Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 411: Presidential Election MMXX Rebirth

(+) Yeah! (+)

Dangit Jakyl youre asleep on the job!!!!

NYT: Sephiroth has been accused of heinous deeds, but here in this Nibelheim diner we hear from those who see in him a return to a less chaotic time.

Wait, was abortion illegal in the UK before this?

In the US, we have many laws that are on the books but are never enforced because everyone understands that they are unconstitutional. However, in the UK there is no written constitution and I thought the courts are not empowered to strike down any act of Parliament as unconstitutional. So if there was an act of Parliament prohibiting abortion and it hasn't been repealed then it would be in force - am I missing something?

red_sox_777 posted...

Wait, was abortion illegal in the UK before this?

Oh boy!

UK abortion law is weird. Rather than just legalise it normally the 1967 and then 1990 acts that effectively legalised abortion in the UK provided exemptions to the 1861 act which made it legal on any grounds with two doctors agreement (also no limit on how many doctors you can ask so de facto legal on request) up to 24 weeks (the latest in Europe) and in certain situations after. So its a weird case where it is both legalised and not, because so much of British lawmaking is amending centuries old laws. You could technically be convicted if you had an abortion outside of these laws, though this only happened to three women in 160 years. However, in 2022 there was a sudden spike in prosecutions so now theres a push to get rid of the law. The current requirements would stay the same but abortion would be fully decriminalised so no women could be prosecuted for having an abortion.

As for how this can happen with the UKs current right wing government that couldnt organise a piss-up in a brewery, the amendment is being brought forward by Labour and I believe convention gives MPs a free vote on abortion, so enough Tories will vote for or abstain to let it pass through. The survey in the article shows half of the Tories supporting and half opposing while basically all of Labour support. Small parties such as the Lib Dems and SNP will all vote for too, except for Northern Irelands DUP who are nuts. So itll pass easily. Hopefully formal legalisation is next which will not physically change much but would be a good symbolic step.

Christo-fascists are proudly wearing the label "Christian Nationalist". Which is why we should call them Christo-fascists instead. They'll never proudly adopt that label, even as much as they want fascism.

lmao I was gonna make the topic and reference this:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13115115/joe-biden-marriage-success-jill-great-sex.html

Yup, that's a Daily Mail headline all right.

Update on a previous thing:

Oh, right, the time limit. I think he has at least 30 days from the judgment to appeal so at least that long.

As a matter of technicality I'm not sure the judgment has been officially filed yet but I don't know if that's because that only comes after the appeal window closes or if there's some other legal technical reason - but basically I'd probably cautiously say "a month or two?" (depending on whether the clock started with the ruling before or if there's some technical stuff still being handled before it starts for real)

Engoron's signed order was released yesterday and it was dated February 22. Pretty sure that is what starts the 30-day appeals clock.

But also heard some conflicting info on whether Trump needs to be able to front the entire judgment amount to appeal. I saw some people saying he does not but it's not clear to me (1) if they're correct and (2) if so, how much, if any, he needs to put up to appeal this.

Apparently this is some federal vs state court thing and while he would have to put up the full amount to appeal the defamation lawsuit (which was ~$83m) this case may be different?

Someone check on Corrik.

I figure losing to "None of these candidates" was already rock bottom.

https://twitter.com/NewYorkStateAG/status/1761457522395750576

lmao the New York attorney general is keeping a running tab of trump's additional interest on his judgement

Holy fuck, it's rare they're this open with their evil.

https://twitter.com/AriDrennen/status/1761224802222928188

Dehumanization is a hell of a drug.

yea its not been fun here

(if anyone's role model is a state senator they have a very boring life)

Oklahoma is going religious nut big time. First Dusty Deevers, now this guy.

Dusty Deevers has one of the dumbest fucking names Ive seen in a while. Feels like a fake name even

Also hate to switch topics again but since the South Carolina primary happened and I saw dueling takes on the polling going around so I decided to take a look and see if I could reconcile them.

Trump keeps underperforming his final margin against his second-place opponent by roughly 7 points. (For example, for SC the final polling average was 61.6-34 - or Trump +27.6 while the actual result is looking to be roughly 60-40 - Trump +20)

However, the 538 polling average is essentially 3-for-3 in landing Trump's final % of the vote, with the deviations being well within the margin of error:

Iowa
Trump % per 538 Avg: 52.7%
Actual: 51%

NH
Trump % per 538: 53.9%
Actual: 54.3%

SC
Trump % by 538: 61.6%
Actual: 60.0% (89% reporting)

I think this is a bit interesting in that the reason for the discrepancy between the Trump % being mostly right but the margin being consistently off by a bit is fairly easily explainable - that is when you look at the polling average, taking Trump + [his second-place opponent] never reaches 100%, there's always some leftover voters (more in Iowa because that genuinely had multiple candidates running.) To refer back to South Carolina, the polling average ended up at 61.6% - 34% which of course leaves 4.4% "other" hanging around. It's just... that vote appears to be breaking against Trump entirely.

Could just be a quirk of a small sample size of elections to look at right now but it could also be a sign that anyone who hasn't already gone all-in on Trump just... votes against him at the end of the day even if they don't commit to his opponent when polled beforehand - that polling basically captures Trump's ceiling because anyone voting for him is all to willing to announce it loudly.

I find it hard to read into or care much about the primaries when they are completely noncompetitive.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/26/politics/trump-judge-cannon-chutkan-trial-plan/index.html

Nothing much new here, but apparently "do all the (alleged) crimes" is a great strategy to delay, delay, delay.

Yeah, no real upsets happening anywhere and hard to find useful information from what we're getting. One's like Samus VS Midna and one's like Mario VS Toad if Mario sometimes had to be the write-in option: even if you run those fifty times each, it's hard for either of them to tell you more of what to expect in a rematch of Mario VS Samus than when they last faced off years ago.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/8/8607b6ef.jpg

This timeline is uniquely horrendous

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1761767593226961365

I... um... *sigh*

Im sure the Trump family is very familiar with needing viagra to even get an erection

https://www.thedailybeast.com/adams-county-judge-robert-adrian-is-reassigned-after-shock-reversal-in-drew-clinton-teen-rape-case

Another corrupt sicko judge who overturned a guilty verdict after victim blaming a rape victim has been reassigned. He should be forced to resign. Republican judge, of course.

good news: sweden will get to join NATO

bad news: if trump gets elected NATO won't matter anyway

FFDragon posted...

bad news: if trump gets elected NATO won't matter anyway

Hey, NATO will still matter. They'll be our enemies.

Dancedreamer posted...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/adams-county-judge-robert-adrian-is-reassigned-after-shock-reversal-in-drew-clinton-teen-rape-case

Another corrupt sicko judge who overturned a guilty verdict after victim blaming a rape victim has been reassigned. He should be forced to resign. Republican judge, of course.

That article is from January 2022. I mention that because, while it took entirely too long, consequences did finally arrive last week (which might be why you saw the story pop up again?)

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/02/23/in-rare-move-illinois-judge-who-reversed-sexual-assault-ruling-is-removed-from-bench/

The Illinois Courts Commission found that he "intentionally circumvented the law to satisfy his personal belief as to what constituted a just sentence, resulting in the reversal of a criminal defendant's conviction." They also found he lied in sworn testimony as part of the Inquiry Board's investigation and of improperly ejected a prosecutor on the basis of liking a social media post that was critical of him.

He's the fourth judge removed by the commission since 2003 (though the article notes others resigned before they reached a conclusion.)

Judge still on the GOP victimization excuse, blaming his removal on a "two-tiered justice system for conservative Republicans in Illinois" and that he was targeted because he's "a known Christian conservative."

And really saying he overturned a guilty verdict after victim blaming a rape victim (unironically using the phrase "female people") is somehow underselling it. He outright stated he knew that if he simply ruled that the sentencing guidelines the law required him to use in the case were unconstitutional (because he didn't want to send the guy to jail), the prosecution could appeal it and would certainly win. So he intentionally found the guy guilty and then vacated his own decision to dismiss the charges and make it appeal-proof.

Yeah, I was looking for an article rather than a tweet and that's the article i found. He's been removed finally. I would not be surprised if he has his own victims.

On a lighter note:
https://wtop.com/lifestyle/2024/02/burger-chain-wendys-looking-to-test-surge-pricing-at-restaurants-as-early-as-next-year/

Yet another reason to stop eating out. "Oooh we're real busy right now so that burger is gonna cost you $2 more!"

Well if the goal is to be less busy at those times...

Employees should be the next group to test surge pricing tbh, we'll see how quickly companies decide they're actually against it.

i think wendys is overlooking the fact that anywhere a wendys is, there's inevitably 6 other fast food joints that also serve mid as fuck burgers

Kenri posted...

Employees should be the next group to test surge pricing tbh, we'll see how quickly companies decide they're actually against it.

Inevitably, this scheme wouldn't ever result in lower prices, only higher at peak times. So that $5 burger now is $6 during lunch and $7 during dinner.

And how do they "sell" that. Well, you do exactly what you said, and say "we're using that increased price to pay our staff better during the most hectic times". That extra buck it costs during lunch during lunch: $.25 goes to the employees and $.75 goes to the owners. At dinner, same to the employees but more to the owners! Awful shit.

There are bound to be some small towns where the only other fast food place is on the other side of town

Seanchan posted...

Inevitably, this scheme wouldn't ever result in lower prices, only higher at peak times. So that $5 burger now is $6 during lunch and $7 during dinner.

The less stupid way to implement "surge pricing" would be to set the official menu price to the maximum and have discounts during off-peak times. Don't charge more for busy hours, offer deals for going the rest of the day. People love to think they're getting a good bargain, maybe even enough to overlook that it's just a price increase in disguise.

Xeybozn posted...

The less stupid way to implement "surge pricing" would be to set the official menu price to the maximum and have discounts during off-peak times. Don't charge more for busy hours, offer deals for going the rest of the day. People love to think they're getting a good bargain, maybe even enough to overlook that it's just a price increase in disguise.

Most bars and restaurants: Happy hour
Wendy's: Unhappy hour, for some reason

Xeybozn posted...

The less stupid way to implement "surge pricing" would be to set the official menu price to the maximum and have discounts during off-peak times. Don't charge more for busy hours, offer deals for going the rest of the day. People love to think they're getting a good bargain, maybe even enough to overlook that it's just a price increase in disguise.

Yeah, that makes sense too, since it amounts to the same thing. Ultimately it's just a messaging and marketing "issue".

The problem with surge pricing is that it's dynamic based on demand. So you couldn't just offer discounts at certain times of day, it would always depend on the number of orders actually being placed.

I think people would generally be okay with different times of day being priced differently as long as those pricings were predictable and uniform.

I don't think this will work for Wendy's because they have too much competition offering similar products.

Surge pricing but it's set by demand of the previous day for each time block

PeaceFrog posted...

There are bound to be some small towns where the only other fast food place is on the other side of town

Wendy's isn't one of the chains to open in tiny towns in my experience.

McDonald's and Subway are there big ones for that.

https://twitter.com/UrsulaPerano/status/1762603896680157629

Senate Republicans expected to block a bill that would protect IVF at the federal level. Claiming that Dobbs made it "states rights!"

The same motherfuckers who came out and said "I strongly support IVF" after they realized the Alabama decision could/would cost them votes?

Seanchan posted...

The same motherfuckers who came out and said "I strongly support IVF" after they realized the Alabama decision could/would cost them votes?

I mean many of the ones saying they supported IVF when that happened were co-sponsors on a bill that would ban it so par for the course, really.

"Obviously we don't need to protect IVF at the federal level because all the states will choose to do the right thing. But also we need to let them have the option to do the wrong thing, for reasons."

You know, it sure is weird how often the GOP brings up "states' rights" rather than defend their ideas with actual arguments. It almost like they want a ton of stuff that people really hate.

Well, it's also a part of their pattern of moving the goalposts. They did the exact same thing with abortion.

pre-Dobbs: Roe was a bad decision, abortion is a states-rights issue!
post-Dobbs: Actually, we totally should ban/restrict abortion federally. This isn't a states-rights issue.

To the GOP human rights were a mistake and up for legal debate aside from themselves of course

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/02/27/us/elections/results-michigan-democratic-presidential-primary.html

Any thoughts on these results?

I'm glad we're not nominating "uncommitted". I don't think they could win the national election.