Octopus Overlords

waitingtoconnect wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2024 8:01 am https://www.openculture.com/2016/10/isa ... tates.html

Issac Asimov on the cult of ignorance in the US

Always a favorite.

GreenGoo wrote:

Dramatist wrote: Thu Feb 01, 2024 10:15 pm There’s a tiny number of whack jobs in Texas that want to secede. The vast majority of Texans think that it’s stupid.

Your politicians should probably shut up about it then.

My politicians suck.

My journey from Republican to anti- Republican actually started with exposure to Texas Republicans. Rick Perry, Dan Patrick and Ken Paxton. Then Greg Abbot after Perry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand. I just meant that the media wouldn't be talking about Texas leaving if Texas politicians weren't talking about it. Obviously this is red meat for (some of) their constituents.

Don’t underestimate in our modern first past the post system that the republicans are going to go all out on immigration this election cycle. And it won’t get the results people want or the majority wants.

Elections have been won solely on immigration in other countries. This is why trump wants it and why he won’t endorse any deals. Republicans know that people will blame democrats regardless.

In 2001 in Australia the government there was under pressure from the combination of far right anti immigration parties and the centre left opposition. When a cargo ship called the Tampa rescued a bunch of boat people the government refused to let it dock and used commandos to storm the vessel. The government won the election having turned around 40-60% negative polling indicating they were going to get smashed if they hadn’t made immigration an issue (an issue that was their fault because they were actually in power!!)

Despite this immigration rules for legal migration into Australia were loosened considerably which was not what people actually wanted. But the population at large thought the issue dealt with.

Similarly with Brexit: people who voted to Leave the Eu were convinced that mostly it would mean getting control of immigration. But hardline far right advocates have used it to completely divorce from Europe and immigration both illegal and legal has surged. Again not what the majority wanted.

They have made this available on YouTube, for everyone.

PBS Frontline: Democracy on Trial



It's -seriously- worth watching. It's 2.5 hours - so make the appropriate time (or carve it up)... And if you can - share it with anyone who needs to see it and may listen (if they exist).

I mean at this point I think we all know both candidates are old as fuck and mixing up names. The difference is one of them isn't going to destroy American democracy.

YellowKing wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 11:02 am I mean at this point I think we all know both candidates are old as fuck and mixing up names. The difference is one of them isn't going to destroy American democracy.

In Poland, I Saw What a Second Trump Term Could Do to America

This is checking in on Poland, where an authoritarian government in power for ~ 8 years was recently ousted via elections. It's both an optimistic example of bucking the authoritarian trend worldwide, and also talking about the difficulties of undoing the entrenchment of authoritarians within an electoral system.

Just to make sure it's on the record, Nikki Haley lost to "None of these Candidates" in Nevada.

Not really about her necessarily - they're indirectly showing support for Trump because he wasn't listed on the ballot:

“We have not spent a dime nor an ounce of energy on Nevada,” Haley campaign manager Betsy Ankney said in a media call Monday. “We aren’t going to pay $55,000 to a Trump entity to participate in a process that is rigged for Trump. Nevada is not and has never been our focus.”

The double-barreled nominating contests in Nevada sparked confusion among voters, thousands of whom called state officials and local party leaders asking why Trump wasn’t on the primary ballot they received in the mail.

Nevada once exclusively used caucuses for its presidential elections. But in 2021, the Democratic-led Legislature changed the law so that the state instead held a primary election, which included early voting, and the opportunity to vote by mail. The Nevada GOP insisted on holding caucuses apart from the state-run election, saying it wanted to control its own contest, using its own rules. The party dictated that candidates weren’t allowed to compete in both elections and that only those competing in the caucuses could win delegates.

Houston, we have a problem, as 3/4 of sampled Republicans think that Trump being dictator for a day is "good."

On Wednesday, UMass Amherst released the results of a poll conducted by YouGov in which respondents were asked about the concept. The framing of the comment was stark, excluding Trump’s specific plans for using his theoretical dictatorial power. It was just, “Trump recently said that if elected, he would be a dictator only on the first day of his second term. Do you think that this is a good or bad idea for the country?”
A plurality of respondents said this was “definitely bad” with 6 in 10 saying it was “definitely” or “probably” bad. Among Republicans, though, a third said it was “definitely good” with three-quarters saying it was at least “probably” good.

Hoping that the methodology is off, or is was just a bad sample, as that's not an attitude that bodes well for the long-term health of our government.

"Dictator for a day" means what, exactly?

He gets to do unconstitutional things and exercise unfettered power for 24 hours, but then he goes back to being a normal checks-and-balances Executive on day 2? And all of his dictatorial actions still stand because of the Constitution's "no backsies" clause?

It will be the new "President's Purge" inauguration day tradition.

Holman wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 3:59 pm "Dictator for a day" means what, exactly?

He gets to do unconstitutional things and exercise unfettered power for 24 hours, but then he goes back to being a normal checks-and-balances Executive on day 2? And all of his dictatorial actions still stand because of the Constitution's "no backsies" clause?

It means that scientists who invent sharks with frickin laser beams attached to their heads will do very well.

I think dictator day will go like this.



And don’t forget the campaigning with his family in the meantime:

Dictator for one day only.

One day with that authority is enough to declare himself God-Emperor.

Or to simply order the Constitution amended to make guarantee life in office, immunity from prosecution, and to shut down opposition.

Id vote for Dr Evil over trump. At least sticks to the accepted rules.

Blackhawk wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 4:51 pm Dictator for one day only.

One day with that authority is enough to declare himself God-Emperor.

Or to simply order the Constitution amended to make guarantee life in office, immunity from prosecution, and to shut down opposition.

Serve the Trump today, tomorrow you may be woke.

Marianne Williamson suspends her campaign one day after "None of these candidates" pulled in twice the votes she got in the Nevada primary.

Exodor wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 1:35 am Marianne Williamson suspends her campaign one day after "None of these candidates" pulled in twice the votes she got in the Nevada primary.

One wonders why she ran in the first place. "I failed to be Connor Roy last time, but this is my year."

Kraken wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 3:00 am One wonders why she ran in the first place. "I failed to be Connor Roy last time, but this is my year."

Would we be talking about her at all if she hadn't technically been a candidate for the past year?

Attention is a helluva drug. Just ask Dean Phillips.

I'm sorry, but does anyone really believe that Biden isn't in significant cognitive decline?

Questions about President Joe Biden’s age and fitness for office are not going away, even as the 81-year-old president juggles multiple high-stakes international and domestic crises simultaneously and criss-crosses the country to make his case to voters for another term in the White House.

Two verbal slip-ups in the last few days are again bringing the concerns about the president’s cognition to the forefront. Biden twice referred to dead European leaders – François Mitterrand and Helmut Kohl – when talking about recent conversations with his global counterparts, making for awkward moments that highlight the foremost concern about the president among his core supporters.

I mean, really? This is the best we can do. It's pathetic.

That's why you write in Pete Buttigiege and settle for Trump.

hepcat wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:06 pm That's why you write in Pete Buttigiege and settle for Trump.

I wish Pete Buttigiege was actually on the ballot. It's insane to me that he's not.

Kurth wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:13 pm

hepcat wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:06 pm That's why you write in Pete Buttigiege and settle for Trump.

I wish Pete Buttigiege was actually on the ballot. It's insane to me that he's not.

Agree. Biden should have been taken off the ticket long ago (though I don't know how that works...he has to agree? Someone has to convince him not to run? The party decides?).

And he's not going to magically get better and possibly get much much worse by election time. But I was saying he's too decrepit several years ago, so....??

Neither one could be the CEO for the Packers, but both are magically capable of running the entire country.

Not enjoying this timeline at all. I still think it all goes back to the Hadron Collider somehow. That we shifted chaos into high gear when we started smashing subatomic particles together.

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:42 pm

Kurth wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:13 pm

hepcat wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:06 pm That's why you write in Pete Buttigiege and settle for Trump.

I wish Pete Buttigiege was actually on the ballot. It's insane to me that he's not.

Agree. Biden should have been taken off the ticket long ago (though I don't know how that works...he has to agree? Someone has to convince him not to run? The party decides?).

And he's not going to magically get better and possibly get much much worse by election time. But I was saying he's too decrepit several years ago, so....??

Like it or not, he's the only candidate that has a chance to beat Trump. Buttigieg is bright and can be an effective communicator, but seems to have limited appeal so far. Harris might have slightly more appeal that Buttigeig, but doesn't seem to have proven to be a political asset to the administration. Bernie is old, has limited appeal, and doesn't win in the polling against Trump. Whitmer (Michigan) I don't think is there yet. Newsom would like to be there, but again, he loses in the polling against Trump. Who else is there? Michelle Obama? Taylor Swift? The Democrat bench of candidates is neither overwhelmingly strong nor deep.

Dogstar wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:52 pm
Like it or not, he's the only candidate that has a chance to beat Trump. Buttigieg is bright and can be an effective communicator, but seems to have limited appeal so far.

Being gay is still a no no to many who have only thought of voting for Trump. In other words, he'd lose a ton of independent votes. Which is a shame as Pete is a goddamn breath of fresh air in this political world.

Merkley. But he won't run and when he doesn't run this time, he'll be in his 70s for the next election...

Also, I don't know enough about Raskin but damned I love everything that comes out of his mouth.

I'd vote for Buttigeg with no reservation but I don't think the nation can handle a gay president because we were once a great nation or some such thing.

Dogstar wrote:Who else is there? Michelle Obama? Taylor Swift? The Democrat bench of candidates is neither overwhelmingly strong nor deep.

Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson with Taylor Swift as his VP... guaranteed win!

Biden has always tripped over his words. It’s why Obama did so well against Joe. But I work with older people who are very smart but make verbal mistakes. It happens to me, too.

LordMortis wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 3:20 pm Merkley. But he won't run and when he doesn't run this time, he'll be in his 70s for the next election...

We're really blessed in Oregon to have two amazing senators. Wyden is consistently on the right side of privacy issues and is pretty outspoken about it but he's too old to run for President. Merkley doesn't seem to have any interest.

They're both probably too liberal to win a national election.

There's no question in my mind that Biden is too old and in decline and the only way I could ever see myself voting for him is if the alternative is Trump. So I'll hold my nose and vote for him one more time.

Kurth wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:13 pm I wish Pete Buttigiege was actually on the ballot. It's insane to me that he's not.

We still dealing with the aftermath of Obama being elected to two terms. It's beyond sad that America largely isn't ready for a Pete Buttigiege in any capacity.

The issues around Washington DC being a nursing home aren't new, and I doubt anyone here would argue that the upper echelons of the Federal government are too old, and that cognitive decline is a major issue across the board.

Whether Biden is or is not I don't know, but when half of Congress is over 60, and every Presidential candidate is over 75, it's not a question of whether, it's a question of how many. Just line up Trump, McConnell, Feinstein, and Biden up. Even if Biden is starting to slip (and he is - practically everyone has some decline by 80), he'd still think circles around the others.

And yes, I know that Feinstein died.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 3:31 pm

Kurth wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:13 pm I wish Pete Buttigiege was actually on the ballot. It's insane to me that he's not.

We still dealing with the aftermath of Obama being elected to two terms. It's beyond sad that America largely isn't ready for a Pete Buttigiege in any capacity.

I'm not so sure. We elected, and re-elected a black president. Muslim, at that! ALMOST elected a woman president in 2016. If we are talking about "non standard" (not white, straight, male) possibilities, not sure why we can't have a gay president considering the recent history. I definitely think we are ready, FWIW.

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 4:13 pm not sure why we can't have a gay president considering the recent history. I definitely think we are ready, FWIW.

The recent history where multiple (dozens) of states are still trying in 2024 to revoke/rewind/erase LGBTQ+ rights?

I know I'm terminally cynical, but I genuinely don't believe the voting public would support a gay man as President, no.

Carpet_pissr wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 4:13 pm

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 3:31 pm

Kurth wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:13 pm I wish Pete Buttigiege was actually on the ballot. It's insane to me that he's not.

We still dealing with the aftermath of Obama being elected to two terms. It's beyond sad that America largely isn't ready for a Pete Buttigiege in any capacity.

I'm not so sure. We elected, and re-elected a black president. Muslim, at that! ALMOST elected a woman president in 2016. If we are talking about "non standard" (not white, straight, male) possibilities, not sure why we can't have a gay president considering the recent history. I definitely think we are ready, FWIW.

The reactionaries have been trying to take us back to the early 1960s when 80% went to church every Sunday and contraception was illegal.

Because of exposure to more scientific ways of thinking only 10% of the population went to church by the end of the decade.

That the democrats have given us two Irish Catholics and a black man being president only fuels the conspiracy theory. (That they also gave us the first evangelical in Jimmy Carter is forgotten.) Give these forces a woman or a gay person and they’ll be pushing to replace America with Gideon even harder than they already are.

Smoove_B wrote:

Kurth wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:13 pm I wish Pete Buttigiege was actually on the ballot. It's insane to me that he's not.

We still dealing with the aftermath of Obama being elected to two terms. It's beyond sad that America largely isn't ready for a Pete Buttigiege in any capacity.

IMHO, it's more dealing with Gore not being elected and Cheney /Bush pushing Nixon-esque authoritarianism. Muslim hate was already there, but they didn't do much to lean against it, and leveraged for power. Obama did exacerbate some, but the same wing would probably have been even worse had it been Hillary instead of Obama.

AKA the lean into hate and fear for power politics already were rising to supremacy in the GOP, and only the idea that they could control it and use it rather than getting eaten was still present.

Pyperkub wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 4:41 pm Obama did exacerbate some, but the same wing would probably have been even worse had it been Hillary instead of Obama.

That's a bit of thought experiment, isn't it? It's hard to argue against it when you see the venom for Biden. But boy, did they dial it to 11 when Obama won... twice... and it literally took the assumption that Hillary would win to put TFG in power the first time to fully reveal how bad our nation is truly is and how much the glue 250/150/80 years of norms really were.

Pyperkub wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 4:41 pm

Smoove_B wrote:

Kurth wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 2:13 pm I wish Pete Buttigiege was actually on the ballot. It's insane to me that he's not.

We still dealing with the aftermath of Obama being elected to two terms. It's beyond sad that America largely isn't ready for a Pete Buttigiege in any capacity.

IMHO, it's more dealing with Gore not being elected and Cheney /Bush pushing Nixon-esque authoritarianism. Muslim hate was already there, but they didn't do much to lean against it, and leveraged for power. Obama did exacerbate some, but the same wing would probably have been even worse had it been Hillary instead of Obama.

AKA the lean into hate and fear for power politics already were rising to supremacy in the GOP, and only the idea that they could control it and use it rather than getting eaten was still present.

FWIW I disagree that Bush "didn't do much to lean against" Muslim hate, and leveraged it for power. Bush really went out of his way to message "Islam is a religion of peace" and that our enemies were Al Qaeda and fundamentalists not Islam more generally.

I think that Obama getting elected to two terms was more central in Trump's rise. That and a growing percentage of minorities is I think what really caused reactionaries to freak out that they were "losing the country for good" and is a large part of why 2016 became the "Flight 93 election" for the far right.

Zarathud wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 3:27 pm Biden has always tripped over his words. It’s why Obama did so well against Joe. But I work with older people who are very smart but make verbal mistakes. It happens to me, too.

A couple days ago I called a cow a horse and Wife will never let me live it down.