Octopus Overlords

Posted: **Thu Oct 27, 2016 5:29 pm**

If Schwarzenegger works better, use him.

My sole point is that being well known is not enough to be a good governor. Why doesn't he start with his local PTA or something. And if he has then good on him. I just think it's hard to be qualified for governor at 29 even if you've dedicated your life to public service. if you've played football for most of your adult life? Sorry, son. Maybe in 5-10 years if you don't putter around?

Which of course is not actually how it works and if you can convince enough people then you can be president of the United States, despite being almost singularly unqualified to do the job.

If you just vote for people you like (based on the person and not their policies and qualifications) then it's a crap shoot. You might get a good one who grows into the job, or you might get a bad one who doesn't have a clue what they're doing and never learns. I think the bias is towards the second one.

Posted: **Fri Oct 28, 2016 2:55 pm**

I early voted today for the first time ever (this is the first year that MA has opened up early voting to everyone).

The whole town is voting at my precinct polling place, so it was a lot busier than I expected on the middle of a Friday afternoon. Poll worker told me they're averaging 600 people per day. IIRC my town has about 13,000 registered voters, so if that pace holds for 10 days, half the town will have voted early.

Posted: **Sun Oct 30, 2016 9:08 am**

Thoughtful opinion piece on national GOP effects on world order.

Posted: **Sun Oct 30, 2016 1:17 pm**

Good look at how the GOP might pick up the pieces after election day.

“It’s like Humpty Dumpty fell and broke, then a giant lawn mower ran over it, acid was thrown on the pieces — and a bunch of racist idiots ran off with an arm and a leg,” said John Weaver, a longtime Republican consultant. “How do you put it back together? I don’t know.”

Posted: **Mon Oct 31, 2016 4:56 pm**

Getting really sick of the "We're a Republic not a Democracy" diatribes I've been reading lately. Were they directed to resurface recently by the party of Trump or something?

If I have to get stuck with you being pedantic, at least be pedantic and not just try to sound pedantic with no depth.

Posted: **Mon Oct 31, 2016 6:21 pm**

LordMortis wrote:Getting really sick of the "We're a Republic not a Democracy" diatribes I've been reading lately. Were they directed to resurface recently by the party of Trump or something?

If I have to get stuck with you being pedantic, at least be pedantic and not just try to sound pedantic with no depth.

Just ask them what the difference is, and *IF* they know, ask them how that changes the fundamental nature of the conversation where it was brought up.

Unless the conversation is actually about the differences between the two, chances are being pedantic is meaningless to the conversation.

Posted: **Mon Oct 31, 2016 11:26 pm**

GreenGoo wrote:
LordMortis wrote:Getting really sick of the "We're a Republic not a Democracy" diatribes I've been reading lately. Were they directed to resurface recently by the party of Trump or something?

If I have to get stuck with you being pedantic, at least be pedantic and not just try to sound pedantic with no depth.
Just ask them what the difference is, and *IF* they know, ask them how that changes the fundamental nature of the conversation where it was brought up.

Unless the conversation is actually about the differences between the two, chances are being pedantic is meaningless to the conversation.

I'm not sure that is always true (although I agree it's usually pedantic drivel). In particular, if we were more of a Democracy and less of a Republic, we might not have a Congress to be so obstructionist. Right now the Republicans are taking a "if we aren't in power, we are gonna keep whoever is in power from governing" stance. Which is ultimately self-destructive, but is also country-destructive. I don't think it would be so easy to hold the government hostage in a Democracy. Of course, lots of other issues would arise, so I'm not really suggesting it as a solution. I'm just suggesting that the whole Democracy vs. Republic thing isn't all just hot air. Only most of it.

Posted: **Fri Nov 04, 2016 3:06 pm**

Southern states have closed down at least 868 polling places for the 2016 election. Good ole' fashioned democracy, am I right?

Posted: **Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:49 pm**

Enough wrote:Southern states have closed down at least 868 polling places for the 2016 election. Good ole' fashioned democracy, am I right?

And just to make the point clear, they did this after the Supreme Court let them out from under the relevant parts of the Voting Rights Act.

Because the VRA was meant to prevent the suppression of minority voters, and we all know that that's ancient history now.

Posted: **Fri Nov 04, 2016 7:46 pm**

Germany has the Fatherland. Russia has the Motherland. The USA has the LGBT land.

Posted: **Fri Nov 04, 2016 7:56 pm**

dbt1949 wrote:Germany has the Fatherland. Russia has the Motherland. The USA has the LGBT land.

And it's fabulous.

Posted: **Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:03 pm**

Holman wrote:
Enough wrote:Southern states have closed down at least 868 polling places for the 2016 election. Good ole' fashioned democracy, am I right?
And just to make the point clear, they did this after the Supreme Court let them out from under the relevant parts of the Voting Rights Act.

Thanks, Scalia. (well, not just him, obviously, but did we need yet another reminder that presidential election matters in oh so many ways?)

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 12:13 am**

Starbucks

Earlier this week, Starbucks began serving its seasonal holiday drinks in new green cups that were meant to promote a message of unity. But the cups are having the opposite effect, causing an uproar among some customers who are accusing the coffee chain of "political brainwashing."

On Tuesday, a week before Election Day, Starbucks rolled out the green cups that feature an illustration by Shogo Ota showing the faces of more than a hundred people, drawn with a single continuous line.

"During a divisive time in our country, Starbucks wanted to create a symbol of unity as a reminder of our shared values, and the need to be good to each other," Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz said in a statement.
...
On Wednesday, the conservative web aggregator Drudge Report linked to a news article about the backlash, using the headline "Calls To Boycott STARBUCKS Over Holiday 'Unity Cup' Showing Liberal Bias." Drudge's headline, which went out on Twitter, elicited more negative responses.
...
The green Starbucks cups launched on the same day that Starbucks reintroduced its lineup of holiday beverages, which includes a Caramel Brulée Latte and a Chestnut Praline Latte. In years' past, Starbucks has launched its red holiday cups on the day holiday drinks returned to the menu.

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 12:17 am**

I'm confused. How could this a cup with pictures of faces on it possibly, by any non-tin foil hat wearing lunatic, be considered "liberal brainwashing"? I'm entirely baffled by this one.

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 5:18 am**

Drudge feels left out of the alt-right outrage cycle. Manufacture a controversy, sound the alarm, and the Riplings will come along howling.

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 5:37 am**

Propagandists need targets. Starbucks is on every corner and highly visible. Also it is marginally elite which makes it appealing to invent attacks about. Also they can seem to be a favorite center point for the attack on Christmas.

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:19 pm**

A longish article well worth reading: My Journey to the Center of the Alt-Right.

I went to a white nationalist ethnostate in Indiana. I got bounced from a secret meeting in D.C. I spent weeks figuring out how hate gurgles up from the nastiest recesses of the Internet. And I'm sorry to report that unconscionable racists will be a force in American politics well beyond November 8.

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:41 pm**

malchior wrote:Propagandists need targets. Starbucks is on every corner and highly visible. Also it is marginally elite which makes it appealing to invent attacks about. Also they can seem to be a favorite center point for the attack on Christmas.

I get why Starbucks is a target, but I just can't wrap my head around why that particular picture on the side of a coffee cup is considered oppressive liberal propaganda. What is the "objectionable" message it's supposedly portraying?

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:46 pm**

Skinypupy wrote:
malchior wrote:Propagandists need targets. Starbucks is on every corner and highly visible. Also it is marginally elite which makes it appealing to invent attacks about. Also they can seem to be a favorite center point for the attack on Christmas.
I get why Starbucks is a target, but I just can't wrap my head around why that particular picture on the side of a coffee cup is considered oppressive liberal propaganda. What is the "objectionable" message it's supposedly portraying?

At a guess, it begins and ends with the fact that it's an inclusive "seasonal holiday" cup instead of a "Christmas" cup. The War on Christmas® never changes.

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:48 pm**

Max Peck wrote:
Skinypupy wrote:
malchior wrote:Propagandists need targets. Starbucks is on every corner and highly visible. Also it is marginally elite which makes it appealing to invent attacks about. Also they can seem to be a favorite center point for the attack on Christmas.
I get why Starbucks is a target, but I just can't wrap my head around why that particular picture on the side of a coffee cup is considered oppressive liberal propaganda. What is the "objectionable" message it's supposedly portraying?
At a guess, it begins and ends with the fact that it's an inclusive "seasonal holiday" cup instead of a "Christmas" cup. The War on Christmas® never changes.

Ah, that makes sense.

(In an "oh, now I understand it" sort of way, not a "yeah, that's even remotely reasonable" way.)

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:05 pm**

I still don't get the "war-on-X" people.

If I went to an Indian restaurant and they wished me a "Happy Diwali" or whatever I'd be confused for a sec, but then I'd probably ask them what that holiday was about. If they threw color-bombs at me I might be less courteous about asking.

If some company doesn't celebrate your holiday, who the fuck cares? (Besides professional victims and instigators?)

Posted: **Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:24 pm**

Apparently, Glenn Beck has been replaced by a copy of him from an alternate universe, even down to the goatee

Glenn Beck: 'Obama Made Me A Better Man'

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:17 am**

Beck is in my conservative podcast rotation that I added a little while back. I've being enjoying his show consistently.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:13 pm**

Broke my vow to myself. Logged into FB and took a look around before the 9th. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:21 pm**

LordMortis wrote:Broke my vow to myself. Logged into FB and took a look around before the 9th. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

My FB feed has been surprisingly tame this morning. Lots of "I Voted" posts, but that's about it.

I fully expect that the fireworks will start coming once we see some results.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:15 pm**

I am getting political spam texts from the HRC camp.

Aside from being annoyed at having to check them, I only get 40 texts a month before I am charged by the text.

How do charities and politics get excluded from all of the "don't fucking bother me" lists?

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:19 pm**

Methinks that Kristine Guerra may not be the Washington Post's finest reporter...

Clint Eastwood: ‘TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP’

Clint Eastwood is, unabashedly, a Donald Trump supporter.

And you can tell from the “Dirty Harry” star’s hashtag-filled Election Day tweets.

Eastwood has said that he isn’t thrilled about Trump, noting that the Republican candidate has said “a lot of dumb things.” But he’s supporting him anyway.

“I’d have to go for Trump,” Eastwood said, four years after delivering a Republican National Convention speech to an empty chair. “You know, ’cause [Hillary’s] declared that she’s gonna follow in Obama’s footsteps. There’s been just too much funny business on both sides of the aisle. She’s made a lot of dough out of being a politician.”

On Monday, Eastwood tweeted that “President Trump will save America, Hillary will just continue her pay to play scheme but on an even larger scale #corrupt.”

I'm no investigative journalist, but that doesn't like like the "Clint Eastwood" twitter account that she thinks it is.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:20 pm**

LordMortis wrote:I am getting political spam texts from the HRC camp. Aside from being annoyed at having to check them, I only get 40 texts a month before I am charged by the text.

How do charities and politics get excluded from all of the "don't fucking bother me" lists?

What is this, 1995? Who the f**k still charges per text nowadays?

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:27 pm**

GreenGoo wrote:
LordMortis wrote:I am getting political spam texts from the HRC camp. Aside from being annoyed at having to check them, I only get 40 texts a month before I am charged by the text.

How do charities and politics get excluded from all of the "don't fucking bother me" lists?
What is this, 1995? Who the f**k still charges per text nowadays?

A company that allows me to have a $29 a month plan (that actually equates to $41 a month after taxes and federal fees not specified by the plan)

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:48 pm**

Cell phone taxes and fees are normally a substantial markup. IN my Cingular days, I would quote 20-25%.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:20 pm**

Just saw this in my Twitter feed and it made me feel better:

Look, Clinton's gonna win. US President order has to follow Star Trek Captain order: white guy, white guy, black guy, woman, Scott Bakula.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:59 pm**

You may feel better in the short term, but doesn't bode well for the Bakula'd future.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 9:32 pm**

They're predicting that the R's will keep the House

Trump wins AR.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 9:38 pm**

Republicans keep their IN senate seat.

Posted: **Wed Nov 09, 2016 2:39 pm**

Coming here and talking and reading politics (mostly) doesn't bother me but I am this far >< closing my FB account, especially as it's not even talk but the signal is strong, there is literally nothing social left on my media.

It's going to be sad if I feel forced to leave it behind to keep myself in emotionally stable way, as it was my primary outlet to being social, both in simply keeping up with people, and with actually planning to do real world, social things.

So right now, when I need a lift me up, I'm even more psychologically drained.

Posted: **Wed Nov 09, 2016 3:09 pm**

After spending a long time alienated from social media, I'm actually finding FB a source of solace today. My liberal friends are actively supporting each other and reminding that the future isn't completely hopeless.

My hardcore right-wingers are gloating, but I unfollowed them long ago.

Posted: **Wed Nov 09, 2016 3:27 pm**

Holman wrote:After spending a long time alienated from social media, I'm actually finding FB a source of solace today. My liberal friends are actively supporting each other and reminding that the future isn't completely hopeless.

This.

My hardcore right-wingers are gloating, but I unfollowed them long ago.

This too, except I don't unfollow people. But maybe I should consider starting. At least those that are gloating.

Posted: **Wed Nov 09, 2016 5:05 pm**

LordMortis wrote: So right now, when I need a lift me up, I'm even more psychologically drained.

This too. My wife and I took time last night specifically to support each other emotionally. This wasn't a lost election, it was a serious blow to ideology and world outlook.

The world is a shittier, darker place for now. It doesn't matter if Drumpf can or can't manage to get a single thing done. He TOLD US what he wanted to do, and people LIKED it.

Geezus H.

Posted: **Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:07 am**

Woke up this morning and the world is still here.
I wonder if I'll be able to say that Jan.21st?

Posted: **Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:17 am**

dbt1949 wrote:Woke up this morning and the world is still here.
I wonder if I'll be able to say that Jan.21st?

The world isn't going away. it has just shifted in the wrong direction. The aftershocks will be felt and some peoples' lives will actually be destroyed, but for the majority, the world won't change much. The poor will still be poor and the rich will get richer. The middle class will work to keep the whole thing upright.

The rule of law still exists, although there is going to be a lot more bending of it in public, and breaking it in private. Email servers will again become a trivial issue.

Octopus Overlords

Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness

Re: Political Randomness