U.S. Politics: Gunnin' From The Long Arm of the Law

[Martell Spy]

11 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

At some point we have suspected that politics would be a race to the bottom, eventually the President is going to be a person like the President of the Universe.  It won't be a straight decline to idiot celebrity, but look at 3/4 of the last Republican presidents.  Would have loved to hear the conversation between Ryan, McConnell and Trump where Trump is pushing to create a Department of Professional Wrestling and TV and TV Shows.

Wait, did that happen? I no longer know what is real.

[Liver and Onions]

50 minutes ago, Yukle said:

Oh my goodness!

Reports are emerging that Chinese "persons" tried to take possession of the nuclear football case during Trump's visit to Beijing. I'm guessing his photos showing people posing with the case at Mar-a-Lago, and therefore allowed close contact with it, proved wonderful for security.

This is alongside another story that Trump apparently went off his nut complaining that he couldn't play golf because it would be seen as insensitive to have come to Florida for that reason.

What? 

You really can't make this stuff up.  As for the later point, I'm not surprised. 

 

[Jace, Extat]

@Tywin et al. If I wanted you to know I had all the monies, you'd be dead.

Meanwhile, I sense a disturbance in the force.

Jack Kingston surprised me last Friday and again yesterday by trying to pivot away from Guns towards 'violence in Hollywood and videogames'.

That was interesting. But I figured he's just a fuckin' weirdo anyway.

Turns out apparently that might have been pushed by more than just Mr. Kingston. And Jace is on the YouTube watching her videogame videos and peoples aren't having it.

Very interesting.

My recollection is that both parties pretty much just abandoned the war on freedom of expression (I wouldn't buy it but I support your right to make a game about cutting peoples' legs off for fun while listening to Kim) but in this age of sensitive trolls could these little potshots rile up the very lowest among us to the polls against R's?

Long have I suspected that a large part of my generation is so apathetic that nothing could get them to the polls. But you start talking about their fucking videogames?

 

[DMC]

6 hours ago, Kalbear said:

can say this with some confidence because this is already what they've been doing. Trump isn't in charge of this plan anyway - it's Kelly and the folks at ICE. And they know perfectly well what they want to do. They've already moved on a number of older, peaceful members, but never in force for a given community, and not a whole lot at once. They've specifically gone after those who have had prior issues of some kind (even if they were 20-30 years ago) and had shown up recently in some fashion, often as part of work snitching and reporting. 

I think that's going to continue, because it's been successful as far as Trump's goals go and hasn't caused too much negative press. 

Yeah, I agree with pretty much all of this.  Nothing here changes what is already going on, and that's the problem.

6 hours ago, Kalbear said:

As to the court, I think they're going to decide quickly along partisan lines that the ban on DACA is perfectly fine, with major dissenting opinions that will be ignored.

 

5 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Those court cases are going to be heard by SCOTUS as early as Monday. Chances are good it'll be denied. 

Heh.  On SCOTUS actually ruling or doing anything anytime soon?  Yeah I'll take the under.

[Jace, Extat]

Just now, dmc515 said:

Yeah, I agree with pretty much all of this.  Nothing here changes what is already going on, and that's the problem.

 

Heh.  On SCOTUS actually ruling or doing anything anytime soon?  Yeah I'll take the under.

SCOTUS has proven a propensity for outright political exercises. Remember 2000?

[The Anti-Targ]

46 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

@Tywin et al. If I wanted you to know I had all the monies, you'd be dead.

Meanwhile, I sense a disturbance in the force.

Jack Kingston surprised me last Friday and again yesterday by trying to pivot away from Guns towards 'violence in Hollywood and videogames'.

That was interesting. But I figured he's just a fuckin' weirdo anyway.

Turns out apparently that might have been pushed by more than just Mr. Kingston. And Jace is on the YouTube watching her videogame videos and peoples aren't having it.

Very interesting.

My recollection is that both parties pretty much just abandoned the war on freedom of expression (I wouldn't buy it but I support your right to make a game about cutting peoples' legs off for fun while listening to Kim) but in this age of sensitive trolls could these little potshots rile up the very lowest among us to the polls against R's?

Long have I suspected that a large part of my generation is so apathetic that nothing could get them to the polls. But you start talking about their fucking videogames?

 

Games are a convenient scapegoat for both sides. On the R side it can look like they are doing something to limit the harm of virtual guns at the same time as taking people's attention off the harm of real guns. And on the D side it can look like they are doing something to limit the harm of virtual guns at the same time as taking people's attention away from the fact that they continue to fail to do anything about the harm of real guns.

[Jace, Extat]

9 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Games are a convenient scapegoat for both sides. On the R side it can look like they are doing something to limit the harm of virtual guns at the same time as taking people's attention off the harm of real guns. And on the D side it can look like they are doing something to limit the harm of virtual guns at the same time as taking people's attention away from the fact that they continue to fail to do anything about the harm of real guns.

Yeah, but that only works on old people. Regular adults ain't buying that shit.

And the video I was watching tried to blame both sides but the best relevant Democrat comment was the Colorado Governor saying 'virtual' in the same sentence as 'gun' in a very brief clip that had no context.

Whereas there was minutes' worth of soundbites from Republicans.

This could be a landmine that these weirdos chose to step on.

[DMC]

34 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

SCOTUS has proven a propensity for outright political exercises. Remember 2000?

Yeah, I remember that one incredibly unique time.

[DMC]

4 hours ago, Kalbear said:

The best way to beat gerrymandering is to make it so that the maps allow for local officials to be elected but also allow balancing based on total party vote. 

Hey, an interesting thought, caught like a butterfly of..whatever.  What you're talking about is proportionality vs. district "compact-ness" - or respecting county lines.  That's the entire point of Wasserman's 538 project - there'll be be tradeoffs.  Bet me and you could agree on the tradeoffs right quick.  Not sure about the voters.

[DMC]

5 hours ago, lokisnow said:

Certainly an improvement, but still looks unfairly compact. Lets start a gerrymandering movement that ensures there are never more than 250,000 non urban residents per district ( in states with urban areas.)  chop up some of those big rural blockades with good philly voters. Dilute the rural vote!  

(Note silliness )

 

5 hours ago, Mexal said:

It’s the best Democrats were going to get and very nonpartisan. From what others are saying, it’s better than House Dems submitted. At best, in a wave, Dems could be looking at a 11-7 advantage. That’s pretty good. Just looks like a fair map.

The Dems can change this type of shit throughout the country and it's by continuing to raise money at the rate they are now.  Everything the GOP did in 2010 can be undid by 2020 at the state level.  I am very confident in this because of research that will be rejected from being published in the premiere state politics journal.  Keep up, don't stop.

[Yukle]

44 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Hey, an interesting thought, caught like a butterfly of..whatever.  What you're talking about is proportionality vs. district "compact-ness" - or respecting county lines.  That's the entire point of Wasserman's 538 project - there'll be be tradeoffs.  Bet me and you could agree on the tradeoffs right quick.  Not sure about the voters.

 

12 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

 

The Dems can change this type of shit throughout the country and it's by continuing to raise money at the rate they are now.  Everything the GOP did in 2010 can be undid by 2020 at the state level.  I am very confident in this because of research that will be rejected from being published in the premiere state politics journal.  Keep up, don't stop.

That's true, but it will be harder for the Dems than it was for the Republicans. They were much better prepared when it came to using algorithms to gerrymander with excellent precision, while at the same time the Dems were removing the ability for the states they controlled to do the same.

It's not a level playing field - the Dems must first overcome the fact that Gerrymandering requires a nearly impossible 10% swing in their favour, and then must get the changes through the legislatures.

And this is assuming that the Republicans don't regain enough control by the next census to simply reverse all of the efforts anyway.

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, Yukle said:

That's true, but it will be harder for the Dems than it was for the Republicans. They were much better prepared when it came to using algorithms to gerrymander with excellent precision, while at the same time the Dems were removing the ability for the states they controlled to do the same.

The bolded doesn't make any sense.  It's essentially saying the GOP is better at math than the Dems, which, as someone fairly well trained in statistics, I know is not true.  What is true is that the GOP has better advantages at exploiting gerrymandering because Democratic voters tend to cluster in urban areas whereas one can split up the rural and suburban areas to benefit the GOP in an easier fashion, generally speaking.

[Darth Richard II]

3 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Wait, did that happen? I no longer know what is real.

Right? Every time I wake up and look at the news I feel that way.

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, Triskele said:

I think that it can mostly be explained by saying that a GOP group was extremely well-prepared for the census opportunity in 2010 and pounced.

Agreed.  So let's pounce back!

[all swedes are racist]

this trump/romney relationship is a wonder to behold

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, unpaid comintern said:

this trump/romney relationship is a wonder to behold

They could both do worse.

[all swedes are racist]

3 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

They could both do worse.

they certainly aren’t doing any better

[Darth Richard II]

11 minutes ago, unpaid comintern said:

this trump/romney relationship is a wonder to behold

I dunno man, I saw Ghostbusters. That's some Keymaster/Gatekeeper shit right there.

[Yukle]

1 hour ago, dmc515 said:

The bolded doesn't make any sense.  It's essentially saying the GOP is better at math than the Dems, which, as someone fairly well trained in statistics, I know is not true.  What is true is that the GOP has better advantages at exploiting gerrymandering because Democratic voters tend to cluster in urban areas whereas one can split up the rural and suburban areas to benefit the GOP in an easier fashion, generally speaking.

I refer to being prepared to exploit the issue, as in morally. The Democrats were aiming to eliminate gerrymandering, while the Republicans were not. Therefore they were prepared to act immorally in a way that has ruined America's voting and the Democrats, in most cases, were not.

Clustering in urban areas doesn't account for gerrymandering on this scale. One-person-one-vote should be an operating principle of all effective democratic systems. Allowing rural areas to have disproportionate power is built into the American voting system but it needn't be the case. A proportional voting system would eliminate this, rather than a representative model, for instance.

[Yukle]

2 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

Mitt Romney running for Senate, Ben Sasse visiting Iowa, Jeff Flake branding himself #RepublicanClassic. Long odds, I know, but what do we think the chances are one of these guys actually challenges Trump in 2020?

Fairly good. The chances of winning? Less than zero. Trump could declare the old constitution void and that he has a much bigger one, more beautiful than ever before, and it's going to be better in every way. It will have so much winning, believe me. And his followers would swallow it.