patrick.net

marcus says

The world has changed, in some ways that many of us find troubling.

MOST of us find troubling.

The most disturbing part is where two different groups see the same facts but different "truths". Also disturbing is the personal attack as the goto tactic in a "debate".

The fact and the "truths".

In polite society (that non virtual world we live in) I don't bring up politics because you just can't win. When somebody talks about how global warming has made them feel so much hotter than they used to despite facts. Or how our presidents attempt to root out AMERICAN corruption in Ukraine is an impeachable offense but it's OK if other politicians blatantly use their influence to amass great wealth at the expense of the American people.

marcus says

:
Please share with us what the mandatory hospitalization is, and how democrats ended it. Seriously, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Those crazy people that live in boxes and roam the streets in a mind addled zombie like state used to be institutionalized.

marcus says

I don't have to know exactly (or predict exactly) how bad it is to keep spewing carbon in to the atmosphere, to know that moving away from burning fossil fuels is a good and actually very conservative risk adverse idea.

@Marcus,
Issue is not IF we should get off fossil fuels, issue is HOW. So-called environmentalists who are in reality fucking uneducated idiots propose solutions which will catapult us back into 19th century life quality. Rational discourse is shut down largely due to screeching of the collective Left - and now the collective right is reciprocating in kind.

marcus says

:

Then why are so many politicians paid t5o say that we don't need to get off of fossil fuels ?

And why aren't we further in to development of 3rd and 4th generation nuclear reactors ?

I mean what the hell man ! Electric cars are here ! NOW !

I have no idea, but a rational explanation is that environmentalists have scared people off from nuclear so that any politician who supports it will not be elected. Competition with oil (as if need less oil if use nuclear) will not be helpful either to achieve more donations.

jazz_music says
This is a victimhood claim from an establishment who actually holds the majority of power.

Same as white male victimhood.


As usual - 1. please let me know if white males are accepted into professional schools with much higher scores than certain minorities or not, and is that racism/discrimination or not. 2. I would like to see what realistic solutions do your saints such as AOC offer with respect to fossil fuel replacement. The solutions proposed should not involve ones that decrease life quality of 99% or involve taxing everyone at 90%.

jazz_music says

milking a conspiracy theory,

Hunter and Joe Biden's corruption is not a Conspiracy.

jazz_music says

offense but

But it is because he was milking a conspiracy theory, and blackmailing to get foreign help for the upcoming elections.

Biden is not a viable candidate. The Democrats don't a viable candidate except Tulsi and she has been rejected because she is not globohomo enough.

jazz_music says

Trump is not the source of all truths.

Whatever makes you think so?

jazz_music says

No, and stop lying about me I never told anyone there is an impeachment trial

1. If different admission standards according to race is not discrimination, then I really have nothing to say. Next is race-segregated schools, if we go down that slippery slope, and we end up in Alabama 1950. I guess progressives=KKK.
2. ??? I have 0 posts here about impeachment trials.

marcus says

Oh the irony of that image.

marcus says

And if were lucky and have some semi-bright students reading those history books, they'll realize it's BS because those very same "racists" would have had to first elect that black man, twice.

40 million in CA, so what? 330 million in the US. Have Ben Rosen call his Jr High school teacher and go over what "proportion" means.

HeadSet says

40 million in CA, so what? 330 million in the US.

Exactly. Yes CA produces the most food by VALUE. Although they will likely fuck that up with their water usage in the future beyond what's already happened. Next is Iowa and Nebraska. Those states barely have any people, but produce a ton for this country. They need 2 senators. They don't barely have any electoral votes either. Stop picking on the minority states Marcus.

https://www.farmprogress.com/management/what-us-states-produce-most-food-ranking-1-50

Hircus says

Oh the irony of that image.

The projection coming from the political Left is almost breathtaking. Have they been totally asleep the last 3 years? Do they think we have been asleep the last 3 years and can't immediately call out their massive hypocrisy?

NoCoupForYou says

Left: One provocateur with nazi banner = Trump is a Nazi
Also Left: Scores of protesters at Abortion/Bernie/Globohomo Rally with Hungry Hammer Flag != Abortion/Bernie/Globohomo is Communism

What makes you think it's actually not a photoshopped picture? This is ABC news. You know what else ABC news does? It takes footage from a Kentucky shooting range and tries to pass it off as the Turks attacking the Kurds.

www.youtube.com/embed/Pf8PvDMPgI8

These aren't mistakes, when are people finally going to accept our "news" media for what it is? How many times are you told Trump is a racist, Russia hacked out elections,
Gabbard is a Russian puppet, War is peace - before you realize it's just propaganda. Not just ABC, not just CBS, or Fox, or NY Times, or PBS, nor NPR - it is all propaganda. All of it. We do not have a functioning media.

That was gone 30 years ago. See?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmfVs3WaE9Y&t=38s

You know who that little girl is? She's the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States at the time, and she's LYING. Do you think our media is so incompetent, that they couldn't identify her as a plant? Do you think nobody in the government knew who she was?

People are JUST getting there, they're STARTING to understand what level of propaganda they experience. Hey, we're all subjected to it, but if you want to be free from it, you have to recognize it as the problem it is. You have to know it exists. You can't trust anything, and I mean anything, from corporate media.

marcus says

Do people actually believe this is what happened? The full transcript is released, and people just assume you never look at it. It's only 5 pages. Please quote Trump and the page number where he supposedly engaged in a quid pro quo.

richwicks says

Do people actually believe this is what happened? The full transcript is released, and people just assume you never look at it. It's only 5 pages. Please quote Trump and the page number where he supposedly engaged in a quid pro quo.

This is the reverse version of read the Mueller Report, when you ask them what part and they just say "Read it" without specifying anything in it.

Worse of course, because we have a picture of Joe and Hunter Biden golfing with a Burisma board member, Joe bragging about getting Shonkin fired in front of a think tank audience, Shonkin's testimony that he was investigating the Burisma Board, etc.

NoCoupForYou says

This is the reverse version of read the Mueller Report, when you ask them what part and they just say "Read it" without specifying anything in it.

No, my point is that Trump was careful to avoid a quid-pro-quo. He didn't with-hold funding demanding an investigation - but Biden did to demand the firing of an investigator.

I'm just surprised how often you see BLATANT LIES about what happened or what is going on.

When it was 2003, I thought Republicans were the dumbest scumbags on the planet because they just couldn't believe George W. Bush lied us into a war, and he freaking did! There was a ton of evidence at the time. You'd be called a traitor, anti-American, a liberal, stupid - whatever, but what you wouldn't see is any evidence of a WMD program in Iraq.

At that time, it was entirely unimaginable to think I'd be looking upon "liberals" in exactly the same way.

There's like almost 50% of the society that just believe ANY bullshit of "their party", and another 50% that engages in some critical thought. It's not divided along conservative/liberal. Those are just false dichotomies, which have no real meaning. What does it mean to be a liberal today? In 1985, it meant you wanted to keep the nation out of war, freedom of speech was absolute, education in sciences was essential and good. That's called a Republican today. !

marcus says

What an asshole.

marcus says

Liberal Arts major: I read a bunch of books about Gender Fluidity, but I never learned about the Virginia and New Jersey Plans because of my narrow, illiberal education.

marcus says

Occasionally you find a humorous one.

marcus says

I hope you don't think I have any fucking idea what you're talking about.

Oh dear.

Let me help with some K-12 Civics:

We only have a United States, instead of a Colonial Confederacy, because big states like VA and smaller ones like NJ/Delaware/etc. made a deal to have both a population based House and a 2-fixed-per-state Senate. Otherwise it would be have been "No Deal" as smaller states did not want to have large states always call the shots. It's called the Great Compromise, or the Connecticut Compromise (it being formulated by CT delegates to the Constitutional Convention) and I learned about it in Junior HS.

marcus says

I learned about what we have the electoral college in junior high, or earlier too. Doesn't mean I think it works quite as planned today.

How so?

I'd argue it works much better today since we have huge concentrations of populations in 3 big cities.

Without the electoral college, Presidents would only have to campaign in California, New York and maybe Illinois and ignore the rest of the country.

marcus says

I learned about what we have the electoral college in junior high, or earlier too. Doesn't mean I think it works quite as planned today.

Yes, since it was in reference to this:

NoCoupForYou says

marcus says

Liberal Arts major: I read a bunch of books about Gender Fluidity, but I never learned about the Virginia and New Jersey Plans because of my narrow, illiberal education.

That you forgot to include it was in reference to. So the context was known: A Lib Arts major with no clue about the USA itself being a compromise.

marcus says

I learned about what we have the electoral college in junior high, or earlier too. Doesn't mean I think it works quite as planned today.

The electoral college works as planned. It stops the big states from IMPOSING their will on the smaller states.

Eric Ciaramella was retained at the National Security Council in the Trump Admin,
and even promoted as
'Acting Senior Director for European and Russian Affairs'

under the suggestion (insistence?) of General McMaster,
Trump National Security Adviser

https://twitter.com/GregRubini

That's on purpose, TPB. They are feeding him nonsense and laughing as he meets with WaPo and Schiff Staffers. I have little doubt he's the bogus Whistleblower, probably #1, maybe #2.

marcus says

I don't expect arrogant idiots to want to ever learn more than what they knew in junior high

Just becasue?

marcus says

Besides, even if we weren't going to go to full popular vote, there would be ways to update the electoral college.

Why do you hate diversity of states? Why do you hate diversity of political ideology?

This isn't about doing what's in the interest of the majority - it's about making an INCLUSIVE country where people from all states matter. A country where things work equally well for ALL STATES. A country where ALL STATES feel EQUALLY welcome and EQUALLY valued. A country with equity we can be proud of.

We've been down this road before, where people argue that the nation should be tailored primarily to the citizens in the majority, because it should be proportional, and they outnumber the minorities. But, if we did that, then it would hurt diversity, and diversity is our strength!

Bigot!!!

marcus says

But if you ever feel like updating your understanding there are people out there who have thought about this a lot, not just the history of the beginning of the electoral college system, but what has happened since, such as the winner takes all aspect of electors votes, and the fact that electors simply go along with their party. This isn't even close to what was relevant or intended when the system was formed.

We have a FEDERAL system. A balance between State representation, and the people as a whole. States are entirely free to determine how their electors are assigned.

Let's see California and New York and Illinois put their money where their mouth is first, show leadership and integrity, lead by example -

and assign electoral votes the way Maine does, proportional to the state popular vote

That means of course the 55 California Electoral votes won't all go to Hillary Clinton or whomever the Dems end up nominating. probably 20-25 would go to Trump.

The current system is vastly superior to a simple majority of the popular vote, since it forces politicians to consider broad groups of people, such as in large swing states, rather than just promising the world to one group and entirely ignoring another.

socal2 says

Without the electoral college, Presidents would only have to campaign in California, New York and maybe Illinois and ignore the rest of the country.

marcus says

How do you figure ? IF It was simply the popular vote, the sum of NY City, Los Angeles and Chicago's population is something like 15 million out of 320 million of the US. THat's not even one twentieth ?

You ignored that socal was talking about the states those cities reside in. I don't claim to know the others well, but know Chicago very well. The collar counties around Cook county almost are alway blue, so you can't just talk about the city itself.

I'm guessing this is likely true for other cities. The entire county is likely blue and the surrounding counties. LA County 10.16M. Since there are multiple counties, I looked up the NYC metropolitan area, almost certainly blue. 23.7M. Chicago metropolitan area has 9.5M. That's about 43M people and we haven't even touched SF and SD in CA. 4.7M for SF area and 3.3M for those two. So 51M people. And there's still millions of others in these 3 states.

No, you won't win the popular vote in a high turn out year, but constantly campaigning in those areas and pandering to their issues will likely get you 75% of the registered voters. Throw in 90% of college towns/cities across the country that have professors campaigning for you and there's probably another 20M people easy and you don't have to do anything.

Our country cannot be run based on a few poorly run cities is the point. Hence the electoral college. I know you know this, but it just didn't work out in 2016 and now it's become a problem. It will work out for the left at some point in the future and the right will go through the same pouting. It's honestly a brilliant system and should not change just because people can't be adults about their guy/gal/tranny losing.