Jump to content


Board Moderators
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About davos

  • Rank
    can't stop the signal
  • Birthday 10/29/1975

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Madison, WI

Recent Profile Visitors

7,780 profile views
  1. The problem is that to remove a sitting president is still a political decision, not one based on laws. Its likely a vote to impeach could get through the house but it would be meaningless. Successful conviction would require 2/3 of the senate, and there is zero chance of that happening. There are simply not enough GOP senators that put country before party to vote Trump out. This is especially true given the nature of the crimes committed. While of the deepest gravity, and while quite likely traitorous, they are too esoteric for much of the public, especially most of the demographics that make up Trump's base, to really wrap their head around how bad they truly are. There are enough Senators that live in states where the voting electorate contains close to a majority of Trump supporters. For them to turn on the Donald, there would have to be significant pressure from their constituents. These crimes are not going to flip enough of these voters to actually make senators from those deep red states change their calculations. If they vote innocent they are safe, if they vote guilty they may well loose their jobs. It might be possible if we found that Trump did something more readily graspable, like say, murder. As things stand there is no chance of conviction. Sadly, we are stuck with Trump for the remainder of this term. And it actually gets worse. Its likely, given what we can see of the Mueller investigation, that more and more evidence will come out that connects Trump directly to illegal election manipulation by the Russians. While large regions of the country might be controlled by committed Trump partisans, this is actually a significant minority of the electorate nationally. Combine increased outrage with Trump's crimes with anger from many of those voters, particularly in the Midwest who bought into Trump's economic snake oil and are not finding themselves completely fucked, and his position nationally is going to deteriorate drastically. Trump will be backed in an ever tighter corner, surrounded by a nation that has rejected him but lacks a way to remove him, constantly hearing about his crimes and his horrid situation from the media he hates, and completely lacking the skills to deal with the demands of a presidency, much less one in the midst of a constitutional crisis. He will become increasingly dangerous both to the country and to the world.
  2. davos

    Chess - the world in black and white

    It was well accepted that Magnus had the edge in the tie breakers. I didn't expect him to just dominate Fabi like that though. I haven't had a chance to look through analysis but Fabi may have had chances to at least tie in the first game. Magnus just proved sharper in an end game when both were in time trouble. Outside of that Magnus just was the better player in that format. He was sharp, he was aggressive, and locked onto any advantage available and just kept turning. From the light of right now, it would seem that Magnus was smart to play it safer most of the match and that Fabi needed to try to find more opportunities to press. Carlsen well understood both his strengths and his opponents weaknesses and played the match accordingly. The next cycle is far away, and perhaps Carlsen will slip in that time. If he retains his form, I'm hoping that someone who is more comfortable in shorter game formats is the challenger so that Magnus can't repeat this approach with the same kind of confidence.
  3. davos


    Eventually using genetic editing tools to greatly reduce or even eliminate certain genetic diseases will be the norm. We shouldn't hide from this technology. We should make sure it is properly tested and that a proper regulatory and ethical environment is built around it to prevent abuse. My concern with this is that it seems they jumped way ahead when we have only had successful animal trials not that long ago. We would have been well advised to have a better understanding of what the risks and implications are before jumping into engineering traits in embryos.
  4. davos

    Chess - the world in black and white

    Shocked that Carlsen didn't press that position, especially given the kind of time trouble Fabi was in. He had an attack coming that would have been hard for white to find a way through. He's been the dominate force in chess for nearly a decade. He's won 3 world championship matches. You are the best player in the world with a meaningful advantage in a potentially decisive game, you almost need to play it out. To me, he's been a great champion but he's not the player he was 4 years ago.
  5. davos

    Chess - the world in black and white

    Game 12 is actually kind of interesting so far. 22 moves in and only 1 pawn from each side off the board. There is a lot of tension and a lot of complexity. There are going to be some fireworks at some point. Right now I like Carlsen's chances better, especially with Fabi being way down in time for having 18 moves to time control in a really involved position.
  6. davos

    Chess - the world in black and white

    Game six was insane, with Carlsen finally taking Fabi on in the Petrov. A crazy opening that was half Knight moves, solid middle game that ended with an piece sac give Carlsen a 3 pawn edge, and a intense end game in which Fabi apparently (according to a super computer) missed a 30 move forced mate that no one can quite understand. Still a draw but by far the best game of the match. Game seven was a solid, interesting, but uneventful draw. Fabi is playing well, Carlsen doesn't seem as sharp as he has been, but I still give the edge to the defending champ.
  7. davos

    Chess - the world in black and white

    After coming out swinging in the first game, it appears Carsen is now willing to grind things out. Just like working down a small but meaningful advantage into a winning end game, he knows that if it comes down the tie break, that being stronger in the blitz and rapid formats gives him a meaningful advantage. It will be interesting to see at what point Fabi takes a real swing to try to win a game and prevent that from happening. There are going to be fireworks at some point and it almost has to be from Fabi (unless of course Fabi makes an error that Carlsen jumps on).
  8. Walker hasn't won yet. As of a few minutes ago Evers was up by about 100 votes with large parts of Milwaukee, a Dem stronghold, yet to report. Very strong chance of a recount, who ever finishes on top after today.
  9. Having been raised by a racist father, I can confirm that this is very much the case. Being a raging bigot requires a lot of mental gymnastics.
  10. davos

    U.S. Politics: A Song Of Mimes And Musicians

    *mod hat* time for a new thread. */mod hat*
  11. davos

    U.S. Politics: A Song Of Mimes And Musicians

    And immediately following John McCain's funerals, which were a big middle finger to the Oompa-Loompa president.
  12. davos

    U.S. Politics: A Song Of Mimes And Musicians

    While the author (authors?) back off from wanting to do just that, I suspect that the first public move to set up a an attempt to remove Trump via the 25th amendment. The whole thing is engineered to piss Trump off to the point of a real, public meltdown. The anonymity. Publishing it through the NY Times. The revealing of stuff Trump would think should have been left behind closed doors. The use of big words. While it could simply be a chance for a frustrated individual to vent in public, everything about it screams of a more calculated attempt to goad an already enraged and unstable individual into rash action. If he takes the bait and does something even more stupid and vile publicly than has been the daily norm for this administration, then the group behind this would have a stronger case from a public relations standpoint for invoking the 25th amendment. While the amendment allows for the temporary removal of a sitting president by the majority vote of the cabinet, if the claim of being unfit is contested by the president it would require a 2/3 vote in congress to make it permanent. So a group scheming to take this route would have to sell doing so to congress and the country. Otherwise they could temporarily replace Trump with Pence only for trump to return in a few weeks even more deranged and full of rage and paranoia than he is now. Yes, even if that is their plan, this person or persons are cowards for failing to take action early given the severity of their claims. But if this is an opening move, there is some sense to it. Rather this is what is indeed happening and if it is rather it is a viable approach are not clear but I am convinced the op-ed is part of something more significant.
  13. davos

    U.S. Politics- This Is Us, Basically Fascists

    It is a limitation. If an ID is required to vote, it limits voting to not just citizens, but citizens with an ID. If an ID was issued to all citizens free of charge, then you might in fact be correct. As it is, requiring an ID limits voting to citizens with the financial means to pay the fees for an ID and the ability to take the steps to acquire one. The primary ID used in the US is a driver's license, which implies an ability to drive and access to a motor vehicle. State issued photo ID's are also available but in every state of which I am aware, they are issued by the same entity that issues driver's licenses. Offices that provide this service are relatively remote from some areas, usually are only open during business hours, and often require long waits in line. Current student ID's can also be used, though there are restrictions in some states, but this requires enrollment in some form of post-secondary education. So to require an id to vote effectively limits this right to citizens who drive, who are students, or who have the ability to acquire an id. This is a serious impediment to the elderly, the disabled, and the poor (especially poor minorities as offices that provide ID services are often far from regions of low income housing). In reality an ID requirement is actually a significant limitation on the right to vote, at least as things currently stand in the US. ETA: The post about the ready availablity of an alternative ID in SC was made after I started writing the above post. While I acknowledge this maybe the case in that state, it is far from true for many other states as an another poster already pointed out. In WI, where I live, there is a fee and the times and locations to acquire one are limited (in some areas quite severally so.
  14. davos

    U.S. Politics: The Marionette Presidency Edition

    Grand Moff Tarkin: [walking in with Darth Vader] The Imperial Senate will no longer be of any concern to us. I have just received word that the Emperor has dissolved the Council permanently. The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.General Tagge: That's impossible! How will the Emperor maintain control without the bureaucracy?Grand Moff Tarkin: The regional governors now have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battle station. While this is fiction, its not unrealistic. The emperor had won 20 years before this but it took that time for him to be in a position to actually remove the most important of Republic institutions. This process has been seen frequently with totalitarian and authoritarian governments replacing a freer, more representative one. We can see that process in the present day in Turkey, we have seen it in recent years in Russia with Putin and in Venezuela. a bit farther back, Stalin, while not working against established institutions since the Bolsheviks had mostly swept them away rather than co-opting them, had to work incrementally over a decade before he crushed the last meaningful vestiges of opposition. Even Hitler, who able to implement radical changes upon becoming chancellor, had to solidify his power in steps. In our current situation, while the institutions of the US government are far from as robust as they once were (say back in Nixon's day), they still are a formidable block to the US going too far down the authoritarian path. While they have not yet provided more than a drag on Trump's program, there is a real potential for the congress to partially or completely fall into opposition party hands. In that case Trump would likely face not just some discomfort, but an aggressive counter-attack. As such either altering institutions such as congress and large segments of the executive branch so that they are either patsies or no longer able to offer meaningful opposition, or eliminating them entirely would be needed for Trump or a future dictator wannabe to secure long-term authoritarian rule. Not saying they intend this, but a coup is not out of the question. Say there is a national crisis, either real or manufactured. The administration tries to impose nationwide martial law. A significant portion of congress objects. The president suspends congress and will only open it back up to members who are willing to make an oath of personal loyalty to him. All in the name of protecting the country.