US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[Mandark]

benj, you listen to The Bugle?

[benjipwns]

Nope, only recently started looking into things outside the Bombcast and Cruncheons actually. I've had other things like EconTalk, Mission Log, Adam Carolla, Penn, etc. in my feed for a while but never actually download them except once in a while if the guest catches my eye. (Like Gabe Newell or Alton Brown on the Nerdist, Penn on Carolla and vice versa, etc.) Will have to add that one.

Oh, and Mike and Tom Eat Snacks though I think there's only been like one of those in a year.

Are there any friendly debate/roundtable ones? Red Eye's become more of a Republican circle jerk since Bill got fired and the guest list reduced to 80% Fox News Contributors. The Independents is too libertarian circle jerky and unfunny, The Five is too Republican circle jerky and unfunny. Real Time has become annoying for some reason over the last couple years, might just be the guest combos. I've been listening to Firing Line's the last couple weeks but I wouldn't mind something where the participants are still alive and talk less about Vietnam or Nixon.

Huh, didn't realize Uncommon Knowledge came back. (Well, sorta.) Somebody recommended Common Sense with Dan Carlin and something John Dvorak is on one time but I never followed up.

[benjipwns]

http://time.com/32718/rick-santorum-2016-presidential-race/

In an interview with TIME, the former Pennsylvania senator who finished second to Romney in 2012 says he's sure he would have defeated Obama had he won the GOP nomination. He also previews some of the themes he might emphasize should he run for president in 2016

...

It’s not only Barack Obama who has been advocating a more cautious foreign policy. It’s also Republicans.

Agreed. You’ve seen me out there taking on the Paul faction. I did during the campaign. I took on Ron Paul at debate after debate on Iran, on Pakistan. I see the Rand Paul wing of the Republican Party for what it is: allied with Barack Obama’s foreign policy. I think that’s a very serious threat to our own security.

...

Do you think you would have beaten Obama?

Without a doubt.

Why?

Because I would have been able to attract the voters in the states that mattered. Romney would probably do better than me in New Jersey and California and New York. But I’d do better in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Virginia—in the states that were going to decide the election. Look at how we did in Ohio in the primary. We got outspent by huge amounts. I didn’t run a single ad in the Cleveland market, and we still almost beat him in Ohio.

...

You know what, they can get to the top of the pack and fall too. One of the things I know is that when I got to the top of the pack I didn’t fall. I ran out of money, and I ran out of time. And the forces were against me. It’s tough running against City Hall.

The amazing thing, here we are looking at 2016, and many of the national polls don’t even put my name on the list. They review the candidates, and I’m not included on the list of people who they look at, which I sort of get a kick out of. It’s sort of been my strength over the course of my political career that I’m always underestimated. Always. The Democrats did that for a long time and I won four straight races. And now it’s happening on the Republican side.

Also, Benghazi:

After playing a montage of the reactions from loved ones of the people on board Flight 370, host Kimberly Guilfoyle imagined what it must be like for these people to still have no idea what happened to the passengers nearly two weeks later.

“Think how long it took for them to get this kind of media attention,” Tantaros added. “I mean, living in Malaysia, the government seemingly ignored these people, they didn’t want their stories to get out. They weren’t talking to them.”

After warning co-host Bob Beckel to plug his ears lest he explode with rage, Tantaros said it “feels like the families of Benghazi, just saying. And we’re better than that.”

[Mandark]

Sheeeeit, I don't listen to podcasts about serious things.  Sometimes I see a link to a video or audio file explaining something, and I'm like "why can't this just be plain text like God intended?"

[benjipwns]

Yeah, I'd much prefer to read.    I hate when sites will post like an hour long interview video but no transcript.

I found the Dvorak show, called No Agenda with another MTV VJ. Actually along the lines of what I was thinking of looking for in the past, though they pretty much agree on everything, it's a lot of playing clips from things and making fun of them. Or at least the one hour I sampled was. Of course, I could be very biased after they spent a few minutes mocking the opening intro of Sean Hannity's radio show which is one of my favorite "this can't be serious" things ever.

By referencing Buckley's Firing Line was more of a stylistic thing where they're kinda having a conversation even when disagreeing, and Buckley cracks little jokes and there's plenty of digressions, whereas a lot of the more modern stuff I have come across is a lot like cable news programs where they just throw talking points at each other for a while until the clock runs out.

Though to be fair, I suppose the task of tackling political topics while disagreeing and also being friendly and funny is quite the tall order. And not something that many listeners would even want.

[benjipwns]

Can't find the absurd Hannity intro anywhere for some reason. But did find this guy:


He has a bunch of videos confronting Danny Bonaduce for some reason. Always knew he was part of the New World Order.

And this:

[Eric P]

benj, you listen to The Bugle?

the bugle is amazing.anyone who lurks this thread should listen to it.

[Phoenix Dark]

I could see Santorum doing better in working class states, but losing worse overall than Romney. Romney won the white vote handily and it's not like Santorum was going to do better with minorities.

[Joe Molotov]

A strong anti-gay candidate is exactly what we need to get the kids excited.

For Hillary.

[benjipwns]

[Joe Molotov]

First lesbian president

[benjipwns]

Somedays I wish I would be polled so I could have said something like that or "More Benghazi's" though they probably wouldn't report it.

[Human Snorenado]

BUSH CLINTON II: ELECTRIC BUGALOO

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/03/22/sheldon-adelson-plans-vip-dinner-for-jeb-bush-at-gop-gathering-in-vegas/

But sure, there's no aristocracy in this country. Uh huh.

[benjipwns]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/03/22/sinkhole-of-bureaucracy/

 

[ToxicAdam]

I'm getting a kick out of some on the left turning on Nate Silver because he had the audacity to hire someone that doesn't follow their extreme climate change religion.


http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/tarnished-silver/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto

[Phoenix Dark]

Kind of reminds me of when Daily Kos found out he's a libertarian (around fall 2012) and some people began questioning is credibility

[Rufus]

I'm getting a kick out of some on the left turning on Nate Silver because he had the audacity to hire someone that doesn't follow their extreme climate change religion.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/tarnished-silver/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto

[Phoenix Dark]

Quiet. I want to see if Mandark falls for that.

[Rufus]

Well he won't now, of course.

I'm still 50/50 on whether TA is joking or not. I've seen otherwise smart people turn out to be climate change 'sceptics' offline.

[ToxicAdam]

Why would I be joking? I've been following the issue since the early 90's.

[Rufus]

M-hm.

[Joe Molotov]

He's already got an anti-Gay gay guy, now an anti-Climate Change guy, and is predicting big wins for Republicans in the Senate mid-terms? I guess I don't even need to go to The Blaze anymore!

[Human Snorenado]

Apparently the lesson Silver took away from working in close proximity to the political pundit class for so long was less "do thorough research and don't believe people obviously talking out of their ass" and more "people who allege to be experts in every field are obviously full of shit."

[Phoenix Dark]

He's already got an anti-Gay gay guy, now an anti-Climate Change guy, and is predicting big wins for Republicans in the Senate mid-terms? I guess I don't even need to go to The Blaze anymore!

You're mixing your Jews up. Ezra Klein hired the anti-gay guy.

[Brehvolution]

[Joe Molotov]

He's already got an anti-Gay gay guy, now an anti-Climate Change guy, and is predicting big wins for Republicans in the Senate mid-terms? I guess I don't even need to go to The Blaze anymore!

You're mixing your Jews up. Ezra Klein hired the anti-gay guy.

You may be right, but I feel like it would irresponsible of me not to present an alternate view point.

[Oblivion]

I'm getting a kick out of some on the left turning on Nate Silver because he had the audacity to hire someone that doesn't follow their extreme climate change religion.


http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/tarnished-silver/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto

TA, do you believe in evolution and the Earth being older than 6,000 years?

[Mandark]

I'm actually surprised you're still on that bandwagon, TA.  I legitimately got the impression that you had quietly left it in the dustbin with Newt a couple years back.

But wasn't this the concern from when 538 was announced?  Amateurs with decent math skills can discover new things in fields where stats are important yet hardly anyone's actually been crunching the numbers.  That applied to sports a decade ago and election coverage a couple years back, but stray from that and suddenly you're doing the Malcolm Gladwell/Freakonomics/Cass Sunstein thing.  "Let me apply this really basic model to something that I've studied for a weekend.  Fresh eyes!  Problem solved!  What's next?"

The only thing I've read at 538 so far was a statistical analysis of which characters shared dialogue with each other in Romeo and Juliet.  (Juliet talks with her nurse more than Romeo!  What does this mean!?)  Hopefully it'll get better, but it's not looking like a must-bookmark just yet.

[Phoenix Dark]

538 is looking like a Beltway parody of what they think a Nate Silver site would be. Not a good look.

He should probably stick to sports analysis with some poll driven election stuff mixed in. Right now the Beltway is harping his midterm prediction, which is based on a rather small amount of early polls, some from partisan pollsters. I'm not denying dems aren't in a good position but there's not enough data out there for most races.

[ToxicAdam]

TA, do you believe in evolution and the Earth being older than 6,000 years?

I believe in making casual associations and slanders in an attempt bully and pigeonhole curious people that see more nuance into an issue.

[Mandark]

TA, do you believe in evolution and the Earth being older than 6,000 years?

I believe in making casual associations and slanders in an attempt bully and pigeonhole curious people that see more nuance into an issue.

Can't tell if serious.

[ToxicAdam]

Everything I post is serious in that moment.

[Phoenix Dark]

TA, do you believe in evolution and the Earth being older than 6,000 years?

I believe in making casual associations and slanders in an attempt bully and pigeonhole curious people that see more nuance into an issue.

Can't tell if serious.

Be honest, how many paragraphs did you write before settling for this.

PoliBore Rules: Don't discuss abortion with JayDubya, and don't discuss science with ToxicAdam.

[ToxicAdam]

Long-range climate modeling isn't science. I have no problem with real science.

[Mandark]

PoliBore Rules: Don't discuss abortion with JayDubya, and don't discuss science with ToxicAdam.

Oh, I learned that a while ago.  I remember when TA thought that the body's nervous system worked on sound waves or something.

Just noticed that when someone compared his position to a religious belief, he was all "SLANDER, BULLYING!" and awarding himself bonus points for nuance, just a page after having a good larf at people's "extreme climate change religion."  It's like in the NBA thread, does AWESOM-O know he's being a stan or does he think he's being objective any time he posts about Dwight or Bron?  For my money, I'd say TA's got a bit more self-awareness and a handle on his feels, but we've all got our pet issues.

[ToxicAdam]

The point was about discrediting others through loose associations. The same way conservatives compare liberals to socialists of years gone by or some compare those on the right to fascists. I guess 'flat-earther' would be another casual slur of the intellectually lazy.

[Mandark]

Yeah, and my point is you were making a casual association between liberals who believe in climate change and religious zealouts.  Which is probably a pretty effective way to rustle some r/atheists, but do you really not realize you're doing that?

[Great Rumbler]

if global warming is real why we still got winter though

[ToxicAdam]

Yeah, and my point is you were making a casual association between liberals who believe in climate change and religious zealouts.  Which is probably a pretty effective way to rustle some r/atheists, but do you really not realize you're doing that?

I said extreme.  Words have meaning.

For example, those that believe the 'tipping point' is happening or will happen in the next decade. Or those that adamantly that believe the coastlines will be swallowed up in a century.

[Steve Contra]

Either way it doesn't mean much. Are we presently jumping out of our seats to prevent climate change? Are we preparing to?

Yeah, but liberals

[Phoenix Dark]

If I was a black conservative I'd use this opportunity to point out the hypocrisy of liberals who criticize the wealth and tax loopholes oil barons benefit from while saying nothing of those who stand to profit from climate change policies.

[benjipwns]

"Let me apply this really basic model to something ... Problem solved!"

Sounds like climate chaos and the proposed policy solutions.

 

538 is looking like a Beltway parody of what they think a Nate Silver site would be. Not a good look.

He should probably stick to sports analysis with some poll driven election stuff mixed in. Right now the Beltway is harping his midterm prediction, which is based on a rather small amount of early polls, some from partisan pollsters. I'm not denying dems aren't in a good position but there's not enough data out there for most races.

I've never understood this notion he was doing mind-blowing predictive work, the RCP average gets races just as right. Especially if you look at the momentum trend and adjust accordingly. (Which is what Silver's model does.)

If you had taken the RCP average in APRIL 2012 as your prediction, you would have gotten 48 out of the 50 states right. Could have flipped a coin on the two closest and possibly hit all 50.

[Great Rumbler]

He wasn't necessarily doing mind-blowing work, it's just that he was actually using data and models in an arena dominated by people who very seriously based their analysis on "vibrations" and "gut instinct."

[ToxicAdam]

Either way it doesn't mean much. Are we presently jumping out of our seats to prevent climate change? Are we preparing to?

That's the head scratching question I always come back to.  If the problem is as dire as we are led to believe, then why aren't we attacking the easy stuff like black carbon and methane emissions?  Those are the ghgs that would pay immediate dividends if they were harshly regulated. But the focus always goes to co2 instead.

It's not like there even needs to be legislature to get it done. It can be done by the EPA tomorrow.

[Human Snorenado]

Either way it doesn't mean much. Are we presently jumping out of our seats to prevent climate change? Are we preparing to?

That's the head scratching question I always come back to.  If the problem is as dire as we are led to believe, then why aren't we attacking the easy stuff like black carbon and methane emissions?  Those are the ghgs that would pay immediate dividends if they were harshly regulated. But the focus always goes to co2 instead.

It's not like there even needs to be legislature to get it done. It can be done by the EPA tomorrow.

I'm sure if the EPA were to issue new regulations that the reaction from those on the right would in no way be something close to "EMPEROR OBAMAO COMIN TO TAKE YER CARBON!"

[benjipwns]

He wasn't necessarily doing mind-blowing work, it's just that he was actually using data and models in an arena dominated by people who very seriously based their analysis on "vibrations" and "gut instinct."

Why do you want Peggy Noonan to starve? Heartless progressives smh.

[Great Rumbler]

Peggy Noonan can eat once she actually starts doing some work.

[ToxicAdam]

I'm sure if the EPA were to issue new regulations that the reaction from those on the right would in no way be something close to "EMPEROR OBAMAO COMIN TO TAKE YER CARBON!"

That should be of no concern if the issue is as grave as people say it is.

Especially in the case of black carbon, which is shown to melt ice faster, cause lung damage in humans and cause other public health issues. If you want to line up on the other side of that debate, then you are going to look pretty bad.

[Phoenix Dark]

[benjipwns]

I think in a decade or so when they finally publish accounts of all the voter fraud that went on to steal the election from Romney despite what experts like Noonan and Rove were feeling in the crowds and what all the unskewed polls were saying, people are going to be really upset with the Democratic Party.

Especially when Putin seizes Quebec.

[Phoenix Dark]

I can't wait until summer 2016 when polls show Hillary up 2-4 points on Scott Walker and the pundit class brushes off the old "anyone who says this isn't a dead heat doesn't understand politics" memes.

"A black canddiate isn't on the ballot, therefore Silver's numbers are irrelavant. There's no way blacks or Hispanics turn out in high enough numbers to change this from a tie race."

[Oblivion]

TA, do you believe in evolution and the Earth being older than 6,000 years?

I believe in making casual associations and slanders in an attempt bully and pigeonhole curious people that see more nuance into an issue.

Actually, I wasn't really trying to insult you, that was out of genuine curiosity. I mean, if one thinks that there's a liberal conspiracy to promote man made climate change, why wouldn't that extend to other areas as well? What makes you trust the left when it comes to matters of biology and geology, but not climatology?

I'm just saying that the conservatives haven't had a great record when it comes to science in general since the days of Copernicus. So with that in mind, why would you give them the benefit of the doubt?

[benjipwns]

That just assumes there's only two positions one which is entirely right all the time and one which is entirely wrong all the time. When it's possible for "conservatives" to be right on evolution and wrong on climate chaos or vice versa.

It's also possible to be right for the wrong reasons.

[Oblivion]

http://thefederalist.com/2014/03/13/five-things-neil-degrasse-tysons-cosmos-gets-wrong/

These are the type of people who shape science policy on the Right, just to throw it out there.

[Dickie Dee]

http://thefederalist.com/2014/03/13/five-things-neil-degrasse-tysons-cosmos-gets-wrong/

These are the type of people who shape science policy on the Right, just to throw it out there.

5. The Universe Was Also Not Created In One Year
On January 1st, we had the Big Bang and on December 31st, I am alive, less than a tiny fraction of a millisecond before midnight. That can’t be right — it took me a whole day just to write this article.

Oh, Cosmos is not being literal? Oddly, a number of religious critics, Tyson included, insist that too many religious people believe the Book of Genesis is taken literally by people who read the Bible. Unless we accept that figurative comparisons help make large ideas manageable, a year is no more accurate than six days — it is instead a completely arbitrary metric invented to show some context for how things evolved.

[ToxicAdam]

Actually, I wasn't really trying to insult you, that was out of genuine curiosity. I mean, if one thinks that there's a liberal conspiracy to promote man made climate change, why wouldn't that extend to other areas as well? What makes you trust the left when it comes to matters of biology and geology, but not climatology?

It's immaterial to the subject at hand. It's a peer pressure tactic meant to influence people that are generally on the fence or indifferent to the topic. You create an archetype of 'those people' and then continually add layers on to the falsehood with other labels. Flat-earthers, holocaust deniers, anti-science, bible literalists, bought by corporate interests, etc etc. So, it doesn't surprise me to see you lazily regurgitate what you are fed. It's the same shit Rush Limbaugh has made a career out of.

I'm just saying that the conservatives haven't had a great record when it comes to science in general since the days of Copernicus. So with that in mind, why would you give them the benefit of the doubt?

With history, you can cherry-pick many different events throughout human history to fit whatever narrative you want to say. For much of the the previous millennia, many of the foundations of scientific thought and practice were laid down by the monks and friars of the middle ages.  But I wouldn't even classify them as 'conservative'. It's a meaningless label that has no real through line in history.

The through line I would focus on is that the Catholic church sought to demonize and discredit anyone that brought forth information that could upset their power base. So, it wasn't "science" that threatened them, it was particular observations made of the universe that upset the dogma they had laid down. Things that could diminish their funding or political capital. It's that same kind of tribalism of thought and preservation of power that corrupts much of climate science today. 

[Joe Molotov]

http://thefederalist.com/2014/03/13/five-things-neil-degrasse-tysons-cosmos-gets-wrong/

These are the type of people who shape science policy on the Right, just to throw it out there.

5. The Universe Was Also Not Created In One Year
On January 1st, we had the Big Bang and on December 31st, I am alive, less than a tiny fraction of a millisecond before midnight. That can’t be right — it took me a whole day just to write this article.

Oh, Cosmos is not being literal? Oddly, a number of religious critics, Tyson included, insist that too many religious people believe the Book of Genesis is taken literally by people who read the Bible. Unless we accept that figurative comparisons help make large ideas manageable, a year is no more accurate than six days — it is instead a completely arbitrary metric invented to show some context for how things evolved.

We can allow that catchy buzzwords make something timely and that they are a snapshot of the culture of the period. James Cameron used the term “shock and awe” in the futuristic “Avatar” film not because he actually believes solders will be using that term when we invade other planets, but because he was selling an anti-military message to viewers at a time when George Bush was president.

Avatar
2009 Film
Release date: December 18, 2009 (USA)

Conservatives' pop-culture knowledge is even worse than their science knowledge.

[ToxicAdam]

 Follow the money, brehs!

 :geoff

[benjipwns]

$992 million = 206 electoral votes
$946 million = A123, Beacon Power, Ener1, Solyndra
$900 million = complete undermining of the global climate through secret propaganda

Put those last guys in charge if that's the kind of returns they get.

[Mandark]

I remember TA saying back in the day that climate scientists couldn't be trusted cause they were incentivized to go after that sweet sweet grant money by producing ever more apocalyptic projections.

Of course now they apparently command comparable "power" to the 16th century Catholic church, so they've definitely done well for themselves over the last few years.