0 Post – 696 Comments
Joined 5 months ago

One thing I'm looking forward to with millennial leadership is just people that finally fully understand the power of the internet, big data and what truly distinguishes the information age. If you didn't grow up with it, it's hard to grapple with just how much it truly upended ... fucking everything. They mostly still don't understand that a computer can basically read their mind now, just through indirect data gathering and comparing them to all of the other people. We all get that at a more intuitive level, we've spent too long around these algorithms and seas of semi-anonymous others.

Of course we'll be in some quantum AI room-temp-superconductor age by then, so, y'know how it goes. But we should at least have a better handle on the information age problems, so that'll be nice.

Guessing you've never heard of cottagecore, which has been a thing for a few years if I'm not mistaken.

Internet is a big place.

1 more...

It's like an instagram/tumblr/pinterest type trend if I'm not mistaken, mainly focused around homemaker type stuff. Pretty sure knitting is a big part of it. There's all sorts of whatever-cores now.

I've been rather taken by bardcore cover songs personally.

I hope she tackles campaign finance reform to get unlimited money out of politics, and widespread voter protection laws to protect the right to vote as top priorities. Biden helped put out all the critical brushfires and made some investments in the future, as usual for an incoming dem, but we can't make long term progress when repubs can walk away with every other election due to their business support and voter suppression.

Make election day a federal holiday. Undo Citizens United, somehow.

Campaign finance reform to stop unlimited money into politics and voting rights protections would be a huge win. If election day was a national holiday, that's something people would feel.

1 more...

Don't try for a one-size-fits-all policy. Try to remember they're all individuals who will have their own opinions and interaction preferences, and calibrate accordingly to the individual reactions you get.

This office could also just have a different overarching culture to your previous one. You should probably be able to figure out the nuances in time if you pay some attention.

That's funny, I see it the exact other way around. Since the Supreme Court declared monetary contributions are essentially a form of speech, campaign donations have been protected by the first amendment. This is difficult to overturn, since it's a SC ruling based in the constitution itself. Any law trying to say otherwise could be declared unconstitutional and completely struck down by this even more extreme court.

Main workaround I see is mandating more thorough transparency to at least be able to track it all. There's probably other strategies too though.

A federal holiday just takes a bill through congress. Won't be an easy one, would be filibustered for sure. But possible.

It's no secret that the American electorate is right-of-center in the grand scale of things. We just don't give a fuck since we know we're dealing with the realities of our own country and voters. Regular, American, voters. Not all the most deep-thinking folks all the time, you understand. So the accusation of mainstream dems as right is academic and largely pointless, when American culture itself is right leaning. We're a country that loves John Wick movies.

Regarding the Times, rumor is the beef with Biden was personal. So now that he's off the ballot they're back to normal.

Well said. Even if you are in a solid-whatever state, the degree to which that is true is important. A 5 point lead is different from a 10 point lead, is different from a 20 point lead. The closer you can make it, the more you force people to pay attention to you.

Just glad they're not messing around with this one, and went ahead with the three charges of first degree murder.

20 more...

I wonder how possible it would be to sway a genuine Green by pointing out how much Russian oil refinery production has been taken offline by Ukrainian strikes. Every refinery they hit is a blow against global warming.

edit: Oh yeah, and Ukraine just recently shut down a major oil pipeline going into Hungary. That will put pressure to find alternative energy sources.

Russia is a major global producer of fossil fuels in general, though. That's a very unnatural alliance with the Greens.

Speaking of voter suppression, if we can deliver a powerful mandate this time, we absolutely need campaign finance reform to reduce the power of money in politics and legislation to protect the right to vote. Biden helped steer the economy back towards stability and made some investments in the future, now electoral reform desperately needs to be the very top priority moving forward. We can't do shit about shit if the repubs can just walk away with every other election due to their business support and voter suppression.

I hope we don't get distracted from this, it's the most critical priority. We also have nothing to lose by playing the hardest hardball possible, since they're accusing us of great replacement crap in the mainstream now anyway.

If history is any example, it can get much, much worse than this. This is our early shot at holding the line against the nutjobbery fully taking over.

Yeah, I think you're just throwing random bullshit around and have no interest in wasting my own time.

You seem to be asserting that you think the DNC should elevate lesser-known candidates to equal stature of a well-known candidate, instead of leaving it to the candidates themselves.

I do not think the DNC should elevate anyone anywhere. They should not support a popular candidate, but they also should not support a lesser-known candidate. They should set a reasonable bar where all candidates that can prove themselves serious, unaided, can participate equally in DNC sponsored events. This should keep out fame seekers that want the profile boost, I have no interest in what some author that wants to sell more books to gullible idiots has to say.

Fine, you're entitled to your own opinion I suppose.


At any rate, I don't think it's the DNC's job to support any specific candidate. They made that mistake with Hilary vs Bernie, and hopefully learned from the blowback they subsequently received.

It is an individual candidate's responsibility to create their own public discourse, this is the process of campaigning. Otherwise it becomes too tempting to use a Presidential run simply to increase one's own individual fame.

Lastly, perhaps I should have been more specific. I don't think any strong candidates want the job. I'm sure plenty of weak candidates and frankly, foolish people, would love to have the job because they wrongly think it wouldn't be that hard.

1 more...

All I've done is try to understand your positions and try to support my own. If I've mischaracterized yours I apologize and encourage you to correct me. Really though, I think your position becomes very weak when any other framing except your conspiratorial one is used.

Politics is hardball, no question about it. Especially nowadays. The media is its own thing though, they can put whatever they want on the air, for whatever reason. Our first amendment allows this freedom of the press, for better or for worse. Though I do agree some of the behavior of the Hilary campaign was unethical.

What progressive candidates have been recently blackballed? This reeks of conspiracy theory. I think the real reason we do not see more progressive candidates is that most democratic voters are not really all that progressive, unfortunately. It sometimes seems to me the party is held up mainly by soccer moms. Everyone knew Bernie was running, announcement speech on MSNBC or no. But he lost the popular vote to Hilary, 13.2 million to 16.9 million. I don't think any change in MSNBC's behavior could have swung it his way, with its viewership of about 1 million.

Sorry if I've offended you, but your guarantees of your own knowledge do not impress me. Your arguments and evidence in support of your own positions are what I'm paying attention to.

I think vastly, vastly more people look to wikipedia than any debate or interview watching. For one thing, it's much more time efficient. For another, you get more than just pre-packaged sound bites and prepared lines of attack. To be fair though, I suppose we should include candidate websites as well.

If a delegate wants to tell CNN who they plan to vote for, they have the freedom to do that. They should have that freedom too, there is nothing wrong with it. Similarly, CNN should have the freedom to ask a delegate who they plan on voting for.

The rest is just making 2000 phone calls, which is what interns are for.

Making a requirement that a certain amount of support is necessary before wasting time and money on debates is reasonable. Williamson has no experience, and debate performance has minimal value in deciding who wins an election or how good of a president they would be. Hilary won debates, lost the election.

This hanging onto debates as some sort of important thing is foolish. In 2020, the DNC set a record of 20 million people watching their most viewed debate. Out of 330 million citizens. Almost two dozen people participated in the debates. People just don't really give a shit about debates, they're not a particularly good medium, and are unnecessary to understand a candidates positions in the era of wikipedia.

1 more...

Getting low income people to the polls is a big part of this. If a particular group does not vote, then politicians have no incentive to care about them.

3 more...

Biden is a veteran politician, a little horse trading of policies for support is nothing new to him. And besides, if you're slugging it out with a populist nationalism type, Bernie's advice is probably some of the wisest you could ask for anyway.

2 more...

Honest, I hope she prosecuted them all properly. It's not a DA's job to just let people off the hook when they legit break the law. If you want to change the law, you should probably become a Senator or something.

6 more...

A state is allowed to allocate their delegates by whatever rules they see fit, it varies state to state. In Maine they don't even all have to go to the same candidate.

We did have a primary. Remember "write-in uncommitted"? Those were primaries. Anyone who wanted could have ran, even you, assuming you're an American citizen over the age of 35. Which is actually pretty unlikely now that I think about it, but whatever.

15 more...

They are waiting for the convention to choose, these choices are not made yet. They do, however, still have first amendment protections, so if they want to tell CNN who they plan to vote for, then they may. CNN, enjoying freedom of the press, has the right to ask.

5 more...

While I understand the complaints, I completely disagree with your argument. We are not ruled top-down, but bottom-up. They can vote third party if they choose, but if they do not vote at all, then no, a politician should not be expected to try to convince them otherwise. The politician has no guarantee that they actually can become engaged, and it is fully reasonable to expect them to try to secure the votes of people that actually are engaged. It's just how the incentive structure is logically set up, an already safe bet is more likely to win than a risky one.

1 more...

Except the only reason those donors have that power is due to our campaign finance laws, which only exist because republicans in the SC allowed infinite money into politics with Citizens United. If we had far greater voter turnout, this would have been impossible, as that puts dems in power and they do not believe in unlimited money in politics. Will play by those rules once those rules are made, though.

The idea that the US should never become fascist is a value, likely one that you and I share. It is not some high law though. If voting voters want fascism, then fascism is what we should get. It is our responsibility as voters to prevent this.

No, voters are absolutely not customers. We are 100% employees of the greater political sphere. From regular every day voters, to volunteers running polling places and campaigns, to people standing up to run for office. It's all, 100% on us. We cannot simply shirk our duty, otherwise our democracy will change, as was intended by the framers.

It's the people that do not vote that enable all the corruption. Not the people that go out and make themselves heard.

Well, it pretty much is inevitable. Nobody else really wants the job on such short notice. President is something you want to prepare for, have a good, solid plan, with people you're planning on staffing your presidency with. You usually start the groundwork years in advance, to avoid failure with extraordinary consequences once you are actually in office. There's reasons Whitmer, for instance, simply endorsed Harris even though a lot of people wanted her to be the nominee.

Even Manchin waffled on it in his interview, and he's a colossally arrogant asshole.

3 more...

Ranked choice voting would fix these concerns.

7 more...

Probably not. Dean was running to the right of Biden and unlikely to appeal to current day dems, and Williamson has no political experience.

3 more...

Certainly, and I would hope she was reasonable about it, particularly when it came to sentencing for people like first time offenders. Which cases to prosecute should just be the ones with strong evidence of guilt though. Not something like "I think marijuana laws are wrong so I won't prosecute those."

3 more...

Sure. I was mainly concerned with the inadequacy side of it this time. My problem is tangential to the OP post but not directly related. I firmly believe the primary was actually adequate, and am interested in discussing it, at great length if necessary.

The primaries are over thing is a legitimate argument imo, I have no issues with it. I fully understand how people could be upset with the current situation, I think that is a healthy, democratic opinion a person can have, even if I don't personally share it.

In what way do you think it should have been fixed? A Philips/Biden/Williamson debate?

13 more...

I agree, it is. I believe that our rights come from the people, though, and it is ultimately people that are responsible for choosing and upholding them. This is why we can amend our constitution.

Obamacare wasn't bad before it got mostly dismantled. Iran Nuclear Deal was smart. Paris Accords had potential. He cleaned up our ISIS mess. Nuclear disarmament was nice. He wasn't a bad pres, considering his situation. Mainly screwed up with his approach to the Russians.

Comparing George W to him is pretty meh.

31 more...

Don't celebrate too soon. Trump was the one that recognized Jerusalem for the Israelis. He's really not fond of brown people, and counts American Evangelicals as part of his supporter base.

This particular thread is about whether we had adequate primaries or not. Not when they were.

4 more...

This is just nitpicking. Being barely grazed still falls under the overarching umbrella of "gunshot wound", even if it doesn't conjure the same mental image as we'd normally have.

If a soldier on a battlefield gets barely nicked and goes "I think I got shot!" nobody is going to argue about the details.

Am I the only one that thinks charging her as an adult is a little much? A 12 year old is probably still treatable. Incarceration in our criminal justice system will not accomplish that.

8 more...

It's also probably looking at scroll speed. So if the people conducting the experiment tended to linger longer examining content they disliked, that could result in getting more of it.

Would need to see a more detailed explanation of the methodology. Ideally the scrolling was done in an automated way, at a consistent speed.

People don't know much about Kamala yet. That will now change very dramatically. Biden had hit his ceiling, a known quantity that everyone already knew very well. Harris has room to climb.