If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE

General politics thread (was: General U.S. politics thread)

15758606263101

Comments

  • edited 2020-05-10 06:10:45
    There is love everywhere, I already know
    It started in late March but the last two weeks has really gutted the credibility of #MeToo/#TimesUp "movement".

    Credibility is a weird word. I didn't believe the movement had decent goals to start with. It hijacked decent goals for something else, a goal I can't really speculate about because I don't think anybody involved tried to really set anything in stone either. Mainly I guess it was justification for patting each other on the back and unfairly maligning every man on the planet (oh Aziz Ansari...).

    I mean, women (I'd say men but seriously, the Kevin Spacey thing got weird) should always feel open about coming forward with any abuses of power or just assault in general, but I'm pretty sure most decent people knew that before 2018.

    However, pretending that people didn't know this was a big part of the whole deal, on purpose.

    Hilariously enough Betsy DeVos undid Joe Biden's Title IX modifications and he then proceeded to complain about it, even as he advocates for what she's proposed in his own circumstances.

    In other news I noticed that it's been quiet here the last few days so I decided to just Beyblade it.

  • There is love everywhere, I already know
    Dear GMH:

    This is extremely childish of me, but I've had this on my mind for days on end. You don't actually even have to say anything against it, it's that dumb.

    Here goes!

    You complain a lot about Ron DeSantis but you're aware that if he weren't your Governor, Andrew Gillum would be, right?

    I mean, in all fairness, in this alternate timeline he probably wouldn't have had the time to meet up with "honeyhammock@gmail.com" because of the Coronavirus stuff but, like, still.

    Actually, does Coronavirus even happen in this timeline? Who knows...
  • edited 2020-05-11 15:34:33
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Dear GMH:

    This is extremely childish of me, but I've had this on my mind for days on end. You don't actually even have to say anything against it, it's that dumb.

    Here goes!

    You complain a lot about Ron DeSantis but you're aware that if he weren't your Governor, Andrew Gillum would be, right?

    I mean, in all fairness, in this alternate timeline he probably wouldn't have had the time to meet up with "honeyhammock@gmail.com" because of the Coronavirus stuff but, like, still.

    Actually, does Coronavirus even happen in this timeline? Who knows...
    And if Andrew Gillum were my governor I would probably get things like...
    * more forward-thinking (not just reactive) environmental policy that'd involve better protection of things like my drinking water aquifer and probably vaguely better enforcement of stuff like the coastal construction control line
    * a compromise map rather than a gerrymandered map from redistricting
    * a more competent -- or at least more open, even if incompetent -- response to the coronavirus pandemic (at the very least, one that's more closely aligned with the recommendations of epidemiology experts than with following in the footsteps of an incompetent president)
    * fewer coverups involving nursing homes and other such weirdness
    * similar problems with the unemployment system
    * a Florida Man sex scandal involving Gov. Gillum drunk off his ass being reported by a male prostitute

    I'll take that deal. :)


    Edit: With regards to my not responding to your previous post: I generally don't dabble in the affairs of celebrities. If I'm forced to have something to say in response to them, I can say something, but if I don't feel forced to do so I can just blow it off.

    As for the #metoo hashtag, the proper purpose of this social phenomenon is to highlight the problem of sexual misconduct (including but not limited to actual assault) and to improve scrutiny on the issue. Unfortunately, (1) this is a complicated topic and very much not well-suited for tweets (or worse, hashtags), and (2) this often involves a variety of very private information that can't be and ought not to be used as a public battlefield for ideological wanking, in part due to the fact that the public is generally not actually privy to the relevant information anyway. The opinion "look at what a mess the #metoo movement has become!" basically just gets a shrug out of me.
  • edited 2020-05-11 15:59:45
    There is love everywhere, I already know
    Eh, that's life. I can't get you to take a position on everything just cause I want to talk about it. If this was a YouTube video it'd be called 14w EXPOSES GMH as a COWARD or maybe GMH CURB-STOMPS 14w's REACTIONARY TACTICS, depending on if you were on the pro-GMH or pro-14w side.
    a Florida Man sex scandal involving Gov. Gillum drunk off his a** being reported by a male prostitute

    Again, I'm not sure this would happen in the alternate timeline, so at least in that regard I'm glad we got this one instead.
    the Kevin Spacey thing got weird

    I did actually want to talk about this. There's a lot of stuff that gay men, under the guise of the 'gay community', basically go around whitewashing*1. There's stuff like drugs (I honestly can't remember all the secret codewords for meth there are right now that get passed around on Grindr or whatever).

    In the 90s, one of those things was underage guys. I mean, straight guys have that too*2, but for them it's been culturally unacceptable forever (unless you want to be pedantic and ask the Romans or whatever). Unfortunately, much like in a lot of statutory sexual assault stories that only come out when the older lady gets pregnant, U18 boys aren't so smart when it comes to making decisions about their potential sex lives.

    So you have this situation where there are genuinely guys out there, in the 90s and before, who took advantage of this a lot.

    1* To expand from this, girls at least have (had? I think it's had now) "shaming" to prevent any bad decision making, since there was an external force that could be linked to the internalized guilt of making bad sexual decisions.

    Boys don't, at all, and "being a gentleman" is so dead I won't even bother with it. So when it's two boys, there's no mental limiters on the both of you (and your regret is never reinforced by the outside world, at least not in a way that could yield positive results). Of course, if I want to practice what I preach in terms of ideology I should say "people will go after whatever because they're humans and you can't stop that" but also, like, there's no way that's good for you.

    I read about how West Hollywood*3 and New York had to tell the organizers of gay "social mixers" to really, really stop it for now because of coronavirus and what most surprised me was that these guys aren't running around looking for a husband, getting real jobs, and not being hyper-promiscuous in general at all times.

    I'm honestly not an expert on this stuff, I wish there was somebody who was who wasn't also simultaneously like "Let your sexuality free ie literally sell your humanity to your body's urges." so I could at least get a handle on what the heck is going on.

    2*

    3*West Hollywood being where Stormy Daniels was given the key to the city (by the mayor? I can't remember now, probably by the mayor) in front of a prominent drag queen/still gay adult film director's uh... "novelty" store.

    Overall, I'm not saying promiscuity is anywhere nearly as bad as taking advantage of U18s, but the mechanisms that allowed the latter are prominent in the former, and I dislike the former on it's own faults.

    However, I also love the world and I really don't want the world to stop being the world (I mean, you saw *3 right?), but I'd like it if once in a while somebody pointed out that all this rampant promiscuity and, even worse, "monogamish"-ness(????), is really not something to be celebrated.
  • Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Eh, that's life. I can't get you to take a position on everything just cause I want to talk about it. If this was a YouTube video it'd be called 14w EXPOSES GMH as a COWARD or maybe GMH CURB-STOMPS 14w's REACTIONARY TACTICS, depending on if you were on the pro-GMH or pro-14w side.
    If I were involved in that world I'd probably just shitpost quick responses and hot takes on twitter, too. Because fuck making clickbait videos; that's too much work.
  • There is love everywhere, I already know
    Kay:
    If this was a twitter post:
    Funny how some people always want to talk until THEIR sacred cow is under attack.
    some of us are just above all the noise, especially when you're spreading misleading narratives. and you should at least @me if you're talking to me @fourteenwings
    @glennmagusharvey I was just making a generalization, not everything is about you. Also; check your facts before you accuse me spreading false information.

    (A gigantic thread where neither of us can decide to consistently either direct-reply or quote-reply ensues).
    @glennmagusharvey you say @fourteenwings didn't acknowledge (the most random, out of context thing we mentioned sixty-four posts ago) but what about when YOU didn't mention (something neither of us knows anything about)
    @somerando02 that's a sexist dog whistle. why don't you just DIE???

    Later, on The 14w Digest dot Com: GMH accuses 14w of spreading false information, 14w TOTALLY SHREDS his argument.

    Later, on TotallyNotOnGMH'sSide dot Org; Outrage as people on the tweeter accuse known far-Souther 14w of spreading 'a deeply misogynist narrative'.

    This is fun.
  • edited 2020-05-11 16:41:51
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    I think these days I actually use twitter mostly to:
    (1) make a few offhand comments regarding various topics, with hashtags included as might be relevant
    (2) ask developers about making their games DRM-free
    (3) respond to elections geeks, often asking for more data

    I've occasionally gotten involved in some arguments, but the difficulty of conducting an argument over twitter the way I want -- and twitter's horrible user interface -- usually just makes me walk away.

    I've heard of the crazy beefs various webspace celebs like youtubers can get into. I look at them as an outsider and wonder "how the flying frack did this become a thing". It's like a soap opera, except starring people with gaming chairs instead of mamacitas.
  • Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Meanwhile, I'm upset at all that perfectly good food that is being wasted despite the demand from food banks, due to a lack of logistical support (transportation and otherwise) connecting the two.
  • There is love everywhere, I already know
    I've heard of the crazy beefs various webspace celebs like youtubers can get into.

    I think the important thing to remember about fights is that human beings are predisposed to fighting, the medium is basically irrelevant. Education systems have weaned a lot of us off physical violence, but that doesn't mean we'll ever stop fighting in general.
  • Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    I'd argue that human beings aren't so much predisposed to fighting as much as predisposed to being open to the possibility of fighting.
  • edited 2020-05-13 00:19:34
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Mr. Trump being a serial shitposter is something I had already known, but given that he's been put on the spot in recent months to (at least ideally) be serious about something, this situation has shown off another facet of his style: he basically can't do precision.

    While it's possible for someone to as heavily politicize everything as he does and also stay on message, and it'd work to such a person's advantage to do so, he himself does not do this.

    So, not only are his political messages a mess, but so is his leadership during "serious time" circumstances.
  • edited 2020-05-13 05:11:52
    There is love everywhere, I already know
    You're being kind of vague. Precision on what? On message, or in terms of decision making?

    And then there's "on message", which message? And in terms of "leadership"... do you mean in terms of how he communicates, or how he leads/delegates to his team, which, in all respects, has been pretty good? Of course, the public disagreements between him and his experts should be kept behind closed doors, but that's still more in terms of message than actions.

    I actually had a funny thought; I remember watching a commercial for dolls from Barbie in the Princess and the Pauper. The commercial went; Anneliese sings of Duty, and Erika sings of Hope. So, I'd say, Trump is Erika, and the various experts are Anneliese. That's not an inconsistency.



    I mean, I personally think he falls into a lot of great policy. The state by state federalist policy on lockdowns and reopenings for example, was great, but probably not intended.

    But when you go "falls into" and then "a lot" you have to start thinking some of it is actually on purpose.
  • Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Staying on-message is about communication, and I'm talking not just about the public disagreements that he has with experts but even the public disconnect he has with people charged with disseminating policy information for his administration. This leads to things like conflicting information regarding policy promulgations, conflicting information regarding current conditions (though conspiracy theorists will milk that for all it's worth), and even conflicting information regarding campaign talking points.
  • edited 2020-05-15 12:52:15
    There is love everywhere, I already know
    I'm not a legal expert, let alone one on American constitutional law, but it appears that certain figures within the Obama administration genuinely tried to kneecap the Trump administration post-election, pre-Inaguration which resulted in the various charges laid against Michael Flynn that were based not only on electing to spy on him (unmasking, or whatever) and then entrapment.

    I mean, I always knew from the start that the whole machine vs Everybody Donald Trump knew was to get to an endpoint rather than based in these people having done things they'd have been arrested for otherwise (but were still wrong). At the time, I thought the means justified the ends because they were looking into Russian collusion.

    Even so, I didn't think "the means justifying the ends" included "lying and cheating" and "obvious kneecapping for political reasons". I mostly thought exercising the opposite of prosecutorial prudence was okay, since at the very least it's legal. Now it seems like there's an effort to keep Flynn under investigation just cause otherwise it'd look bad.

    I'm not saying this here to be all "Gotcha!" because I mean, I was a Russia Collusion guy for years (in fact I still believed in the whole Russian prostitute dossier thing long after everybody realized it was a fraud ). I'm looking for something more along the lines of a decent counterargument.

    Also, keeping in the theme of clarity, here's a gigantolongpost on the full extent of what doesn't make sense about Tara Reade's allegations by the only journalist both GMH and I can agree isn't a shill.
  • "I've come to the conclusion that this is a VERY STUPID IDEA."
    Flynn was already being investigated before the election. The "unmasking" they're talking about is basically
    This intelligence report you gave me says that [Person A, foreign agent being investigated] worked together and had frequent contact with [Person B, name redacted in the report]. I'd like to know who Person B is.
    And Flynn wound up on the NSA's (and later FBI's) radar because he kept showing up as Person B. Obama specifically advised Trump, "do not hire this man". He did anyway. The investigation continued.

    Unmasking is a routine procedure that happens thousands of times a year, and the current administration and conservative media (like, say, that National Review article you linked) is trying to pretend that it's an unprecedented scandal because they want to use it as Irrefutable Proof™ of a Deep State Conspiracy™.

    Also the reason none of the "Russia Collusion Guys" ever corrected their story is because there really wasn't much to correct. It was, in fact, a real thing that resulted in dozens of people being indicted and convicted, but folks act as if the president himself not being charged is equivalent to the president being Completely Exonerated™ and doing Nothing Wrong™, and Irrefutable Proof™ of a Deep State Conspiracy™" (notice a pattern?)
  • edited 2020-05-16 06:05:29
    There is love everywhere, I already know
    keeping in the theme of clarity, here's a gigantolongpost on the full extent of what doesn't make sense about Tara Reade's allegations by the only journalist both GMH and I can agree isn't a shill.

    So, uh, it turns out that the transcript of what Reade said irt her underwear is kind of ambiguous but leans on the side of 'they were normal lingerie undergarments' rather than anything as scandalous as is claimed here.
    the reason none of the "Russia Collusion Guys" ever corrected their story is because there really wasn't much to correct

    I'm specifically talking about the Steele dossier, not everything, as I've said here:
    was to get to an endpoint rather than based in these people having done things they'd have been arrested for otherwise (but were still wrong)

    ---
    I'd like to know who Person B is.

    That's what I said!
    electing to spy on him

    I guess I should specify here that unmasking involves American citizens, not foreign agents.

    Essentially, I think you're attempting to neuter these things. It happens thousands of times a year, but is still a big deal.

    ---
    Obama specifically advised Trump, "do not hire this man". He did anyway.

    I understand that. I also understand that he and Obama had a history, so to Trump (who probably wouldn't have listened anyways) Obama wasn't exactly a neutral party (even if we were to pretend that one isn't a Democrat and the other a Republican and that they were just CEOs).
    Unmasking is a routine procedure that happens thousands of times a year

    The part where Flynn was unmasked to the media was probably illegal though.
    Deep State Conspiracy™.

    Dude, NR has Kevin Williamson and Michael Brendan Dougherty, two of the biggest (not insane) Never Trumpers around. This is not about the Deep State, this is about one administration targeting the other, there's no magic conspiracy to people wanting to do what people do (but usually refrain from).

    And I'm not saying the unmasking was the be-all, end-all, that's why I mentioned the entrapment, which you didn't justify.

    Neither I, nor any decent conservative, least of all the guys at NR, believe in the magical and mysterious land of the Deep State.
    conservative media (like, say, that National Review article you linked)

    You have no idea how deep conservative media goes. NR is basically as center right as things get (well, The American Conservative is both staunchly Christian and very Never Trump, but I don't think these two thinks bode very well in terms of 'center', just felt I had to mention it).

    Also, this being dismissive thing (with the trademarks) feels like you don't wish to argue these things or explain them to me and take them at face value as truths instead of issues with many shades of grey.
    It was, in fact, a real thing that resulted in dozens of people being indicted and convicted

    As I've said before!
    was to get to an endpoint rather than based in these people having done things they'd have been arrested for otherwise (but were still wrong)

    Do you honestly think Michael Cohen being indicted for the Stormy Daniels (and... tax evasion?) thing counts as Russian collusion? Or do you mean Massie Block if she were a Greek Dude George Papadopoulos' twelve-day prison stint for "making false statements".

    Or, maybe, Roger Stone's more significant 40-month sentence, also on "making false statements" and other fixer nonsense.

    Do you honestly think no politician before Donald Trump had fixers who, based on this precedent, deserve to be in jail?

    ahem

    Nice you see you Blueyed. It's been a while!
  • edited 2020-05-16 07:59:01
    "I've come to the conclusion that this is a VERY STUPID IDEA."
    Nice you see you Blueyed. It's been a while!
    I lurk this thread, but don't usually get involved in the discussion 'cause politics debate tends to make my anxiety flare up. Sorry if I jumped in halfway through the conversation and missed a lot of details in the process; I think this particular topic is just one I've seen floating around a lot lately, so I thought I'd toss my two cents in for once.

    Re: the entrapment case, I recall someone on another forum describing it better than I could, so I went and dug it up:
    Basically, someone at the Department of Justice leaked a document from the FBI where one of the higher ups asked "Are we simply going after [Michael Flynn] or are we trying to prove Russia interfered in our election". Despite the full document saying they were trying to do the latter and Flynn just criminalized himself, Republicans took the question (and disregarded the rest of the message) as proof that the Russia-Trump Investigation was a frame job meant to harm Trump and his administration. That's why Attorney General William Barr is trying to drop their half of the Flynn case (despite it essentially being over already).

    Meanwhile, Republicans are arguing that there's no way Obama and Biden didn't know that the FBI was 'intentionally trying to "coup" the White House', and that they must've been actively telling the FBI to do this.
    Make of it what you will.

    Re: the deep state, I won't contest
    Neither I, nor any decent conservative, least of all the guys at NR, believe in the magical and mysterious land of the Deep State.
    But I'll say that my problem with it is that there are a lot of indecent conservatives in positions of power who are willing to use it as an excuse (mostly "ousting a career official and replacing them with a loyalist yes-man, justifying it after the fact by claiming they were a Never Trumper all along or part of some other nebulous conspiracy", but "trying to make an investigation go away by claiming it was a plot against them" also shows up, like what seems to be happening with Flynn), whether they actually believe it or not, so I might view the idea a bit derisively, and anything that feeds into that narrative comes across as a red flag to me. I apologize if I painted you with that brush as well.

    And I think I misread some of the stuff you said about the other topic, but I will say about the Steele dossier, I can't recall ever hearing that it was actually debunked? Like, most of it is still assumed to be accurate intel? I couldn't tell you for sure, though. I don't stay up-to-date on every detail (politics, anxiety, etc).
  • There is love everywhere, I already know
    leaked a document from the FBI where one of the higher ups asked "Are we simply going after [Michael Flynn] or are we trying to prove Russia interfered in our election"

    The document wasn't leaked, the DOJ has just made it public record.

    It clearly says (you can ctrl+f):
    “What is our goal? Truth/Admission, or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?”

    In all honesty, I think this type of callous language happens in the FBI like, on an hourly basis, but it doesn't look good here.
    Republicans are arguing that there's no way Obama and Biden didn't know that the FBI was 'intentionally trying to "coup" the White House'

    Wooooah, that's a lot. It's clear that at the very least Biden knew about the effort (since that's been released by Richard Grenell) but it's not clear that this was a "coup". I mean, that would have required organization directly with the Obama administration, but what happened seems to be to the effect of nobody stopped it (even after the agents who interviewed Flynn came to believe he wasn't anything other than he said he was*), rather than direct interference.

    *
    Although Deputy Director McCabe acknowledged that ‘the two people who interviewed [Flynn] didn’t think he was lying, [which] was not [a] great beginning of a false statement case,’ General Flynn pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements on December 1, 2017,”

    As I mentioned, he did in fact misstate his call to the Russian ambassador to both Mike Pence and the FBI, but we don't know if it's he forgot or just felt like not mentioning it meant he'd look better (the FBI had a recording of this call hence that "get him fired" thing up there). What he said on the phone call (I'm sure a transcript is available somewhere) is that the Russian government should wait out the transition, which seemed okay advice for somebody who knew what Trump's Russia policy would be, and not significantly terrifying with hindsight.

    All I'm saying is that, the FBI is staffed by humans, and they were going with a theory that they were trying to prove. In trying to prove it, a lot of mistakes were made (because, as I said, the means would justify the ends), mistakes nobody wishes to own up to (hence this weird thing in charging Flynn with parallel charges to keep him under investigation).
    meant to harm Trump and his administration.

    See, I do think this was about Trump, but I'd guess it was more about being terrified/ginned up about Russian involvement. The facts didn't bode well, but nobody knew that till they looked into it. Feelings definitely ran high, and I'm not one to say "I would never, ever let my feelings and bias get in the way of doing things thoroughly and ethically." because nobody ever does that.
    but I will say about the Steele dossier, I can't recall ever hearing that it was actually debunked

    Everything that could be verified, I think, was based on documentation already available. This was mixed in with scandalous information to make it seem more believable.
    anything that feeds into that narrative comes across as a red flag to me

    I guess my "narrative" in terms of politics, especially when it boils down to what is essentially office politics like this, is that "Literally everybody is covering their backsides at all times, end of".
    'cause politics debate tends to make my anxiety flare up.

    Ah, I see. Well, it's a shame, since it'd be nice to see more of you around here. Plus, this surely counts as CBT.
  • edited 2020-05-16 11:59:21
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Also, keeping in the theme of clarity, here's a gigantolongpost on the full extent of what doesn't make sense about Tara Reade's allegations by the only journalist both GMH and I can agree isn't a shill.
    Just to be clear: I don't recognize the name of that piece's author, Cathy Young. As such, I can't preemptively agree whether she is or isn't "a shill".

    Anyhow, the line between "is it political kneecapping" and "is it genuine national security interest" unsurprisingly becomes very blurred when there's an actual (or incoming) elected official who's well-known to be tied (very much so) to business relations with a foreign government that has a record of at least questionable motives regarding the country.
    Do you honestly think no politician before Donald Trump had fixers who, based on this precedent, deserve to be in jail?
    They may or may not, but right now, Donald Trump is the problem.

    And if others were shady, he's shadier. He's pretty much built his whole reputation on being able to do various shady things to be able to turn negotiations into zero-sum games and look good winning at them while hiding his losses. (He's not a normal "business" person in the sense of seeking to create win-win situations and a stable business environment.)

    Honestly, a big problem with the criticisms of the investigations surrounding Mr. Trump is that they're all about "but the people who are supposed to be the good guys are actually doing shady things!" and it's like it's completely missing the bigger picture of what's going on.
  • There is love everywhere, I already know
    I don't recognize the name of that piece's author, Cathy Young.

    You posted an Arcdigital article she wrote about gender differences a few months ago!

    Also I hope you recognize that my usage of the term "shill" is sarcasm and not me genuinely calling someone a shill.
    the line between "is it political kneecapping" and "is it genuine national security interest" unsurprisingly becomes very blurred

    Which is why I said:
    The facts didn't bode well, but nobody knew that till they looked into it.

    So, without trying to bring us into alignment to the letter, I think we agree.
  • edited 2020-05-16 13:12:31
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    I don't recognize the name of that piece's author, Cathy Young.

    You posted an Arcdigital article she wrote about gender differences a few months ago!
    Ah, heh.

    Probably something a friend showed me that I read and thought was interesting/meaningful/intriguing/thought-provoking; I don't read this stuff often to differentiate the authors by name.
  • edited 2020-05-16 13:25:08
    There is love everywhere, I already know
    I thought you'd remember because it was so out of the ordinary.
    Donald Trump is the problem.
    a big problem with the criticisms of the investigations surrounding Mr. Trump is that they're all about "but the people who are supposed to be the good guys are actually doing shady things!"

    Be careful not to twist yourself into something like this.

    (I am really confused by all of this. There's ample time before the DNC convention to get literally anybody else.)

    (Not that I believe or don't believe he did what he's accused of, but still.)
  • edited 2020-05-16 14:18:15
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    I never presumed Biden to be a perfect person anyway, nor anyone else for that matter. (Might be why I took so darned long to endorse in the Dem primary for POTUS (only for my preferred candidate to unceremoniously lose).) But it probably also helps that I never married myself to hashtaggy social movements.

    A candidate is package of traits, good, bad, and ugly all together, and I'd vote for a candidate whose is likely to succeed at enacting policies that I think are better. And I'm pretty sure most people understand this (in spite of "voters are stupid" memes). Like, I'm pretty sure most of the people who voted for Mr. Trump don't think he's a saint either.

    Ms. Reade's recent allegations, even if true, are almost certainly not going to change my choice for POTUS in the general election; even if those allegations are true, at the present time I would have no moral qualms about voting for Mr. Biden over Mr. Trump.

    also for some reason this music feels appropriate though it's only coincidential that I'm listening to it while writing this lol
    (I am really confused by all of this. There's ample time before the DNC... convention to get literally anybody else.)
    And doing so would constitute a "backroom deal" that would overturn the will of voters, even if the voters weren't happy with the choice(s) they had/made. There exists a transaction cost to that tactic, which is something the article you linked to points out (though not in detail). It also says this:
    So what is the greatest good or the greatest harm? Mr. Biden, and the Democrats he may carry with him into government, are likely to do more good for women and the nation than his competition, the worst president in the history of the Republic. Compared with the good Mr. Biden can do, the cost of dismissing Tara Reade — and, worse, weakening the voices of future survivors — is worth it. And don’t call me an amoral realist. Utilitarianism is not a moral abdication; it is a moral stance.
    Not exactly the same as my stance, but my stance is basically like "voting Biden into office fixes the big picture, which will give us the chance to then fix the small details", those small details including but not limited to improving laws and customary practices regarding sexual assault.
  • There is love everywhere, I already know
    (only for my preferred candidate to unceremoniously lose)

    I think this happened to literally everyone with an opinion.

    Re:Music; I'm listening to Aoi Eir's AUBE and so of course I just got to Niji no Oto which is not appropriate at all!!
    There exists a transaction cost to that tactic

    That's true, and given what you just said, I'm starting to think that it genuinely might not be worth it.

    Yeah, anyways, I understand your position better now, I guess.
  • Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2020/05/18/censorship-covid-19-data-researcher-removed-florida-moves-re-open-state/5212398002/

    https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article242773056.html

    TL;DR version: the first five paragraphs of the first article
    Late last Friday, the architect and manager of Florida's COVID-19 dashboard — praised by White House officials for its accessibility — announced that she had been removed from her post, causing outcry from independent researchers now worried about government censorship.

    The dashboard has been a one-stop shop for researchers, the media and the public to access and download tables of COVID-19 cases, testing and death data to analyze freely. It had been widely hailed as a shining example of transparency and accessibility.

    But over the last few weeks it had "crashed" and gone offline; data has gone missing without explanation and access to the underlying data sheets has become increasingly difficult.

    The site was created by a team of Florida Department of Health data scientists and public health officers headed by Rebekah Jones. She announced last week her removal as of May 5 in a heartfelt farewell note emailed to researchers and other members of the public who had signed up to receive updates on the data portal.

    Citing "reasons beyond my division’s control," Jones said her office is no longer managing the dashboard, is no longer involved in publication, fixing errors or answering questions "in any shape or form."
  • edited 2020-05-21 04:38:45
    There is love everywhere, I already know


    etc.
    [DeSantis'] office released a statement shortly after the news conference saying Jones “exhibited a repeated course of insubordination during her time with the department, including her unilateral decisions to modify the department’s COVID-19 dashboard without input or approval from the epidemiological team or her supervisors.”

    [...]

    “She’s not involved in collating any data, she does not have the expertise to do that. She is not an epidemiologist.”

    [...]

    “What she was doing is she was putting data on the portal which the scientists didn’t believe was valid data,” he said. “So she didn’t listen to the people who were her superiors, she had many people above her in the chain of command.”
  • Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Tracking and displaying geographic data by maintaining a GIS-based public data resource for the state with regards to the pandemic seem like things that would relate rather logically to geography and communication degrees.

    Also, ironically, DeSantis cites White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx's praise of Florida's data, which included praise for the website:
    "If you go to the Florida Public Health website on COVID, they’ve been able to show their communities’ cases and tests district by district, county by county, ZIP code by ZIP code," Birx said. "That’s the kind of knowledge and power we need to put into the hands of American people so that they can see where the virus is, where the cases are, and make decisions."
  • edited 2020-05-21 15:48:00
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Meanwhile, from the sidebar of that WFLA article

    https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/florida-unemployment/whos-been-waiting-desantis-says-floridians-waiting-on-unemployment-likely-filled-out-application-wrong/

    Someone I know, who filled out the form correctly, is in the boat of the many, many people who have yet to receive the money. He filled up the form, sent it in by mail because the website was horribly broken, and now he got a response with a temporary PIN and case number, and now has to fill up yet another form, and also input his resume in through the state's own specially formatted resume input mechanism (and if you've ever applied to the a job board that forces users to upload their resume or pieces thereof in a specific format, you probably know how much of a pain this is), and other red tape.

    The DeSantis administration seems concerned about reopening the economy as soon as possible, or at least exhibiting the narrative that we can move on already:
    The governor then tried to move on, asking if anyone had any questions about Florida reopening.
    “Any insinuation otherwise is just typical partisan narrative trying to be spun,” he told reporters. “And part of the reason is you’ve got a lot of people in your profession who waxed poetically for weeks and weeks about how Florida was going to be just like New York.”

    The governor said Florida has a lower death rate compared to several other states despite being “the number one landing spot for tens of thousands of people leaving the number one hot zone in the world.”

    “We succeeded and I think that people just don’t want to recognize that because it challenges their narrative, it challenges their assumption,” DeSantis said. “So they’ve gotta try to find a ‘boogeyman.'”

    If it were more competent, then it'd be in a hurry to put this money into the pockets of the citizens of Florida who'd actually be able to spend this money to jumpstart the economy by paying even for their basic needs like food and rent.
  • There is love everywhere, I already know
    It'll definitely let people pay for their food and rent (which is important), but this whole thing is a massive knock to the economy long term with the practically magical amounts of new debt everybody is taking on.

    Actually though; I don't think this'll show up anytime soon in real life. In fact, this may just be the new normal level of American deficit.
    that would relate rather logically to geography and communication degrees.

    I didn't want to spam you yesterday, but here's more:
    Helen Aguirre Ferré, communications director for Florida governor Ron DeSantis, explained that Jones’s “function” was “to load the data into the graphics.”

    “That is not an accurate assessment, that she built [the dashboard], she participated in putting the dashboard together, she played a role in the development of the website dashboard,” Ferré told National Review. “She’s not a content creator. She doesn’t she’s not a data analyst, she’s not an epidemiologist, she wouldn’t have access to the raw data, much less how to interpret the raw data of the information that she was receiving.”

    [...]

    “She was forever clashing with her team, because she was not a team player. She was erratic. She changed information without consulting with the epidemiological team or her supervisor, and, in short, she was insubordinate,” she explained. “She perceived that she had ownership of this dashboard, which is completely inaccurate.”
  • Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    It'll definitely let people pay for their food and rent (which is important), but this whole thing is a massive knock to the economy long term with the practically magical amounts of new debt everybody is taking on.

    Actually though; I don't think this'll show up anytime soon in real life. In fact, this may just be the new normal level of American deficit.
    By "new debt" do you mean personal debt or do you mean the "government budget deficit" sort of debt? Because the first one wouldn't make sense here.
Sign In or Register to comment.