|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: The political junkie POTUS prediction thread
|
GoodCatholicLad
Shipmate
# 9231
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
quote:
Originally posted by GoodCatholicLad:
... Newsweek Magazine, ... I wouldn't consider any of those conservative.
Good Lord. One of our professors brought in a copy of Newsweek which he picked up on a 'plane, principally so we could have a laugh at it. I don't think I've ever seen so much right-wingery in print!
Oh yeah and I forgot to mention the left dominates
colleges and universities also! LOL If Newsweek is considered right wing then the prof is <---------------
The only national news magazines I like are The Atlantic Monthly which is not too left or right ie it's not dogmatic and The Economist but I wish it had bylines for the articles.
--------------------
All you have is right now.
Posts: 1234 | From: San Francisco California | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
Let's see. If people who spend their entire lives looking for the truth - university professors and journalists - are prone to a left-wing point of view, then perhaps it is not bias, but simply the truth.
As Stephen Colbert says "Reality has a well-known liberal bias".
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
I like the first post in this thread.
quote:
Clinton/Obama lose by two percentage points to Guiliani/Huckabee.
Guiliani's proven administrative prowess wins him the nomination and Huckabee's appeal to southern/conservative voters wins him the south and rural areas generally.
Clinton's savvy and conciliatory choice of Obama is not enough to overcome the baggage Bill has saddled her with, and in the privacy of the voting booth not enough people pull the lever for her.
What a difference 3 months make.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
Let's see. If people who spend their entire lives looking for the truth - university professors and journalists - are prone to a left-wing point of view, then perhaps it is not bias, but simply the truth.
As Stephen Colbert says "Reality has a well-known liberal bias".
Well, who said tat professors and journalists look for the truth? To me that start out with an agenda and bend the "truth" to fit.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
agrgurich
Shipmate
# 5724
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
Let's see. If people who spend their entire lives looking for the truth - university professors and journalists - are prone to a left-wing point of view, then perhaps it is not bias, but simply the truth.
As Stephen Colbert says "Reality has a well-known liberal bias".
You are assuming (A) that they're looking for truth(rather than confirmation of their biases) & (B) that they find it. Both of those things may be untrue. I could quote Pontius Pilate here, but I don't think I need to. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Life is a comedy to those who think & a tragedy to those who feel.-Horace Walpole
AJG
Posts: 4478 | From: Michigan's Copper Country | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
What a difference 3 months make.
Well, I could still be batting .750. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
McCain will need someone with similar credentials to Huckabee in order to appeal to southern conservatives. Obama doesn't have this wrapped up yet although I don't think anyone predicted he could do what he's done, and it could be his success reinforces my suggestion that Hillary is lugging some serious baggage.
And at least I know how to spell Giuliani now... ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
If I grant that facts are irrelvant to bias, the whole notion of bias becomes purely a whiff in the nostrils of people with an agenda. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "how the facts are presented." Reportage is pretty formulaic. There is some judgment from editors about what gets covered, and then there are facts that get revealed and presented in the reports.
Well, I don't think I said that facts are irrelevant to bias. I think I was debating with you whether fact-checking was the way to identify bias (which was your position).
Getting facts wrong is sloppy reporting. It can also be an element of bias or a lazy way to achieve it: be sloppy and get your message over; be accurate and your message may not fly at all. However, in itself sloppy reporting wouldn't indicate bias. Omitting certain facts may signify the nature of your bias or perhaps embellishing them slightly. But I think the language surrounding what facts do appear in an article or item are the better indicator of bias.
A very simplistic, and probably somewhat silly, example would be a report of today's weather here in little England (since I'm English, I may as well talk about the weather!). Here are some facts about the weather here today. We experienced rain, wind, hail and snow. I could leave it at that, except that we also had spells of quite glorious sunshine. Here are two ways of presenting a weather story.
Ignore the skeptics! Global warming is happening now! Storms are battering Britain yet again! More and more people are asking how we are going to cope. We need to learn fast because things are not going to get any better. In fact, a report out this week says that it's all going to get much, much worse ...
Things got a little breezy in the north west of England today. Amidst the odd flurry of snow, a sprinkling of rain and zing of a hailstone or two, the sun did manage to shine, which was helpful to those of us rushing back to work after hunting out the last of the sales during lunch break ...
Granted, they're both totally daft, but I thought the least worst way to explain what I mean by 'how facts are presented' is by, well, presenting the facts in different ways!
I agree that journalism can be formulaic, but the formula tends to be set by the media organisation employing the journalist. The formula will include how to present the facts. Bias is everywhere and it isn't primarily to do with the facts; it's more to do with what surrounds the facts: the language, the tone, the implications (or implicatures, if you want to get technical), the style, etc.
FWIW: while I know of the Cato Institute, I've no idea what the 'metric' is of which you speak. I just picked up on your comment about bias, so I'm sorry if I've missed some earlier reference (keeping up with this thread has been fascinating but sometimes a bit challenging!). My own observations on bias in the media come from my studies at university (stylistics as the core subject in an English degree).
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
Let's see. If people who spend their entire lives looking for the truth - university professors and journalists - are prone to a left-wing point of view, then perhaps it is not bias, but simply the truth.
As Stephen Colbert says "Reality has a well-known liberal bias".
Agreed.... If you're convinced that the vast majority of the academic and journalistic establishment has a "liberal bias", maybe it's time to consider the possibility that you're the one who is out of touch with reality.
[ 01. February 2008, 19:03: Message edited by: Living in Gin ]
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
It was more of a joke, but the point is that both the explanations of 'bias' and 'truth' are consistent with the data.
Actually, you should quote Pontius Pilate here. Because before anyone can talk about bias, they have to talk about what it is to be accurate. This is a clear failing of all of the so-called studies of bias in the media.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
Coulter wants Clinton over McCain
So what do people think? Does this change anything? Does Ann Coulter have any real political clout?
Edited to add: I've seen some people on livejournal who say this has decided their primary votes in favor of Obama now.
[ 01. February 2008, 19:07: Message edited by: Nicolemrw ]
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
No. She is the political equivalent of a circus geek.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by nicolemrw
So what do people think? Does this change anything? Does Ann Coulter have any real political clout?
[/b]No, and no. To compare her to a sideshow act at a Barnum and Bailey freak show would elevate her far above her station in the American political scene.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
So what do people think? Does this change anything? Does Ann Coulter have any real political clout?
I can't figure out what she's trying to accomplish (selling books?) given she's unlikely to convince any 'true' conservatives to pull the lever for Clinton or Obama over McCain come next November.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Me neither. That woman's got more hair that wit.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by 206:
I can't figure out what she's trying to accomplish (selling books?)
Whenever has she done anything else? Media whore does not begin to describe it.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580
|
Posted
I know someone who worships at the altar of Ann Coulter - go figure.
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GoodCatholicLad:
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
quote:
Originally posted by GoodCatholicLad:
... Newsweek Magazine, ... I wouldn't consider any of those conservative.
Good Lord. One of our professors brought in a copy of Newsweek which he picked up on a 'plane, principally so we could have a laugh at it. I don't think I've ever seen so much right-wingery in print!
Oh yeah and I forgot to mention the left dominates
colleges and universities also! LOL If Newsweek is considered right wing then the prof is <---------------
The only national news magazines I like are The Atlantic Monthly which is not too left or right ie it's not dogmatic and The Economist but I wish it had bylines for the articles.
Hey, we're just humble scientists here! I should add that no-one in the department departed from his view on this matter... as I recall, the headline ran something like Global warming - How to Cash In...
Though you are quite right that the Left dominates our department, including one professor who is the grandson of a local leader of the Communist Party.
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
I was wondering if maybe her aim was what she does seem to have accomplished, getting (some at least) Democrats to vote for Obama over Clinton simply on the theory "if Coulter likes her there must be something wrong with her", because maybe she thinks Clinton has a better chance of winning in November than Obama does?
She does seem to me to be devious enough to think that way.
Or am I giving her credit for to much understanding and intelligence?
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
She does seem to me to be devious enough to think that way.
Or am I giving her credit for to much understanding and intelligence?
It's possible but keep in mind she's making a very comfortable living riling the rank and file.
Here we all are posting for free and there she is.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
While, Ann does go too far from time to time, I generally find her funny. But then I'm not a liberal. I saw her and heard her say that she'd vote for Hillary. I thought it very funny.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
agrgurich
Shipmate
# 5724
|
Posted
If I were McCain I'd be pleased that Ann Coulter came out against me. For every vote I lose, I'll gain ten. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
Life is a comedy to those who think & a tragedy to those who feel.-Horace Walpole
AJG
Posts: 4478 | From: Michigan's Copper Country | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
Agreed... The only people to gain anything by Coulter's "endorsement" are McCain and Obama.
I've liked Obama all along, and the more I see right-wing nutjobs frothing at the mouth over McCain, the more I like him, too.
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
While, Ann does go too far from time to time, I generally find her funny. But then I'm not a liberal. I saw her and heard her say that she'd vote for Hillary. I thought it very funny.
I have very conservative friends who find her snide
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RadicalWhig
Shipmate
# 13190
|
Posted
Does anyone here from outside the US find the whole idea of Primary elections strange? As far as I know Primary elections are very rare in other Western democracies (they have been half-heartedly tried in Italy and Israel, I believe, but without much uptake). Do you think we (other Western countries) would benefit from Primary elections? Or is it enough to have a choice between parties, without having to choose candidates within parties? Is it possible, or practicable, to combine primaries with a Parliamentary system, do you think? How about a Primary to select the next leader (and therefore the Prime Ministerial "candidate") of the Tories and the LibDems ahead of the next UK general election? Would it improve the state of our failing (or so many believe) democracy?
--------------------
Radical Whiggery for Beginners: "Trampling on the Common Prayer Book, talking against the Scriptures, commending Commonwealths, justifying the murder of King Charles I, railing against priests in general." (Sir Arthur Charlett on John Toland, 1695)
Posts: 3193 | From: Scotland | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
In other countries, how are the decisions made as to who gets to run?
IIRC, before we had primaries, it was more common to have specific party elites gather together to pick the candidates rather than throwing a primary election.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
Let's see. If people who spend their entire lives looking for the truth - university professors and journalists - are prone to a left-wing point of view, then perhaps it is not bias, but simply the truth.
As Stephen Colbert says "Reality has a well-known liberal bias".
Not even close. First, if we are talking economic questions about taxation, spending etc then academic economists have a strong right wing bias; they may not like the Republican Party for other reasons (and after several years of GWB one cannot blame them) but they are generally against big government, more strongly even than the 'Publicans. OK, the average arts professor may disagree, but if Arts profs disagreed with the science establishment over whether, say, global warming was occurring, I wouldn't side with the Arts profs, and if they disagreed with with the economists on economic questions I wouldn't agree with them either, for much the same reasons. Very clever people commenting on something totally outside teir area of expertise does not make for good policy.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
Let's see. If people who spend their entire lives looking for the truth - university professors and journalists - are prone to a left-wing point of view, then perhaps it is not bias, but simply the truth.
As Stephen Colbert says "Reality has a well-known liberal bias".
Not even close. First, if we are talking economic questions about taxation, spending etc then academic economists have a strong right wing bias; they may not like the Republican Party for other reasons (and after several years of GWB one cannot blame them) but they are generally against big government, more strongly even than the 'Publicans. OK, the average arts professor may disagree, but if Arts profs disagreed with the science establishment over whether, say, global warming was occurring, I wouldn't side with the Arts profs, and if they disagreed with with the economists on economic questions I wouldn't agree with them either, for much the same reasons. Very clever people commenting on something totally outside their area of expertise does not make for good policy, especially when it disagrees radically with very clever people commenting on their area of expertise.
Second, I have observed a strong tendency among academics to breathe in whatever political views were fashionable among young people way back when they were undergraduates, and then essentially hold those views uncritically for the remainder of their careers. Talk to an aging professor and it is not uncommon to find the sort of warmed over Marxism common among campus radicals in the '60s. Most of us, when we leave uni, have to grow up, and are, in someone or other's famous phrase, "mugged by reality". Our interaction with life and our changing circumstances forces us to re examine our previous beliefs; academics however have an awful habit of regurgitating whatever they picked up as 19 year olds, and thinking it qualifies as an intelligent opinion (or the intelligent opinion) even after it has been disproved in both theory and practice many times since.
Third, academia in social sciences is not, for the most part, about unbiased seeking for the truth. It is about trying to demonstrate how clever and knowledgeable you are, and being able to come up with all kinds of bizarre schemes and opinions which will never be put into practice. There is no feedback mechanism, no method of determining who is correct or incorrect, plausible or implausible. Promotion depends not, as it does wit, say, a business leader, on being able to implement schemes which are successful, but on being able to say something original and clever enough to get yourself noticed and published.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amazing Grace
High Church Protestant
# 95
|
Posted
Folks - I'd start the "media slant/bias" thread myself, but since I'm not particularly interested in discussing it on the Ship (I'm here because this is a thread for talking about the elections), I don't know a good way to phrase the OP.
I'll do it if someone gives me good suggestions, but in the meantime, could y'all please stop taking this one off on a big, heat-filled tangent?
Back on topic - can someone in my state (oh hai thar Miss Ruth) tell me if we have gone to proportional instead of winner take all? I must have been not paying attention when that was announced. "The California Report" tonight seems to indicate that both parties are doing proportional and it is causing some Strange Strategy in campaigning.
In other news, I am not answering the land line until Wednesday. At least today the calls had something on the other end instead of white noise. Must call ROV and see how to get my number off the books.
Charlotte
--------------------
WTFWED? "Remember to always be yourself, unless you suck" - the Gator
Memory Eternal! Sheep 3, Phil the Wise Guy, and Jesus' Evil Twin in the SoF Nativity Play
Posts: 6593 | From: Sittin' by the dock of the [SF] bay | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Shepard Fairey, street artist extraordinaire, did Obama.
Killer, and I don't even like Obama
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by 206:
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
So what do people think? Does this change anything? Does Ann Coulter have any real political clout?
I can't figure out what she's trying to accomplish (selling books?) given she's unlikely to convince any 'true' conservatives to pull the lever for Clinton or Obama over McCain come next November.
E.J. Dionne,in his column today, wrote:
quote:
Some on the right feel it would be les damaging to their cause to lose the 2008 election with the Republican-conservative alliance intact than to win with John McCain.
If McCain wins, it would make the Republican party safe for moderates again. For extremist kooks like Coulter, losing the party's right-wing purity would be worse than losing the White House.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
beza
Shipmate
# 10581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
Does anyone here from outside the US find the whole idea of Primary elections strange? As far as I know Primary elections are very rare in other Western democracies (they have been half-heartedly tried in Italy and Israel, I believe, but without much uptake). Do you think we (other Western countries) would benefit from Primary elections? Or is it enough to have a choice between parties, without having to choose candidates within parties? Is it possible, or practicable, to combine primaries with a Parliamentary system, do you think? How about a Primary to select the next leader (and therefore the Prime Ministerial "candidate") of the Tories and the LibDems ahead of the next UK general election? Would it improve the state of our failing (or so many believe) democracy?
The Tory Party in the UK has piloted open primaries in a few places to choose their candidates where any registered voters can be involved, not just party members. I don't know whether they went well or not.
I suspect part of the problem in the UK is that you may get activists swamping another party's open primary and picking a unelectable right wing/leftwing nutjob (or in the case of the Lib Dems a centrist nutjob, and there are plenty of those, too).
We Brits can be very snooty about the perceived lack of sophistication in American politics, but the fact you don't have these kind of en masse shenanigans there (I know individuals might vote for their opponent's worst option), shows a really mature democracy.
[ 02. February 2008, 09:12: Message edited by: beza ]
Posts: 510 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
Does anyone here from outside the US find the whole idea of Primary elections strange?
Not strange, but they do look a bit unfair. I think this was referred to earlier in the thread, but it seems to me that just a handful of states actually get to enjoy the full selection of choices on offer. Even with Super Tuesday still a few days away the number of candidates has dropped.
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
In other countries, how are the decisions made as to who gets to run?
At the risk of having my hand slapped for indulging in a tangent, of course we don't elect a president so probably a British response isn't useful. The Prime Minister here is supposed to be 'first among equals' so he or she is simply the leader of a group rather than a person on their own. So far as I'm aware, party members elect their leader (who would become the PM if the party was elected at a general election) but that sounds more straightforward than it actually is.
[ 02. February 2008, 13:35: Message edited by: Littlelady ]
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
well, before Primaries in the Democratic Party, there was the dominance of "machine" politics centered around the large cities in "smoke-filled" rooms. The primaries aren't a perfect system but let's learn from what came before.
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amazing Grace
High Church Protestant
# 95
|
Posted
SS,
I seem to recall hearing that wasn't just the Dems in those "smoke-filled rooms".
Charlotte
--------------------
WTFWED? "Remember to always be yourself, unless you suck" - the Gator
Memory Eternal! Sheep 3, Phil the Wise Guy, and Jesus' Evil Twin in the SoF Nativity Play
Posts: 6593 | From: Sittin' by the dock of the [SF] bay | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
SS,
I seem to recall hearing that wasn't just the Dems in those "smoke-filled rooms".
Charlotte
of course not But I was just pointing out why the reforms of the early 70's in the party (including the Primary system) came about.
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
Folks - I'd start the "media slant/bias" thread myself, but since I'm not particularly interested in discussing it on the Ship (I'm here because this is a thread for talking about the elections), I don't know a good way to phrase the OP.
I'll do it if someone gives me good suggestions, but in the meantime, could y'all please stop taking this one off on a big, heat-filled tangent?
Oh, look! Now they can have their own thread!
A Washington Post blogger says Bill Clinton will be coming to South Central LA churches tomorrow to apologize to black people for his "racially tinged" comments, escorted by our very own Maxine Waters. Seriously, I don't know why people like Waters are willing to forgive that shit.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by beza:
...I suspect part of the problem in the UK is that you may get activists swamping another party's open primary and picking a unelectable right wing/leftwing nutjob (or in the case of the Lib Dems a centrist nutjob, and there are plenty of those, too).
We Brits can be very snooty about the perceived lack of sophistication in American politics, but the fact you don't have these kind of en masse shenanigans there (I know individuals might vote for their opponent's worst option), shows a really mature democracy.
Mature democracy? The kind of en masse disinterest in pulling their dead asses away from the idiot box to even register - is why there are no inter-party shenanigans. Americans aren't sophisticated enough to look beyond their immediate personal concerns to coalesce as a group, let alone plan sabotage on a primary.
The only group identity most Americans share is a vague, patriotic image fed them by warmongering military industrialists through the media machine, whenever the tank builders and oil companies feel compelled to boost their bottom line.
Don't be fooled by television coverage of massive turnouts at political campaign rallies into thinking the majority of Americans give a shit. Any election with voter participation approaching 50% is an historical aberration. Most of the $600 give-away planned by the current administration is expected to be spent at Walmart and Burger King to keep the trailer-trash fat, dumb and happy.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
illed tangent?
Back on topic - can someone in my state (oh hai thar Miss Ruth) tell me if we have gone to proportional instead of winner take all? I must have been not paying attention when that was announced. "The California Report" tonight seems to indicate that both parties are doing proportional and it is causing some Strange Strategy in campaigning.
Charlotte
ok, from Yahoo News, here is the answer on how it works in the Dem Primary. Clear as mud??
" For the Democrats, in a congressional district with three delegates, two go to the popular vote winner, and the loser gets the third as long as they win 15 percent of the popular vote.
But in a congressional district with four delegates, the winner and loser in a two-way race are likely to divide the spoils evenly. The winner must receive nearly 63 percent of the vote to get a 3-1 split in delegates, and 85 percent of the vote to win all four. "
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
OK, I can see where this could be very interesting, then -- and the source of Strange Strategy. Obama is trailing in big delegate states like New York, New Jersey, California, but he's closing fast. In a winner-take-all scenario, it makes sense for him to concentrate on the states he can win. But with this proportional thing in the four-delegate districts (and I don't know where they are, but if I had to guess I'd say they're in the big-delegate states), he just needs to come reasonably close to split the delegates evenly with Clinton. So the big push we're seeing from him in California makes sense.
I gotta say, it's weird seeing ads from presidential candidates in January and February. Not what we're used to out here! They make a nice break from all the ads about the Indian gaming propositions.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
beza
Shipmate
# 10581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by beza:
[qb]Most of the $600 give-away planned by the current administration is expected to be spent at Walmart and Burger King to keep the trailer-trash fat, dumb and happy.
Surely not at Walmart! Isn't Hilary on the board?
Posts: 510 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amazing Grace
High Church Protestant
# 95
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
OK, I can see where this could be very interesting, then -- and the source of Strange Strategy. Obama is trailing in big delegate states like New York, New Jersey, California, but he's closing fast. In a winner-take-all scenario, it makes sense for him to concentrate on the states he can win. But with this proportional thing in the four-delegate districts (and I don't know where they are, but if I had to guess I'd say they're in the big-delegate states), he just needs to come reasonably close to split the delegates evenly with Clinton. So the big push we're seeing from him in California makes sense.
I gotta say, it's weird seeing ads from presidential candidates in January and February. Not what we're used to out here! They make a nice break from all the ads about the Indian gaming propositions.
Yeah, it's way too early in the year to be dealing with this. I shouldn't have to think about it until the weather gets nice and Easter is done.
But those clear as mud rules (thank you, SS, for wading through that!) do explain why Obama's team is stumping hard in areas in the state he might be expected to do well in. *waves arm* Clinton was way ahead here early, but it's worth his team's time to try to close the gap because the rules say that he might do very well out of coming close.
"The California Report" said that the Central Valley wasn't getting much of a look-in during a competitive Republican race; there was more of a concentration in the delegate rich southland. Although Romney has been spending his money on the ObTeeveeAds, which are statewide. (I don't watch tv very much at all so I can't say how common they are.)
Charlotte
--------------------
WTFWED? "Remember to always be yourself, unless you suck" - the Gator
Memory Eternal! Sheep 3, Phil the Wise Guy, and Jesus' Evil Twin in the SoF Nativity Play
Posts: 6593 | From: Sittin' by the dock of the [SF] bay | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
Does anyone here from outside the US find the whole idea of Primary elections strange? As far as I know Primary elections are very rare in other Western democracies (they have been half-heartedly tried in Italy and Israel, I believe, but without much uptake). Do you think we (other Western countries) would benefit from Primary elections? Or is it enough to have a choice between parties, without having to choose candidates within parties? Is it possible, or practicable, to combine primaries with a Parliamentary system, do you think? How about a Primary to select the next leader (and therefore the Prime Ministerial "candidate") of the Tories and the LibDems ahead of the next UK general election? Would it improve the state of our failing (or so many believe) democracy?
An interesting topic.
May I suggest a new thread, rather than this tangent to this one.
More generally, there have been a number of tangents, some quite far removed from the topic, and you all have been well behaved in ending discussion or moving it to new threads. This is good. Keep it up.
Down with tangents! (at least, when some people really do want to talk about the original topic.)
John Holding
Purgatory Host
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Speaking of presidential ads in California, there's a new one for Hillary, featuring Robert Kennedy, Jr. and the grandson of labor activist Cesar Chavez.
It's short and to the point. Aimed at Baby Boomers, I suspect, to whom those names mean something.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
No kidding.
And to pull a reverse Ann Coulter -- if we end up with Clinton vs. McCain in November, I just might vote for McCain. I disagree with him about 90% of the time, but I trust him more to be straight with us and make an effort to do what he says he'll do. And if, God forbid, we have another terrorist strike on U.S. soil or some other crisis situation that makes people start thinking about military action, I definitely would trust him more than her not to lead us into a war we didn't need to be in, and I feel like he would have a better handle on what the military is and isn't good for. What he said about the war in Iraq back in fall of 2003 makes me think that if he'd been running this thing everyone involved would be a whole lot better off today.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
I mostly like McCain. If we have a Republican president, I'd much rather have him than any of the other R. candidates.
But he seems to have a temper. He definitely still has issues about Vietnam, from his time there as a POW. I don't fault him for that; he has every right to feel that way. But during his previous run, he forgot himself enough to say "gook" in public. (Racial slur.)
Could he keep himself in check under constant pressure? Would he be able to make fair decisions?
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
I can't agree with his outlook on Vietnam but he is a maverick and both parties need them.
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
I'm not a fan of the hawks, Ruth, but I do trust McCain to be straight with us. This is not the case with the Clintons. (Understatement Alert.)
Ross
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
This just in from the LA Times: Maria Shriver endorses Obama.
I'm never going to be more glad I live in the Pacific time zone than this election season -- I can go to Shrove Tuesday at church and still get home in time to catch election returns before bed. ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif) Though the California Secretary of State is warning that counting the California ballots could take a long time, and I'm starting to think that it could be really close here.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
