October 15, 2019, 03:17:35 AM

Author Topic: Politics and other ailments of the real world  (Read 267340 times)

Offline m3mnoch

Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #195 on: December 06, 2015, 05:09:38 PM »
if they can't get rubio or jeb (anyone actually *electable*) to win the primary, the general election is going to be the biggest landslide in history.
Actually, you might be wrong there. There's a good number of independents out there willing to vote for anyone whose not a politician, even Trump. Jeb won't get anywhere near the top of the primaries because he's a Bush, plain and simple. Rubio has a chance, but apparently Cruz is crushing him at the moment?
If the Republicans want to win the vote, they need to elect Carlie however you spell her last name. She's a woman meaning she has a chance against Clinton, and she's a non-politician almost securing the independent vote. However, apparently the party isn't thinking like this, and just wants another guy up there.

nope.  not remotely wrong.

if someone far, far to the right wins the primary, it will be a landslide for hillary/bernie/trained ape.  even the gop is freaking out about this.  that's why they're trying like hell to get trump out of the lead.  that's why he's at war with fox news.  that's why they had him sign an 'i won't run as an independent' pledge, because if he does, he takes all the crazies with him and they can't win a general election on logic and issues alone.  it will be absolute chaos if trump splits the party.

welcome to pandering to your base.

also, keep in mind there's a severe difference in number of voters between 'moderates' and 'independents'.  trump may get some of the independent votes (at least until he has to field policy questions in a presidential debate) but he will certainly not get any of the moderate votes.

and carly "liar liar pants on fire" fiorina?  heh.  there's a reason she dropped out of sight after the 'baby parts' thing.  she's a freakin' political third rail now.  even fox news told her to her face no video of what she described exists.  and she's just doubling down on it.

oh, and despite the 'we just need a woman in there' sentiment, they're not going to make it out of the primary.  the core of the base is just too white-guy-hungry.  again, there's a reason the evangelicals are moving from carson to cruz in droves.

the gop nomination is seriously a clown car.

Offline JMack

  • Hircum Magna Rex of the Fabled Atku Temple, and writing contest regular
  • Writing Group
  • Ringbearer
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Total likes: 4738
  • Gender: Male
  • Our daily efforts are love poems to the universe.
    • View Profile
    • Tales of Starlit Lands
Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #196 on: December 06, 2015, 05:24:39 PM »
Two comments:

I have to agree with @ultamentkiller about abortion being a complex issue. I'm not a fan, because I'm not a fan of anything that defines a person as not a person. I also know it's an entirely reasonable position of divergence around what truly constitutes a person. But in an area where I just don't think we know the answer, it's hard for me to assert one person's rights over another's death. But again, I see this as an area where reasonable and moral people can disagree. The overall POV in the U.S. is that abortion should be legal, safe and rare. I find myself having to be in that camp.

On a separate point, I think some the key problems in the U.S. government structure are around proportion of representation in the Senate and voting district manipulation for cementing power in the House of Representatives (called gerrymandering).

In the Senate, there are two senators for each U.S. state. But 70% of the population lives in the 18 most urban states. The other 32 states tend to be much more rural, which also tends toward more conservative politics. Oddly, because senators serve for 6 year terms, the Senate is still more careful and centrist than the House. But still, 30% of the voters in smaller states (below 5M population) control about 66% of the Senate votes.

In the House, voting districts are usually controlled by the state legislatures. If a legislature and the state governor are of the same party and have sufficient majority, they almost immediately start manipulating voting district lines to split supporters of the other party into separate districts so that their party has a permanent majority. Both sides do this. That said, over the last two decades or so (and I may be wrong on some details, but I think I'm correct in general), conservatives have had control of state legislatures and governorships and so the Republican majority - after years of Democratic majorities - has been cementing its place.

One last comment. Race is a big driver, too. During the Civil War, Lincoln was form the Republicans and represented the more "progressive" party. As a reaction to this, Democrats became the party of the South. At the time of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt took the Democrats far to the left, but southern democrats stayed in the party, giving it a strong majority for many years. When Kennedy and Johnson supported civil rights, the southern democratic wing dissolved. Southern states are now almost entirely Republican.  See small state over-representation in the Senate; see gerrymandering and permanent majorities; see voter registration malarky; see.......
 
Change, when it comes, will step lightly before it kicks like thunder. (GRMatthews)
You are being naive if you think that any sweet and light theme cannot be strangled and force fed it's own flesh. (Nora)
www.starlit-lands.com

Offline Rostum

Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #197 on: December 06, 2015, 05:49:00 PM »
Quote
Christians don't see it as being just "apart of the reproductive process." They see it as dealing with a human life.

There is a big difference between holding beliefs and stopping others from making a choice. That comes under fumdementalism not religion.
A tiny fraction of Planned Parenthood is about abortion. There is a massive amount of information on the web opposing abortion in the cases or rape and incest by various American pro-life religious groups.
I am aware This is the extreme but the rights of the victim are not equal to the rights of a foetus? Even the catholic countries in Europe are not that backward.
I do not like the idea of abortion but I do not in any way feel compelled to force my beliefs on others and certainly feel there are situations where a choice should be given anything else is tyranny.

Quote
if they can't get rubio or jeb (anyone actually *electable*) to win the primary, the general election is going to be the biggest landslide in history.

Just like us you pretend to have a democracy. You really think another Bush in power will make America a better place, just like the last two did...or another Clinton (actually the last one made you a more prosperous place)? Perhaps getting away from political dynesties would be a plan. Or just admit you have an egolitarian fascade are class based and have an aristocracy based on money not bloodlines like everyone else.

Quote
they need to elect Carlie however you spell her last name

Really? I am not a fan, but maybe that was something to do with joining a company which literally wrote the book on labour relations made fantastic stuff and provided the best customer support I have ever encountered.
In those days it was run by engineers and managed double digit growth and they were embarressed to talk about the money. At a certain point shareholder pressure meant getting business persons involved. Massive cuts in staffing about 30,000 from memory all the perks and benefits stripped from the workforce no pay increases and the company was asset stripped. 14 months after she joined the division of Lucent she came from collapsed. She had sold the buildings and plant and the business was renting them back, but it gave her a spectacular quarter to jump ship. Oh no growth and the employee bonus scheme was sabataged (later destroyed by Hurd) after she took control. Eventually the board got rid of her and brought in a succession of greater idiots wielding MBA's and a disdain for making or doing things. If you really want a self entitled sociopath in power thats up to you but I can promise you American lives wont matter and everyone elses less so.





« Last Edit: December 06, 2015, 05:56:29 PM by Rostum »

Offline m3mnoch

Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #198 on: December 06, 2015, 06:07:12 PM »
Two comments:

I have to agree with @ultamentkiller about abortion being a complex issue. I'm not a fan, because I'm not a fan of anything that defines a person as not a person. I also know it's an entirely reasonable position of divergence around what truly constitutes a person. But in an area where I just don't think we know the answer, it's hard for me to assert one person's rights over another's death. But again, I see this as an area where reasonable and moral people can disagree. The overall POV in the U.S. is that abortion should be legal, safe and rare. I find myself having to be in that camp.

On a separate point, I think some the key problems in the U.S. government structure are around proportion of representation in the Senate and voting district manipulation for cementing power in the House of Representatives (called gerrymandering).

In the Senate, there are two senators for each U.S. state. But 70% of the population lives in the 18 most urban states. The other 32 states tend to be much more rural, which also tends toward more conservative politics. Oddly, because senators serve for 6 year terms, the Senate is still more careful and centrist than the House. But still, 30% of the voters in smaller states (below 5M population) control about 66% of the Senate votes.

In the House, voting districts are usually controlled by the state legislatures. If a legislature and the state governor are of the same party and have sufficient majority, they almost immediately start manipulating voting district lines to split supporters of the other party into separate districts so that their party has a permanent majority. Both sides do this. That said, over the last two decades or so (and I may be wrong on some details, but I think I'm correct in general), conservatives have had control of state legislatures and governorships and so the Republican majority - after years of Democratic majorities - has been cementing its place.

One last comment. Race is a big driver, too. During the Civil War, Lincoln was form the Republicans and represented the more "progressive" party. As a reaction to this, Democrats became the party of the South. At the time of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt took the Democrats far to the left, but southern democrats stayed in the party, giving it a strong majority for many years. When Kennedy and Johnson supported civil rights, the southern democratic wing dissolved. Southern states are now almost entirely Republican.  See small state over-representation in the Senate; see gerrymandering and permanent majorities; see voter registration malarky; see.......

i have two more things too!

1) the 'complex issue' is really hitting the nail on the head.

the far right (i say this as i personally know many people 'on the right' who are more moderate and to whom this statement doesn't apply.  also, i have lots of experience personally with the far right as much of my family exists squarely in the space) believes there are not really any complex issues -- everything can be solved simply.  they don't see the world is a big bucket of gray.  they only see black and white.  good and bad.  it's weird.

welfare drug testing is an amazing example of this.  "if i have to take a drug test for a job, they need to take one for welfare."  sounds simple, right?  then, you go into 'well, how much does it cost to test everyone?  and how many people is it going to catch?'  come to find out, if you're so poor you're on welfare, you don't have money for drugs.

the numbers have been proven it wastes tax payer money in every state that's tried it, but it still comes back because the answer is 'simple' so there must be some level of corruption.  after all, we know those bastards are making at more than minimum wage just being on welfare.  bunch of 'takers' anyway!

except -- if you take the number of people on welfare (we're a nation of takers!!) which is 110,000,000 or so and multiply that by 'more than minimum wage' (they're making over 40k a year!  on welfare!) of $43k per year, you come up with a number that's about a trillion dollars more than the entire federal budget.

so, yeah, taking the entire social system budget (it's about $400 billion, btw) from both state and federal, you end up with an average of $3600 a month.

you can't simultaneously say 'there are tons of people on welfare' and 'welfare recipients are making tons of money' without math proving you wrong.

so, no -- it's not simple.  none of our divisive issues are.  that's why they're divisive.


2) i'm totally going to drive everyone's opinion of the u.s. political system further into the ground.  yes, even farther than it is now.

oh, and i guess it's not me doing it -- it's adam.  he ruins everything.

[youtube]90RajY2nrgk[/youtube]



Quote
they need to elect Carlie however you spell her last name

Really? I am not a fan, but maybe that was something to do with joining a company which literally wrote the book on labour relations made fantastic stuff and provided the best customer support I have ever encountered.
In those days it was run by engineers and managed double digit growth and they were embarressed to talk about the money. At a certain point shareholder pressure meant getting business persons involved. Massive cuts in staffing about 30,000 from memory all the perks and benefits stripped from the workforce no pay increases and the company was asset stripped. 14 months after she joined the division of Lucent she came from collapsed. She had sold the buildings and plant and the business was renting them back, but it gave her a spectacular quarter to jump ship. Oh no growth and the employee bonus scheme was sabataged (later destroyed by Hurd) after she took control. Eventually the board got rid of her and brought in a succession of greater idiots wielding MBA's and a disdain for making or doing things. If you really want a self entitled sociopath in power thats up to you but I can promise you American lives wont matter and everyone elses less so.

similarly, i was working with hp when she came in there.  similarly, it was a complete, unmitigated disaster.  similarly, the board fired her.  i, too, am not a fan.


Offline Rostum

Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #199 on: December 06, 2015, 06:30:00 PM »
Quote
similarly, i was working with hp when she came in there.  similarly, it was a complete, unmitigated disaster.  similarly, the board fired her.  i, too, am not a fan.

Same company same experiences different side of the pond.

Offline m3mnoch

Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #200 on: December 06, 2015, 07:37:58 PM »
while we're on the subject.



Offline JMack

  • Hircum Magna Rex of the Fabled Atku Temple, and writing contest regular
  • Writing Group
  • Ringbearer
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Total likes: 4738
  • Gender: Male
  • Our daily efforts are love poems to the universe.
    • View Profile
    • Tales of Starlit Lands
Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #201 on: December 06, 2015, 07:39:17 PM »
Crumped. Hate Love it.
Change, when it comes, will step lightly before it kicks like thunder. (GRMatthews)
You are being naive if you think that any sweet and light theme cannot be strangled and force fed it's own flesh. (Nora)
www.starlit-lands.com

Offline ultamentkiller

Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #202 on: December 06, 2015, 08:16:24 PM »
Quote
Christians don't see it as being just "apart of the reproductive process." They see it as dealing with a human life.

There is a big difference between holding beliefs and stopping others from making a choice. That comes under fumdementalism not religion.

Again, you're simplifying the passion people feel about this. Normally, I would completely agree with you. Just because you believe something, doesn't mean everyone else has to. Gay marriage is the prime example of that. But with abortion, you're talking about life and death here. Pro Life activists believe that we're allowing the death of thousands of children.
Let me put it into perspective. Imagine a religion that believes a certain race aren't actually people. Hell, let's take this fantasy. Imagine elves wandering around America. They like it here, even though we cut down there trees. A group of people have formed an elf hunting group and dedicate themselves to vacating them from forests. They are saying it's perfectly legal since they're not humans or animals. Now, I'm apart of a group that believes this is completely wrong. You're taking the life of something for land. Would it be  suppressing their beliefs to make elf hunting illegal? Sure. But it's a thing's life that's at stake.
Even though the example is a bit extreme, that's how a lot of Christians feel about abortion. A lot of the Christians I know have an argument that goes like this. "Yes, I believe in freedom of religion. That doesn't mean I'm going to let another one sacrifice an animal at the altar."

Offline JMack

  • Hircum Magna Rex of the Fabled Atku Temple, and writing contest regular
  • Writing Group
  • Ringbearer
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Total likes: 4738
  • Gender: Male
  • Our daily efforts are love poems to the universe.
    • View Profile
    • Tales of Starlit Lands
Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #203 on: December 06, 2015, 08:28:49 PM »
Yes. Stopping people from making a choice to kill is a good thing. The question is whether it's killing to abort a child/foetus.

Now, believing that a speck of tissue is a human because one bit of scripture says "I knew you before you were in the womb" is a little closer to fundamentalism. But admitting that we don't know when "human" begins - and wanting to protect the rights of children against parents - is, to my way of thinking, rational and fair. So is the counter-argument. (It's just tissue, for Pete's sake!) What we do from there is the tough part. But rejecting "pro life" because of fundamentalists is sort of like throwing out socialism because of East Germany.
Change, when it comes, will step lightly before it kicks like thunder. (GRMatthews)
You are being naive if you think that any sweet and light theme cannot be strangled and force fed it's own flesh. (Nora)
www.starlit-lands.com

Offline ultamentkiller

Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #204 on: December 06, 2015, 08:41:57 PM »
What we do from there is the tough part. But rejecting "pro life" because of fundamentalists is sort of like throwing out socialism because of East Germany.
I have to disagree. While I see your point, we can see the pros and cons of socialism and capitalism in the real world. Abortion comes down to a mixture of religion and science, both of which are a bit more abstract.
Science abstract? You mean the thing that gives us answers and can be proven by evidence is abstract?
Yes, because in this case, we don't have the answer. Not completely. We're always learning something new. Sometimes we think we know, but then we find something else that proves it wrong. So while it's a bit more concrete than religion itself, it's still abstract.

Offline xiagan

  • Writing Contest Organizer
  • Powers That Be
  • Elderling
  • *
  • Posts: 5947
  • Total likes: 2587
  • Gender: Male
  • Master Procrastinator
    • View Profile
Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #205 on: December 06, 2015, 09:05:03 PM »
What bugs me most about pro-life is that it's really pro-birth and not pro-life. If you are pro-life, you should care for the baby that is brought into this world ( = health care, the well being of the mother/parents, ...) and not just that it is brought into this world.

"Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis." (Laplace)

Offline xiagan

  • Writing Contest Organizer
  • Powers That Be
  • Elderling
  • *
  • Posts: 5947
  • Total likes: 2587
  • Gender: Male
  • Master Procrastinator
    • View Profile
Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #206 on: December 06, 2015, 09:33:34 PM »
Oh wow, that Adam ruins everything Video was incredible... You really managed to drive my opinion of your system deeper into the ground...
"Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis." (Laplace)

Offline JMack

  • Hircum Magna Rex of the Fabled Atku Temple, and writing contest regular
  • Writing Group
  • Ringbearer
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Total likes: 4738
  • Gender: Male
  • Our daily efforts are love poems to the universe.
    • View Profile
    • Tales of Starlit Lands
Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #207 on: December 06, 2015, 09:40:12 PM »
What we do from there is the tough part. But rejecting "pro life" because of fundamentalists is sort of like throwing out socialism because of East Germany.
I have to disagree. While I see your point, we can see the pros and cons of socialism and capitalism in the real world. Abortion comes down to a mixture of religion and science, both of which are a bit more abstract.
Science abstract? You mean the thing that gives us answers and can be proven by evidence is abstract?
Yes, because in this case, we don't have the answer. Not completely. We're always learning something new. Sometimes we think we know, but then we find something else that proves it wrong. So while it's a bit more concrete than religion itself, it's still abstract.

Hmm. I think we're in "violent agreement" (as we say at work) on the complexity thing.
As far as my comparison, yeah, okay probably not great. But to push it a tad, i think we can see the ffects of fundamentalism in the real world. You don't throw out Socialism as a concept because of the horrors of how it has been implemented in some places. Just as you don't throw out an argument for life because of the perils of fundamentalism.

But yeah. Probably not the best comparison.
Change, when it comes, will step lightly before it kicks like thunder. (GRMatthews)
You are being naive if you think that any sweet and light theme cannot be strangled and force fed it's own flesh. (Nora)
www.starlit-lands.com

Offline Rostum

Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #208 on: December 06, 2015, 09:42:46 PM »
The 'complex question' comes down to whether you should have control over your own body or the state should?
Whether is is right to force someone, possibly a child to carry a foetus to term and then provide them with none to minimal support. Whether the much translated changed and abridged set of rules for living in a middle eastern kingdom 3,000-1,000 years ago should hold sway over knowledge and Science of now. How do you claim the moral ground while forcing someone to bring a child to term they dont wish to carry, don't want when it is born and often cannot provide for. Never mind the medical cost of the birth.
As you elect the likes of Donna Campbell

The all (human) life is sacred bit would possibly stand up better if you led by example. You could provide healthcare and a first rate education for all for free. Show you value your people, end poverty. You hold over a 1/3 of the world commerce and 1/2 its wealth lead by example, but instead America as a nation has not done this. Even the daily shootings that no sane country would tolerate cannot be stopped but abortion can be. instead you vote for the likes of senator Donna Campbell.

Back in the late 80's I worked as a librarian for a midwives charity. Detroit had the highest child mortality bar 3 mid African cities in the world the pro life arguement would sit better if places in your incredibly rich country were not the third world.

Offline JMack

  • Hircum Magna Rex of the Fabled Atku Temple, and writing contest regular
  • Writing Group
  • Ringbearer
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Total likes: 4738
  • Gender: Male
  • Our daily efforts are love poems to the universe.
    • View Profile
    • Tales of Starlit Lands
Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
« Reply #209 on: December 06, 2015, 09:44:21 PM »
What bugs me most about pro-life is that it's really pro-birth and not pro-life. If you are pro-life, you should care for the baby that is brought into this world ( = health care, the well being of the mother/parents, ...) and not just that it is brought into this world.



A reasonable critique of many of the "pro-life" folks. My other is that so many pro-lifers are pro death penalty. This is one of the places where I appreciate the Catholic church's consistency: pr-birth, pro-human dignity, anti-death penalty. I think the church takes its position too far in respect to contraception, and there are many other areas where i disagree with its POV strenuously. But at least in regard to the current discussion, there's a consistency there.

My own position is pro-contraception, anti-abortion, pro-legal/safe abortion, pro-dignity, anti-death penalty.

If only everyone agreed with me!  :o ;)
Change, when it comes, will step lightly before it kicks like thunder. (GRMatthews)
You are being naive if you think that any sweet and light theme cannot be strangled and force fed it's own flesh. (Nora)
www.starlit-lands.com