Jump to content
UnevenEdge

2024 Presidential Elections: the schadenfreude commences


NewBluntsworth

Recommended Posts

On 9/28/2024 at 7:38 AM, André Toulon said:

The first time around, this was harrowing but this time, it's just hilarious to watch. How can any rational person think that this dude is ever thinking of anyone other than himself

News consumption is declining. Twenty seven percent of people 30-50 (as of 2022) said they pay attention to the news more than a few minutes a week, that's down to about 19 percent of under 30s. Sounds weird to people who are chronically online but you get out of the bubble, you'll find it to be true. Most people get their information from someone that heard it from someone that heard it on TV or online. You ask most people off the street who Lindsey Graham or AOC is and they'll probably have no idea what you're talking about ... maybe not even know you're talking about politics. It's not just a US thing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, matrixman124 said:

Or you could... Like... Appeal to immigrants

bafkreidw64pjkeyflsmlsibxyw2kgi3cj44hranygqdj7cbt3zkbj2igr4.jpg

Please tell me someone with a Blue Anus replied to this asshat and told him directly that the human traffickers flying asylum seekers all over the place have been spurg republican governors 'I ain't got no legs' Abbott and 'I ain't got no brains' DeSantis. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, katt_goddess said:

Please tell me someone with a Blue Anus replied to this asshat and told him directly that the human traffickers flying asylum seekers all over the place have been spurg republican governors 'I ain't got no legs' Abbott and 'I ain't got no brains' DeSantis. 

That's actually a very good point lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Blackrose321 said:

I can't take someone who uses religious buzzwords seriously. 

He's not using them seriously, it's in jest to make fun of Lichtman's characterizations of his 'keys' method. I think the origin of the Twitter spat was Silver saying he had gone back through all of his prior comments to point out subjectivity and inconsistencies etc.

I am of the mindset that the keys stuff is unserious, but I am also way less invested in forecasts than I was ten years ago because the probabilities they spit out for presidential races just aren't verifiable.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ZoomBubba said:

Also, Silver is trying to prove something with his new model after parting ways with 538.

Actually Silver kept the original model in the divorce. The new 538 built a new model and by most accounts it was completely busted, which is why they delayed for so long in launching the Kamala one (because they had to redo it).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we have not one but two candidates for an October surprise - 

The dockworkers union has struck today due to continued fears of being replaced by automation.

Meanwhile Iran is responding to Israel essentially breaking Hezbollah’s back by preparing a ballistic missile attack.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harris better get in front of that dock workers strike because Biden will be blamed if shortages start to happen. I believe he can actually force them to work. These guys have a very important job and the walkout can cause chaos on the east coast. 
 

https://nam.org/manufacturers-call-on-president-to-invoke-taft-hartley-act-to-stop-port-strike-32188/?stream=policy-legal
 

He keeps saying he won’t intervene. I have mixed feelings about whether or not he should get involved.  The workers lose their leverage if they’re forced to work while negotiations continue but on the other hand mass shortages of goods is not something I look forward to 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jman said:

So we have not one but two candidates for an October surprise - 

The dockworkers union has struck today due to continued fears of being replaced by automation.

Meanwhile Iran is responding to Israel essentially breaking Hezbollah’s back by preparing a ballistic missile attack.

I doubt Iran would do much beyond their previously telegraphed and half-hearted missile attempts, like those a few months ago. They aren't worried about being destroyed in an all-out war; they're concerned because Israel has demonstrated the ability to strike anywhere, anytime, at will. If you're part of Iran's leadership, would you really push things so far that your own toilet could explode? Say what you will about policies, but Israeli intelligence plans targets months or even years in advance. I doubt anyone in key Iranian positions sleeps well at night, knowing there could be an explosive in their home, at the gas station they frequent, or even in the next pair of shoes they buy. If Iran truly wanted a full-scale war, they’d act rather than making so much noise about it. Most of the noise is just for show, signaling to their foreign affiliates that they're still around—nothing more.

The Longshoreman situation is trickier. You can't fight off automation when it works better and more efficiently than humans. This isn’t like dealing with Facebook's customer service AI that leads you down dead ends. These are robots that can physically outperform humans, avoid long-term injury risks, and handle items with more precision and steadiness. Automation will eventually replace most of these jobs. That's not a smug "ha ha, fuck them,"—it's simply a fact.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, ZoomBubba said:

I don't think Silver is trying to ride his coattails, Lichtman and Silver belong to two utterly different spheres. Lichtman is in the academic sphere and Silver is from the betting sphere, they just happen to both try to predict presidential races. Silver would probably be the one with the coattails since nobody paid attention to Lichtman until he predicted Donald Trump's win. I doubt any coattails come into play because Silver is pollster and lives and dies by them while Lichtman ignores polls and uses economic and political keys to make his predictions.

Silver is trying to sell a book right now, one that seems to be some sort of philosophical/sociological tract even though he's neither a philosopher no sociologist or even a journalist. Also, Silver is trying to prove something with his new model after parting ways with 538. If he has another bust, he and probably the whole polling industry will take another credibility hit. Polling is a big business and the pollsters want to remain relevant in the eyes of the media and the public even though there's a new poll almost every day now.

I knew about Lichtman before I knew about Silver so I wouldn't say "nobody paid attention". "Nobody" paid attention to Fauci until COVID but the man was still a fucking boss for decades - just because people started bitching about him in 2020 doesn't mean he wasn't established well before that for people who are academically minded. Also, as I said, Silver has correctly guessed 2 out of 3 elections. Lichtman has correctly predicted 9 out of 10 so I'm confused about how Lichtman is riding the coattails of a man far younger than himself. His book on his own system was written in 1996, when Silver was just graduating from high school. For Silver to talk down to Lichtman about his own Keys is childish and arrogant and I shouldn't even have to say that. His attitude sucks but if you want attention on social media, being polite is not the way to go.

ETA: Also clearly Silver knows about Lichtman. Just because you didn't know who he is doesn't mean other people didn't. Silver clearly finds him worthy of his continued attention.

Quote

 

Silver is trying to sell a book right now,

 

So then what I said was correct, he's using someone else with a more established "thing" to accomplish a personal goal.

Quote

 

Also, Silver is trying to prove something with his new model after parting ways with 538.

 

Predicting more than 2 out of 3 elections correctly would help with that. Which will take time. Not a Twitter tantrum.

Edited by Blackrose321
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Insipid said:

I'm so bored with this debate. At least the fly in Pence's hair made that one entertaining. Then again, these debates aren't supposed to be entertaining.

The time before every debate felt like the end of the country.  Good times…

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Vance no surprise basically spent most of the night changing the subject, not giving any specific answers on anything, and of course garnishing it all off with a big bunch of lies. He avoided shooting himself in the face though in not making up any new super insane sounding ones, so he basically came off I'd say sounding like your pretty typical sleazy two-faced politician. In other words, for him, I'd say that's a pretty decent night.

Seriously though, I think that's how low the bar is. Walz was way more specific, likable, and just plain believable. In a sane world, I think any sensible person would say he was the clear winner. In the world we live in.... ehhhh. Only thing I feel really comfortable in concluding is that tonight's probably not gonna make much a difference in swaying things all that much in either direction. World events can always cook up some last minute surprises, but I'm feeling like the pie is pretty much baked at this point.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Vance came across better than Trump by not being a complete psycho, but ultimately it seems the effect was minimal, even if Walz seemed to win overall.  Everyone seems to agree that as good as Vance did, he sort of screwed that goodwill by not admitting Trump lost the election.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

And another that sums up the night nicely.

 

VP debates dont move the needle, but it sure did shine some light on Waltz.  Im betting Democrats really wished that it was Shapiro up on that stage last night. But they couldnt do that because of the rabid antisemitism in the left flank of the party right now.

Waltz was supposed to help bring along rural men, and he failed miserably at that last night.

  • D'oh 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

 

And another that sums up the night nicely.

 

VP debates dont move the needle, but it sure did shine some light on Waltz.  Im betting Democrats really wished that it was Shapiro up on that stage last night. But they couldnt do that because of the rabid antisemitism in the left flank of the party right now.

Waltz was supposed to help bring along rural men, and he failed miserably at that last night.

Wtf is wrong with your """"brain""""?

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

 

Whooooo boy was that the line of the night last night.

 

"Ive become friends with school shooters" - Tim Waltz

 

Going to be interesting to see how he ducks this one.

But it's a mental health issue, MD. He shouldn't treat mentally ill people like actual people?

I'd give him the benefit of the doubt until he specified which ones in particular he meant. There's a difference between those that got bullied until they snapped and the straight-up psychopaths.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

 

And another that sums up the night nicely.

 

VP debates dont move the needle, but it sure did shine some light on Waltz.  Im betting Democrats really wished that it was Shapiro up on that stage last night. But they couldnt do that because of the rabid antisemitism in the left flank of the party right now.

Waltz was supposed to help bring along rural men, and he failed miserably at that last night.

Oh hey, I don't think you ever replied to my post outlining some of Trump's pro-corporation policies, did you get a chance to read it?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PenguinBoss said:

GY2dYIOWQAEF69j.thumb.jpg.b48dcb9112749b5bd660c0c936a67506.jpg

I’d argue this is where Vance lost.  Up to this point he was articulate, not a complete unhinged idiot, and did his best to talk policy.  From here he got whinier and descended into Trump talking points where Walz hit him harder.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

 

And another that sums up the night nicely.

 

VP debates dont move the needle, but it sure did shine some light on Waltz.  Im betting Democrats really wished that it was Shapiro up on that stage last night. But they couldnt do that because of the rabid antisemitism in the left flank of the party right now.

Waltz was supposed to help bring along rural men, and he failed miserably at that last night.

 

1 hour ago, Blackrose321 said:

Oh hey, I don't think you ever replied to my post outlining some of Trump's pro-corporation policies, did you get a chance to read it?

MD is more of a “post the latest right wing buffoonery then take no questions” kind of person. Substance? Nah.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

 

And another that sums up the night nicely.

 

VP debates dont move the needle, but it sure did shine some light on Waltz.  Im betting Democrats really wished that it was Shapiro up on that stage last night. But they couldnt do that because of the rabid antisemitism in the left flank of the party right now.

Waltz was supposed to help bring along rural men, and he failed miserably at that last night.

If antisemitism was a problem in the party, then it's a miracle that Harris got chosen with her Jewish husband

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, matrixman124 said:

If antisemitism was a problem in the party, then it's a miracle that Harris got chosen with her Jewish husband

If MD gave a shit about antisemitism, she wouldn't be so eager to cry it for cynical, political purposes.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, naraku360 said:

She's still learning to do that.

I actually told Rose a while ago that MD would never respond, and it was like a week later ...MD was actually responding. So then I felt a bit foolish....thinking maybe MD is capable of discourse and it really you guys dogpiling that she ain't fucking with.

But honestly, after seeing these shares, I'm back to square one where I'm like, why do Y'ALL even bother. This is obvious trolling became there is no way she watched any of that and thinks that's a sane takeaway 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, André Toulon said:

I actually told Rose a while ago that MD would never respond, and it was like a week later ...MD was actually responding. So then I felt a bit foolish....thinking maybe MD is capable of discourse and it really you guys dogpiling that she ain't fucking with.

But honestly, after seeing these shares, I'm back to square one where I'm like, why do Y'ALL even bother. This is obvious trolling became there is no way she watched any of that and thinks that's a sane takeaway 

Nobody expects sincere engagement. I do renjoy goading her into the occasional reveal of her psychopathy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2024 at 8:52 AM, Blackrose321 said:

[I'm trying to go through everything as well and since I quote a lot to keep my own thoughts straight, this might look weird, sorry. lol]

Here’s a list but the sources they linked to weren’t smart enough to establish redirects before moving their content… *grumbles in web development* Obviously, there are a lot so it would take a while to go over them one by one, but here are some that stood out to me as “WTF material”:

These two, when looked at side by side, are odd-

1) Revoked California’s power to set stricter tailpipe emissions standards than the federal government.

2) Replaced the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, which would have set strict limits on carbon emissions from coal- and gas-fired power plants, with a new version that would let states set their own rules.

Why would you revoke a state’s power to set their own tailpipe emissions standards, and then replace the Clean Power Plan to give power to the states? It’s like he’s picking and choosing based on who and what he dislikes. In the first, it’s California, in the second, it’s Obama. And as I continued to scroll through this list, I couldn’t help but notice he made it a point to target much of what Obama did which I 100%, fully and completely believe is because of the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. I genuinely believe his leap into the presidency, and everything that came after, was a “fuck you” to Obama and it's been one hell of a villain arc.

3) Canceled a requirement for oil and gas companies to report methane emissions.

Is this really such a big ask? They should be tracking that info, they should be able to report it fairly easily. It’s just a report…

4) Weakened oversight of some state plans for reducing air pollution in national parks.

Why were the states not allowed to do that without meddling? Our national parks need to be protected.

5) Lifted ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

=(

6) Rescinded water pollution regulations for fracking on federal and Indian lands.

7) Withdrew a requirement that Gulf oil rig owners prove they can cover the costs of removing rigs once they stop producing.

That’s blatantly pro-corporation, and it’s ridiculous. Why shouldn’t they have to remove their own ugly shit from the landscape? Why do we have to pay for it? Because you fucking know we will, we always do. Now this is a use of taxes I am 100% against.

8) Scrapped a proposed rule that required mines to prove they could pay to clean up future pollution.

Another pro-corporation move - if they cause pollution, why wouldn’t they be responsible for cleaning it up? Why are companies never responsible for anything? We’ll be paying for this some day, too.

9) Eliminated the use of an Obama-era planning system designed to minimize harm from oil and gas activity on sensitive landscapes, such as national parks. 

He really went to town attacking national parks. He’s been called “The Most Anti-Nature President in U.S. History” : https://www.americanprogress.org/article/anti-nature-president-u-s-history/

The National Parks Conservation Association called it out, too.

10) Rolled back a roughly 40-year-old interpretation of a policy aimed at protecting migratory birds, potentially running afoul of treaties with Canada and Mexico.

Why was he even looking a 40 year old policy interpretation? Which corporation do we think he was looking out for here?

11) Loosened fishing restrictions intended to reduce bycatch of Atlantic Bluefin Tuna.

Another corporate butt-kissing move. There was a point to those restrictions: "Bluefin tuna bycatch in the Gulf of Mexico is particularly concerning because this area is the only known spawning ground for the western Atlantic population of bluefin tuna. Additionally, Gulf of Mexico bluefin tuna were historically overfished and are still recovering from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill."

12) Rejected a proposed ban on chlorpyrifos, a pesticide linked to developmental disabilities in children.

Another decision made specifically for corporations. We’ll worry about vaccines causing autism, but then we’ll do shit like this, that does cause developmental disabilities in children.

13) Rolled back most of the requirements of a 2017 rule aimed at improving safety at sites that use hazardous chemicals that was instituted after a chemical plant exploded in Texas.

Annnd another point for corporations, at the expense, this time, of workers, the surrounding land, the economy, etc. We're just gonna blow everything up, I guess… Reminds me of this tragedy, which was also caused by corruption and mismanagement: https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/08/03/they-killed-us-inside/investigation-august-4-beirut-blast 

 

So looking at that list, it’s clear that there are a lot of things being regulated that you and I don’t consider, or know about. Like the fact that “bluefin tuna were historically overfished and are still recovering from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.” So while it sounds like the government is just strangling the hell out of corporations, corporations are causing a significant amount of damage that they don’t regulate themselves on. They don't care even when 218 people die in an explosion that was 100% preventable. If the government doesn’t regulate this, they clearly don’t, and it costs lives, land, livelihoods, etc.

Most regulations are written in blood anyways - something bad has already happened that pre-dates the policy. We’re rarely, very rarely ever ahead of anything.

 

Could you give me some examples of what that means to you?

Do they actually have Pride paraphernalia or just rainbows? Because my childhood classrooms were always colorful, they were never drab so they look kind of like what I grew up in. Only now if you put a rainbow anywhere, you must be some liberal child pedo or something. I was thinking of putting a rainbow flag up outside my house at one point, because the whole damn thing was tan and I hate that so much, but then I thought, "Someone might tp my house..."

I’ve never heard of this happening, do you have any news stories I can read?

I didn't reply to the stuff I agreed with, and I may have missed some things in my rush, but as you said, it's not intentional. =)

Was this the one I missed? Ive been traveling a bunch the last month so I cant remember what was where.

 

For regulations, if those things are so important, and some of them are, then they can be passed as a law. If tracking emissions is a priority for the country, then it can be a law. It might be a high priority for some, but "some" isn't enough. Some people, like me, want to audit the Federal reserve and Pentagon. But there isn't enough popular support for that, so it wont happen. Ive accepted that, even if I still try and do what I can to build support for those positions. That's just how Democracy works. Some things become law, some don't. Im just not going to be convinced that its OK that some nameless face in a bureaucracy should have the authority to write rules and regulations that have the potential to massively impact someones life.

Now if we want to talk about the Feds overruling Local laws like the tailpipe regulation, then thats an interesting topic. I dont want DC to dictate rules to the States. Each State is going to have a much better handle on what its citizens needs, and issues, are. So I have no problem with California setting higher emission standards for that state, and at the same time I dont care of one state burns more coal. That might be the cheapest source of energy, and dirty energy is better than no energy.

Im not saying regulations are entirely bad. Some are good. Clean water and fire laws are pretty important things. There is mass consensus that those are good things. But it is far too easy for the Feds to issue regulations that punish, or benefit, their political enemies/allies. States are more likely to represent their constituents than the Feds are.

 

I dont remember what that other stuff was about, its been a month. Probably not something we would agree on anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2024 at 8:37 AM, Master-Debater131 said:

 

 

Whooooo boy was that the line of the night last night.

 

"Ive become friends with school shooters" - Tim Waltz

 

Going to be interesting to see how he ducks this one.

Go back in time and convince the entire MAGAt hivemind that giving tours and offering high placed jobs to someone who actively went to another state and picked the coolest looking gun in order to go hunting humans is a bad look. :| Then maybe you can talk.

Everyone knows that the line of the night was issued by Crybaby Guyliner "The rules were you guys weren't going to fact check!" whine whine whine. Because facts are inconvenient. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://nypost.com/2024/10/02/us-news/trump-resorted-to-crimes-after-losing-2020-election-in-failed-bid-to-cling-to-power-feds/?utm_campaign=iphone_nyp&utm_source=pasteboard_app
 

here’s the NY Post’s take. They’re usually good for a laugh, that’s really just covering up the horror of the nonsense they put out. NYP is like Fox but for barely literate people. Oh wait nvm. Same thing 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Was this the one I missed? Ive been traveling a bunch the last month so I cant remember what was where.

 

For regulations, if those things are so important, and some of them are, then they can be passed as a law. If tracking emissions is a priority for the country, then it can be a law. It might be a high priority for some, but "some" isn't enough. Some people, like me, want to audit the Federal reserve and Pentagon. But there isn't enough popular support for that, so it wont happen. Ive accepted that, even if I still try and do what I can to build support for those positions. That's just how Democracy works. Some things become law, some don't. Im just not going to be convinced that its OK that some nameless face in a bureaucracy should have the authority to write rules and regulations that have the potential to massively impact someones life.

Now if we want to talk about the Feds overruling Local laws like the tailpipe regulation, then thats an interesting topic. I dont want DC to dictate rules to the States. Each State is going to have a much better handle on what its citizens needs, and issues, are. So I have no problem with California setting higher emission standards for that state, and at the same time I dont care of one state burns more coal. That might be the cheapest source of energy, and dirty energy is better than no energy.

Im not saying regulations are entirely bad. Some are good. Clean water and fire laws are pretty important things. There is mass consensus that those are good things. But it is far too easy for the Feds to issue regulations that punish, or benefit, their political enemies/allies. States are more likely to represent their constituents than the Feds are.

 

I dont remember what that other stuff was about, its been a month. Probably not something we would agree on anyways.

I think we generally would agree actually. In the case of the things that you agree are important, they had been laws - Trump reversed them. I just want to make sure you're aware that he does absolutely make decisions that benefit corporations over people. Some of them are actually quite dangerous, like his decision to loosen safety restrictions following a previous explosion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...