Electile Dysfunction (Current students plz look!)

[davej]

COVID has given me such a big Tabloner.

fixed

[ViPER1313]

Show me all the people Clinton and Obama threw in jail for 11 round magazines Rex.

Quite a few people have gone to jail for this, both while the 94awb was active and in some states. I know you think you're being clever but being dismissive because an enumerated right in the Constitution is important to me isn't a great look imho. 

I'm also big on speech and privacy, but both candidates suck equally on that and for like the 10th time I'm not voting for either of them.

The constitution is a big thing for me too. A very, very big thing. But it is worth the paper it’s printed on if our Government doesn’t abide by it and it is actively attacked by the people in power, and if those people in power are willing to actively suppress the rights granted in it utilizing the Military. Sound familiar?

It’s important to see the bigger picture here and not focus a single issue like you seem to be doing Rex.

I get it. There is a candidate that you like better that better aligns with your views. I didn’t vote for Hilary or Trump in 2016 (as though that matters) for many of the concerns you have brought up here. But I think you should stop and really think about what is at stake in this election.

“We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution. At the same time, we must remember Lincoln's "better angels," and listen to them, as we work to unite.” - Jim Mattis


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Apoc]

If any of these were applied to speech or the right to vote (my god, a background check to vote? *clutches pearls*) you guys would be baying in outrage.

There are plenty of exceptions to 1A, like threatening the president without actually having the capacity to execute it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta...exceptions

No one here's crying about them. 

Our system is specifically designed so one voter cannot unduly impact other citizens. When that changes or a single person's access to certain firearms doesn't make them *more* lethal, we'll compare 2A to the right to vote.

[CaptainHenreh]

Show me all the people Clinton and Obama threw in jail for 11 round magazines Rex.

Quite a few people have gone to jail for this, both while the 94awb was active and in some states. I know you think you're being clever but being dismissive because an enumerated right in the Constitution is important to me isn't a great look imho. 

I'm also big on speech and privacy, but both candidates suck equally on that and for like the 10th time I'm not voting for either of them.

The constitution is a big thing for me too. A very, very big thing. But it is worth the paper it’s printed on if our Government doesn’t abide by it and it is actively attacked by the people in power....

Precisely why I'm voting the way I am. I thought I made that clear. I'm voting for the government I want, I won't compromise my values for the lesser evil, and if we all did that, we wouldn't be in this position.

That I'm being criticized for being consistent in my values and beliefs is...well not surprising any more but I wish it were.

---

If any of these were applied to speech or the right to vote (my god, a background check to vote? *clutches pearls*) you guys would be baying in outrage.

There are plenty of exceptions to 1A, like threatening the president without actually having the capacity to execute it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta...exceptions

Sure, there are plenty of exceptions to the 2A too...but if you had to pay a $200 "Speech Technology Tax" to use a computer to make political speech you'd agree that is an unjust infringement, wouldn't you?

 You wouldnt say "Well computers permit broad transmission of radicalizing speech, so to keep us all safe you'll have to register with the government to write political speech with anything other than pen and paper", would you? You wouldn't advocate a felony charge for someone with an unregistered laptop, would you?

If computers were so registered, you wouldn't campaign on banning "Assault Copiers" and closing the "Typewriter Loophole" would you?

Would you?

[Apoc]

I'm being criticized for being consistent in my values and beliefs

If you think that's why people are critical, there's really no point in debating politics at all. 

Your entire premise of this discussion was "Trump's world is not that bad; prove me wrong" and NOT, "Hey guys, I have someone who is better in almost every way." You painted Trump as the lesser of two evils, but then disavowed responsibility by saying you didn't want to see a second term. Seems more like you're advocating being an anti-Democrat than trying to win voters to your cause. That's what people who aren't hardcore liberals, like me, react to.

---

Your argument switched from outlawing of "assault weapons" to taxing possession. I think a $200 tax for suppressors is idiotic, but that's not what we were debating.

- signed, a fellow Libertarian who didn't vote D or R in 2016

[CaptainHenreh]

---

Your argument switched from outlawing of "assault weapons" to taxing possession. I think a $200 for suppressors is idiotic, but that's not what we were debating.

That is...the same thing? "You must turn it in or pay the tax" what happens when you do neither?

---

And yes, I am being anti democrat, I think we have the anti GOP pretty well covered in this thread, yes? I mean RJ was convinced in '16 that we were headed for a Atwood Theocracy and seems STILL convinced, people have unironically suggested that Trump is on the verge of Dictatorship, and yes, I am definitely over here like "C'mon y'all...it ain't THAT bad..."

I only brought up my candidate because of the people saying, explicitly, Its an act of malfeasance to vote for any one other than Biden, which is how we got into this situation in the first place.

[Apoc]

I only brought up my candidate because of the people saying, explicitly, Its an act of malfeasance to vote for any one other than Biden, which is how we got into this situation in the first place.

As a third party voter, this perspective annoys the shit out of me too. However, I can vote my ideal candidate in four years... like I did four years ago. 

Unfortunately, the cost for not pushing for Trump's defeat is too great for those I purport to be allied with. I have a voice empowered with all the things I was lucky enough to be born with, like my sexuality, gender, skin color, etc. I feel my allyship requires I help represent those who may not think exactly like me, but whose voices have been marginalized. If I had any inclination gun owners were being marginalized, I might feel differently.

[CaptainHenreh]

I mean, that's good, and I'm not criticising you for it. I simply feel like fighting against the inexorable erosion of our inaleinable rights is a good use of *my* political thought cycles.

[SlimKlim]

I only brought up my candidate because of the people saying, explicitly, Its an act of malfeasance to vote for any one other than Biden, which is how we got into this situation in the first place.

As a third party voter, this perspective annoys the shit out of me too. However, I can vote my ideal candidate in four years... like I did four years ago. 

Unfortunately, the cost for not pushing for Trump's defeat is too great for those I purport to be allied with. I have a voice empowered with all the things I was lucky enough to be born with, like my sexuality, gender, skin color, etc. I feel my allyship requires I help represent those who may not think exactly like me, but whose voices have been marginalized.

[CaptainHenreh]

Oh, yes, please do more reading about expected deaths. It's fascinating.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...-countries

Ok so forget all the other bullshit for a minute, I just got back to a PC and I'm reading this very cool dive...I mean you could use this data to plot the "flatness" of "the curve" could you not? Since "dying from the 'rona" would be a novel addition to the data set, yes?

[Apoc]

Oh, yes, please do more reading about expected deaths. It's fascinating.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...-countries

Ok so forget all the other bullshit for a minute, I just got back to a PC and I'm reading this very cool dive...I mean you could use this data to plot the "flatness" of "the curve" could you not? Since "dying from the 'rona" would be a novel addition to the data set, yes?

They have deaths compared to excess deaths farther down the page. What's difficult to glean is whether those excess deaths were a result of coronavirus or our response to coronavirus. Regardless, you can see there's a correlation between early and aggressive lockdowns in places like France and Portugal. These differences are even more stark in central and northern European countries, where Sweden didn't do shit but Germany went hardcore. There also appears to be a greater disparity between reported deaths and expected deaths for lesser developed countries in Latin America; presumably because their testing or medical infrastructure has a hard time identifying things specifically related to COVID. 

[ViPER1313]

people have unironically suggested that Trump is on the verge of Dictatorship, and yes, I am definitely over here like "C'mon y'all...it ain't THAT bad..."

From today

“I think this will end up in the Supreme Court,” Mr. Trump told reporters at a White House event on social media, adopting an argument for quick action made by his ally, Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas. “And I think it’s very important that we have nine justices,” instead of the eight seats currently filled.

"But I think it's better if you go before the election because I think this — this scam that the Democrats are pulling — it's a scam, the scam will be before the United States Supreme Court," the president continued. "And I think having a 4-4 situation is not a good situation, if you get that. I don't know that you'd get that. I think it should be 8-nothing or 9-nothing. But just in case it would be more political than it should be, I think it's very important to have a ninth judge," Mr. Trump said.

Please tell me more Rex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CaptainHenreh]

Oh, yes, please do more reading about expected deaths. It's fascinating.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...-countries

Ok so forget all the other bullshit for a minute, I just got back to a PC and I'm reading this very cool dive...I mean you could use this data to plot the "flatness" of "the curve" could you not? Since "dying from the 'rona" would be a novel addition to the data set, yes?

They have deaths compared to excess deaths farther down the page. What's difficult to glean is whether those excess deaths were a result of coronavirus or our response to coronavirus. Regardless, you can see there's a correlation between early and aggressive lockdowns in places like France and Portugal. These differences are even more stark in central and northern European countries, where Sweden didn't do shit but Germany went hardcore. There also appears to be a greater disparity between reported deaths and expected deaths for lesser developed countries in Latin America; presumably because their testing or medical infrastructure has a hard time identifying things specifically related to COVID. 

Yeah I saw that, and the states one which was super interesting and I'm actually angry I haven't seen this before and it is from JULY what the FUCK. I wonder what the data looks like now, and if there's any prognosticatory value to this.

Damn, I really do wish I'd seen this months ago.

---

Please tell me more Rex.

"What are the chances anything like that will either die upfront or would never be anything remotely close to this in practical terms as an actual law. this is Trump simply saying words to rally a base..."

I'm hearing left AND right that either side isn't going to accept the result of this election (hell the left never accepted 2016) and it, to me, has been a foregone conclusion that the 2020 election with anything short of a dramatic landslide was gonna end up in court.

Doesn't mean he's going to be Generalissimo Trump, christ y'all. Do you not remember "hanging chads"?

[Apoc]

Much of the data is through Aug 28 - look at each exhibit, not the article publish date.

Regarding prognostication, this isn't about expected deaths but is forward looking: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/covid-forecasts/

As with any model, the quantity and quality of inputs matters a great deal. It's also difficult to know what you should put in to the model if you don't actually understand the nature of what you're trying to analyze. Economists and social scientists have ways of controlling for this, but the margin of error still remains wide.

^ This type of stuff is what my team used to when I managed an analytics team at amazon. It was cool to witness.

[ViPER1313]

Please tell me more Rex.

"What are the chances anything like that will either die upfront or would never be anything remotely close to this in practical terms as an actual law. this is Trump simply saying words to rally a base..."

I'm hearing left AND right that either side isn't going to accept the result of this election (hell the left never accepted 2016) and it, to me, has been a foregone conclusion that the 2020 election with anything short of a dramatic landslide was gonna end up in court.

Doesn't mean he's going to be Generalissimo Trump, christ y'all. Do you not remember "hanging chads"?

The left did accept the result of the 2016 election, on election night. Everything else the left did afterwards was punditry and politics as usual. Power transferred peacefully.

Do you remember this many warnings from high ranking officials, constitutional scholars and statements Clinton made during his presidency concerning how he would not accept the result of the 2000 election? Me neither.

It’s going to be a mess. Which is what Trump wants.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ViPER1313]

Concerning COVID forecasts, I just hope IHME’s is inaccurate:




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ViPER1313]

Concerning COVID forecasts, I just hope IHME’s is inaccurate:




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CaptainHenreh]

The left did accept the result of the 2016 election, on election night. Everything else the left did afterwards was punditry and politics as usual.

With all due respect, bullshit. The left was trying to impeach Trump before he was even sworn in. The fuckin' FBI was in on it ferchrissake.

Anyway I guess we'll find out. Y'all novaites arent gonna have any fun if you're right

[G.Irish]

The left did accept the result of the 2016 election, on election night. Everything else the left did afterwards was punditry and politics as usual.

With all due respect, bullshit. The left was trying to impeach Trump before he was even sworn in. The fuckin' FBI was in on it ferchrissake.

Anyway I guess we'll find out. Y'all novaites arent gonna have any fun if you're right

The FBI investigation began before the election because multiple people in the Trump campaign were interacting with counterintelligence targets.  Part of the FBI's job is to identify, investigate, and neutralize counterintelligence threats.  From that investigation it was discovered that several people in the Trump campaign committed crimes and over a half dozen of them have been convicted.

That's not, 'trying to impeach Trump before he was sworn in'.  That's one of the world's best federal law enforcement agencies doing their job.

Bottom line is that Trump was claiming the 2016 election was rigged before election day, and after he won, Hillary Clinton conceded.  She didn't call into question the results, demand a recount, file any lawsuits, or call for violence.  Trump just today said that he would not commit to a peaceful transfer of power.  He has outright admitted he seeks to sabotage the USPS to prevent them from processing mail-in ballots.  All of that is plain and out in the open.  No president Democrat or Republican has attacked the legitimacy of American elections and sought to sabotage them like Trump has.

[SlimKlim]

The left did accept the result of the 2016 election, on election night. Everything else the left did afterwards was punditry and politics as usual.

With all due respect, bullshit. The left was trying to impeach Trump before he was even sworn in. The fuckin' FBI was in on it ferchrissake.

Anyway I guess we'll find out. Y'all novaites arent gonna have any fun if you're right

And then what did QAnon tell you?