US Politics: On Tear and Blood shed. A beautiful picture of a man with a Bible.

[Rorshach]

5 hours ago, karaddin said:

Puts me in mind of this as well

The way young white men get sucked into this shit on the internet is complicated, and at least in part probably stems from a correct feeling that something is wrong, but attributing it to entirely wrong causes.

It seems to me that the cops have made a major mistake in assuming that because the public has largely accepted their brutality for years, then the public was on board with it. I think the reality is that a large chunk of the public, largely due to the complicity of the media, actually bought the bullshit justifications and lies. Now you've got the cops running around shooting peaceful protestors in the face (less lethal munitions), arresting people that have done nothing wrong, assaulting old white people for no reason, shooting and punching journalists and their cameras, the list goes on...

And it's tearing the binders off a lot of people. There is no justification for police brutality. There never was and they need to be stopped. It might even help pull some of those young men back from the brink.

Sorry, no point other than that this typo made me think of Mitt Romney and his binders..

[karaddin]

1 hour ago, Rorshach said:

Sorry, no point other than that this typo made me think of Mitt Romney and his binders..

How do you think he got his binders? By tearing them out of the hands of other people, obviously.

[Freshwater Spartan]

3 hours ago, DMC said:

The 12th amendment came about to rectify the obvious issues with the original setup of the Electoral College - at first every elector essentially cast two votes that were counted equally, which caused quite uneasiness among rich aged white male farmers at the time.  The 12th was necessary to distinguish between president and vice president votes for the precise reason that if otherwise there's a strong possibility many elections would then be thrown to the House.  Imagine 2016 under this situation - in which you could vote for, say, Hillary and Trump at the same time - knowing the loser would be vice president.

Dollars to donuts Hillary would have won in such a case, but that's not how it should work (as if the EC "should" exist at all).  The possibility the election gets thrown to the House - thanks to the 12th - necessitates a third party has negated the majority rule that favors Trump v. Biden.  In turn, that assumes someone either than the Trump or Biden receives EC votes.  I'm not holding my breath.

Many of the Founding Fathers assumed that most elections would be decided by the House. This was when they thought people would vote for their state and not their party.

 

In other good news Trumps approval among Catholics slips.

 

[Rorshach]

1 hour ago, karaddin said:

How do you think he got his binders? By tearing them out of the hands of other people, obviously.

Mostly women, as I recall. 

 

[DMC]

2 hours ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

Many of the Founding Fathers assumed that most elections would be decided by the House.

No they didn't.

[Guest]

So, in a welcome bit of good news in my state, the upcoming state primary election will include a state question on expanding Medicaid. There isn't a question of if it will pass, but by how much, because our dickhead of a governor is trying to pass his own stripped-down POS version through our Republican-dominated legislature.

Support for the SQ is at 71%, which, iirc, is up about 10 point since before the pandemic, and I don't expect that to go down at all. That's higher than the vote for medical marijuana expansion, and when the legislature tried to screw with that, they got slapped down hard. I imagine the same thing will happen here.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

15 hours ago, Triskele said:

Maybe I'll look like a fool, but the NFL thing feels like a huge change.  God I hate Brees and other morons.  

ETA:  to be more precise:  more like huge signal rather than actual change

I just read about Brees' comments on the kneeling protests. The NFL is full of morons. The Broncos head coach Vic Fangio, who should never come out and offer his perspective on anything, offered his perspective on the protests around the country. He had some canned statement about listening and understanding, then he said something like, "But in the NFL, racism is dead. It's a meritocracy." Fucking moron. The headline of the article I read (I think it was Sports Illustrated, not some local blog) also was something like, "Fangio Finally Offers Much Sought After Opinion," but it wasn't an Onion-like headline. It was literally the writer/editor acting as though people had been waiting on pins and needles for his opinion.

These mother fuckers just need to keep their mouths shut. And reinstate Kapernick if only to have him sitting in the middle of the field for prime time national anthem bullshit.

 

 

[Centrist Simon Steele]

12 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Biden shreds Trump for calling Friday a 'great day' for George Floyd
Pointing to a promising jobs report, Trump said earlier in the day, "Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying, 'This is a great thing happening for our country.'"

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/biden-shreds-trump-calling-friday-great-day-george-floyd-n1226036

 

Biden needs to keep this line of attack up. Trump's comments are beyond offensive, and it seems like a winner for Biden for point out the pure idiocy of what Trump says.

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

These mother fuckers just need to keep their mouths shut.

I entirely agree with you on substance, but the "keep your mouth shut" mentality towards athletes is exactly the type of bullshit that was leveled at Kaep in the first place.

1 minute ago, Triskele said:

So Murkowski says maybe not able to support Trump, and Trump predictably goes ballistic.  Hopefully helps Murkowski make up her mind.

Yeah, Murkowski said something critical yesterday.  Just as Collins, Romney, Sasse did the day before.  SSDD.  They always seem to forget it come election time.

[ThinkerX]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

I entirely agree with you on substance, but the "keep your mouth shut" mentality towards athletes is exactly the type of bullshit that was leveled at Kaep in the first place.

Yeah, Murkowski said something critical yesterday.  Just as Collins, Romney, Sasse did the day before.  SSDD.  They always seem to forget it come election time.

Presidential election in 2020.

Murkowski up for reelection in 2022, plus she's getting old.

Maybe nothing for her to lose, especially given Trump's numbers?

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Maybe nothing for her to lose, especially given Trump's numbers?

Murkowski hasn't owed her party, and definitely not Trump, since 2010 when she was reelected via write-in.  That's virtually unheard of in this day and age.  Whether she retires or not, however, she's still likely to echo her constituents whether she decides to go all Burkean or not.  And the strong majority of her constituents heart Trump.

[ThinkerX]

about that unemployment report - somebody fessed up to a 'misclassification error.'  Probably because people were not quite as gullible as hoped.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-misclassification-error-made-the-may-unemployment-rate-look-better-than-it-is-here-s-what-happened/ar-BB156kRr?ocid=ob-fb-enus-580&fbclid=IwAR1QPRImSLxj7d64q3lQ62d1V5DYJjajyuylb1YuBDys2x2Xav37USHIusA

 

When the U.S. government’s official jobs report for May came out on Friday, it included a note at the bottom saying there had been a major “error” indicating that the unemployment rate likely should be higher than the widely reported 13.3 percent rate.

The special note said that if this “misclassification error” had not occurred, the “overall unemployment rate would have been about 3 percentage points higher than reported,” meaning the unemployment rate would be about 16.3 percent for May. But that would still be an improvement from an unemployment rate of about 19.7 percent for April, applying the same standards.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics, the agency that puts out the monthly jobs reports, said it was working to fix the problem.

[Ran]

6 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Probably because people were not quite as gullible as hoped.

A whole bunch of people who are familiar with the BLS -- liberal to conservative and everything in between, including the Obama-appointed former acting head of the Labor Department -- are very adamant that the BLS did not try to fudge anything for anybody. It's a very professional, civil-servant driven agency and the one Trump political appointee basically has no power to fudge their statistical output. It was a genuine misclassifaction error at a time of extraordinary events that made gettings thing exactly right harder, not easier.

[DMC]

Yeah, full disclosure, some of my data very much relies on the legitimacy of the BLS.  But their standards are beyond reproach for the most part.  I don't see Trump being able to change that.

[ThinkerX]

life after the Mueller investigation, Page gets a job, Trump flabbergasted (she probably knows a great deal of what's in the redacted portions of the report)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-lashes-out-after-ex-fbi-lawyer-lisa-page-hired-as-msnbc-analyst/ar-BB157RRf?ocid=ob-fb-enus-580&fbclid=IwAR0plxqLvL95YKNL8-PBf8MShoBHob2WUHPB2pUaYWr8i0NUbdCbLWidfJc

 

President Trump was incredulous after MSNBC announced that it had hired former FBI lawyer Lisa Page as a legal analyst.

[Martell Spy]

Still complicit.

Ivanka Trump Gets A Blunt Reminder Of Her Own Complicity After ‘Free Speech’ Call
Twitter users pointed out the hypocrisy of Donald Trump’s daughter and adviser.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ivanka-trump-free-speech-call-backlash_n_5edb3543c5b67f2275c1e9e9

Quote

 

Critics, however, reminded Trump of her father’s violent and divisive rhetoric about anti-racism demonstrators who are protesting nationwide.

Many noted her reported involvement when federal authorities on Monday used tear gas to clear peaceful protesters from near the White House so that the president could pose with a Bible in front of St. John’s Church. The stunt has been widely condemned.

 

 

[OldGimletEye]

20 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Still complicit.

Ivanka Trump Gets A Blunt Reminder Of Her Own Complicity After ‘Free Speech’ Call
Twitter users pointed out the hypocrisy of Donald Trump’s daughter and adviser.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ivanka-trump-free-speech-call-backlash_n_5edb3543c5b67f2275c1e9e9

 

Frankly I find a lot of hypocrisy on both the left and right when it comes to free speech issues. The main difference being is the right is just blatantly hypocritical, while the left will try to cover its hypocrisy with a healthy dose of post modernist flim flam, mentioning something about what Lyotard had to say about as if I give fuck what Lyotard had to say.

But, in so far, as to what is the worse violation, Ivanka being dis-invited, or the crackdown on the protesters, the crackdown on the protesters is far worse because that was done in a public forum where free speech should receive the highest protection. BLM has filed I believe a section 1983 action against Barr, and I hope they prevail. Although, conservative justices will strain hard to dismiss their case, at least fortunately they are quite limited in considering the protester's viewpoint versus other alleged concerns like "law & order".

[Freshwater Spartan]

3 hours ago, DMC said:

No they didn't.

Surprised. What I posted is very mainstream historical analysis.

Here is an article from a five minute google search. 

https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2012/10/why-constitution-s-framers-didn-t-want-us-directly-elect-president/

Short summary is that the founders had a blind spot for political parties. Everyone knew George Washington would be elected unanimously but after he was done they couldn't see who would best replace him so they a concocted a system that probably wouldnt chose a clear winner because of everyone s state loyalties. The house would then help choose, which would be to the betterment of all. Remember congress is article 1. 

Of course political parties immediately form screwing up the whole system. The House only chooses 1 President John Quincy Adams in 1824,

Took me longer to write that than to Google.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

Here is an article from a five minute google search. 

Congrats on successfully conducting a google search.  It still doesn't change the fact the Framers (not Founders) agreed upon the Electoral College precisely because they did not want the House or any national legislature to make the selection.  Next time you google try looking into and actually reading the sources instead of pretending like you should get a medal for citing a damned source.

[Freshwater Spartan]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

Congrats on successfully conducting a google search.  It still doesn't change the fact the Framers (not Founders) agreed upon the Electoral College precisely because they did not want the House or any national legislature to make the selection.  Next time you google try looking into and actually reading the sources instead of pretending like you should get a medal for citing a damned source.

Source?