|
RaySmuckles posted:And the man's doing a heck of a job at it too. Obama, excluding donors that donated more than 200 in a single contribution forcing their disclosure, still averaged ~60 bucks a donation. Bernie is averaging 30. Other than NH, he's losing by 30ish points in the polls that have any relevance (the ones that don't poll Biden.) In North Carolina he is losing to a guy who isn't even running (again, Biden.) He has basically no party support (in SHARP contrast to Obama.) I mean, he's doing a heck of a job in that people talk about him, but not in the sense that he's going to win.
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:51 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:They're a good surrogate for a "solid supporter" that is to say, if you've donated to someone you're going to vote for someone. So nationally, there are at least 1 million people who will vote Sanders. That's to be expected based on his poll numbers. Million donations, not donors. Typically, a significant proportion of donors donate more than once (for example, Bernie supporters scraping together their allowance on a weekly basis) - for Obama it was probably at least half of his donors. And it's more common in small donors for the obvious reason.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
A Terrible Person posted:The simple fact that self-defense for an offensive group should over-ride international law is insane. Reminds me far too much of Israel's human shield justification for firing indiscriminately in Gaza. You mean, recognized as valid under the law of armed conflict? It doesn't override international law - international law is what says it's okay (with some limitations and refinements Etc etc.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
Condiv posted:https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule156 That's the Netherlands LoAC manual, not the international instruments themselves, and the Netherlands also defines being an unlawful combatant as a war crime so that miiiight not be as strong a piece of evidence as you want it to be.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The text will not be public for 5 or 6 years No. The negotiation materials are under a non disclosure bar for that time period. The final text will be made public as soon as they actually finish it (they've agreed on contents, which is typically done by debating snippets of text, but still have to actually put together the final text based on what the parties agreed to).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Uh, they kind of took over a couple decently-sized cities and steamrolled a bunch of other militia groups a while back. The answer is that the Mideast isn't some stone-age hellhole and even IS knows that pickup trucks are going to be more useful than sedans for their war rig needs. If someone is shipping cars in and selling them to ISIS then they have FinCEN to investigate the financial trail so they don't need to ask a loving manufacturer what happened to a vehicle after they sent it to a dealer. Granted, Toyota doesn't make guns so expecting some kind of documentation after release to dealers is somewhat reasonable but I'm gonna call it now and say that any cars they're having shipped in are being bought by straw buyers who are slipping through financial intelligence nets in the countries they inhabit. They ought to be asking the individual dealers and banks for their books. How do you think FinCEN (which is part of Treasury, meaning they're probably the ones who actually talked to Toyota) figure out which individual dealers to talk to? Do you think maybe they ask Toyota about which dealer received specific VINs, and for other details of how vehicles are distributed?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Maybe but considering that she was one of the founders of the idea of the agreement in the first place I think that she just waited until her opposition wouldn't be excessively damaging to it. Man, that's a neat trick Hillary pulled off, getting the Bush Administration to push for her idea.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:You just know that those various groups of conservative lawyers will find some random person they can use as a challenge, which of course SCOTUS will take up, since they will take anything that furthers their agenda You're being a crazy person right now. There's not even the thinnest veneer of legal logic - which even the ACA case had - to justify the idea that opting out of voter registration is unconstitutional.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:King v. Burwell shouldn't have gone forward due to lack of standing. King wasn't even affected by the mandate. Standing is infamously negotiable. Exactly what argument do you think they'd make that an opt-out voting approach is unconstitutional?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Clinton hasn't release a criminal justice position paper yet while Bernie has, but don't let that get in the way of claiming she has firm positions on it and he doesn't I mean, other than regularly speaking about what she would like to do and having the specific issues she'd like to focus on on her website, she doesn't have any firm positions on it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:The speeches that keep changing and just Thursday had her telling activists that this was something that needed to be done on the local level, not federal and not the preview of the president? Those speeches? You mean when she pointed out that the federal government constitutionally doesn't have the police power and can't directly affect it? I am okay with having a president that recognizes that there are limits on what can be done directly and what ultimately does have to be done on the local level when those limits are basic elements of our constitution. (And hey, Campaign Zero agrees with her that successful reform will involve federal, state, and local efforts, but you go ahead and keep believing that that's somehow a negative.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
While I still doubt Biden winds up jumping in, bear in mind one thing: The person who leaked Joe and Beau's death bed conversation (where Beau urged him to run) was Joe. You don't do that if you're sure you won't jump in.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:It is certainly the one the activists she said it to took So wait you didn't even know she sat down with them again last week to continue discussion of how to fix things and talked about the local vs federal issues? This was about the August meeting where she called them out on not actually wanting to suggest solutions? At least know your loving facts, man.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 06:19
|
|
|
zoux posted:Not in this case. Her primary competitor isn't even a Democrat. He effectively is, though. He's not a Democrat in the same way that Putin isn't a dictator - there's a thin veneer that allows each to pretend they aren't, but in every meaningful way they are.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:why are you ranting about your experience in grad school like an unhinged lunatic when what is being discussed is undergrad Seriously. Look at that scrub who couldn't find someone to pay for him to get an aerospace engineering PhD.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
Lotka Volterra posted:I assume campus jobs won't/can't be made available to everyone at large state schools. Why? There's plenty of that kind of poo poo to go around. Various labs, libraries, etc., many of which can have extended hours if you assume a large student job need. Dorms need front desk staff as well. Also assume every single professor is given a minimum of three undergrad research assistants. Lab tech roles can exist for science and engineering majors as well. Work/study availability is unlikely to be a sticking point - colleges have no problem finding ways to use that kind of labor.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:I don't pay tuition and I get paid for my work. I don't know where you got that. My incorrect has linits in what they want to pay because of benefits, even if I get funding through AFOSR. Congrats, you're already working 10 hours a week, you are a success story for Hillary's plan.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
Condiv posted:if the 10 hours thing is a real requirement then it helps the rich and middle class disproportionately to the poor. disadvantaged groups like black people, native americans, etc have really high youth unemployment rates, and so they will not see the benefits of these policies as much as people that don't need help as much. plus, it turns employers into the gatekeepers of education, letting them be more able to abuse the students that must work for them in order to afford college. if we need to make kids have skin in the game, make their continued admission to the college more strictly contingent on their grades in college. students that aren't keeping a 2.5 gpa minimum get the boot quickly and have to wait for a bit before they can go back to university. Your stupid idea on GPAs is exactly how lovely law schools make sure that the students they give scholarships to lose those scholarships. And gee, I wonder which students have the hardest time maintaining a minimum GPA... And if schools receive funding to give those students 10 hour jobs (like, eg, existing federal work/study aid programs) they will fall over themselves to find ways to create those jobs. There won't be an employee gatekeeper effect.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:
Pretty sure you have it exactly opposite - public sector jobs with significant qualification requirements tend to pay less (including benefits), while public sector jobs that don't require degrees pay better, and overall public sector employees are compensated a bit better when corrected for age, education, and experience. http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-30-FedPay.pdf
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
IIRC, there's a list the Speaker submits that describes who assumes the position of acting Speaker in the event the current Speaker resigns, dies, etc. until such time as a new Speaker can be elected. Reports are that Boehner submitted such a list in January. Of course, McCarthy is probably the first name on it...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Where are you getting this from? House Rules. Look at 8(b)(3)(B). Forget where I saw it reported he'd submitted such a list though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:I've never really understood the point of "force politician to the left/right", because all you are accomplishing is getting them to say certain things during their campaign, it doesn't actually change anything they believe or care about, so I don't really see Bernie "forcing Hillary to the left" as accomplishing jack or poo poo when she can(and probably will) just ignore the left once she is in office, no matter how much Bernie "forces her to the left" while campaigning. You're wrong and dumb.. Politicians generally try to do what they said they'd try to do, so getting them to say they'll try to do something in and of itself is valuable in changing their behavior.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Something Else posted:How about a loving warning shot? Dogs are smart and all but I don't think they really comprehend the concept of a warning shot.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Joementum posted:That's a really, really bad idea. I don't know, I don't think you could top appointing him Ambassador to Libya.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I don't know, does working for Dan Snyder count? Calling PG County "third world" is a little harsh.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:One of the apocryphal notes post-Monicagate that I always loved was the fact that the Clinton deposition was carefully negotiated by Bill's end -- dead certain time limit, no chance for followups, etc. I mean, that kind of thing is pretty typical for depositions. On the other hand, usually the "if we aren't done at 7 hours exactly, I am taking my client and walking out of the room" is just a threat, not something you actually carry out. (Clinton's lawyers were pretty adept at using procedural techniques to their advantage - Nan Hunter wrote a decent book about it that we used in my civpro course called the Power of Procedure.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2015 08:12
|
|
|
Joementum posted:That seems completely plausible. An "I'm going to meet this person across town and need a security detail" kind of request. One other possibility: "We'd like a pair of jersey barriers for each of the north, south, and west entrances" is being counted as 6 requests.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Have Hillary's favorables among Democrats always been that high, or is that the result of the Benghazi hearing? They've varied a little but she's always been incredibly popular with Democrats. Typically 75-85% favorable in Iowa depending on the poll, so she's seeing some bump from the debate and/or hearing but it's not a huge sea change or out of her historical norm.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
duz posted:Those were copyright bills, this is different. This is the one that requires companies to share personal information with the government so they can find They're not always allowed to share personal information, and the bills don't require them to share any information at all. (There are weak scrubbing requirements for PII - inadequate ones, but the idea is not to share personal information if avoidable). CISA isn't a particularly good bill, but you're mischaracterizing it completely.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:51 |
|
|
mcmagic posted:So she's lying and is really going to advocate ending the death penalty when she's elected? Given that she's historically not been a particularly big fan of it, and was part of the impetus that resulted in SCOTUS cases ruling that execution of the mentally disabled is unconstitutional before Bill got into politics, she was almost certainly lying the last time she said she supported the death penalty ("unenthusiastically", fifteen years ago) and it's entirely possible she would work to limit or end it at the federal level, though I doubt it would be her highest priority.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2015 20:32
|
|