Jump to content

pyrohornIII

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    4209
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by pyrohornIII

  1. They could be funding some research in the topic, have a clearinghouse to help the public understand what is coming along.   For starters.  

    At least in the workforce area.  The military stuff, the robotic soldiers and war machines we aren't going to hear about, but are already out there, and not just ours.  Think drones.

    Someone referenced off hand how this will affect capitalism.   And while it will save money, that won't do the shareholders much good if no one has income to buy their goods or services. 

    It's a natural progression we have done, from local merchants to big box, to corporations.  But even when you did that, there were still jobs for people.  They moved from manufacturing buggy whips to antennae.    But the more automation the less jobs for humans, which is what happened when you saw agriculture move into mechanization.  In about a decade or two, you had a lot of sharecroppers looking for new work.    Wars helped with that some, either in reducing the workforce or reducing the output of countries who were decimated.  Either of those meant more jobs here.   In fact, it can be argued that wars hastened the move to mechanized agriculture, because so many soldiers came off of farms.  

    But this is different.   And I think about it a lot, when it comes to helping my son decide career paths he can take.   Seems like a lot of paths will be drying up, or fiercely competitive.

    • Like 1
  2. To keep this topic alive without threadshitting on others. 

    It is where we are headed, not just in our job force, but also in our military.  This is what our government should be addressing, along with environment and other long range issues.  Since they won't educate us, then we need to do that for ourselves, and our kids/grandkids. 

    • Like 1
  3. 3 hours ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

    The only people who can be replaced with automation right now are high headcount/low skill (read: manual, no-thinking, repetitive) roles.

    Yeah, and they certainly don't need jobs, right?  The drive to cut overhead, to deliver the highest profit to the shareholder is costing this country.  Be it at the local grocery chain or big box store like Lowes or Walmart.  Not only is it costing us when it comes to service, it is also costing us when it comes to reducing the opportunities to introduce our kids into the workplace, to give them the chance to learn responsibility to a job, and the reward for having done that job well.   How many of us here worked jobs like that as youths or even college students? 

    It is not just the uneducated that are suffering from the reductions in jobs.  And it is moving upward, taking higher tech jobs.   It's a huge thing that no one is paying much attention to because it's a very slow process that is doing in our workforce.

  4. 9 minutes ago, Lhorn said:

    At some point Herman and Beck deserve to get some accolades for the improvement in Sams play and the offense overall. Don’t know how much Beck deserves but one thing is for certain, he’s ours for at least another year and likely longer.  As much as we’ve shit on these two the improvement is Sams play and the offense is almost best case scenario.  Still things to work on but they are getting it done much more than I had realistically hoped for.  Hand deserves a hand too 

    And Herman deserves credit for going out and bringing Hand in. 

  5. 1 hour ago, bolverk said:

    Unfortunately, given all the various choices for the pursuit of higher office, I think his best shot is to be selected as the eventual 2020 Democratic presidential candidate's veep, whoever that may be. He won't have broken his promise to not run for president; there's no clear statewide office for him to run for; it'd give him ample time to be with his kids (veep is selected relatively late in the campaign); and I honestly do believe he could swing some votes in favor of the head of the ticket putting Texas partially in play.

    This is my thinking as well.   The fact he has firmly said no is a strong factor, considering how much he wants people to believe he is good for his word. 

  6. On 11/9/2018 at 8:05 PM, SmokeyTheBear said:

    The ones I know tend to think of themselves as computer geniuses that will destroy our infrastructure and banking system, if we mess with Trump, their god.  They can do that without leaving mom's basement.

  7. 16 hours ago, Jack Straw said:

    Hmmmm, where are the Trump hacks and apologists? I’m sure they’re formulating what new dishonest statements about “the left” that they can throw up here to distract from and excuse away how disgraceful their leader and party are.  

    Still gloating on the Beto thread, I imagine.

    • Like 1
  8. 8 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    The Russians don’t want us in a significant armed conflict, they want us completely out of the Middle East and neutralized militarily so they can be more aggressive on the geopolitical battlefield. 

    There’s a reason the alt-right fucks are isolationists that only want to be cruel to people here.  

    I don’t think the Kremlin will be throwing Trump under the bus but they may squeeze him to do more crazy shit.  The concern I have is the relationships with our allies and trading partners.  Those fractures will take decades to repair.

    Yeah, I agree they would not want to go head to head against us.   I was thinking armed conflict as in another Crimea or Georgia situation where our allies would expect us to step up and Trump would be in a position to choose.  Kind of like the Syria thing.  I agree, they will continue to keep up the divisive strategies, but I am not sure they won't sell Trump down the river to keep emotions high.    Almost like a "the king is naked" moment where Russia starts pushing their propaganda against Trump reinforcing the left's stance against Trump.   That would lead to a showdown between the fringes for sure and maybe even the more central on either side. 

    The best thing for Russia is for us to be literally at each others' throats, ignoring the rest of the world.  I don't see how they are ever going to get their money out of trump now.   Realistically, unless he can run in 2020 successfully and recover the House, keep the Senate, he's a lame duck as far as Putin is concerned.   Better russian money would be what Hugo said, use him to further divide and isolate our country from the rest of the world, thus weakening it.

    • Like 1
  9. So I guess the question that raises in me is will Russia throw Trump to the wolves somehow, maybe by forcing him into some localized armed conflict that could bloom into something more significant?  Something so outrageous everyone would expect the US to counter, forcing Trump to waffle, thus brewing even more dissent in the US?  

    Just seems to me they bet a lot on Trump getting the sanctions lifted and now they aren't.   It wouldn't surprise me if they threw him under the bus in a way that causes even more discord here at home.

    Either way, the veil has been lifted, their long game using Trump has been outed.  Will be interesting to see their next move.  I just hope it won't be fatal to a lot of Americans. 

  10. Hey Hugo, repost here that article about the Russian response to the House going blue.   That had a whole lot of meat in it and I think it got overshadowed too easy in the Trump thread.  

    I am intrigued by what Russia will do next and we shouldn't lose sight of them. 

  11. 3 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    So a place where guys can fuck sex doll in a private room is insane while we allow XXX video arcades with gloryholes is a ok and legal 

    You're a big Cruz backer, right?  The same Ted Cruz that was behind this?

    Quote

    Ted Cruz’s War on Dildos: A Short Explainer

    Presidential candidate once argued against “right to stimulate one’s genitals”

    https://www.thewrap.com/ted-cruzs-war-on-dildos-a-short-explainer/

    So sex robots are ok, but dildos aren't right?  Or is this some sort of misogynistic measure to deprive women, but not men, of self pleasure devices?

  12. 4 hours ago, LowPressure said:

    Looks like Beto outspent him 2 to 1.

    Not to mention free MSM press & coverage.  The left threw the kitchen sink at Cruz...and he won.

     

    Ted Cruz (R)Incumbent

    $40,118,702 $33,896,025 $6,702,090 10/17/2018
    Beto O'Rourke (D) $69,099,803 $59,162,289 $10,336,214

    10/17/2018

     

    He spent an extra 30 mil overcoming the headstart Cruz had.  And nearly caught his sniveling ass.  So your point is not very strong.  Not to mention the fact that the Rs had to put a whole lot of resources saving Ted's butt that could have gone to other races. 

    4 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

    Ted Cruz has a nationally-recognized name. His name recognition in Texas must be as close to 100% as anyone's could be. He just ran a hard presidential primary in 2016, which he won in Texas. He is a Republican in a state that has not elected a statewide Democrat in 24 years.

    Beto O'Rourke had no recognition outside Texas, and basically none inside Texas. He's a Democrat in a state that hasn't elected a statewide Democrat in 24 years.

    This is an embarrassing result for Cruz and the Republicans at large. It's not a great one for O'Rourke and Dems, but Cruz should not win this race by fewer than 10 points.

     

    • Haha 1
  13. 41 minutes ago, Lobo said:

    Fun fact, in 2008 Noriega spent about $4.0mm to get about 3.4mm votes (IMO, the most successful D statewide run in the last 15 years)

    Robert O'Rourke spent about $70.0mm to get about 4.0mm votes.

    $66.0mm spent to get another 600,000 votes.  $110,000/vote.  

    Da fuh?  

    Math error aside, Cruz didn't spend a dime, huh?  No dark money ads or mailouts working in his favor?  

    An important part you leave out is the majority of Beto's money came from inside the state.  Texans funding their own choice for senate.  Cruz accepted much more out of state money.  If we were voting by Texans who supported their candidate with time and/or funding, Beto would win in a landslide. 

  14. 1 hour ago, InkaUtexas said:

    Same here, but every cycle there are "young voters"  

    Yea, but the young voters are replacing the old voters.  And it was the 65+ crowd that made up the red firewall for the most part.  My 16 yo son is already excited he can vote in 2020. 

    If they get a candidate who can relate to them like Beto, then I think they will turn out.  And I think they will find such a candidate to stand behind. 

    Another big thing I credit to the Beto effect is the Tex Dems are awake and engaged again.  Just in my little community, we are already talking about organizing now to help the effort next election.  The grassroots are already in place, if the Tex Dem Party can adjust to change and follow Beto's lead more. 

    What I saw though is the Dems have entirely different apps for phonebanking and canvassing that Beto used.  They need to settle on one and combine and clean up the data bases once the election data is collected.  If the state party was smart, they would get Beto to be an advisor to help them build a better machine. 

     

  15. He's been thinking about this for a while, apparently.

    Quote

    After losing House, Trump threatens Democrats with leak investigations

    President Trump threatened that if a Democrat-led House "[wastes] Taxpayer Money investigating us...we will likewise be forced to consider investigating them...at the Senate level" in a Wednesday morning tweet.

    "If the Democrats think they are going to waste Taxpayer Money investigating us at the House level, then we will likewise be forced to consider investigating them for all of the leaks of Classified Information, and much else, at the Senate level. Two can play that game!"

    The big picture: Axios' Jonathan Swan reported in August that House Democrats were preparing a wishlist of investigations they hoped to initiate if they won the majority, which House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi confirmed was coming in her post-midterms victory speech, promising to restore "the Constitution’s checks and balances to the Trump administration."

    He controls the Senate, what does he hope to achieve besides trying to update the rallying cry from "but her emails!" ? 

  16. 23 minutes ago, Js1 said:

    Old voted, young don't.

    White people (especially white women) continue to suckle at the GOP's tit for all eternity.

    I think the white women are leaving the big red tent. 

    Quote

    Not all of them have abandoned him, for sure. The angry old men are still there, screaming their insults at immigrants, the media and anyone else who isn’t an angry old man.

    But all those white women – the people he called a majority of women (because the rest of them don’t count to him) – they just ran for the doors that say Trexit.

    The exit polls gave Democrats a massive 21-point advantage among women, while Republicans scored just a two-point lead among men. White women split 50-48 for the anti-Trump movement known as Democrats. The only age group that Republicans won were 65 and older – and that was only by one point.

    Just two years ago, in those same exit polls, white women gave Trump a nine-point lead over the first woman to hold a major party’s presidential nomination. Married women were pretty divided in 2016, but leaned heavily towards Democrats on Tuesday.

    The 2018 election was a story of suburban white female flight away from Trump, shifting a Texas statewide race into nail-biting territory for the first time in more than two decades. You don’t need to be a political consultant to know what a competitive Texas means for the presidential contest that begins almost immediately.

     

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/07/trump-unchecked-power-end-midterms

  17. 3 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

    Have plenty of friends that could care less about the election, pretty indifferent, but after the Kavanaugh spectacle got tired of basically being called the party of rapists and womanizers.

    The attacks pissed them off enough to basically do a "I'll show you" response.   I strongly feel Beto would have squeaked by without the Kavanaugh shit show.

    The sad part of that is that Kavanaugh should have been thoroughly investigated not only on the assault accusations but also the financials.  He wasn't.  Thanks to Trump and Trump alone.  If a real investigation would have been conducted, things might have turned out different for BK and thus the senate races.  Whole lot of "squirrel" diversions went on in all that, while the major issues swept right by, like a sailboat in the dark. 

  18. 4 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

    It’s funny how the horrible candidate Cruz was able to outlast Jeb’s arsenal and media darlings like Rubio, Kasich, etc., in the GOP pres primary. He’s an utterly dispicable human being, but their base likes him.  They came out to vote for him in droves this year. 

    They came out to vote for the R behind his name, not him.

  19. 49 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

    never mind the fact that Beto has repeatedly stated that he he knows the importance of the fossil fuel industry in Texas. He wants to strengthen Texas as an energy leader, not weaken it (like Cruz and Trump have)

    He wants to keep the O&G but also start investing in renewables like solar, wind and tidal.  I have a hard time understanding why this is so bad for anyone.  It brings new jobs and money into Texas without killing off others.  We are not going to walk away from O&G tomorrow, we can't.   But it's a scare tactic used too often. 

     

    • Like 1
  20. 2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    There's a reason Texas has the lowest voter turnout in the country and it's not because the republicans aren't voting. 

    I didn't turn out for on a regular basis, especially in the last 2 decades.  Complacency and apathy were the result of feeling my vote didn't matter.  They were all politicians, they were all crooked, they were all in the pockets of the special interests and corporations.  Some just wore red ties, and other wore blue.  They all slung mud at each other, and all came across as disingenuous liars set only on obtaining office for their own interests, not mine.   I think more than anything, that last part is why Beto has stirred me.  He has espoused a message of unity, compromise to benefit everyone as much as possible.  He hasn't reverted to the scare tactics.  He wants Texas to lead in finding solutions, not cowering from the problems. 

    I too think Beto wins.  And if he doesn't, then at least he has reinvigorated those of us who felt passed by by legislators who paid us lip service, but were puppets for much larger, greedier interests.  

    I, like many of you, have donated both money and time to a candidate for the first time.  I see others rising up around me to do the same and feel maybe our vote does still count, it just needs leadership, organization and focus.  Not only Beto, but MJ, Gillum, Abrams and others are standing up and running.  We aren't beaten down into submission by the lobbyists, we are rising up and retaking our system. 

    Maybe a new party arises from this, maybe on old one is rebuilt to be better.  Either way there has been an awakening and things are going to change.  In the state of Texas the Dem system needs to be rebuilt, new blood needs to bring new fresh ideas and tactics.  For a long time the Dem party here has basically given up, put placeholders in for statewide offices.  But that is going to change. 

    The Dems of Texas need to use this campaign by Beto to re-energize.  To rebuild for the future.  Truly grass roots.  Like Brisket thinks, maybe it is too late, but I hope it is not.  

     

    • Like 6
  21. 7 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

    No but my dad is unfortunately a scared old retired man.

    He probably thinks Antifa is creeping around the golf course behind his house.

    He lives in a gated golf course neighborhood yet keeps a loaded giant handgun in his bedside table and one in the remote control compartment in his fancy recliner.

    I think he should be proud to have raised a daughter who can think and speak for themselves.  I mean if that isn't what we are here for, to raise children that are better people than we are, then what?   I think for a lot of them it gets twisted when the definition of quality of life comes in.  

    It's pretty incredible how many on our board and how many I have met door knocking are in your shoes.  Children of very scared old white people who vote R, but they themselves counter their parents by being more progressive.  Prone to seek more than one viewpoint of an argument. 

    For years the topic of the boob tube, the dumbing down of America by what has come out of the TV has been floated.  I think this is an example of the birds coming home to roost.   That generation turns to the TV for entertainment and information.  Fox News is the new Walter Cronkite to them.   Like Walter, they speak the unvarnished truth.  There is no reason to go elsewhere for information. 

    Their world is defined by what they see on TV, while the world of their offspring is broader thanks to the internet.   Yes, some of the olds use the internet, but  really only to seek or spread reinforcement for what they see on TV. 

    The internet has made a difference to how we gather and disseminate information.  A lot of what we are seeing now, this purported blue wave, the standing up to Trump, et al, would not be happening without it.  Hopefully it can continue to be free range long enough to allow us a chance to protect it from being turned into the same message control system TV has become. 

    TL;DR:  He should be proud of you and yours.  TV is the debil.  Internet might save us.

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...