Lurker > Antifar

Over/under 2% of the vote? I'm guessing under
---

kin to all that throbs

It turns out, people fucking hate the wealthy using their money to influence politics, and particularly when they do so for causes they don't like.

A good thing to do would be to overhaul campaign finance rules.
---

kin to all that throbs

ZombiePelican posted...

leave it Google to put the wants and needs of advertisers before the people who bring traffic to their site in the first place

This is how every website that seeks to make a profit works. Every content farm pumping out SEO listicles, every site "pivoting" to videos that no one watches is doing so to appease advertisers.
---

kin to all that throbs

Anyways, The narrative is going to be about millennial bernie Bros, but I wonder how much of this is Union voters who fucking hate NAFTA
---

kin to all that throbs

I'm not going to read this topic, but has it been pointed out that 25% of Clinton supporters voted McCain in 2008?
---

kin to all that throbs

RIP.
---

kin to all that throbs

Wing_Phoenix posted...

But removing monuments to it isn't allowing it to stay in the past. It is trying to rewrite the past the same way every text book I read in public school that discussed the war neglected to mention the Union government violating the rights of its citizens.

What if I told you that the erection of these statues was also an attempt to rewrite the past?
---

kin to all that throbs

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/stagnant-wages-u-s-tied-decline-collective-bargaining-article-1.3439603

A new report on the state of America’s unions offers a fresh look at who makes up the core of the labor movement — and it’s not the manufacturing base that Donald Trump has been courting.

In a deep dive into unions published Thursday, the Economic Policy Institute puts a special focus on the role collective bargaining plays in the labor market.

Over the last few decades, America has seen an uptick in productivity but a stagnation in wages for all but those at the very top — and the decline of collectively bargained union contracts is one reason U.S. workers’ earnings are being hollowed out, EPI said.

Sixteen million Americans currently belong to a union — far fewer than in decades past, the report said.

“Union decline can explain one-third of the rise in wage inequality among men and one-fifth of the rise in wage inequality among women from 1973 to 2007,” the report found.

Among men, the erosion of collective bargaining has been the largest single factor driving a wedge between the middle class and the top 1%, EPI said.

“The lack of collective worker power helps explain why workers’ wages have been stagnant for the past 40 years, and why working people are so frustrated — as they have not reaped any of the gains of an improving economy,” said EPI president Lawrence Mishel.

Yet not all has been stagnant in the world of organized labor.

Membership, for one thing, has changed dramatically.

While many Americans still think white men working blue-collar manufacturing jobs in the Midwest are the bulk of labor, roughly 10.6 million union members covered by a union contract are people of color.

Black workers are the most likely to be represented by unions: 14.5% of black workers age 18 to 64 are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, compared with 12.5% of white workers and 10% of Hispanic workers, EPI said.

About two-thirds, 65.4%, of workers age 18 to 64 and covered by a union contract are women and/or black, Asian or Hispanic.

Almost half, 46.3%, are women.

More than a third, 35.8% are black, Hispanic, Asian, or other nonwhite workers, EPI said.

And the manufacturing industry that Trump courted so strongly on the campaign trail no longer dominates organized labor.

Education and health services are now the dominant forces in unions, EPI discovered.

---

kin to all that throbs

Wing_Phoenix posted...

Did it ever occur to you that their grandchildren, great grandchildren, or descendants of other family members might be upset at the memorials to them being removed or renamed for no reason?

1. Robert E. Lee's descendants are not upset

http://www.newsweek.com/robert-e-lee-statue-charlottesville-donald-trump-white-nationalists-651208

The Lee heir says it would make sense to remove the embattled statue from public display and put it in a museum—a view shared by the great-great-grandson of Jefferson Davis.

"I think that is absolutely an option, to move it to a museum and put it in the proper historical context," Lee says. "Times were very different then. We look at the institution of slavery, and it's absolutely horrendous. Back then, times were just extremely different. We understand that it's complicated in 2017, when you look back at that period of time... If you want to put statues of General Lee or other Confederate people in museums, that makes good sense."

2. Consider how the descendants of slaves feel about statues to their enslavers.
---

kin to all that throbs

bump
---

kin to all that throbs

Jesus, I'm sucked in again. Probably put in like 7 hours since Tuesday
---

kin to all that throbs

Both, yeah
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/yoojin_cho/status/900725436556161024
---

kin to all that throbs

---

kin to all that throbs

CEs_EFG posted...

that's 100% right he's that "i'd have a beer with him" just like G double U

Note: Neither Trump nor W drink
---

kin to all that throbs

This topic was a good use of bandwidth
---

kin to all that throbs

Those aren't buzzwords; they describe actual things, ideologies and beliefs.
---

kin to all that throbs

NadYobWoc posted...

Nintendo was founded in the 1800's. Why can't the GOP go one paragraph without lying?

Also, Mario is their best-selling series
---

kin to all that throbs

Note: basically all the soldiers fighting the war on terror are millennials
---

kin to all that throbs

Balrog0 posted...

Antifar posted...

Hearts and souls won't keep Aetna afloat.

how can you be a socialist when you think something like that

It's capitalism that demands monetary profit as the bottom line for firms. Shareholders will not accept "being nice" as a return on their investment. Now, I think that this is a deeply immoral system, and of course there has to be room for projects and programs that don't meet capital's demand for profit. But I'm talking about how things are, not how they should be.

In the US, the government took on healthcare for the oldest (and generally most expensive) and the poorest (those with the least ability to pay) precisely because they are unprofitable to cover. A government has a duty to its citizens in a way that insurance companies do not, and it is not beholden to the profit motive.
---

kin to all that throbs

fenderbender321 posted...

Our hearts and souls can profit, too

Hearts and souls won't keep Aetna afloat.
---

kin to all that throbs

"The newspaper editor juxtaposed a photo of violence with the mayor's words urging peace."
---

kin to all that throbs

Outlet that needs clicks to survive posts clickbait
---

kin to all that throbs

I never got that far in Sonic 1
---

kin to all that throbs

Guys, the place was packed

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DH4RzKHVoAEgvUK.jpg
---

kin to all that throbs

Hazardous to the health of those who get in it?
---

kin to all that throbs

The property tax rates in Illinois are too damn high
---

kin to all that throbs

Featuring a recent shift away from positional rigidity towards more flexible, versatile players?
---

kin to all that throbs

fenderbender321 posted...

The demand for services has to be there, first and foremost. Then the ability to actually provide them to the public in a profitable manner has to be there as well

What if there's no way to provide healthcare to the sickest members of society profitably?
---

kin to all that throbs

Dominated by Warriors?
---

kin to all that throbs

This is very silly on its face, but ESPN's side of the story seems kinda reasonable.

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/900219648473522178
---

kin to all that throbs

KarmaMuffin posted...

oh fuck

See, they do like Democrats!
---

kin to all that throbs

The point



your heads
---

kin to all that throbs

Just gonna paste them as bullet points
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2017/08/trump-holds-steady-after-charlottesville-supporters-think-whites-christians-face-discrimination.html

- 40% of voters approve of the job Trump is doing to 53% who disapprove, little change from the 41/55 spread we found for him in July.

- Asked what racial group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 45% of Trump voters say it's white people followed by 17% for Native Americans with 16% picking African Americans, and 5% picking Latinos. Asked what religious group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 54% of Trump voters says it's Christians followed by 22% for Muslims and 12% for Jews.

- Overall 89% of Americans have a negative opinion of neo-Nazis to 3% with a positive one, and 87% have an unfavorable opinion of white supremacists to 4% with a positive one. Just 11% agree with the sentiment that it's possible for white supremacists and neo-Nazis to be 'very fine people,' to 69% who say that's not possible.

- In a finding that says a lot about how we got to where we are today, Trump voters say they would rather have Jefferson Davis as President than Barack Obama 45/20.

- Things are continuing to look good for Democrats in 2018, as they lead the generic Congressional ballot 49-35. The 14 point lead for Democrats may be too good to be true though- it's a function of a highly divided Republican base at this point. While Clinton voters say they'll vote Democratic for Congress next year 90-4, Trump voters say they will vote Republican by only a 74-13 margin.

- Only 25% of voters support the health care bill that was considered by Congress last month, to 57% who disapprove of it. Even among GOP voters there's less than majority support, with 48% in favor of it to 34% who are opposed. At this point only 33% of voters think the best path forward on health care is repealing Obamacare, to 57% who think it's keeping the current law and making fixes to it as necessary. Voters say by a 21 point margin that they're less likely to vote for a GOP member of Congress who supported the repeal bill

- Only 15% believe he has been successful in 'draining the swamp,' to 64% who say he hasn't. Even among Trump's own voters just 26% think he has delivered on this promise to 53% who say he hasn't. When it comes to whether Trump has come through on 'Making America Great Again,' just 33% of voters say he has to 59% who say he hasn't.

- Generally speaking just 57% of Republicans want Trump to be the party's nominee again in 2020 to 29% who say they would prefer someone else. That 28 point margin for Trump against 'someone else' is the same as his 28 point lead over Mike Pence at 52/24. Both Ted Cruz (a 40 point deficit to Trump at 62/22) and John Kasich (a 47 point deficit to Trump at 68/21) are evidently weaker potential opponents than 'someone else.'

---

kin to all that throbs

DelianSK posted...

Can also kill the enemy that is mind controlling your guy.

Easier said than done when it's the Avatar
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/axios/status/900186379174498306
---

kin to all that throbs

The Deadpool posted...

The week after a neo Nazi kills a protester with his car?

Seriously?

No, these were put forth months ago
---

kin to all that throbs

Decided to pick up my old file (I hadn't played since January, damn) and after several attempts managed to get through the mission with everyone still alive. Having a Psi op who can remove mind control was huge.
---

kin to all that throbs

So what's different
---

kin to all that throbs

kirbymuncher posted...

I generally expect professionals in a field to be more knowledgeable than I am in those fields yes

To play Devil's advocate, we're talking about a government run by Donald Trump
---

kin to all that throbs

We've been down this path before

http://democracyjournal.org/magazine/32/the-voluntarism-fantasy/

The Hoover Administration’s initial response to the Great Depression was to supplement private aid without creating the type of permanent public social insurance programs that would arise in the New Deal. Hoover’s goal was to maintain, in the words of the historian Ellis Hawley, a “nonstatist alternative to atomistic individualism, the romantic images of voluntarism as more truly democratic than any government action, and the optimistic assessments of the private sector’s capacity for beneficial governmental action.” ...

Noble as that goal may be, it failed. The more Hoover leaned on private agencies, the more resistance he found. Private firms and industry did not want to play the role that the government assigned them, and even those that did found it difficult, if not impossible, to carry out those responsibilities. The Red Cross, for instance, did not want to move beyond providing disaster relief. Other groups, like the Association of Community Chests and Councils, had no interest in trying to coordinate funds at a national, rather than local, level. Hoover understood that private charity wasn’t getting to rural areas, yet private charities couldn’t be convinced to meet these needs.
...
But the Great Recession offers the perfect case study in why the voluntary sector can’t solve these problems. If people like Mike Lee are correct, then the start of the Great Recession would have been precisely the moment when private charity would have stepped up. But in fact, private giving fell as the Great Recession started. Overall giving fell 7 percent in 2008, with another 6.2 percent drop in 2009. There was only a small uptick in 2010 and 2011, even though unemployment remained very high. Giving also fell as a percentage of GDP (even as GDP shrank), from 2.1 percent in 2008 to 2.0 percent in 2009 through 2011. (The high point was 2.3 percent in 2005.)

As research by Robert Reich and Christopher Wimer showed, the decline occurred with all sources and hit almost all types of nonprofits.
...
The first is what Salamon describes as philanthropic insufficiency. This occurs when the voluntary sector can’t generate enough resources to provide social insurance at a sufficient scale, which, as noted, is exactly what happened in 2008. There is also the problem here of geographic coverage. As Hoover discovered, charity will exist in some places more abundantly than in others; the government has the ability to provide a more universal baseline of coverage.

But it isn’t just about the business cycle. A second issue Salamon identified is philanthropic particularism. Private charity has a tendency to focus only on specific groups, particularly groups that are considered either “deserving” or similar in-groups. Indeed, in one telling, this is the entire point of private charity. Using very generous assumptions, Indiana University’s Center for Philanthropy finds that only one-third of charitable giving actually goes to the poor. Almost by definition, there will be people who need access to social insurance who will be left out of such targeted giving.

Instead of charity representing a purely spontaneous response by civil society, or a community of equals responding to issues in the commons, there is, in practice, a disproportionate amount of power that rests in the hands of those with the greatest resources. This narrow control of charitable resources, in turn, channels aid toward the interests and needs of those who already hold large amounts of power.

---

kin to all that throbs

JohnLennon6 posted...

Hate might seem like something that divides, but for some people, it can bring them together.

That's, uh, not the way I would frame this story, but okay
---

kin to all that throbs

Chronofan8 posted...

I missed the rally can i safely assume he has turned the corner on this whole nazi business and been forgiven for his errors?

Uh

https://twitter.com/MyDailyReporter/status/900207137703563264
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/edatpost/status/900190911572955136

lol
---

kin to all that throbs

I was off playing Xcom, lol, but, uh...

https://twitter.com/SteveKopack/status/900194636391747584

That's not how that...works.
---

kin to all that throbs

Nomadic View posted...

Gerrymandering has been around for a while, and even if it's done specifically for political gain the Supreme Court ruled it's still constitutional.

Neither of these things make it good.
---

kin to all that throbs

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/north-carolina-republican-gerrymandering_us_599c93b7e4b0d8dde99981ca?sj2

North Carolina Republicans gave themselves a “large and durable” advantage in proposed state districts after a federal court forced them to redraw the electoral map, according to a new analysis released Tuesday.

The Campaign Legal Center analyzed the recently proposed maps using the “efficiency gap,” a mathematical method growing in popularity that measures the votes each party wastes in an election. The method has gained considerable attention because a federal court in part considered it when striking down Wisconsin’s state map on partisan grounds. The Campaign Legal Center is representing the plaintiffs challenging the maps in the appeal of that case, which the Supreme Court will hear in October.

When an efficiency gap is greater than 7 percent, experts say, it is extremely likely the majority will maintain its majority. The CLC analysis shows that in North Carolina, where Republicans have supermajorities in both legislative chambers, the expected efficiency gap for the proposed state House and Senate maps is just under 12 percent for each.

“Assuming a statewide uniform swing in the vote, in order for there to be a Republican majority in the House, Republicans will only need a statewide vote of 45.7 percent. By contrast, Democrats would need 54.8 percent of the vote to get a majority in the House. This is asymmetrical, and evidences a severe bias in favor of Republican voters,” Ruth Greenwood, voting rights counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, wrote in the analysis.

Assuming the same conditions in the Senate, Republicans would need just 46.15 percent of the statewide vote to retain a majority, while Democrats would need a 55.15 percent share.

“By historical standards, these are extraordinarily large figures, revealing an enormous Republican edge,” Greenwood wrote in the memo, which she submitted to lawmakers charged with creating the new maps. Those lawmakers were holding public hearings on the maps across the state on Tuesday.

Even if Democrats perform better than expected ― with up to 5 percentage points more of the vote ― the efficiency gap increases in Republicans’ favor in the proposed House and Senate plans. That result shows the power of gerrymandering: Even though Democrats would be getting more votes, they wouldn’t be able to translate them into more elected lawmakers.

The Supreme Court has never struck down a legislative map on partisan grounds, leading to intense interest in the Wisconsin case and the efficiency gap.

The North Carolina analysis shows that lawyers can use data provided by the state to predict a large efficiency gap that signals a map will be unfair to voters, Greenwood said.

A federal court forced North Carolina lawmakers to redraw its maps because they took race into account too much. But understanding the political advantage that a map gives one party is linked to understanding how gerrymandering dilutes the influence of racial groups, Greenwood told HuffPost.

---

kin to all that throbs

It's extremely dope
---

kin to all that throbs

glitteringfairy posted...

Wow. Fuck MLK if true. Who cares if he didn't openly practice it, he still believed it. Fucking bigot. Tear that shit down.

I do not think you are making this point from a position of genuine belief.
---

kin to all that throbs