|
vyelkin posted:lmao the Guardian has an article exploring how Trump is causing wider divisions in voting intention among married people than ever before, and includes gems like this: There's going to be soooooo many divorces next year. Shimrra Jamaane posted:I wonder how many married women feel compelled to say they support Trump when they do a phone poll since people might be listening but privately in the voting booth they're gonna vote Clinton. Not enough to matter, but I hope this becomes some point that continuously gets brought up on CNN panels.
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Personally, I'm glad she isn't up ten points on him nationally. As much as I want her to completely destroy him and the racist wave he's riding on election day, I also don't want casual Democrats to get comfortable with the idea of Trump losing and not bother voting. How many times do we have to say that this won't happen? People like to vote for winners. If anything, her being up by 10 depresses Trump's turnout as people don't want to expend effort for someone who they know is gonna lose.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Iowa is 6 electoral votes, why do you keep repeating this as if it matters?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Sure, that is accurate for people that like voting. For people that don't care about voting and only get involved when they think it matters a close race works for them. She can run away with the numbers after the debates, I'd rather it stay close until then to *maybe* slow down the TRUMP COMEBACK OMG narrative that the press is ready to use at the end of the month. And that's ignoring fundraising, although funding doesn't seem to be an issue this year. People donate to candidates that they think need it, not people that're walking away with the election.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
Anyway speaking of dead white people, Maricopa County is left with one insurer on its insurance exchange because the second pulled out because they couldn't raise their rates 120%. 14 of 15 AZ counties will have one insurer and one county will have 0. Obamacare is great.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Which doesn't change the fact that Bernie primarily targeted white progressives. The only evidence of that changing is post-Super Tuesday, and even then it was too little too late. Yeah getting Killer Mike on your side isn't going to magically get black people to vote for you. There's about as minorities on stage as their are in the crowd at most Run The Jewels concerts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
http://www.richmond.com/opinion/our-opinion/article_b79cc2b6-8ed5-532c-92eb-4a37e779c433.html The Richmond Times Dispatch, who has endorsed a Republican in every Presidential election for the the past 30+ years, takes the "strong and principled" stance and endorsed Gary Johnson.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
so they endorsed the only Republican candidate this cycle, good for them
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Xae posted:They were saying it about computers programming themselves. Things aren't automatically untrue now just because they were untrue in the past. I wasn't old enough in the 1980s to remember if people were breathlessly excited for self-driving cars at the time, but it doesn't really matter since the level of technological development and investment in the field is literally orders of magnitude higher today than it was then. NHTSA level 3 autonomous vehicles are going to be available for purchase within a few years and there's basically no question at this point that level 4 vehicles will be on the road within a decade or two. It's actually happening this time, regardless of what people might have said in the past. The same goes for a lot of forms of automation that were just speculation a few decades ago.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Anyway speaking of dead white people, Maricopa County is left with one insurer on its insurance exchange because the second pulled out because they couldn't raise their rates 120%. 14 of 15 AZ counties will have one insurer and one county will have 0. Obamacare is great. To be clear there's only one on the exchange, you can still get whatever through work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
AMorePerfctGoonion posted:White rage on the surface and white fear behind it; they have a far too overactive amygdala. The authoritarian personality thread went more into this. I feel like it's worth pointing out that by this metric Clinton was the "white rage" candidate in 2008 since she was getting absolutely smoked in the black vote and among black southerners and relied on the same dynamic to stay in the race: courting states with higher percentages of white people and midwestern/white rural primaries. I'm also not sure I buy this "Bernie didn't court the black vote" thing, he campaigned hard in states like South Carolina and only stopped when polling showed he wasn't making any headway a few days before the primary, his reliance on whiter states, like Clinton in '08, was a survival strategy from a losing campaign that wasn't going to win going head to head for black voters. This was even the same dynamic of 2008, only Clinton was harnessing white resentment against Obama, often far more stridently than Sanders ever did. There was even the same reveal that a small minority were misguided racist weirdos, HillaryIs44, PUMA's, all that stuff. A number of Clinton's attacks on Obama were perceived as racially insensitive, such as her insistence on an "experience" argument when she had been serving in elected office for less time than Obama, or her argument to Fox News that it was Johnson that was ultimately responsible for the Civil Rights act and making MLK's dream a reality, Clinton's "fairy-tale" thing, the nastier statements of surrogates (Ferraro etc), and Clinton's strategy of condescension in general. Her campaign wound up using some dog whistle politics, and there were some controversial memos leaked that had unsavory strategy stuff in them about trying to harness white mistrust of Obama. I think if you're being honest, she ran a far more dog-whistley, white-racism harnessing campaign than Sanders, so it's a bit much to have people cluck in 2016 about how Clinton's authenticity with black people was just too much for the race-baiting Sanders. Clinton used white resentment already when she was losing in '08, the reason she didn't in 2016 is at least in part because she didn't have to, but pretending that's solely a principled stance runs pretty contrary to history.  (edited to come down slightly less hard on Clinton, I'm not trying to make this an attack on Clinton, just a reality check) Periodiko fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Sep 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
cargo cult posted:because people are talking about landslides for some reason and Obama won it handily twice and also its trump Did they provide any information about why he's up?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Things aren't automatically untrue now just because they were untrue in the past. I wasn't old enough in the 1980s to remember if people were breathlessly excited for self-driving cars at the time, but it doesn't really matter since the level of technological development and investment in the field is literally orders of magnitude higher today than it was then. NHTSA level 3 autonomous vehicles are going to be available for purchase within a few years and there's basically no question at this point that level 4 vehicles will be on the road within a decade or two. Google's own engineers have said that those are 30 years away, it's not nearly as guaranteed as you want to make it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Google's own engineers have said that those are 30 years away, it's not nearly as guaranteed as you want to make it. Google is basically the only one saying this any more. Actual car manufacturers seem pretty confident that we're a decade or two away, at most. And they're the ones investing more heavily at this point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:I agree. Once all middle-aged white people die off the country will fix itself.  Hey, I'm one of the good ones!
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Google is basically the only one saying this any more. Actual car manufacturers seem pretty confident that we're a decade or two away, at most. And they're the ones investing more heavily at this point. The Volvo guy just got mad at US roads because the cars relied on legible road markings. That's a pretty big flaw. e: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-autonomous-infrastructure-insig-idUSKCN0WX131 quote:Volvo's North American CEO, Lex Kerssemakers, lost his cool as the automaker's semi-autonomous prototype sporadically refused to drive itself during a press event at the Los Angeles Auto Show.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The Volvo guy just got mad at US roads because the cars relied on legible road markings. That's a pretty big flaw. You get that I didn't say that fully autonomous cars were coming out tomorrow, right? poo poo infrastructure is a problem that will absolutely have to be dealt with, but I have no idea why you think it means that the technology will just vanish or stop being developed. The point is that practically every automaker has dug in their heels on this being the major selling point for their cars in the coming years. That's a much different situation from a few university and government pilot projects in the 80s.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Google is basically the only one saying this any more. Actual car manufacturers seem pretty confident that we're a decade or two away, at most. And they're the ones investing more heavily at this point. They've been saying we're a decade away for 30 years. Self-Driving cars aren't going to end up being the next Fusion (always 25 years away), but even if a self-driving car came out tomorrow it would take 10-20 years for the fleet on the road to take over. Like every other car feature it will start with high end luxury cars and gradually work its way down main stream models. If I had to ballpark it I would say 5-10 years for a "real" self driving car, 5-15 to make them main stream and another 10-25 to completely replace the fleet. So yeah, some time in the next 20-50 years it'll happen. 20-50 years is a long time. People shouldn't be banking on this happening in the near future.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:You get that I didn't say that fully autonomous cars were coming out tomorrow, right? The point is that true autonomy is Very Very Hard so what will most likely happen is that some feature will be perfected in a very niche scenario (like the parallel parking assist that already exists) and companies will bill that as "autonomous driving". Especially since right now autonomous driving basically relies on "oh hey you drove this once before, remember there's a pothole at 9th and Avery". It's not really proactive. Xae posted:Like every other car feature it will start with high end luxury cars and gradually work its way down main stream models. Not even, honestly. There are several drive-assist features that have been in luxury cars for forever and still haven't made their way down to base models. You are right though that even if the government mandated it tomorrow it'd take 10-20 years to actually replace non-autonomous cars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Not even, honestly. There are several drive-assist features that have been in luxury cars for forever and still haven't made their way down to base models. You are right though that even if the government mandated it tomorrow it'd take 10-20 years to actually replace non-autonomous cars. Yeah, Tesla learned the hard way that how a select group of people using something is very different from the general public. Trained people who oversee the Xae fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Sep 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Anyway speaking of dead white people, Maricopa County is left with one insurer on its insurance exchange because the second pulled out because they couldn't raise their rates 120%. 14 of 15 AZ counties will have one insurer and one county will have 0. Obamacare is great. The republican voting block there is on Medicare so why should they give a poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:The republican voting block there is on Medicare so why should they give a poo poo? Because IT'S A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT'S THING THAT'S FAILING, that's why.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Hillary issues an executive order for Medicare to accept patients who can never comply with the ACA mandate due to the pullouts. The newly liberal Supreme Court upholds this decision 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
BiohazrD posted:Hillary issues an executive order for Medicare to accept patients who can never comply with the ACA mandate due to the pullouts. The newly liberal Supreme Court upholds this decision In a 4-4 decision, wait
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:I feel like it's worth pointing out that by this metric Clinton was the "white rage" candidate in 2008 since she was getting absolutely smoked in the black vote and among black southerners and relied on the same dynamic to stay in the race: courting states with higher percentages of white people and midwestern/white rural primaries. I'm also not sure I buy this "Bernie didn't court the black vote" thing, he campaigned hard in states like South Carolina and only stopped when polling showed he wasn't making any headway a few days before the primary, his reliance on whiter states, like Clinton in '08, was a survival strategy from a losing campaign that wasn't going to win going head to head for black voters. It's funny to look at how Hillary was THE CANDIDATE OF APPALACHIA! in the 2008 primaries and whomped Obama by ridiculous margins in places like West Virginia but in 2016 those same people were against her. Granted she did have some key gaffes like the "putting coal miners out of business" one, but I can't help thinking how not having a black dude running against her seems to be a significant element in this. I have tried like a maniac to find the image from the 2008 WV primary with the toothless old WV ladies at a Hillary rally, one holding up a "NO HUSSIEN" sign but alas I can't find it anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:In a 4-4 decision, If they don't keep the senate, hell even if they do it would be hard as poo poo to justify holding on to a justice for 2 years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:I agree. Once all middle-aged white people die off the country will fix itself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
I didn't have too much of an issue with Hillary in 08, Bill was on some fuckshit though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:It's funny to look at how Hillary was THE CANDIDATE OF APPALACHIA! in the 2008 primaries and whomped Obama by ridiculous margins in places like West Virginia but in 2016 those same people were against her. Granted she did have some key gaffes like the "putting coal miners out of business" one, but I can't help thinking how not having a black dude running against her seems to be a significant element in this. Were you thinking of this: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/cnuv8c/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-indecision-2008---west-virginia ?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
Dexo posted:If they don't keep the senate, hell even if they do it would be hard as poo poo to justify holding on to a justice for 2 years. Like that's ever stopped them before.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Dexo posted:If they don't keep the senate, hell even if they do it would be hard as poo poo to justify holding on to a justice for 2 years. Why justify anything? Quite a lot of the government works on precedent, not law. Legally as I understand it a hostile senate can stall forever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:Why justify anything? Pretty much. All the checks and balances built into the US government are negatory- one branch can stop the other from doing something but there's no way to force it to move within its exclusive area of responsibility. This is on some level deliberate as the founders definitely preferred a paralyzed government to a runaway abusive one, but they don't seem to have realized that decorum and respect could ever break down so completely and that voters would choose not to punish it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:such as her insistence on an "experience" argument when she had been serving in elected office for less time than Obama, This is kind of dumb. Obama had only been a US Senator for two years, she had been a US Senator since 2000. If you want to count his time has a pee-wee league state senator in Illinois, fine. But given her outsized role in healthcare and education policy in her husband's administration, you should count that too. Also that she'd been involved in elective politics since the loving 70's.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:Why justify anything? With control of the senate, we can nuke the filibuster. There's no constitutional requirement for it. And if they continue to stall on it, we will.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:Were you thinking of this: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/cnuv8c/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-indecision-2008---west-virginia ? That sums up the situation well but there was a specific photo from that time that crystallized the whole thing even more succinctly. It's amazing to me how stuff like that can just disappear from Google Image Search.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:It's funny to look at how Hillary was THE CANDIDATE OF APPALACHIA! in the 2008 primaries and whomped Obama by ridiculous margins in places like West Virginia but in 2016 those same people were against her. Granted she did have some key gaffes like the "putting coal miners out of business" one, but I can't help thinking how not having a black dude running against her seems to be a significant element in this. Bernie won WV because he was a White Dude. Hillary won WV by being a White Woman. In the same election that Socialist Bernie Sanders won the Dem Primary, a billionaire coal baron won the Dem governor primary against a liberal who endorsed Bernie, and a dumbshit corporatist Republican won the state Supreme Court race handily. But let me tell you about how it had everything to do with Hillary's coal plans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
Dr.Zeppelin posted:What's this fantasy world you live in where the media is going to do that? If anything, him attacking them just makes them more desperate to please him. Here's some NYT reporting on why Hillary is bad while they continue not giving a poo poo that Trump's foundation more or less bribed multiple AGs into not investigating his scam university: Even if the CF were a pay-for-play scheme the money was going to charity. Funneling money to charity is the absolute least evil pay-for-play scheme possible. That the donors didn't get the access they sought is even richer. If Clinton took advantage of anyone, it was the donors. edit: if it wasn't clear, I'm agreeing that the NY Times is doing a lovely job reporting this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
In other news: Republicans totally care about the military. They want only the best equipment for the best soldiers in the best country. https://twitter.com/tomgara/status/772132400092553216
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Bernie won WV because he was a White Dude. Hillary won WV by being a White Woman. also weren't something like 39% of sanders' voters saying that they'd vote for trump over him in the general
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
computer parts posted:The point is that true autonomy is Very Very Hard so what will most likely happen is that some feature will be perfected in a very niche scenario (like the parallel parking assist that already exists) and companies will bill that as "autonomous driving". Maybe, but the companies that are making these claims aren't really using weasel words to do so: Ford plans self-driving car for ride share fleets in 2021 quote:Ford Motor Co plans to offer a fully automated driverless vehicle for commercial ride-sharing in 2021, the automaker announced Tuesday, expanding its efforts in driverless cars and ride sharing - two areas where rivals have already made inroads. Most automakers seem to think that fully autonomous vehicles are going to be on the roads within 4-5 years and readily available before 2030. That's pretty near term.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 18:24
|
|