Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 261: Schiff Happens

(+) Yeah! (+)

These topics are moving too quickly for clever titles
---

Jakyl25 posted...

These topics are moving too quickly for clever titles

Eh. Schiff happens

---

HeroDelTiempo17 said...

donate to raices

This is good advice
---

Is anyone watching the impeachment proceedings? What are the ratings vs the kavanaugh hearing?

Just anecdotally I get the sense that no one really cares about this

---

Schiff is a problem because he is unrepentant. He does not acknowledge that the Democrats are a huge part of the problem. He does not acknowledge that Democrats are corrupt. He does not acknowledge that they are hypocrites. He does not acknowledge that they support the rich and corporations over the working class at every opportunity. He is from California.

Without true contrition, the people will not listen to the Democrats.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

This is good advice

Just dropped them $25
---

this is a pretty clever title.

Jakyl25 posted...

Imagine a person you know with average intelligence

Then realize that half the population is dumber than that

i like that Carlin joke too.
similarly, i like the NPC joke, it applies well to a fringe of the left and (to a lesser extent) a fringe on the right, with some bizarre overlap you can find in some issues.

yet that's not what this is and i don't get what's supposed to be controversial here. dismissing half the people is wrong and should be called out for that. that shouldn't be a political position!

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Just anecdotally I get the sense that no one really cares about this

some sources say a lot of people care.
meanwhile you've got networks literally pulling it from broadcast because it's a flop so i mean... take what you will?
realistically it's going along party lines as expected and the end result is as predetermined as it was on day 1. i think most people are aware of that already.


---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Is anyone watching the impeachment proceedings? What are the ratings vs the kavanaugh hearing?

Just anecdotally I get the sense that no one really cares about this

Ratings are delayed a bit this week due to MLK Jr holiday
---

Wanglicious posted...

dismissing half the people is wrong and should be called out for that. that shouldn't be a political position!

Are conservatives really half the people?
---

actually hold on seems we got some info there.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/day-1-trump-impeachment-trial-draws-11m-viewers-1272169

Fox News topped both daytime and primetime coverage of the Senate's debate over rules of the trial.
The first day of news coverage of President Donald Trump's impeachment trial delivered 11 million daytime viewers across six networks.

Tuesday's proceedings, which featured lengthy debate in the Senate about rules for the proceedings, stretched into the early part of Wednesday. The cable news channels stuck with coverage throughout, but broadcasters ABC, CBS and NBC aired regular programming in primetime thus there are three sets of numbers to show.

From 12:30 to 5 p.m. ET, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News and MSNBC carried the feed from the Senate floor. It averaged 11.01 million viewers, with Fox News scoring the largest share of that audience, 2.65 million. CBS, which cut off its coverage at 3 p.m., drew 1.94 million, followed by MSNBC (1.91 million), ABC (1.63 million), CNN and NBC (1.44 million each).

Among the broadcast networks, only NBC continued coverage into the evening where it got a sizable bump, lifting its average for the day (12:30-5 p.m. and 5:18-7:40 p.m. ET) to 2.79 million viewers. Fox News drew 2.63 million from 12:30-8 p.m., compared to 1.98 million for MSNBC and 1.46 million for CNN.

Fox News had its usual edge in primetime, although all three big cable news channels were on par with their recent performance. Fox News averaged 3.51 million viewers from 8-11 p.m., with MSNBC at 2.53 million and CNN at 1.51 million.

The primetime race shook out similarly in the key news demographic of adults 25-54: Fox News drew 654,000 viewers in the demo, while MSNBC pulled 490,000 and CNN attracted 459,000.

Tuesday's proceedings drew a smaller audience than the Dec. 19 vote on articles of impeachment in the House of Representatives. That vote, carried in primetime on the cable news channels and NBC, topped out at 16.05 million viewers.

CNN's daytime and primetime audiences on Tuesday were pretty close to what they were for the first day of Bill Clinton's impeachment trial in January 1999. It averaged 1.3 million viewers for two hours of daytime coverage and 1.48 million in primetime. Fox News and MSNBC, which were then less than three years old, drew a combined 600,000 viewers in daytime in 1999 and about 800,000 in prime.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Are conservatives really half the people?

fair point. so 2018 numbers that used just three terms:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/245813/leans-conservative-liberals-keep-recent-gains.aspx
35%, tied with moderate as the plurality. the flaw here obviously comes in how it's just three tiers, it doesn't split the right up into different subsections (e.g., conservative, far right, alt right) or the left (e.g., liberal, progressive, communists). if you did you'd probably get a lot more in the middle, like the polarization charts have shown, though that's not particularly well defined either (e.g., center-right, center-left). if you assume conservative will exist as the main group on the right it's still the majority of that section so... maybe more like a third after all?

but i'm not sure "half" or "third" really means much since the difference is still the dismissal of some 70-80 million people.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Just dropped them $25

nice

---

Didn't know that was a charity.

Good numbers.
https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=17769

---

Corrik: America is the best country!

America: https://twitter.com/saletan/status/1220131681803304960?s=19

---

One of his new slogans is Mike Will Get It Done

Not gonna be a great slogan if something happens to Trump and hes running against Pence
---

Jakyl25 posted...

One of his new slogans is Mike Will Get It Done

Not gonna be a great slogan if something happens to Trump and hes running against Pence

It'll do better than "I'm richer than you."

---

Wanglicious posted...

similarly, i like the NPC joke, it applies well to a fringe of the left and (to a lesser extent) a fringe on the right, with some bizarre overlap you can find in some issues.

Why are you like this?

You both sides constantly, but subtly favor the right while claiming to be left.

Do you really think the right is somehow ideologically more diverse and superior but also disagree with them?

I find it curious

---

Probably because he favors the right

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Do you really think the right is somehow ideologically more diverse and superior but also disagree with them?

absolutely, yes. the right's got more ideological diversity in it, better arguments because of it, though i end up disagreeing with a lot. they are consistently much more open to sticking to arguments, points, and ideas whereas the left often ends up being very quick to attacks on character or framing things in more personal ways. the idea that the right is better at this isn't without data either by the way - it's a steady point that's been made really clear to be an issue with the left. the first major study i know covering this time period was back in 2012.

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/the-righteous-mind-by-jonathan-haidt.html

study was on 2000 Americans where they needed to pretend they were other positions. that data showed that while moderates and conservatives managed to mostly get the liberal mindset accurately, liberals could not. worse, the further left the person said they were the more inaccurate results they got. now again: this study's results were published in 2012. we've gotten far more polarized and the left has gone further than the right. he also developed a theory of morality ten years beforehand and ended up seeing conservatives mainly on six axioms, liberals mainly on four. libertarians - or more specifically we're talking Tea Party - was two. that ends up putting the modern right with some serious extremes but also a broad range. no doubt some Trump supporters do fall in there, Ted Cruz and Trump shared a heavy overlap in voterbase after all. but that also means there's a lot of variety to work with.

if you want more empirical data, look at the trouble the left has with understanding Tucker Carlson, conservative.or take the idea of "the left can't meme," which just keeps getting proven right, with the occasional exception (Bernie, Yang). the right is great at condensing ideas into quick, easy to digest info and presenting it in an entertaining way, the left keeps sucking at it. look at the way Dave Chapelle's been treated in recent years, that critic to audience score was one of the most blatant instances of this.

or we can look at people as even when the left has people great at discourse they end up getting pigeonholed with the right, sometimes called alt right, which diminishes what that category got carved out as, a fringe group usually with white supremacist ideas. wasn't always meaning that, that's the closest definition it's got today, though the far left loves pushes everyone in there, to the frustration of everybody else. but i'll also throw down a few names, though if you're at all familiar with "the intellectual dark web" you'd be aware them already. first two are the most obvious for lefties:

Bret Weinstein - progressive. hard progressive. isn't in most left wing spaces because he had the audacity to not accept the twisted version of "a day without black people" that Evergreen had.

Sam Harris - liberal. doesn't like Islam which has resulted in quite a few issues.

know what shows they do end up on? Joe Rogan, Bill Maher. the latter's a liberal who has had more than his share of spats with people further left, so much so that you'll even see them call him a conservative. the former's beliefs are absolutely liberal, sometimes outright progressive. yet Rogan gets called alt right or a gateway to the alt right or any of that nonsense, even in this topic just a few days ago - that's completely wrong. and for a name all the above have talked to you've got Jordan Peterson, famous for being against compelled speech - which is a straight up liberal position, though the left demonized his stance because it was against being forced by the state to say a tran person's pronouns. and yeah, he's got his religious bend and there's some conservative elements to him but he ends up pulling quite left on many issues of personal freedom and individuality. this also gets to another wrong idea the left has on the right today - the idea that Rogan or Peterson would radicalize someone. data suggests the opposite. but it makes sense that the further left you go the more issue you've got seeing that since the study mentioned earlier would suggest exactly that. now who else do they talk to regularly? Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin, a conservative jew who's been called alt right, a nazi, etc and a gay guy in LA who mostly is scattered across the center; Rubin's got a lot of social issues where he goes left but economically he definitely prefers right and plenty on the left hate him. where else may they show up? Steven Crowder, another conservative. but with these names alone you've got a progressive, multiple people on the left, some centered, and a couple right wingers. not one person there is "alt right" or "alt lite" or any kind of extremist. the opposite ends up being true as they're far more likely to pull people away from the extremes of the right. right now the left doesn't have enough of that and any support of a group who uses hammer and sickle flags should be treated the same way as your Richard Spencers.

and it ain't like the left isn't making some ground there, though it tends to be weirder. stuff like Jimmy Dore, a guy not really in the above grouping but very progressive, one of Rogan's favorites, and will discuss many things (some of which he's just plain wrong on - Venezuela comes to mind). i'm not too familiar with Kyle Kulinski's work but that's a name that's come up a few times. David Pakman i am familiar with and though he's a pretty standard progressive though he'll also have discussions with those on the right, stays on point, and though he's way more left than i am, definitely can offer good perspective often. but they don't really know how to stop themselves since you've got things like the young turks which is just plain awful.

all that said, you see that above paragraph of names? the right can typically understand their points and disagree better, often saying they'd love to talk. the left often doesn't, dismisses them, insults them, puts them into completely wrong categories, and lets the right hold a stronger grip on discourse. or to phrase differently, the left has issue with the concept of talking to a Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro, or Steven Crowder, let alone the substance of what they say. they meanwhile will gladly talk to the left and have made a name for themselves off of that.

could get into the way bases react too but eh. i've already got enough that i assume will be falling on deaf ear

I think the problem is that sometimes people want to move on from introductory arguments and move on to something more substantial.

Sure, everyone needs a fair opportunity to discuss whether Breitbart is right or wrong.

Most people paying attention had that discussion 5 years ago- there's no obligation for people to keep inviting them on television

But by all means, you're free to keep having round tables with ben Shapiro

Just don't think that makes said discussion more enlightened somehow

Also, I'd love to see more diverse opinions allowed on the subject of climate change on "the right".

---

I also object with classifying people as "the left" or "the right" in general, but that's a conversation for another time

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

You both sides constantly, but subtly favor the right while claiming to be left.

Do you really think the right is somehow ideologically more diverse and superior but also disagree with them?

I find it curious

Hint: It's because he's not actually left! It's all about infiltration.

---

Wanglicious posted...

if you want more empirical data, look at the trouble the left has with understanding Tucker Carlson

...

---

what an incredibly diverse selection of thinkers for Wang to whine about the left not "understanding"... a buncha racists, bigots, and homophobes

---

Reminder that "Free Speech Champion" Jordan Peterson once sued a professor for comparing him to Hitler in a private conversation that was recorded by one of his supporters.

The "Free Speech Champions" Don't care about free speech. They just want freedom from consequences. They want to spread their misogyny, their homophobia and their transphobia without being called out on it. They don't want free speech for everyone.

---

I recall a video where Tucker Carlson was interviewing a historian who pointed out that he, himself was part of the establishment as a millionaire being paid by the billionaires running FOX News. And rather than engage in well-reasoned debate, Tucker started swearing at the guy and told him that argument wouldnt be aired. Sounds totally reasonable and willing to carry an open mind.

---

Espeon posted...

I recall a video where Tucker Carlson was interviewing a historian who pointed out that he, himself was part of the establishment as a millionaire being paid by the billionaires running FOX News. And rather than engage in well-reasoned debate, Tucker started swearing at the guy and told him that argument wouldnt be aired. Sounds totally reasonable and willing to carry an open mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE

---

Wang, the common denominator with almost all of the people you mentioned that the left demonizes is that theyre openly bigoted towards various groups, typically Muslims or LGBT

Engaging with them legitimizes their bigotry.
---

hot take: the right has more diversity of opinions because there are more ways to be wrong about something than to be correct
---

Wanglicious posted...

the right can typically understand their points and disagree better, often saying they'd love to talk. the left often doesn't, dismisses them, insults them, puts them into completely wrong categories, and lets the right hold a stronger grip on discourse. or to phrase differently, the left has issue with the concept of talking to a Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro, or Steven Crowder, let alone the substance of what they say. they meanwhile will gladly talk to the left and have made a name for themselves off of that.

Oh, you're right. The right understands the left so well. Which is why they always accuse us of being baby killers and 'hating America'. And you're so right. Why don't more liberals go on Tucker Carlson or Ben Shapiro where they can be misrepresented, interrupted and ignored? But don't dare ask conservatives to listen to a news source outside of Breitbart or Fox News! That'd just be outrageous!

---

Grimlyn posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE

That must be Photoshopped. That's how that works, right? I mean, only the left dismiss and insult people!

---

Im sure Wang thought that Crowders figs shirt was incredibly clever and subversive
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Wang, the common denominator with almost all of the people you mentioned that the left demonizes is that theyre openly bigoted towards various groups, typically Muslims or LGBT

Engaging with them legitimizes their bigotry.

So much for the tolerant left!

---

Pro Tip: The marketplace of ideas doesnt work
---

Let me elaborate on that with an example most of us in here can agree on as long as Ulti doesnt show up: vaccines

There is no legitimate debate between pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine stances. The former is just objectively true and the latter is rooted in fearmongering and anti-intellectualism.

And yet pro-vaccine stances seem to be losing in the so-called marketplace of ideas because more and more people are anti-vaxx, and kids are suffering and dying because of it.
---

Even the article Wang posted points out how reasoned debate tends to fail and cause both parties to walk away with their original belief hardened.

Which, as the article points out, is pretty ironic. And sadly applies to the rest of the generized argument presented. Most of it is lamenting that liberals don't seem to understand or respect tradition, and traditional values, having varied foundations, lead to more diversity of thought. I almost understand this argument but it's kind of a "no shit" thing because rejecting "tradition for tradition's sake" is one of the core aspects of progressivism.

---

Also notice that the difference in choices between who's shows conservatives choose to go on (Bill Maher, Joe Rogan) and the shows that liberals avoid (Ben Shapiro, Tucker Carlson).

Bill Maher and Joe Rogan are both transphobic, and incredibly friendly to right-wing voices. (Joe Rogan won't even do an interview with most of the left-wing candidates! He'll interview Alex Jones, but not Joe Biden? Gee I wonder why that is... could it be he's not actually a liberal either?) And neither are really serious journalists. Much like Tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro! Meanwhile of course liberals avoid hacks like Carlson. If he were 1% as friendly to left-wing voices as Joe Rogan was to right-wing voices, he'd be a billion times friendlier to left-wing voices.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Im sure Wang thought that Crowders figs shirt was incredibly clever and subversive

see why can't the left UNDERSTAND that Crowder's just making a joke!

... so that Crowder doesn't have to understand the people offended by it

---

Dancedreamer posted...

Also notice that the difference in choices between who's shows conservatives choose to go on (Bill Maher, Joe Rogan) and the shows that liberals avoid (Ben Shapiro, Tucker Carlson).

Bill Maher and Joe Rogan are both transphobic, and incredibly friendly to right-wing voices. (Joe Rogan won't even do an interview with most of the left-wing candidates! He'll interview Alex Jones, but not Joe Biden? Gee I wonder why that is... could it be he's not actually a liberal either?) And neither are really serious journalists. Much like Tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro! Meanwhile of course liberals avoid hacks like Carlson. If he were 1% as friendly to left-wing voices as Joe Rogan was to right-wing voices, he'd be a billion times friendlier to left-wing voices.

Havent known Rogan to be transphobic except when it comes to sports; is he more generally transphobic?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Havent known Rogan to be transphobic except when it comes to sports; is he more generally transphobic?

Calling Fallon Fox a "man" is definitely more generally transphobic. Even if she's technically sports-related. Also he said that there's no difference between gender dysphoria and 'wanting bigger tits'.

---

Ok thats pretty bad if true

I wonder if his views have evolved any since that controversy
---

Took a look at some of the other things that went on yesterday besides the House presentation. Well, the first is related I suppose.

https://twitter.com/RepValDemings/status/1220017702011535364

Trump saying the quiet part out loud with, "Honestly, we have all the material [re: Ukraine and impeachment]. They don't have the material."

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1220082210356834310

Meanwhile in Davos, the White House gave press credentials to an anti-Semitic "news" group and even the White House Correspondents' Association is going to the WH to go "...the fuck?"

---

Dancedreamer posted...

(Joe Rogan won't even do an interview with most of the left-wing candidates! He'll interview Alex Jones, but not Joe Biden? Gee I wonder why that is... could it be he's not actually a liberal either?) And neither are really serious journalists.

Neither are journalists, theyre comedians.

Secondly, this was just addressed last topic, but literally the only non Left beliefs Joe hold are about hunting and transgender people in sports.

Hes literally for gay rights, trans rights (minus sports), Medicare for all, free college, prison room, etc, but hes not actually Left?

This is RINO-tier stupid.

I think its funny how Wang claims the Right is more diverse, and his examples were a variety of Left-Wing people with wildly different beliefs who share one similarity, that they hold a problematic belief.

Show me some diverse Right people. For example, do you really believe theres more of a difference between SephG and Corrik than me and LotM?


---

Corrik is an isolationist, I wish to start several more wars

I am also hugely in favor of restoring voting rights to felons, completely rethinking our cash bond system, and reforming immigration laws so we can get more low-wage workers

---

Corrik claims to be an isolationist, but he was also perfectly happy with our potential war with Iran because tl;dr the President made the decision he thinks is best.

Those last three things you want are good, but they are offset by your horrific (and confusing) thirst for war.


---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Secondly, this was just addressed last topic, but literally the only non Left beliefs Joe hold are about hunting and transgender people in sports.

Is the left actually anti-hunting? Anti-hunting for SPORT, yes, but I think Joe is also anti-that.
---

Like I dont see how anyone could be against hunting for food unless they are militantly vegetarian or vegan
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Like I dont see how anyone could be against hunting for food unless they are militantly vegetarian or vegan

uh

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Like I dont see how anyone could be against hunting for food unless they are militantly vegetarian or vegan

The left is anti-human so they want us all to die.

---

NFUN posted...

uh

Hey I admit I might be missing something.

Am I?
---