The Goat Pen

That's a pretty good article. This sentence near the end struck me as the crux of the article: "For democracy to work, the losers of elections need to believe that they can win the next time around. Otherwise their incentives to play the spoiler increase." If Trump wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote (and probably by a very wide margin), it will be the 3rd time in 20 years that repubs have won the election but lost the popular vote.

Sure, that's the system we have in place, but on a gut emotional level, the people who are clearly in the majority are going to feel like the system is rigged. And if the majority of people don't feel they can win under the current system, and more importantly, because of the way the system is set up they feel like there's no way for them to change it, there's going to be trouble. That's exactly the kind of thing revolutions are based on.

If somebody as unpopular as Hilary Clinton can win the popular vote by almost a landslide, you have to believe that somebody like Biden will win the popular vote by way more than that, esp. given the historical unpopularity of Trump. If Biden wins the popular vote by 5 million or more votes, but Trump squeaks out another electoral victory by a few thousand votes in a handful of states, a lot of people are going to be pissed. And by a lot, I'm talking about tens of millions. Again, not a very pleasant scenario to consider...

I wouldn't be happy about it either but I understand the reasoning and support the system. The size and scope of America means that population centers don't always represent the interest of Americans across geographic boundaries.

After two cops were ambushed by an African American man with a handgun (per reports) Biden does this on twitter

Weapons of war have no place in our communities.

We need to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines."

Who used an assault weapon? Kyle Rittenhouse who shot 3 people in defense of his life in Kenosha, WI

hedge wrote: ↑Mon Sep 14, 2020 10:05 am That's a pretty good article. This sentence near the end struck me as the crux of the article: "For democracy to work, the losers of elections need to believe that they can win the next time around. Otherwise their incentives to play the spoiler increase." If Trump wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote (and probably by a very wide margin), it will be the 3rd time in 20 years that repubs have won the election but lost the popular vote.

Sure, that's the system we have in place, but on a gut emotional level, the people who are clearly in the majority are going to feel like the system is rigged. And if the majority of people don't feel they can win under the current system, and more importantly, because of the way the system is set up they feel like there's no way for them to change it, there's going to be trouble. That's exactly the kind of thing revolutions are based on.

If somebody as unpopular as Hilary Clinton can win the popular vote by almost a landslide, you have to believe that somebody like Biden will win the popular vote by way more than that, esp. given the historical unpopularity of Trump. If Biden wins the popular vote by 5 million or more votes, but Trump squeaks out another electoral victory by a few thousand votes in a handful of states, a lot of people are going to be pissed. And by a lot, I'm talking about tens of millions. Again, not a very pleasant scenario to consider...

There probably would be some resentment because voters are too dumb to analyze or critically think about anything. These "popular vote" margins is really all about one single state (California) being so lopsided. Hillary won California by almost 5 million votes, which means Trump won the rest of the country by 2 million. Neither party even campaigns in California because it is a foregone conclusion that it doesn't matter, so really its just an assumption that the whole election should change based on winning one race where the losing side doesn't bother trying to win. If we switch to popular vote, yes California would matter more, but it would be the end most of the campaigning in places like Michigan, or Ohio, or North Carolina, etc and the entire election would just be campaigning to wring the most possible votes out of only the major metropolitan areas.

It's the type of thing that you'd think would be taken care of by the news media. In world with real "news" what should happen is that they would go on TV and in newspapers and explain that reality to the people. Instead, I imagine what we would get is 100% of them instigating and fanning the flames of controversy so they can make money off of it.

I am not anti-mask, I wear one in public and I make decisions about my daily routine on whether I will be an enclosed space or not with other people.

That said, the CDC says this basically if you are around someone who has covid-19 for more than 15 minutes, a mask isn't going to do any good. I rarely encounter anyone in public for more than 15 minutes but school kids and teachers - doesn't seem like its a good idea at all to be in a classroom

-----------------------------------
August 24 - Washington Examiner

The CDC states on its Public Health Guidance for Community-Related Exposure page that those who come in close contact with people showing COVID-19 symptoms or someone who has tested positive for the virus can spread the infection whether or not they are wearing masks.

CDC states that "data to inform the definition of close contact are limited." Factors "to consider" when defining close contact are duration of exposure, proximity to an infected person, and whether or not that person is presenting symptoms. Data for what a prolonged exposure is are iffy; however, longer than 15 minutes can be considered an operational definition, according to the CDC.

“This is irrespective of whether the person with COVID-19 or the contact was wearing a mask or whether the contact was wearing respiratory personal protective equipment (PPE),” the CDC states.

The guidance goes on to say masks “may” help people who are infected with the coronavirus from spreading it but adds that “there is less information” if masks protect a person coming into contact with someone with the virus.

“While research indicates masks may help those who are infected from spreading the infection, there is less information regarding whether masks offer any protection for a contact exposed to a symptomatic or asymptomatic patient,” the guideline states. “Therefore, the determination of close contact should be made irrespective of whether the person with COVID-19 or the contact was wearing a mask.”

The CDC also notes that the public has not been trained on how to use PPE properly, and so it is not certain if such equipment protects them from exposure.

“Because the general public has not received training on proper selection and use of respiratory PPE, it cannot be certain whether respiratory PPE worn during contact with an individual with COVID-19 infection protected them from exposure. Therefore, as a conservative approach, the determination of close contact should generally be made irrespective of whether the contact was wearing respiratory PPE, which is recommended for health care personnel and other trained users, or a mask recommended for the general public,” the guideline states.

We're more woke than you! oh yea? well watch this!

https://www.unionleader.com/news/local/ ... 36293.html

Damn, you go girl...

DiMezzo might not fit conventional notions of a Republican candidate for county sheriff. She’s opposed to the war on drugs, and does not want to enforce any crimes she claims are victimless, which include drug crimes, sex work, immigration violations, and even speeding violations.

“If there’s no victim, there isn’t a crime,” she said. DiMezzo, founder of the Reformed Satanic Church, describes herself as an anarchist. She hosts an internet radio program where she is referred to as “She-Male.” Her campaign slogan is “F--- the Police.”

I wonder if the Reformed Satanic Church is locked in internecine battles over church dogma with the Primitive Satanic Church? What about the Free Will Satanic Church?

I do believe I made the call way back when that Kamala would win the nomination.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ibtime ... 06%3famp=1

That's who we're voting for...

I need to see Kamala's tits before I will vote for her. Same goes for Mike Pence.

You talk about gall...

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/09/1 ... the-police

This awkward exchange should fuel some conspiracy theorists...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news- ... og-whistle

That there are articles written (and read) about what transpires on TV news shows (although nothing on them is really news) is indicative of the shithole shape we are in culturally.

sometimes I get hypocrisy and irony confused

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/0 ... opponents/

AOC believes Biden wiill get serious about progressive policies after he is elected

sardis wrote: ↑Wed Sep 16, 2020 5:56 pm This awkward exchange should fuel some conspiracy theorists...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news- ... og-whistle

setting aside whether Soros actually does those things, why is it anti-semitic to say he does? I have never heard anyone tie Jewish causes or a Jewish agenda to his alleged actions

and Marie Harf, state department spokesman under Obama cutting him off is bullshit

" I have never heard anyone tie Jewish causes or a Jewish agenda to his alleged actions"

You only see what they want you to see...

Giuliani’s act is getting old. Another day, another proclaiming deBlasio is NY’s worst mayor ever.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

Its interesting that after 9/11 he was on top of the world and he hasn't been able to capitalize on it.