2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
Based and true brother, that’s exactly what I’m saying. Let’s just ignore that Chomsky, who is far to the left of me, voices my same criticisms about people who deny the reality of a two party system. Let’s also ignore all the insane media criticism levied by the right that is a simulacra of leftist ideology. It’s all because the evil liberal wants to control your free speech.
It's not what you're saying? Look, I know Chomsky is awesome and some other people (like you mentioned Parenti) are maybe not so awesome. But you're saying Chomsky is dangerous for the unwashed masses or something. He's going to turn them in to Trumpkins or something. You can't actually say you want to control speech because the ghost of Mario Savio will haunt you if you cross certain lines, but you like to get your toes right up against those lines.
One of the questions I have about why the world seems worse than it actually is has a lot to do with news. It used to be most people subscribed to their local paper and then possibly in addition to that the NYT or WSJ. Stories were read to their fruition so you didn’t just see the ledes but also got a fuller picture even if it was buried beneath a bunch of trash.
I was mocked in another thread because I think norms have gotten worse in media, but perhaps as well media consumption norms have
Yes, of course it’s the fault of people criticising how bad the media has become that made the media so bad. ****ing commie bastards.
I subscribed to my local-ish paper (the LA Times) for like 20 years. I didn't leave it. It left me. A billionaire bought it and fired all the reporters, it costs more, and it's like 20% as much content. That didn't happen because of criticism from the left or the right. I reckon newspapers lost business because a bunch of competition came out that was free. Some of the competition is better and some of it is worse, but Chomsky didn't make the internet.
The essence of humor... is that IT IS NOT TRUE!
That's why it is funny.
The left being offended by a puerto rico joke that compares the country to a garbage island is akin to same left leaners admitting to the statement being a truism... taking offense is endorsing the statement as truth, and that is the real sickness.
Circling back here, I think I've found the source of the confusion after a few hours of exhaustive research. It seems that you (don't worry, it seems that a lot of others have as well) have confused lying with jokes. Remember classic punchlines like 'Kamala isn't black.' and 'They're eating the dogs'? They weren't jokes. They were just lies! You must feel so silly after all these years
lie
4 of 4
noun (2)
ˈlī
1
a
: an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker or writer to be untrue with intent to deceive
joke
1 of 2
noun
ˈjōk
Synonyms of joke
1
a
: something said or done to provoke laughter
especially : a brief oral narrative with a climactic humorous twist
If only Trump knew that jokes were lies he might not have had his feeling so hurt by the Obama roast that he ran for POTUS.
I like Tony, he can be very funny. Disappointed he did this in the first place and defintely how it went down.
My biggest laugh is imagining the smooth-brained Trump aides who approved his set (it was telepromoted, so someone OKed it) sitting around trying to figure out comedy, like a bunch of Neanderthals trying trying to work an iPhone.
Guess they wanted him to go with the only 'humour' that's ever amused Trump - shitting on other people hahaha
I subscribed to my local-ish paper (the LA Times) for like 20 years. I didn't leave it. It left me. A billionaire bought it and fired all the reporters, it costs more, and it's like 20% as much content. That didn't happen because of criticism from the left or the right. I reckon newspapers lost business because a bunch of competition came out that was free. Some of the competition is better and some of it is worse, but Chomsky didn't make the internet.
It Is more about they lost ad money (classified included) than about "you can now find news for free"
The number of seats in the House is based on a federal law, not the Constitution. But I'm 99% certain that apportionment is Constitutional. That means changing the number of seats would be much easier than monkeying with apportionment. So how would this help Trump?
in theory if you get a trifecta and nuke the filibuster and pass a severe reduction of house seats (say they become 300 from 435), and you still apportion proportionally to the population, given each state needs to have at least one, you are giving more weight to small states for the EC and for the house itself.
No one thinks Trump supporters are all nazis. No one intelligent thinks the majority of his supporters are nazis. Of course, it should go without saying that Trump has Jewish supporters, Asian supporters, Black supporters, and indeed A handful of lgbtq supporters.
That would be a very different and unrelated claim than the Trump administrations obviously facist policies.
The majority of women, black, hispanic, lgbtq, and jewish voters in America do not support Trump or his facist policies.
i mean fascists things did indeed happen during the Trump admin, but they actually happened in Dem controlled states because of covid, and those were the most fascists events domestically in the USA since another democrat interned japanese-Americans in camps and a democrat SCOTUS determined that was constitutional.
Trump had the opportunity to kill tens of thousands of democrat supporters legally, by using lethal federal force against BLM rioters, but he didn't
Trump also had the opportunity to legally persecute democrats and democrat donating companies with the DOJ and the IRS, but it was Obama that persecuted right-wing NGOs with the IRS while Trump didn't do the same to leftwing NGOs when he had the chance, and it was democrats who persecuted Trump and his associates with the DOJ while Trump DOJ didn't persecute the Clintons and their associate.
It's not what you're saying? Look, I know Chomsky is awesome and some other people (like you mentioned Parenti) are maybe not so awesome. But you're saying Chomsky is dangerous for the unwashed masses or something. He's going to turn them in to Trumpkins or something. You can't actually say you want to control speech because the ghost of Mario Savio will haunt you if you cross certain lines, but you like to get your toes right up against those lines.
Not at all, my criticism of how other people use their speech is part of speech and so on. I don’t see how you pull prescriptive statements out of descriptive statements. The only actual ought that I would derive from what I’m saying is that there are a lot of media critics out there and the vast majority are horrible. Meanwhile there is a dearth of journalists out there. Most of the famous media figures now are commentators rather than journalists, and this includes mass media like CNN, MSNBC, and Fox news.
I started this whole diatribe off by saying the vast majority of media I consume is independent media.
This is what I meant when I said the resident populists would twist anything I have to say into their preferred narrative. You can only see things through the lens of manufacturing consent without acknowledging the other half of that thesis. Mainly that news media is largely composed of people who are genuinely smart and believe in what they’re doing. No ill motive is necessary to show why mainstream news is what it is. It’s an incredibly anti-conspiratorial framework. Everything is what it appears and that’s why it functions as it does.
By the way absolutely billionaires buy up legacy media and turn them into conglomerates. I’m absolutely on board with that assessment. But this doesn’t detract from the fact that broadly all those years ago people had different media diets, and it also doesn’t detract from the big problems with new media/alternative media/independent media.
I would leave you with this, since you probably won’t take it from me. Here is Kyle Kulinski, someone you probably agree with, talking about the hollow criticisms that new media thrusts at mainstream media, and how oftentimes they turn out to be WORSE than the very thing they are criticizing. And this guy, if you’re not familiar, is no corporatist as you probably perceive me to be.
Broken YouTube Linkoh btw Trump was crucial to remove the very fascist Patriot act which was kept alive by a bipartisan fascist agreement until he signaled very clearly he would veto the renewal with expanded surveillance powers.
that was one of the most antifa choices ever by a president, and it happened while BLM terrorists were ravaging the country
i mean fascists things did indeed happen during the Trump admin, but they actually happened in Dem controlled states because of covid, and those were the most fascists events domestically in the USA since another democrat interned japanese-Americans in camps and a democrat SCOTUS determined that was constitutional.
Trump had the opportunity to kill tens of thousands of democrat supporters legally, by using lethal federal force against BLM rioters, but he didn't
Trump also had the opportunity to le
Trump did use federal intervention against blm protestors, and it was excessive.
in theory if you get a trifecta and nuke the filibuster and pass a severe reduction of house seats (say they become 300 from 435), and you still apportion proportionally to the population, given each state needs to have at least one, you are giving more weight to small states for the EC and for the house itself.
The only states it would obviously benefit are states with 1 rep in the House, four of which are solidly red and two of which are solidly blue. Seems like a lot of effort for a very marginal benefit if you are Trump.
The only states it would obviously benefit are states with 1 rep in the House, four of which are solidly red and two of which are solidly blue. Seems like a lot of effort for a very marginal benefit if you are Trump.
Why do you think that?
if all states lose 1/3 of their house members (minimum 1) doesn't that significantly improve the EC map in favor of republicans? remember a state is worth EC points as a sum of house representatives + 2 for the senators.
Why do you think that?
if all states lose 1/3 of their house members (minimum 1) doesn't that significantly improve the EC map in favor of republicans? remember a state is worth EC points as a sum of house representatives + 2 for the senators.
That's fair. I was only thinking about the number of House seats. I still don't see why Trump would bother if he won this election. It wouldn't benefit him personally unless he thought he could get the Constitution amended to allow for a third term.
That's wild, I'd ask how come nobody's reporting it, but I assume it's because there are no journalists left.
There is a park in LA named after a journalist assassinated by LAPD in 1970.
But ofc victor is using a "routinely" which he applies to "journalists" being killed in the middle east by Israel, even if they are Hamas/Hezbollah members, or associates, or supporters and so on
There is a park in LA named after a journalist assassinated by LAPD in 1970.
But ofc victor is using a "routinely" which he applies to "journalists" being killed in the middle east by Israel, even if they are Hamas/Hezbollah members, or associates, or supporters and so on
Possibly Gary Webb. Khashoggi as well, since he included "US Allies". But of course, Victor is being a lying hyper-partisan hypocrite as per usual, since the regimes he idolises actually do routinely murder or imprison journalists and dissidents.
Possibly Gary Webb. Khashoggi as well, since he included "US Allies". But of course, Victor is being a lying hyper-partisan hypocrite as per usual, since the regimes he idolises actually do routinely murder or imprison journalists and dissidents.
The clear cut assassination was that of Salazar in 1970.
That's the only instance of an actual American journalist being assassinated almost certainly on purpose by the american government that I know about
The clear cut assassination was that of Salazar in 1970.
That's the only instance of an actual American journalist being assassinated almost certainly on purpose by the american government that I know about
Gary Webb situation was definitely shady. He was the reporter who broke the CIA - crack connection story. IIRC he committed suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head like 15 times, pausing to reload twice. I jest, but there were definitely some shady circumstances around his "suicide".
That's wild, I'd ask how come nobody's reporting it, but I assume it's because there are no journalists left.
Possibly Gary Webb. Khashoggi as well, since he included "US Allies". But of course, Victor is being a lying hyper-partisan hypocrite as per usual, since the regimes he idolises actually do routinely murder or imprison journalists and dissidents.
I dont idolize any regimes or countries. I can just objectively recognize that the USA and its allies kill far more journalists than anyone else and its not even close.
