executive order, nevermind that that was one of the biggest criticisms the GOP had of Obama in his second term.

In the long-term though, forcing Trump to enact all his shit by executive order makes it a lot easier to undo when he leaves, whether by impeachment, electoral loss, or the cold, bony hand of Kellyanne Conway Death. (My bet is that he goes out like Elvis, aneurysm while on the toilet at 3am.)

The Democrats will also likely pick up a number of governors, including in a few red states.

Overall, not exactly a #BlueWave but sure as hell not a #RedWave.

[RedKing]

If polling is any metric, it really doesn't. For either party. Rick Scott raised a bajillion dollars in Florida and is still neck-and-neck with Bill Nelson.

I think in a more polarized electorate, fundraising matters less because there's more "baked in" votes and fewer people to convince. If anything, campaigns are now more about getting your base to actually show the fuck up rather than trying to win over swing/undecided voters.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

The fuck?

Okay, first, how can their due process rights be violated if they are neither in the country nor citizens of the US, and nothing has yet actually been done to them?  There something I'm not aware of, because that just seems like going after someone for something that hasn't yet been done.

Second, why the fuck is the Flores Agreement a thing that can be done by criminals (see below)?   There are embassies that they could have gone to to claim the status *before* they entered into the US illegally?

Third, how is stating the migrant caravan is full of criminals wrong?  What is with people thinking Europe's Schengen Area applies globally?  Entering a country without a passport, and unless there's a Visa-free agreement without that, is a crime.  Several have entered into Mexico in that manner outside of being brought to a processing center due to making a claim of asylum.

[Trekkin]

If polling is any metric, it really doesn't. For either party. Rick Scott raised a bajillion dollars in Florida and is still neck-and-neck with Bill Nelson.

I think in a more polarized electorate, fundraising matters less because there's more "baked in" votes and fewer people to convince. If anything, campaigns are now more about getting your base to actually show the fuck up rather than trying to win over swing/undecided voters.

That's actually another way the model could be systematically wrong, although it's no fault of the model itself: there's significant underpolling of "safe" states, which naturally matters at the district level but also means that many of 538's predictions are falling back partly on CANTOR, which can exacerbate the failure of those polls to pick up increases in enthusiasm since it tends to average them out (but, again, that's not what it was designed to do anyway.)

[Loud Whispers]

The fuck?

Okay, first, how can their due process rights be violated if they are neither in the country nor citizens of the US, and nothing has yet actually been done to them?  There something I'm not aware of, because that just seems like going after someone for something that hasn't yet been done.

Second, why the fuck is the Flores Agreement a thing that can be done by criminals (see below)?   There are embassies that they could have gone to to claim the status *before* they entered into the US illegally?

Third, how is stating the migrant caravan is full of criminals wrong?  What is with people thinking Europe's Schengen Area applies globally?  Entering a country without a passport, and unless there's a Visa-free agreement without that, is a crime.  Several have entered into Mexico in that manner outside of being brought to a processing center due to making a claim of asylum.

Just look at the European refugee crisis of 2015, we are at an interesting point in Western politics regarding the very concept of border control and citizenship. The current law regarding refugees claiming asylum at the first safe country they are in is no longer an issue depending on what your beliefs are regarding border control & citizenship. The contention lies in one contradiction held by nation-states caused between Western pro-border factions and Western anti-border factions. If a nation sets forth to be an open-door haven for everyone fleeing poverty, crime, warfare & destitution, whilst also retaining a border control regulating immigration, residency and visits of aliens, then one of those objectives is going to fail. In short, is living in another country a human right?
Also I doubt the legality of their law suit really matters, it's more about stirring the US political cauldron enough to turn the US border control into a political issue, raising the political costs of any police action on them. Fail to enforce a law long enough and it starts to lapse in relevance

[smjjames]

And the military basically said, "Well... No. That's not how soldiers work..."

That's how Israeli soldiers work, at least according to the excuses they use.

Let's hope the military sticks to their RoE. I do feel like the armed forces have a bit better quality control on keeping white nationalists out of the ranks compared to say, civilian law enforcement. Or ICE, which might as well just have "Do You Hate Brown People? Do You Want To Chase Them Down All Day? Well We Have A Job For You!" as their recruiting pamphlet these days.


In horse-race news, chances of the Democrats taking the Senate is now down to about 1 in 7. Which, incidentally, is virtually the same chance that the Republican keep the House. So Congress is about to get way more dysfunctional. Which -- if Trump is smart -- could actually benefit him in the short run. He could cite Congressional inaction as the justification for ruling by executive order, nevermind that that was one of the biggest criticisms the GOP had of Obama in his second term.

In the long-term though, forcing Trump to enact all his shit by executive order makes it a lot easier to undo when he leaves, whether by impeachment, electoral loss, or the cold, bony hand of Kellyanne Conway Death. (My bet is that he goes out like Elvis, aneurysm while on the toilet at 3am.)

The Democrats will also likely pick up a number of governors, including in a few red states.

Overall, not exactly a #BlueWave but sure as hell not a #RedWave.

I'd have to go digging, but keep in mind- there's a 1 in 7 chance the Democrats take the Senate, a 6 in 7 chance that the Democrats take the House, and a 2 in 5 chance that one of those is wrong.

Additionally, the 538 model does not account for the massive volume of fundraising that the Democrats have been doing- it accounts for fundraising, yes, but not the absolute absurdity of the fundraising that they've had this year. We'll find out if that matters.

Why would they take into account the absolute absurdity of it? They are definetly aware that it's massive compared to previous years, and probably adjusted for it, but the model doesn't care whether the fundraising is absurd or not.

Third, how is stating the migrant caravan is full of criminals wrong?  What is with people thinking Europe's Schengen Area applies globally?  Entering a country without a passport, and unless there's a Visa-free agreement without that, is a crime.  Several have entered into Mexico in that manner outside of being brought to a processing center due to making a claim of asylum.

How many of them do you think were criminals before they started their journey? 100%? 50%? 10%?

I get the point about illegally crossing borders but labelling all or even most of them criminals as if they were criminals before the journey is what's wrong because that's not even true at all.

[PTTG??]

It is legal to attempt to attain asylum, no matter where or how you cross the border.

80 years ago Americans died to fight racism and fascism. Will they vote today?

[MorleyDev]

50 years ago Americans died to fight racism and fascism. Will they vote today?

Unless there's an aspect of American history I'm missing facism was 77 years ago. Though Martin Luther King Jr was assassinated 50 years ago so I'll give you racism...

[PTTG??]

Ok admittedly it's been pretty constant but yeah fixed that.