Football ...
Basketball ...
Baseball ...
Other Sports ...
Futbol ...
🤫995🤫 ...
Gambling ...
Movies & TV ...
Music ...
Hobbies ...
Lulz ...
Food & Travel
...
Daily Texan ...
Business & Markets ...
Cloak Room ...
Help ...
For Sale ...
Board Discussion ...
Advertise...
Tailgate Donations
-
Posts
3370 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by Tuco
-
Take the L, Pussy (Documenting the Coup Until Trump Concedes)
Tuco replied to Firemans4Horn's topic in Cloak Room
Frankly, a lot of the wordspeak stuff gets tedious to me, but I think you are underestimating the challenge here. "Latinx" is not about trying court the Latino vote. Just like using "work hours" instead of "man hours" is not about trying to court the union vote. Using "flight attendant", "server", and "actor" instead of "stewardess," "waitress," and "actress" is not a ploy to bring in people in those professions. The Democratic base is made up of many different segments, many of whom have come from demographics who have faced discrimination and exclusion, throughout history. When you have a segment of the base that is trying to push gender-neutral language, they aren't just going to stop with English. Why would they? Does that cause stress with the Latino community? Sure. Just like trying to switch to gender-neutral language with English terms has caused pushback with others. The black community isn't necessarily going to support Latino issues, the unions aren't necessarily going to respect LBGTQ issues, the LBGTQ community isn't going to understand what's going on with disability rights issues, etc, etc. So, that's a challenge. There are three steps I try to address that challenge: 1. Push the idea that this is a coalition, not a consensus. We aren't not going to get 50% of voters believing..truly believing..in the everything that any Democrat pushes. We can't lose feminists in order to make Latinos more comfortable. It's just not practical. 2. Ask people to prioritize what their issues are to them. It costs you nothing to have someone say "Latinx." What does the Republican agenda cost you? Frankly, if we have Latino voters voting R over "Latinx," they would have found a different reason to vote R. 3. Try to listen to your allies. It's likely you will not come to the same conclusions they did, but at least you can learn why it matters to them. If you have a better approach for holding a coalition together, I'm all ears. I guess you can just tell feminists that their issues don't matter and they should just focus on supporting Latinos. Let me know how that works out. (To me, the biggest weirdness I see are the liberal Natives. Half their effort is trying to push for progress, and half their efforts is desperately trying to preserve traditions, including traditional tribal power structures that tend to be very old man centric.) -
I concur that we aren't going to change the Senate, or the Electoral College for that matter. But appreciating the practical obstacles to that change and agreeing that the current situation makes sense are two vastly different things.
-
States, particularly Western states, are fairly arbitrary constructs of democracy. To prioritize those constructs over democracy itself is fucking stupid. California and Wyoming having the same power in the Senate is fucking stupid. Tradition should not trump logic. An appreciation of history does not excuse the acceptance of a bullshit situation. If there is any historical characteristic that Americans should embrace it's that history does not dictate the future. If it did, we'd still be English.
-
Ok. Vermont has a 1.4% black population. Wyoming is 1.3% black. Alaska is 3.7%. North Dakota is 3.4%. South Dakota is 2.3%. Those are the five smallest states by population. #6 Delaware - 23.2% black (the lone outlier) #7 Rhode Island: 6.2% black #8 Montana: 0.8% black #9 Maine: 1.2% black #10 New Hampshire: 1.8% black The US as a whole is 13.4% black. Obviously Donald Trump utilized white grievance as a campaign strategy. Less obviously, the Republican Party has been doing so for years. Do you think the small state advantage rewards that strategy, or hurts it? In our current system, the average white person has a greater political voice, because white people are more likely to live in the small states than black people. That was not the intent, but that is the reality. The small state advantage is bad. The idea that 800k people in Wyoming should have equal voice in the Senate as 39 million people in California is just fucking stupid. The fact that this advantage flows along racial lines should absolutely be part of the discussion. So, we aren't going to rewrite the Constitution. We know that. But let's stop pretending that 230 years ago a bunch of slave owners were able to form a government structure that would adequately deal with these inequities. They didn't. I do not find any nobility in trying to preserve whatever flawed vision they might have had when confronted with the completely undemocratic, and racially unjust system that actually evolved.
-
The biggest negative I would see is that it would shift more power to the political parties. Trying to get committee positions and bills prioritized is already a challenge. If you triple the House, then access becomes more valuable, and the parties gain more strength. But, they already have a ton of power, and while philosophically it would slant things their way, I don't believe it would make a practical difference. And maybe that would be offset by reducing financial leverage the parties have. (Larger districts = more money required to campaign = more party (and lobbyist) power.) So, yeah, I favor it. There are ways to get around the other issues. Unfortunately, I wonder how many Representatives would vote to reduce their power. Tripling the size of the House means reducing the amount of influence any individual Rep has by a third.
-
So, just another Thursday.
-
We're heading to Colorado for a little fall hiking. Everyone in my family is more or less aligned politically. Frankly, to me it's more annoying when they focus on the anti-Trump stuff, just because I already know it all and it's been beaten to death. But, yeah, Covid means that I plan on doing short, outside stops with my family. Saw my sis this weekend. I will try to get in others this week as the weather is decent.
-
Global pandemics are also bad for business. Trade wars are also bad for business. The concern with Trump wasn't that he wants to start a prolonged widespread war, it's that he is just so fucking stupid and devoid of any moral compass that he might. He's that idiot at a bar who thinks we should have nuked Mecca in response to 911.
-
Garage door company at 1 AM: “Dude, I don’t know how you got my home number, but I’m your accountant. Go to bed.”
-
Sure, the pandemic is killing 100s of thousands of Americans, but the real concern is the immigrants... So, I was laid off in May, hired by a different company in August. When filling out the I-9, there is apparently a requirement for in-person verification of the citizenship documents - drivers license, passport, etc.. But, because the whole in-person things means more people dying, the HHS provided a 60 day relief for the in-person requirement in March, and has renewed it 4 times. The last relief was in September, and it is now going to expire without any renewal. So, anyone who has been hired in the last 8 months, but didn't do the in person verification is required to schedule an in-person appointment to verify their documents. This, while the hospital capacity in my area is being overwhelmed. Fuck Trump, and fuck his shitty band of fucking racist assholes.
-
That is an excellent point. In their version of reality, it is a reasonable path forward. It really demonstrates the problem: BMX writes something on the internet, sounding somewhat authoritative and factual, with specific dates and the government organizations spelled correctly, and that's all it it takes to be credible. For many of these Trumpsters, there simply is no concept of what is realistic.
-
I think that was some expert trolling. But, as I have mentioned on other posts, it's really difficult to discern parody these days.
-
I was skimming the PA election code looking for something else and ran into where this is covered. You can challenge a mail-in ballot on the basis the voter died prior to election day and the ballot would get tossed. So, yeah, it is recognized as a legit possibility with a remedy already built in. Obviously AZ might be different, but I assume they also cover it. The other interesting thing I saw (in PA) was that every ballot you challenge, you pay a $10 deposit. If you win, or withdraw the challenge within six days of the election, you get it back. If you lose your challenge, you lose the money. How many votes is Trump down in PA?
-
Follow-up: it looks like 2100 ballots in Philly had ID issues as of yesterday. The SOS had tried to extend the deadline three days, so they would need to have been cured by today. The article does not mention if any had been cured on Tuesday or Wednesday, but those would have been tossed. link
-
Zero that had already been counted when Pa was called. This is not related to those delivered after Nov 3 and were ordered to be segregated. These are ballots that were sent in without proof of ID. If they don't have proof of ID, they aren't counted. But, for faulty ballots, there is a 6 day grace period where the voter can provide proof of id, which would allow them to be counted. The SOS must have extended that grace period, despite it being clearly written out in the statute. So, it would have affected the ability of anyone that hadn't cured their faulty ballots by Monday, but were planning on curing their ballots after Monday. In other words, not very many ballots. Keep in mind, Pa got called on Saturday.
-
If the Democrats can get enough Republicans to criticize the President, there is a decent chance Trump will attack Republicans, and his cultist dipshits will follow his lead. It's a long shot, but really the best shot of winning the Senate. But let's also talk about timing. The House isn't in session this week. They are next week. How long do you think it would take to get a subpoena issued? How long do you think a subpoena would take to play out in the courts? And are the Democrats going to just prosecute her, or are they going to go back and prosecute every Republican stooge who refused to answer a subpoena during the impeachment? Either way, it looks pretty fucking vindictive to start the "healing" process with a new administration.
-
The last couple of years, I was involved with the Nebraska Dem Party and met a couple from rural Nebraska who identified themselves as being from the Bull Moose faction of the Democratic Party. If nothing else, I think it is better marketing. It is near impossible to get many rural Nebraskans to consider voting for a Democrat. The platform above could play in rural communities, but not if it has a "D" associated with it. (Note that the platform does not contain the word "abortion" in it.)
-
I do too. It is, of course, completely contrary to the Republican rationalization when they torpedoed the Voting Rights Act. It was all about the states having unfettered the power to run their elections without federal intrusion. So, if they now want to discuss federal oversight of elections, I think it should be placed in the overall context of a governing principle rather than just whining like bitches because their guy lost.
-
I wouldn't think the work was consistent enough for a small firm to specialize in it. Having a slug of work come through for a frantic 1-2 months ever two years would be hard to staff for. With a big firm, you could have a few specialists that lead and direct more generic resources when you need it.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if it was related to the stuttering issue. I wouldn't be surprised if it was related to getting older. But, that doesn't mean his cognitive abilities have declined. You can have speech issues without having reasoning issues. Hell, stuttering is a speech issue, but is not related to overall cognitive issues. I'm less concerned that he is speaking in a smooth, flowing manner than I would be if he was suddenly confused on where he was or what he was talking about. He has spoken numerous times, at great lengths, without significant issues on that. To use speech as a proxy for thought process is fucking idiotic.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... COOKIE MONSTER!