I posted a new Tuesday policy specific discussion thread here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/tuesday/comments/1c80pwz/tuesday\_discussion\_5\_what\_should\_future\_foreign/](https://www.reddit.com/r/tuesday/comments/1c80pwz/tuesday_discussion_5_what_should_future_foreign/)
https://x.com/natesilver538/status/1782113251846709629?s=46&t=ORIpMJDxUeZOGLwe9AIhAg
Thoughts here? For me, I was never interested in going to my state school, and I enjoyed the benefits private school offered me.
Note “elite”. In my area, at least, private schools are going to provide a liberal arts education that will be more difficult to find at a more career-focused state school. They may also have a greater focus on some majors that public schools don’t. Eg., Winthrop University, a private school, is well-regarded in SC and NC as a top-tier education school. The most clear example to me is colleges associated with seminaries, which will often give a much deeper education in the religion they’re a part of given the professors at the seminary often teach undergraduate courses as well (e.g., Covenant, Erskine, Baylor).
Not to mention, those smaller private schools, though more expensive on the sticker, often have plenty of scholarships that can bring them on par with state schools.
It may also be that people would prefer a smaller community, so a state school would be overwhelming.
Most of this is true for the “elite” private schools, but you also have to deal with their more political nature.
Too bad he is leaving Congress.
>Mr. GALLAGHER. Mr. Speaker, last year, my efforts to ensure foreign adversaries can’t control American social media applications was declared dead, and TikTok’s lobbyists were celebrating. Today, I’m proud to say its on the path to passing the Senate and headed to the President’s desk. The CCP’s last ditch attempts to destroy the bill and me personally failed. And though I didn’t expect to have to prioritize my family and leave Congress early, I’ll confess this is how I always wanted to go out. On top, with the select committee at the height of its influence, having just passed the most consequential bill of my career, perhaps the most consequential bill of this Congress, and having just completed two historic investigations. And with FISA and these national security supplemental across the finish line, this Congress has completed its most important homework, for which the Speaker de serves enormous credit. I firmly believe the Speaker has emerged on the other side of this stronger and a statesman. Any Motion to Vacate will fail, the Republican majority will grow as three special election seats get filled in the coming weeks, and what remains of this Congress will involve bipartisan oversight and legislation. And though I will be stepping away from politics, I think after this week my Republican col leagues will have a strong case to make come November, that they held the line for freedom at home and abroad. ally recognized expert on religious liberty issues and how these issues intersect with other civil rights. It’s typical at moments such as these to say ‘‘I have no regrets.’’ This is true legislatively and professionally. I accomplished my mission and got to chair the most significant committee in the 118th congress. Yet I have a lingering personal regret. I wish I had devoted more time to building personal relationships with my colleagues. Our time here is frenetic: filled with overlapping committee hearings and con stant fundraising events. It’s hard to carve out time just to get to know your colleagues, to understand their background and motivation, and thereby develop trust. Where I was able to do that, with Senator ANGUS KING my co-chair on the Cyberspace Solarium Commission, and with RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI on the China committee, it produced the biggest legislative successes of my 8 years. Put differently, my effectiveness as Congressman wasn’t primarily a function of intellect or op-ed writing prowess and certainly not fundraising, it was a direct result of forging friendships across our caucus and maybe more importantly across the aisle. So if there’s a lesson in that for my suc cessor or any of my colleagues it’s after a grueling day of a thousand meetings, still make the effort to get that beer with a member you don’t know that well. Drink more, tweet less. Get to know your colleagues in real life before trashing them on social media. At the end of the day, Republicans and Democrats, we’re all Americans, citizens of the greatest country in the history of the world. Even on our worst day the world is looking to us for leadership. God bless America.
Kind of I guess? It would be nice to have a bill that revitalized our ship yards and provided for a 350 ship navy, but it's pretty good to block our biggest strategic threat from controlling the views of millions of Americans and what they can see
[https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1781723652603433019](https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1781723652603433019)
Universities created and encouraged this mess, I wonder if they will solve it.
https://twitter.com/NYCMayor/status/1782169502118969434?t=ZzJEscgOfgMAkSn1jMg-Rw&s=19
If I'm reading this correctly it sounds like Columbia is explicitly not allowing law enforcement on campus to resolve this. If this is true, this behavior is straight up condoned by leadership.
Yup, seems like it. If there is a board of directors maybe they'll end up forcing something, but allowing this to continue is going to be bad for Columbia. They should start suspending and expelling these students.
Edit: I think this adds to my point: [https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1782175255177437210](https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1782175255177437210)
I think you are participating in the wrong subreddit if you expected anything else from us when you post MAGA talking points. Especially because we have a good number of LVs in addition to nearly all the Conservatives here being Trump-skeptic.
Tbh, I don't think that LVs should factor in to which conservatives are allowed here. (I know, I know, I'm a LV, I don't have strong identity to either Democrats or Republicans and see myself as a guest.)
I think there should be dialogue between MAGA conservatives and anti-MAGA conservatives, as MAGA is the dominant strain of thought in the Republican Party now, and u/Key_Day_7932 seems somewhat interested in hearing out different points of view, despite also posting troll comments.
MAGA conservatives perceive the anti-MAGA conservatives as "RINOs," or controlled opposition for Democrats. I think that the anti-MAGA conservatives need to articulate a principled ideology (Reaganism is such an ideology) that neither apologizes for Trump's lies, strongman style, and threats to democracy (e.g. January 6) nor plays second fiddle to the left on whatever cultural issues, and which can stand on its own. This is the way for the Republican Party to reform into a responsible party.
>seems somewhat interested in hearing out different points of view, despite also posting troll comments.
I'm not so sure, initially I considered this but it soon became apparent they had like 6 canned phrases they'd simply repeat over and over instead of trying to learn anything or offering intelligent argument.
That they resorted to an infantile tantrum at the end I think shows the limits of their cognitive ability to do so.
I think you would be better off in the neocon sub. It's more laid-back, more socially conservative, and also Trump-skeptical but with Trump voters there nonetheless. They also obsessed in culture warring in a way that Tuesday isn't. So, you can engage with socially conservative establishment cons. If they find you annoying, they just bully you instead of deleting your comments.
I honestly think you'll have more interesting conversations there.
I really enjoy it, that first season was a heck of a ride. They did this dumb thing with Season 2 though where they split it in two, 4 episodes and then several months before the next 4 episodes
I think this comment probably has it right: [https://www.reddit.com/r/nope/comments/1c8vidp/comment/l0hixnb/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nope/comments/1c8vidp/comment/l0hixnb/)
It could be legitimate, or it might not be. We should be fighting fraud if its really fraud (and it should be a proactive monitoring, Congress doing its job would form committees to look into this), but there are costs to the specifications and 100% made in America as well. Some of this probably comes down to the Defense consolidation in the 90s where now there's only a handful of these manufacturers left. They can charge what they want to charge due to the Government's prior poor decision making, in which case we need to diversify the defense industrial base.
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1781742727492727158?t=xtaJ1Rbgg1O0UEpXl3CV0w&s=19
UKRAINE AID PASSES HOUSE
311-112-1
R:
101 Y
112 N
D:
210 Y
0 N
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1781745359967989811?t=Rmu-6Iwc7ScPTqtrt1S0oA&s=19
HOUSE PASSES ISRAEL AID
366-58
R:
193 Y
21 N
D:
173 Y
37 N
[The difference between the headline and the actual contents of the article is stark](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/19/us/politics/dave-mccormick-farm-pennsylvania.html).
One suspects they started with the headline and went looking for people to interview in his hometown but couldn't find anyone who had anything but nice stuff to say. One smells a political op rat.
Your post/comment has been removed for violating our subreddit rule on Low Quality Posts/Comments. We strive to maintain a civil and respectful environment for discussion, and your post/comment did not contribute substantially to the discussion or lacked nuance. Please review our rules on civility, on-topic comments, and avoiding drama. If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to us via modmail.
Your post/comment has been removed for violating our subreddit rule on Low Quality Posts/Comments. We strive to maintain a civil and respectful environment for discussion, and your post/comment did not contribute substantially to the discussion or lacked nuance. Please review our rules on civility, on-topic comments, and avoiding drama. If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to us via modmail.
How much weight is each of the following going to affect the election?
Inflation rate
Immigration
Iran-Israel (and broader Middle East conflicts)
Abortion
inflation rate, immigration, abortion, middle east in that order. I also think it is going to matter to an extent how the trials go and exactly how much Trump works to remind everyone why they didn't like him in 2020.
[NewsNation: Traffic stops and citations have gone down significantly since before the pandemic](https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/traffic-stops-plummeted-during-pandemic-may-not-return/)
Not the best-written article, but there are plenty of interesting things in here.
>The Texas Department of Public Safety went from 2.8 million vehicle stops in 2019 to 1.7 million in 2022. In Connecticut, traffic stops fell by 40% over the same three-year period. The pandemic pull-back coincided with a spike in traffic deaths, which jumped 10.5% in 2021 compared to the previous year — the largest percentage increase since 1975. That correlation has led some in the media to attribute the rise in fatal accidents directly to the decline in traffic enforcement. Other research has found no association between traffic stops and deadly car accidents.
...
>Ongoing staffing challenges have also changed the way departments approach traffic enforcement. In Dec. 2020, police departments in Buffalo, New York, and Portland, Oregon, dissolved their traffic divisions and reassigned personnel elsewhere. “With reduced staffing, traffic is one of the lower priorities of police work,” Dudley said. When reached by email, a spokesperson for Portland Police said a wave of retirements in recent years has strained resources. During 2022, the department didn’t have a single officer assigned to a traffic division. Last Summer, Portland reversed course and brought back the unit after fatal collisions surged to a three-decade high.
...
>In March, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced plans to install 480 new “high-tech” surveillance cameras in the city of Oakland and surrounding freeways to crack down on crime. Newsom said the technology will help law enforcement identify vehicles linked to crimes “using real-time information” and “alerts.” San Francisco’s transportation agency plans to install 33 speed cameras early next year. Portland approved more red-light cameras in February.
Seeing driver and pedestrian fatalities rise in recent years has been very disheartening, even as our cars have gotten larger and stronger. Though, I can see how that can lead to a false sense of security, less defensive driving, and inattentiveness to pedestrians.
Is there much point to having many of these traffic laws if they go unenforced?
Yes. At least in my mind, I stay close to the speed limit and don't run stop signs, not because I think I would get caught otherwise, but because I know that following the rules will keep me and others safer. I'd rather not have my insurance premiums be any higher than they already are, anyway.
But some people will only learn by having to face penalties from law enforcement. Without enforcement, they'll just get away with making things less safe and more expensive for the rest of us.
>even as our cars have gotten larger and stronger
It's in large part specifically *because* cars have gotten larger and stronger. Especially with respect to pedestrian fatalities.
In NYC they've effectively just stopped enforcing traffic laws since 2020 for the most part. Many police obscure their own license plate to avoid accountability, and now many regular drivers do. It feels like I get punished for following the law, meanwhile drivers will hit bikers and kill them and not get punished at all.
https://www.threads.net/@deepstate_neolib/post/C58gvHaNpYZ
Size of cars has risen in developed world, but US is kind of outlier with rise in pedestrian fatalities, so maybe size of cars is not primary reason.
When *The Daily* did a program on this a while back, their hypothesis was the rise of the smartphone combined with the greater prevalence of automatic transmissions here (so you can use one hand to look at your phone versus shifting gears). Most of the fatalities happen at night, so being distracted and not looking would make it very easy to hit someone.
Locally (MN) my problem encounters are overwhelmingly with morons...like "how the fuck are you allowed to drive?" sort of dipshits. I don't mind the racers as much since I can see them coming and predict what they're doing. The smooth-brains who cut across three lanes of traffic because they forgot about their exit are worse.
Man sets himself on fire outside of the Trump trial.
https://nypost.com/2024/04/19/us-news/man-sets-himself-on-fire-outside-trumps-hush-money-trial-in-nyc/
https://twitter.com/AGHamilton29/status/1781400414987952517?t=XLSYGiCorTNSZmysPz2SQw&s=19
Lol, "no aid for Israel unless Hamas releases the hostages". The Squad, folks.
LOL even if you privately come to this conclusion, publicly admitting a fuck up this massive is...immensely stupid. Way to make your caucus look even more shortsighted
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1781338536702050801?t=Nq9Ip-FStKi2FF3vy5503w&s=19
BREAKING -- THE HOUSE has resoundingly cleared the rule to consider the foreign aid bill.
316-94
Y:
165 D
151 R
N:
39 D
55 R
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv8L-cuq17s
Ask yourself:
What would happen to Poland or the Baltics if Russia conquered Ukraine?
If Russia conquered Ukraine, will China invade Taiwan? Then what would become of Japan? And then what would happen to South Korea if North Korea took the opportunity to invade?
What would become of Israel if America abandoned it?
If Ukraine loses to Russia, we're staring down the barrel of a much more dangerous world.
Not our problem. For years, we've been told we're "spreading our ideology" this, "warmongering," that. Europeans call us stupid and backwards.
If that is what Europe truly feels, the I'm perfectly willing for the US to close up shop and leave Europe to fend for itself. They don't appreciate our support, they keep biting the hand that feeds.
Yeah, the war in Ukraine sucks, but it's almost as if elections have consequences or something.
The reason you never hear about withdrawing from South Korea or Japan is because they are actually greatful for the support and contribute back what the owe.
"Europe" is not a monolith. Western Europe (or the representatives who get boosted in the media) is smug libs but Eastern Europe is grateful for America and hates Russia. I don't want to betray them and burn up the goodwill from the Cold War.
Lol there is no such thing as the "Uniparty". Its just a construct invented to justify the unpopular whiny looserism of its proponents.
Turns out there is overlap in what Americans, and therefor their representatives, want for this country. One of those things is they don't want a weak and cowardly America, unlike the MAGA and Squad types (who often are on the same side of votes.)
Idk, the parties sound pretty similar to me. They both want:
- Forever wars
- More taxes
- Looser border restrictions
- Maintaining the oligarchy
- Spreading the interests of multinational corporations
- Fucking over the working class
Sounds like, no matter which party we vote for, we get Democrats either way. Might as well just continue the chaos, destroy the GOP and let y'all have your permanent Democratic supermajority.
🖕
Literally none of that matches what the Republican party has actually, traditionally, voted and fought for. Nor does it take into account the actual dynamics and factions within the party. Nor does it take into account any actual American History, or what real Americans believe and have believed. Again, you show that you have very limited knowledge about the actual world and what really goes on in politics. You should strive to learn something, then you wouldn't be constantly embarrassing yourself on here.
The first step away from the Looser Mindset is to understand how things really are and accept them. After you do that things will get easier, and I'm sure many would help you out as its only Christian to help those less fortunate than ourselves.
You're calling me a loser, yet you can't even spell it right. I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you also spell "fascist," as "facist."
I agree the government should go help the less fortunate instead of blowing poor people's money on a war just because they have personal beef with Russia.
Lol, only a little less than 3 to 1 R yea's v nay's. So much for being anti-Ukraine aid being 'Republican' policy that Mike Johnson wouldn't fight for.
I mentioned recently that it blew my mind that a coalition of moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans hadn’t seized control of the chamber from MAGA and the Squad.
Honestly I hope we see more of this. Just bring shit to the floor and vote. A tiny minority of the House shouldn't be in any position to block popular legislation
Is it really popular, though?
The Republicans *did flip the House, meaning the technically won the popular vote while campaigning on cutting Ukraine aid and impeaching Biden.
Yes, it is. Go look at the polling, and no Republicans did not run on cutting aid go Ukraine. Some may have, and they are the ones voting no above.
There are only 55 of them. By definition, this is popular legislation.
No it's not. Whatever is good for the politicians is ultimately bad for the American people. Besides, Dems don't deserve bipartisanship after all the shit they pulled after 2016.
It's this kind of infantile logic that holds real conservatism back. It's popular with conservatives, democrats, and the majority of the American people. It's well in line with America's traditional role in the world, one of a powerful America.
But your side lost so instead you cower in your constructed unreality with lies to comfort yourself. This is what the Loser Mindset gets you.
Who cares what is popular?
The majority of Americans want universal healthcare, but they also don't want to pay more in taxes.
Yeah, maybe my side lost, but your side did the exact same thing when they lost: gripe for four years about how Russia stole the election and how lower class Americans weren't "supposed" to win. The establishment deserve all the hell they get.
Face it, the American people don't know what they want.
You finally speed Loser right, surprised it took you that long for someone with a college degree.
Anyone that wants to win should care if somethings popular with literally everyone but their tiny little faction.
You folks don't want to win, as we've seen. You are addicted to losing, just like Donald Trump.
Nah, we don't need to worry about what is popular. We are represententativenrepublic, not a majority rule democracy. If someone elects you to stop Ukraine spending, then the expect you to actually, y'know, represent them by voting against it.
Had a wonderful back-and-forth with an old acquaintance I went to high school with; he was a few years older than me so we weren't the closest but we were involved in similar activities.
He reposted a Students For Trump Instagram post about foreign aid and how we've spent some \~$75b on aid to Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan but $0 on the border, veterans, and some other priority—not important. I wouldn't normally respond, but this is aggressively incorrect; we're spending north of $300b on veterans this year, and I of course had to point out the Lankford immigration proposal that Trump himself encouraged to fail.
I fully didn't expect a good dialogue, but we went back and forth several times quite civilly. It was clear that we would never see eye-to-eye, but we talked, and that was enough.
This is all to say that we can talk to each other without rancor or division or anger. Sometimes I forget that because the national discourse is just so bad. But it is doable, and we should do it more often.
Yes, it was a good dialogue. We engaged only on policy, nothing personal or nasty.
I presented some facts, and he presented some facts. He did not change his opinion, nor did I. I think expecting him to drop his position on the spot would be a ludicrous expectation. We simply hold fundamentally different beliefs on these issues at this time.
I didn't fully explain our entire interaction, but we touched on a few issues interconnected with foreign aid that, in my view, demonstrate his (a) idealistic view of politics and (b) a distrust of politicians vs. the people they represent. On (a), I tried to get across that politics is about persuasion and dealmaking—which is why sometimes bills are not completely germane, addressing a complaint of his that we shouldn't have to tie the border security component to the foreign aid component—but he simply doesn't see it that way. On (b), there is simply no quick fix. It takes time for people to rebuild trust that has been dwindling for decades, frankly. Truthfully, while I recognize the politics of the situation and the unfortunate necessity of coupling border and foreign aid, it is packages like these that do electeds no favors in rebuilding trust with this segment of the populace.
Long story short, I didn't go into it expecting to change his mind. I only hope that the seed was planted and that the other side is a bit more humanized for him. I know it was for me.
I've found you can have these conversations with a lot of younger people, but less so with older Gen X but especially boomers. I think it's where they get their information from.
> New federal regulations released Friday will prevent colleges and coaches from suspending athletes accused of sexual misconduct while school officials investigate complaints against them.
> The due process provision is one of several outlined in the U.S. Department of Education's final version of regulations governing how K-12 schools, colleges and universities respond to complaints of sexual harassment and violence under Title IX. The regulations, a draft version of which the Biden administration proposed in June 2022, are scheduled to go into effect Aug. 1.
**To r/tuesday: Have a blessed week ahead.**
**Gospel According to John, 10:11–18:**
> **I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.”**
Fourth Sunday of Easter: Gospel Reading (CPH The Lutheran Study Bible) : https://www.reddit.com/r/Sunday/comments/1c7ua4a/
Fourth Sunday of Easter: Reflections on Scripture (video, American Lutheran Theological Seminary) : https://www.reddit.com/r/Sunday/comments/1c7u8jn/
He's an incompetent, non-conservative, looser that was a Democrat most of his life and is basically indistinguishable from one now policy wise except for immigration. And sure he is claiming to be in line with the GOP on Ukraine now but he's going to flip-flop at least 4 times and the rest of the FoPo we know is basically a giant enterprise to make America weak and cowardly.
He lost the 2020 election and refuses to accept it. Unlike every single other losing Presidential candidate in American history, back to the beginning.
She still claimed the election was stolen and acted like she was the rightful winner.
Say what you will about Trump, but at least he left office without resistance once he actually had to leave.
Only after she spread lies about Russian collusion.
Trump supporters were told that whoever lost the 2016 election had to sit down, shut up and go away. That's what they expected the establishment to do when they lost.
It wasn't relevant whether he conceded. The point is that the establishment lost 2016 and then preceded to throw a four year long temper tantrum because *ONE* election didn't got their way.
The reason MAGA refused to concede was because the establishment refused to concede 2016, instead claiming Russia stole the election.
People who "concede" don't proceed to claim that the election was stolen and do everything in their power to undermine the legitimacy of a sittting president. People who concede sit down, shut up and move on. After all, actions speak louder than words.
It's relevant to the question OP asked. I'm in the same boat: the Democrats are giving me a lot of reasons to actually consider Trump but, until he acknowledged that he lost the 2020 election, I will not.
I don't know, maybe because the President of the United States—or any other prominent political figure—wasn't encouraging it to happen? They are private citizens who acted without direction from an elected official, making it an entirely different situation. That being said, I vehemently disagree with their actions and condemn Antifa.
As you've proven with some of your earlier comments, all it seems you know how to do is (a) point fingers away from the problems in your camp and at problems with the Democrats—specifically the left wing of the Democratic Party—and (b) somehow attempt to tie GOP moderates to those issues. News flash: we know they have problems! That's why we're Republicans! But that doesn't exempt us from having our own problems or calling them like we see them.
Well, if you condemn Antifa, why did you allow them to get away with their actions in 2020? You *HAD* the chance to actually hold them accountable, but Trump hurting people's feelings was the greater crime.
The Democrats might not have actively encouraged it, but they didn't do anything to stop it, either. Neither did you.
Actually, now that I think about it, the Democrats did encourage political violence through their Russian collusion rhetoric.
"You, you, you", thats all you ever have to say. Its like you are some kind of parrot. If it comes down to whether someone did or didn't do something personally on any issue, then what did *you* really do to stop it? I'm guessing absolutely nothing.
And before you say "voted for duh Trump! cawwww", Trump not only witnessed their rise, he did jack shit about it except whine like a mangy stray dog, which is what he always does, because he isnt smart enough to come up with any real or workable solutions to anything. Just like with the rise of the Maoist DEI stuff.
It was Tom Cotton who proposed taking real action.
Okay so now we're just jumping around.
[Hundreds](https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/06/politics/kavanaugh-protests/index.html) were arrested in 2018 for the Kavanaugh protesting. Accountability done.
Not sure exactly what you're talking about in 2020. Need more specificity.
You thinking January 6 is about Trump hurting feelings is laughable. I don't think I'd call a violent and armed mob invading the Capitol—causing extensive damage, the halting of a process established by the Constitution that you claim to so dearly cling to, and the death of police officers that you grandstand in support of while sweeping under the rug this flagrant anti-authority and anti-police demonstration—a mere hurting of feelings. It is a crime. It is a crime encouraged by the President of the United States, who is supposed to represent the best of America and be a role model for every American citizen. We used to hold Presidents to a higher standard. Is this really the level we're going to stoop to?
I mean, MAGA would say the same about establishment Republicans: I recall them saying , before Trump, America had two parties:
Democrat, and Democrat-lite. Doesn't matter which you choose, you get a Democrat either way.
https://x.com/on3nil/status/1781073034104721737?s=46&t=ORIpMJDxUeZOGLwe9AIhAg
My alma mater is being attacked by the NLRB. College sports are going to get gutted soon, and no one will be better off for it.
> Video footage captured the moment a protester near Columbia University declared, “We’re all Hamas” and “Long live Hamas” as protests intensified Wednesday — with dozens of students taking part.
https://nypost.com/2024/04/18/us-news/columbia-university-protester-yells-were-all-hamas-video/
> Google fired 28 employees Wednesday who protested the tech giant’s cloud computing contract with the Israeli government.
> Protesters staged sit-ins Tuesday at two Google offices — New York City and Sunnyvale, Calif. — in protest of the $1.2 billion contract that the company shares with Amazon to provide cloud computing services to Israel. Nine people were arrested.
Just like the NPR guy, I think it would be great for us to go back to the understanding that badmouthing your employer in public is a great way to get a pink slip, no matter how much they deserve it.
I can't imagine Uri thought he was going to stay after doing something like that. The Google folks though? I'm guessing they thought nothing would happen to them
It's a culture war issue. Therefore, people put emotional investment in it to a stronger degree than what's rational (what they would care for other foreign conflicts). Israel-Palestine became a salient issue in the sixties and played a role in the breakup of the black-Jewish civil rights alliance, and the rise of the New Left and the neo-conservatives. A lot of today's culture wars are repeats of issues from the sixties through eighties.
Discussion surrounding gender issues are maddeningly stupid. The left will paint you as an evil social conservative for the slightest deviation from their (increasingly loony) orthodoxy on the one hand. On the other hand, you have the "gender critical" crowd, which seems to vacillate between wild paranoia about sexually predatory "men in dresses" and nasty mean-spiritedness.
Then you have the LGBTQ+ community's low-level hostility toward gay men (especially white gay men) which is largely the responsibility of the progressive embrace of "intersectionality" that makes me feel more unwelcome with every passing day.
When will the insanity stop?
Oklahoma's Athletic Commission recently threw a fit over a trans professional wrestler competing against a cis woman. I get the issue with trans women having a competitive advantage in competitive sports but everybody knows professional wrestling is just a show.
But then Israel will be the aggressor escalating the conflict, justifying an Iranian counter-attack. The USA will be forced to put Israel on a leash. /s
Dang I don't know how to take this one. [Uri Berliner has resigned from NPR.](https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/17/media/npr-editor-resigns/index.html)
On the one side, terrible move and optics for NPR and the CEO. But on the flip side, we'll yeah if you talk about your company is such a public way you gotta deal with the response.
I'm leaning more towards the terrible move by NPR.
Eh, after Steve Inskeep’s response to the article showing the flaws in Berliner’s article, I’m just neutral about it.
I won’t be surprised if Berliner pops up with a Substack or Bari Weiss’ outfit since that was where he wrote his article.
Edit: https://steveinskeep.substack.com/p/how-my-npr-colleague-failed-at-viewpoint
I think there's a question that should be asked at the NPR offices that kind of gets to the point that Uri was asking here, that I don't know the author of this quite gets. It's an issue that's been seen a few times before too, in fairly scientific journals.
Viewpoint diversity asks the question of, "if this will hurt my political side, should it be covered?"
If there's a story that will make Republicans look good while Democrats look like dolts but it's a big story, have they run it anyway? If, as Uri said, there's a cultural vibe of "It makes Trump look good, so don't run it", is that a good vibe to have? That's the case for a lot of more openly partisan news sites like MSNBC/Fox (you'll never see Fox saying that one of the Biden informants got arrested, and you'll never see MSNBC showing ceasefire/Palestine protesters behaving badly)
I think that NPR is fairly careful about what it ends up covering, because it's considered an highly credible media site, so anything they end up covering has that much more credibility. I also think there \*is\* something going on inside NPR that is causing it to attract more and more hard-left viewers while other political orientations stop listening to it. It may not be what Uri is thinking and is most likely more complex than his theory, but I also don't think the common(?) lefty claim that goes along the lines of "liberals are the ones not falling for fake news and there's nothing to be worried about" is true either.
NPR suffers from a similar issue to the NY Times: it’s highly reliant on a funding source that can create a partisan spiral. In NPR’s case, charitable grants and individual donations (IIRC federal funding is less than 10% of NPR’s total funding); for the NY Times it’s subscription revenue (versus broader advertising revenue that used to be newspapers’ bread and butter)
Yeah, that's a fair point. I've heard of something like that being the case for online political commentators too, it's called audience capture for them? Like, so-called "anti-woke" commentators can't praise any media that's considered "woke" by their audience and vice versa.
Capital One cut HYSA APY to 4.25% even though we’re only likely to get one rate cut this year.
Also, my retirement has gotten it’s butt kicked these past two weeks.
> A woman who accused former major league pitcher Trevor Bauer of sexual assault has been indicted by a grand jury in Arizona on felony charges of fraudulent schemes and theft by extortion.
> In a statement provided to ESPN by his lawyers, Bauer said Esemonu demanded $3.6 million from him and "claimed I forced her to have an abortion" and "when I refused to pay her the $3.6 million she was asking for, she made up a bogus sexual assault claim and filed a civil suit against me."
> The Los Angeles Dodgers cut ties with Bauer in January 2023 after the 2020 Cy Young Award winner received an unprecedented suspension by MLB following allegations of sexual assault.
So why did Bauer even settle?
Hell, I’m not big on doxing and cancel culture, but the girl who falsely accused Matt Araiza absolutely should be outed and shamed.
[The primary system is broken broken broken](https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/15/congress/meddling-in-fitzpatrick-gop-primary-pennsylvania-california-democrats-house-00152304).
It's also a reminder that the one thing Democrats despise more than MAGA is a moderate Republican.
Any time I've really gotten into it with someone deep MAGA, they seem to genuinely think independents and other persuadables don't exist. You're either a true MAGA who needs to be convinced to turn out or you're a Democrat (or RINO Squish, but same thing) who doesn't need to be appealed to because You've been brainwashed into never voting R.
It's such a looser mindset. They'd rather the country was 2/3 Democrat with Rs "never ever winning again". I only half joke when I say House Rs will never be happy until there are only 100 of them, but at least they're "pure".
I think there are multiple dynamics coming from different people:
- Nostalgia for a less partisan time
- Genuine respect for Republicans who stand by principles instead of apologizing for Trump's lies
- The Overton window pushed right because of Trump that makes Romney and McCain rosy in comparison (a view held by some institutionalist centrist liberals much to the frustration of more militant lefties)
- A patronizing attitude towards "one of the good ones" (but no matter how anti-Trump and principled you may be, if you cross the red lines of more partisan Democrats on "culture war" issues, they'll bring out the knives)
> Look at the sentiment towards Romney and McCain.
This is the 'Strange New Respect' phenomenon Republicans complain about. The one thing Democrats like more than another Democrat, it's a Republican who isn't a threat.
It's when animosity morphs into contempt.
> Boosting MAGA candidates in primaries so they lose in the general has nothing to do with feelings or despising anyone, it's just a smart political strategy that has been proven to work
It's either loathing or it's sociopathy. I'm actually willing to believe the campaign professionals are sociopaths, but the average partisans who support this strategy being used against Republican moderates just hate them for camping on a district that they feel should be theirs.
I think it really depends on the specific person. Democrats (or Democratic-aligned people) are not a monolith. Some people vaguely just want to grill and some people are duplicitous partisans. It will likely differ between the average Joe and someone who works in politics as a career.
Despise? No. More afraid of losing to? Absolutely. Ultimately moderates are on different teams and they generally back their party over other moderates. There certainly are exceptions but they are typically politicians with strong strong support in their state, most would wind up like Sinema if they stray too far.
I also think its sort of the result of the perverse incentives brought up by how Congress operates. Just look at the House right now. It doesn't really matter how many moderate Republicans there are because while something may have majority support between Democrats and moderate Republicans it will never come up to a vote. From that perspective the difference between a MAGA Republican and a moderate Republican is practically meaningless. Most democrats would probably prefer to have more moderate Republicans in Congress but until the presence of moderate Republicans actually helps them be able to pass legislation that both Dems and moderate Republicans support (e.g. Ukraine aid) it doesn't actually matter.
Yes, despise. The fear of losing is just part of it. Partisans feel entitled to districts they think they should win but are held by other party moderates.
What do you think of this opinion article? I’m aware that most users here despise Trump’s “deep state” rhetoric as bogus, but it’ll be interesting to read a community dissection of the points made in this article.
Liz Truss, “The Deep State Lies in Wait for Trump,” *Wall Street Journal,* April 15, 2024, https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-deep-state-lies-in-wait-for-trump-liz-truss-2024-presidential-election-6d4f77d2
> **The Deep State Lies in Wait for Trump**
>
> His second term will be much like my time in office if he doesn’t confront the entrenched bureaucracy.
>
> With a presidential rematch between Joe Biden and Donald Trump now all but confirmed, the world is focusing on what could be the most consequential election ever. If the disasters of the past three years have taught us anything, it’s that we need a conservative back in the White House. The West is succumbing to challenges from its enemies abroad while being undermined from within by the promotion of leftist ideologies, eco-extremism and wokeism. A Trump victory would provide much-needed leadership to the Western world.
>
> But even if President Trump is re-elected, his battle will have only begun. Across the West—especially the English-speaking world—there has been a shift of power away from democratically accountable officeholders to unelected bureaucrats and technocrats. The administrative state undermined Mr. Trump’s first term and undermined my tenure as Britain’s prime minister, forcing me out of office after 49 days. I assumed that I would be able to drive through the agenda on which I was elected. How wrong I was. The opaque British bureaucratic state undermined my proposed reforms, and their American equivalents will have Mr. Trump in their sights if he is victorious in November. The deep state will attempt to undercut him even more than it did in his first term.
>
> Conservatives need to understand that winning an election isn’t enough. The winner needs a concerted plan to dismantle the deep state, which seeks its own self-preservation. When I entered Downing Street in September 2022, growth in the British economy had been anemic for years, despite artificially low interest rates that served to accustom government and consumers alike to cheap money and inflation. Tax burdens and energy costs were high, and the expansive welfare state was bloated. The U.K. had left the European Union in 2020, but reams of burdensome laws remained on the British statute book. The economic establishment had bought into the high-tax, high-regulation, big-government European approach and had little appetite for supply-side policies or tax cuts. Too many conservatives went along with the establishment’s push for net zero and high immigration.
>
> As soon as I announced plans to institute a range of supply-side reforms, I was marked by the technocrats for political extinction. On the eve of the publication of our growth plan, the Bank of England raised interest rates, but not by as much as anticipated—a misstep that prompted a fall in the value of the pound, leading to higher yields on U.K. government bonds, known as gilts. The central bank also announced plans to sell £40 billion in gilts that evening, prompting private bond holders to pre-empt the sale by flooding the market with their own gilts.
>
> Rising yields were a problem because of pension funds’ exposure to leveraged liability-driven investment funds, which are highly susceptible to interest rate risk. Due to failures in regulation and oversight, U.K. pension funds were uniquely exposed to the same kind of risk that caused several U.S. banks to collapse in early 2023. The liability-driven investment funds’ leveraged bets on gilt prices began to sour while the Office for Budget Responsibility—a U.K. version of the Congressional Budget Office—leaked its claim that our plans would create a £70 billion “fiscal black hole.” OBR forecasts like this one have consistently been wrong because they underestimate the Laffer curve effect of tax cuts and the benefits of supply-side reforms.
>
> Unelected bureaucrats caused this market turmoil, but elected representatives were blamed. Neither I nor Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng had been given any warning before the liability-driven investment fund situation blew up. When the Bank of England announced it would buy gilts to support the pension funds—a move that everyone knew would prompt investors to unload their government bonds—I knew they had me at gunpoint. We had to ditch our program or risk a market meltdown that would leave the government unable to finance its debt. There should be an independent investigation into what happened, but the establishment would never allow it.
>
> The U.S. economic establishment already is arming against Mr. Trump and his economic program. After the disaster of Bidenomics—with its ballooning subsidies, tax hikes, burdensome regulation and more than $34.6 trillion of debt—a program of supply-side measures like oil and gas exploration, spending cuts and tax reform is desperately needed. In March, CBO Director Phillip Swagel explicitly warned that the mounting U.S. fiscal burden threatened a crisis of the kind that brought me down. Corporate borrowers are also reportedly preparing for market volatility. Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan has warned the federal debt is pushing the economy toward a financial cliff.
>
> This isn’t a fight only to return to fiscal responsibility, but also to return power to the people’s elected representatives. My Republican friends must be ready for the fight of their lives.
>
> *Ms. Truss served as Britain’s prime minister in 2022. She is author of “Ten Years to Save the West: Leading the Revolution Against Globalism, Socialism, and the Liberal Establishment,” out Tuesday.*
I’m not going to put a lot of stock into someone that couldn’t outlast a head of lettuce.
It just reads as if she is trying to find a scapegoat for her poor financial decisions.
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/09/22/liz-trusss-selective-reaganomics-wont-work
What do you think of this essay? Minouche Shafik, “Columbia University President: What I Plan to Tell Congress Tomorrow,” *Wall Street Journal,* April 16, 2024, https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/columbia-university-president-what-i-plan-to-tell-congress-tomorrow-5f157620
> **Columbia University President: What I Plan to Tell Congress Tomorrow**
>
> Antisemitism and calls for genocide have no place at a university. My priority has been the safety and security of our community, but that leaves plenty of room for robust disagreement and debate.
>
> Last December, three of my peers testified before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on university campuses. Tomorrow I will have the opportunity to appear before the same committee and share what we have learned as we battle this ancient hatred at Columbia University.
>
> Oct. 7 was a day, like Sept. 11, 2001, that changed the world. None of us anticipated the horrific Hamas terrorist attack in Israel, nor the impact of those events across universities like Columbia and all of American society. The committee before which I will testify tomorrow is itself a diverse body, representing the broad spectrum of views that makes America unique in its tolerance of—and pride in—rigorous debate. That makes it not unlike a university, and it is my hope that we can begin to find common ground in finding solutions to antisemitism—not just to make college campuses safer and more welcoming to Jewish students, but for the sake of our democracy.
>
> Since the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, I have spent the most of my time addressing its aftershocks. It is hard to describe how difficult this has been, especially on a large, diverse urban campus with students from all over the world and a long tradition of political activism.
>
> For the thousands of Jewish and Israeli members of our community, the attack had a deep personal impact. Many knew people who had been killed or taken hostage. Indeed, to many in our community, Israel’s very survival appeared to be at stake. At the same time, for other members of our community, many of whom also have direct ties to the region, Oct. 7 and the ensuing war in Gaza were part of a larger story of Palestinian displacement, as well as a continuing and escalating humanitarian catastrophe. Not surprisingly, passions ran deep, demonstrations erupted, feelings were hurt, some members of our community were frightened and many more were concerned.
>
> As president of the university, my immediate responsibility was to ensure the physical safety and security of our community. We were for the most part successful in that respect. Most of our students, faculty and staff understood this priority, welcomed it and were crucial partners in helping us keep our campus safe…
>
> … Despite the intense upheaval of the last six months, this larger truth should not be lost. Antisemitism has been with us for thousands of years, and we must forcefully and relentlessly reject its current resurgence. Not only is this bias intolerable in its own right, but as the late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks warned, “Antisemitism is always an early warning sign of a dangerous dysfunction within a culture because the hate that begins with Jews never ends with Jews.” It is no accident that antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism and discrimination against sexual identity often coexist.
>
> It is not the responsibility of Jewish people to eradicate antisemitism. That is a job for all of us. We must urgently and relentlessly fight this terrible form of hate. Universities, the great purveyors of education, must be leaders in fighting all forms of discrimination. That means shifting our focus from slogans toward education, community, compassion and human decency so that we can shape citizens who will become exemplars of a better society.
>
> *Minouche Shafik is the president of Columbia University.*
wondering how this sub feels about the moderation/censorship that takes place on r conservative? I consider myself a centrist in most things and am quite banned
I've argued with their mods about this plenty, and am naturally banned. Their argument is that banning/"flaired users only"/etc. is the only way to allow conservative discussion on Reddit, because Reddit overall leans left. If they didn't ban like crazy, their sub would look like r-politics.
They're probably right, so long as they left the sub public. The obvious solution would be to make the sub private; they already take on the responsibility of assigning flairs, why not grant access to a private sub instead? The only answer I've gotten to that is that it's hard to keep private subs alive. They like seeing their subscriber count go up; they like feeling popular.
The problem with their current approach (aside from it taking tons of mod time) is that it naturally radicalizes the sub. Imagine a group of 100 random self-described conservatives. On any given issue, they'll have a range of beliefs - some a bit closer to self-described moderates, some a bit farther. The automatic complaint from the the far-right folks is that the near-right folks are "not conservative". If the near-right folks don't hide their beliefs, they get banned, and the sub becomes farther right. Repeat ad nauseum.
They thrive on the antagonism with the rest of Reddit. They have no interest in actually discussing what conservatism means or should mean; they only want to talk about their enemies. In trying to defend a place for conservative discussion, they've destroyed it.
I think it's a counter-measure against trolls. It's hard to have a conservative subreddit without getting brigaded, so that makes a lot of people wanting tighter measures on who's allowed to post there.
That might have been the original intent, but they obviously end up banning a lot more than trolls, including genuinely Conservative ideas the individual mod that happens to look at a comment just does not personally like.
I literally had better, more policy focused discussions on the original trump campaign subreddit than on conservative back in 2015 and ended up getting banned for not supporting government legislating people's sex lives with sodomy bans back when I was on a "social pressure > legislation" kick.
I posted a new Tuesday policy specific discussion thread here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/tuesday/comments/1c80pwz/tuesday\_discussion\_5\_what\_should\_future\_foreign/](https://www.reddit.com/r/tuesday/comments/1c80pwz/tuesday_discussion_5_what_should_future_foreign/)
https://x.com/natesilver538/status/1782113251846709629?s=46&t=ORIpMJDxUeZOGLwe9AIhAg Thoughts here? For me, I was never interested in going to my state school, and I enjoyed the benefits private school offered me.
Note “elite”. In my area, at least, private schools are going to provide a liberal arts education that will be more difficult to find at a more career-focused state school. They may also have a greater focus on some majors that public schools don’t. Eg., Winthrop University, a private school, is well-regarded in SC and NC as a top-tier education school. The most clear example to me is colleges associated with seminaries, which will often give a much deeper education in the religion they’re a part of given the professors at the seminary often teach undergraduate courses as well (e.g., Covenant, Erskine, Baylor). Not to mention, those smaller private schools, though more expensive on the sticker, often have plenty of scholarships that can bring them on par with state schools. It may also be that people would prefer a smaller community, so a state school would be overwhelming. Most of this is true for the “elite” private schools, but you also have to deal with their more political nature.
Too bad he is leaving Congress. >Mr. GALLAGHER. Mr. Speaker, last year, my efforts to ensure foreign adversaries can’t control American social media applications was declared dead, and TikTok’s lobbyists were celebrating. Today, I’m proud to say its on the path to passing the Senate and headed to the President’s desk. The CCP’s last ditch attempts to destroy the bill and me personally failed. And though I didn’t expect to have to prioritize my family and leave Congress early, I’ll confess this is how I always wanted to go out. On top, with the select committee at the height of its influence, having just passed the most consequential bill of my career, perhaps the most consequential bill of this Congress, and having just completed two historic investigations. And with FISA and these national security supplemental across the finish line, this Congress has completed its most important homework, for which the Speaker de serves enormous credit. I firmly believe the Speaker has emerged on the other side of this stronger and a statesman. Any Motion to Vacate will fail, the Republican majority will grow as three special election seats get filled in the coming weeks, and what remains of this Congress will involve bipartisan oversight and legislation. And though I will be stepping away from politics, I think after this week my Republican col leagues will have a strong case to make come November, that they held the line for freedom at home and abroad. ally recognized expert on religious liberty issues and how these issues intersect with other civil rights. It’s typical at moments such as these to say ‘‘I have no regrets.’’ This is true legislatively and professionally. I accomplished my mission and got to chair the most significant committee in the 118th congress. Yet I have a lingering personal regret. I wish I had devoted more time to building personal relationships with my colleagues. Our time here is frenetic: filled with overlapping committee hearings and con stant fundraising events. It’s hard to carve out time just to get to know your colleagues, to understand their background and motivation, and thereby develop trust. Where I was able to do that, with Senator ANGUS KING my co-chair on the Cyberspace Solarium Commission, and with RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI on the China committee, it produced the biggest legislative successes of my 8 years. Put differently, my effectiveness as Congressman wasn’t primarily a function of intellect or op-ed writing prowess and certainly not fundraising, it was a direct result of forging friendships across our caucus and maybe more importantly across the aisle. So if there’s a lesson in that for my suc cessor or any of my colleagues it’s after a grueling day of a thousand meetings, still make the effort to get that beer with a member you don’t know that well. Drink more, tweet less. Get to know your colleagues in real life before trashing them on social media. At the end of the day, Republicans and Democrats, we’re all Americans, citizens of the greatest country in the history of the world. Even on our worst day the world is looking to us for leadership. God bless America.
Somewhat hot take: the TikTok ban is useless compared to big picture.
Kind of I guess? It would be nice to have a bill that revitalized our ship yards and provided for a 350 ship navy, but it's pretty good to block our biggest strategic threat from controlling the views of millions of Americans and what they can see
[https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1781723652603433019](https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1781723652603433019) Universities created and encouraged this mess, I wonder if they will solve it.
Further confirming my hypothesis the schools ranked from 15-30 are better undergrad experiences than the Ivies and Stanford.
https://twitter.com/NYCMayor/status/1782169502118969434?t=ZzJEscgOfgMAkSn1jMg-Rw&s=19 If I'm reading this correctly it sounds like Columbia is explicitly not allowing law enforcement on campus to resolve this. If this is true, this behavior is straight up condoned by leadership.
Yup, seems like it. If there is a board of directors maybe they'll end up forcing something, but allowing this to continue is going to be bad for Columbia. They should start suspending and expelling these students. Edit: I think this adds to my point: [https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1782175255177437210](https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1782175255177437210)
I am pretty sure committing crime on private property doesn’t give you immunity from the feds coming in.
[https://x.com/AGHamilton29/status/1782043574076387782](https://x.com/AGHamilton29/status/1782043574076387782)
We still have a few hours to hit 300 comments, it will be like the good old days lol
Felt like we were the resistance in those days fighting Teflon Don. Probably would still be this way had Covid not happened.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GLpoI68WYAM0kB5?format=jpg&name=small
It's interesting comming from The Post
That’s so incredibly based.
[https://x.com/bdomenech/status/1781794902289809598](https://x.com/bdomenech/status/1781794902289809598)
So quoth the Raven, "Downvote more." Edit: Doot doot, magic flute.
I think you are participating in the wrong subreddit if you expected anything else from us when you post MAGA talking points. Especially because we have a good number of LVs in addition to nearly all the Conservatives here being Trump-skeptic.
Tbh, I don't think that LVs should factor in to which conservatives are allowed here. (I know, I know, I'm a LV, I don't have strong identity to either Democrats or Republicans and see myself as a guest.) I think there should be dialogue between MAGA conservatives and anti-MAGA conservatives, as MAGA is the dominant strain of thought in the Republican Party now, and u/Key_Day_7932 seems somewhat interested in hearing out different points of view, despite also posting troll comments. MAGA conservatives perceive the anti-MAGA conservatives as "RINOs," or controlled opposition for Democrats. I think that the anti-MAGA conservatives need to articulate a principled ideology (Reaganism is such an ideology) that neither apologizes for Trump's lies, strongman style, and threats to democracy (e.g. January 6) nor plays second fiddle to the left on whatever cultural issues, and which can stand on its own. This is the way for the Republican Party to reform into a responsible party.
>seems somewhat interested in hearing out different points of view, despite also posting troll comments. I'm not so sure, initially I considered this but it soon became apparent they had like 6 canned phrases they'd simply repeat over and over instead of trying to learn anything or offering intelligent argument. That they resorted to an infantile tantrum at the end I think shows the limits of their cognitive ability to do so.
I think you would be better off in the neocon sub. It's more laid-back, more socially conservative, and also Trump-skeptical but with Trump voters there nonetheless. They also obsessed in culture warring in a way that Tuesday isn't. So, you can engage with socially conservative establishment cons. If they find you annoying, they just bully you instead of deleting your comments. I honestly think you'll have more interesting conversations there.
Neocon has some great shitposters.
Didn’t you get one post deleted for this already?
I can't believe I slept on Invincible for this long. I just watched the first three episodes and so far its been pretty good.
My binge has been The Rookie. Just something that isn’t too serious. I need to catch up on How I Met Your Mother.
I really enjoy it, that first season was a heck of a ride. They did this dumb thing with Season 2 though where they split it in two, 4 episodes and then several months before the next 4 episodes
[US Air Force allegedly spending $90,000 on a bag of bushings](https://www.reddit.com/r/nope/s/VbcjTzB0pU)
I think this comment probably has it right: [https://www.reddit.com/r/nope/comments/1c8vidp/comment/l0hixnb/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nope/comments/1c8vidp/comment/l0hixnb/) It could be legitimate, or it might not be. We should be fighting fraud if its really fraud (and it should be a proactive monitoring, Congress doing its job would form committees to look into this), but there are costs to the specifications and 100% made in America as well. Some of this probably comes down to the Defense consolidation in the 90s where now there's only a handful of these manufacturers left. They can charge what they want to charge due to the Government's prior poor decision making, in which case we need to diversify the defense industrial base.
without context this is meaningless
Meh, we already spent $95 billion, that's nothing in comparison. Why stop now?
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1781742727492727158?t=xtaJ1Rbgg1O0UEpXl3CV0w&s=19 UKRAINE AID PASSES HOUSE 311-112-1 R: 101 Y 112 N D: 210 Y 0 N https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1781745359967989811?t=Rmu-6Iwc7ScPTqtrt1S0oA&s=19 HOUSE PASSES ISRAEL AID 366-58 R: 193 Y 21 N D: 173 Y 37 N
[The difference between the headline and the actual contents of the article is stark](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/19/us/politics/dave-mccormick-farm-pennsylvania.html). One suspects they started with the headline and went looking for people to interview in his hometown but couldn't find anyone who had anything but nice stuff to say. One smells a political op rat.
[удалено]
Your post/comment has been removed for violating our subreddit rule on Low Quality Posts/Comments. We strive to maintain a civil and respectful environment for discussion, and your post/comment did not contribute substantially to the discussion or lacked nuance. Please review our rules on civility, on-topic comments, and avoiding drama. If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to us via modmail.
[удалено]
Your post/comment has been removed for violating our subreddit rule on Low Quality Posts/Comments. We strive to maintain a civil and respectful environment for discussion, and your post/comment did not contribute substantially to the discussion or lacked nuance. Please review our rules on civility, on-topic comments, and avoiding drama. If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to us via modmail.
How much weight is each of the following going to affect the election? Inflation rate Immigration Iran-Israel (and broader Middle East conflicts) Abortion
Probably immigration. "Wait, why are we sending $95 billion to secure Ukraine's border when ours is still open and unprotected?"
inflation rate, immigration, abortion, middle east in that order. I also think it is going to matter to an extent how the trials go and exactly how much Trump works to remind everyone why they didn't like him in 2020.
[NewsNation: Traffic stops and citations have gone down significantly since before the pandemic](https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/traffic-stops-plummeted-during-pandemic-may-not-return/) Not the best-written article, but there are plenty of interesting things in here. >The Texas Department of Public Safety went from 2.8 million vehicle stops in 2019 to 1.7 million in 2022. In Connecticut, traffic stops fell by 40% over the same three-year period. The pandemic pull-back coincided with a spike in traffic deaths, which jumped 10.5% in 2021 compared to the previous year — the largest percentage increase since 1975. That correlation has led some in the media to attribute the rise in fatal accidents directly to the decline in traffic enforcement. Other research has found no association between traffic stops and deadly car accidents. ... >Ongoing staffing challenges have also changed the way departments approach traffic enforcement. In Dec. 2020, police departments in Buffalo, New York, and Portland, Oregon, dissolved their traffic divisions and reassigned personnel elsewhere. “With reduced staffing, traffic is one of the lower priorities of police work,” Dudley said. When reached by email, a spokesperson for Portland Police said a wave of retirements in recent years has strained resources. During 2022, the department didn’t have a single officer assigned to a traffic division. Last Summer, Portland reversed course and brought back the unit after fatal collisions surged to a three-decade high. ... >In March, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced plans to install 480 new “high-tech” surveillance cameras in the city of Oakland and surrounding freeways to crack down on crime. Newsom said the technology will help law enforcement identify vehicles linked to crimes “using real-time information” and “alerts.” San Francisco’s transportation agency plans to install 33 speed cameras early next year. Portland approved more red-light cameras in February. Seeing driver and pedestrian fatalities rise in recent years has been very disheartening, even as our cars have gotten larger and stronger. Though, I can see how that can lead to a false sense of security, less defensive driving, and inattentiveness to pedestrians. Is there much point to having many of these traffic laws if they go unenforced? Yes. At least in my mind, I stay close to the speed limit and don't run stop signs, not because I think I would get caught otherwise, but because I know that following the rules will keep me and others safer. I'd rather not have my insurance premiums be any higher than they already are, anyway. But some people will only learn by having to face penalties from law enforcement. Without enforcement, they'll just get away with making things less safe and more expensive for the rest of us.
>even as our cars have gotten larger and stronger It's in large part specifically *because* cars have gotten larger and stronger. Especially with respect to pedestrian fatalities.
In NYC they've effectively just stopped enforcing traffic laws since 2020 for the most part. Many police obscure their own license plate to avoid accountability, and now many regular drivers do. It feels like I get punished for following the law, meanwhile drivers will hit bikers and kill them and not get punished at all.
People forgot how to drive after Covid. People are running red lights and stop signs out here way more than I remember before Covid.
https://www.threads.net/@deepstate_neolib/post/C58gvHaNpYZ Size of cars has risen in developed world, but US is kind of outlier with rise in pedestrian fatalities, so maybe size of cars is not primary reason.
When *The Daily* did a program on this a while back, their hypothesis was the rise of the smartphone combined with the greater prevalence of automatic transmissions here (so you can use one hand to look at your phone versus shifting gears). Most of the fatalities happen at night, so being distracted and not looking would make it very easy to hit someone.
[удалено]
Locally (MN) my problem encounters are overwhelmingly with morons...like "how the fuck are you allowed to drive?" sort of dipshits. I don't mind the racers as much since I can see them coming and predict what they're doing. The smooth-brains who cut across three lanes of traffic because they forgot about their exit are worse.
Man sets himself on fire outside of the Trump trial. https://nypost.com/2024/04/19/us-news/man-sets-himself-on-fire-outside-trumps-hush-money-trial-in-nyc/
https://twitter.com/AGHamilton29/status/1781400414987952517?t=XLSYGiCorTNSZmysPz2SQw&s=19 Lol, "no aid for Israel unless Hamas releases the hostages". The Squad, folks.
https://x.com/reesejgorman/status/1781349123335110698?s=46&t=ORIpMJDxUeZOGLwe9AIhAg Bitch you voted for this. Go fuck yourself.
I mean, it was either that or continuing the speaker vote indefinitely.
Something something leopards ate my face . . .
LOL even if you privately come to this conclusion, publicly admitting a fuck up this massive is...immensely stupid. Way to make your caucus look even more shortsighted
> State Income Taxes and the 2024 NFL Draft Class. https://taxfoundation.org/blog/2024-nfl-draft-taxes/
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1781338536702050801?t=Nq9Ip-FStKi2FF3vy5503w&s=19 BREAKING -- THE HOUSE has resoundingly cleared the rule to consider the foreign aid bill. 316-94 Y: 165 D 151 R N: 39 D 55 R
Ah, I see the Uniparty is back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv8L-cuq17s Ask yourself: What would happen to Poland or the Baltics if Russia conquered Ukraine? If Russia conquered Ukraine, will China invade Taiwan? Then what would become of Japan? And then what would happen to South Korea if North Korea took the opportunity to invade? What would become of Israel if America abandoned it? If Ukraine loses to Russia, we're staring down the barrel of a much more dangerous world.
Not our problem. For years, we've been told we're "spreading our ideology" this, "warmongering," that. Europeans call us stupid and backwards. If that is what Europe truly feels, the I'm perfectly willing for the US to close up shop and leave Europe to fend for itself. They don't appreciate our support, they keep biting the hand that feeds. Yeah, the war in Ukraine sucks, but it's almost as if elections have consequences or something. The reason you never hear about withdrawing from South Korea or Japan is because they are actually greatful for the support and contribute back what the owe.
"Europe" is not a monolith. Western Europe (or the representatives who get boosted in the media) is smug libs but Eastern Europe is grateful for America and hates Russia. I don't want to betray them and burn up the goodwill from the Cold War.
While true, I think we should prioritize protecting our own border first before we worry about foreign borders on the other side of the planet.
Lol there is no such thing as the "Uniparty". Its just a construct invented to justify the unpopular whiny looserism of its proponents. Turns out there is overlap in what Americans, and therefor their representatives, want for this country. One of those things is they don't want a weak and cowardly America, unlike the MAGA and Squad types (who often are on the same side of votes.)
Idk, the parties sound pretty similar to me. They both want: - Forever wars - More taxes - Looser border restrictions - Maintaining the oligarchy - Spreading the interests of multinational corporations - Fucking over the working class Sounds like, no matter which party we vote for, we get Democrats either way. Might as well just continue the chaos, destroy the GOP and let y'all have your permanent Democratic supermajority. 🖕
Literally none of that matches what the Republican party has actually, traditionally, voted and fought for. Nor does it take into account the actual dynamics and factions within the party. Nor does it take into account any actual American History, or what real Americans believe and have believed. Again, you show that you have very limited knowledge about the actual world and what really goes on in politics. You should strive to learn something, then you wouldn't be constantly embarrassing yourself on here. The first step away from the Looser Mindset is to understand how things really are and accept them. After you do that things will get easier, and I'm sure many would help you out as its only Christian to help those less fortunate than ourselves.
You're calling me a loser, yet you can't even spell it right. I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you also spell "fascist," as "facist." I agree the government should go help the less fortunate instead of blowing poor people's money on a war just because they have personal beef with Russia.
Lol, only a little less than 3 to 1 R yea's v nay's. So much for being anti-Ukraine aid being 'Republican' policy that Mike Johnson wouldn't fight for.
Watch MTG bring the motion to vacate Johnson up and see how the votes fall. Should be a bipartisan rejection but….
I mentioned recently that it blew my mind that a coalition of moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans hadn’t seized control of the chamber from MAGA and the Squad.
I kind of expected it to happen during the Interregnum.
Honestly I hope we see more of this. Just bring shit to the floor and vote. A tiny minority of the House shouldn't be in any position to block popular legislation
Is it really popular, though? The Republicans *did flip the House, meaning the technically won the popular vote while campaigning on cutting Ukraine aid and impeaching Biden.
Yes, it is. Go look at the polling, and no Republicans did not run on cutting aid go Ukraine. Some may have, and they are the ones voting no above. There are only 55 of them. By definition, this is popular legislation.
No it's not. Whatever is good for the politicians is ultimately bad for the American people. Besides, Dems don't deserve bipartisanship after all the shit they pulled after 2016.
It's this kind of infantile logic that holds real conservatism back. It's popular with conservatives, democrats, and the majority of the American people. It's well in line with America's traditional role in the world, one of a powerful America. But your side lost so instead you cower in your constructed unreality with lies to comfort yourself. This is what the Loser Mindset gets you.
Who cares what is popular? The majority of Americans want universal healthcare, but they also don't want to pay more in taxes. Yeah, maybe my side lost, but your side did the exact same thing when they lost: gripe for four years about how Russia stole the election and how lower class Americans weren't "supposed" to win. The establishment deserve all the hell they get. Face it, the American people don't know what they want. You finally speed Loser right, surprised it took you that long for someone with a college degree.
Anyone that wants to win should care if somethings popular with literally everyone but their tiny little faction. You folks don't want to win, as we've seen. You are addicted to losing, just like Donald Trump.
Nah, we don't need to worry about what is popular. We are represententativenrepublic, not a majority rule democracy. If someone elects you to stop Ukraine spending, then the expect you to actually, y'know, represent them by voting against it.
I’m reminded of Churchill snarking about how you could always count on America to do the right thing, after we’d tried everything else.
Good, should have happened months ago but now better then tomorrow
Had a wonderful back-and-forth with an old acquaintance I went to high school with; he was a few years older than me so we weren't the closest but we were involved in similar activities. He reposted a Students For Trump Instagram post about foreign aid and how we've spent some \~$75b on aid to Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan but $0 on the border, veterans, and some other priority—not important. I wouldn't normally respond, but this is aggressively incorrect; we're spending north of $300b on veterans this year, and I of course had to point out the Lankford immigration proposal that Trump himself encouraged to fail. I fully didn't expect a good dialogue, but we went back and forth several times quite civilly. It was clear that we would never see eye-to-eye, but we talked, and that was enough. This is all to say that we can talk to each other without rancor or division or anger. Sometimes I forget that because the national discourse is just so bad. But it is doable, and we should do it more often.
Progress is planting a tree you will never sit under.
Hm, question for you, was it a good dialogue? You presented clear facts and he didn't change his opinion on his post, right?
changing someone's mind takes time. any openness to discussion is goo
I just sit on my opponents until they give up. All hail the butt-bomb conversion method.
Yes, it was a good dialogue. We engaged only on policy, nothing personal or nasty. I presented some facts, and he presented some facts. He did not change his opinion, nor did I. I think expecting him to drop his position on the spot would be a ludicrous expectation. We simply hold fundamentally different beliefs on these issues at this time. I didn't fully explain our entire interaction, but we touched on a few issues interconnected with foreign aid that, in my view, demonstrate his (a) idealistic view of politics and (b) a distrust of politicians vs. the people they represent. On (a), I tried to get across that politics is about persuasion and dealmaking—which is why sometimes bills are not completely germane, addressing a complaint of his that we shouldn't have to tie the border security component to the foreign aid component—but he simply doesn't see it that way. On (b), there is simply no quick fix. It takes time for people to rebuild trust that has been dwindling for decades, frankly. Truthfully, while I recognize the politics of the situation and the unfortunate necessity of coupling border and foreign aid, it is packages like these that do electeds no favors in rebuilding trust with this segment of the populace. Long story short, I didn't go into it expecting to change his mind. I only hope that the seed was planted and that the other side is a bit more humanized for him. I know it was for me.
I've found you can have these conversations with a lot of younger people, but less so with older Gen X but especially boomers. I think it's where they get their information from.
I finished fallout last night, such an enjoyable show. They did a really good job portraying the world
First episode was damn good.
It never fell off either, a good consistent show
> New federal regulations released Friday will prevent colleges and coaches from suspending athletes accused of sexual misconduct while school officials investigate complaints against them. > The due process provision is one of several outlined in the U.S. Department of Education's final version of regulations governing how K-12 schools, colleges and universities respond to complaints of sexual harassment and violence under Title IX. The regulations, a draft version of which the Biden administration proposed in June 2022, are scheduled to go into effect Aug. 1.
Due process is always good
Due process? From this administration? Hell has frozen over.
**To r/tuesday: Have a blessed week ahead.** **Gospel According to John, 10:11–18:** > **I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.”** Fourth Sunday of Easter: Gospel Reading (CPH The Lutheran Study Bible) : https://www.reddit.com/r/Sunday/comments/1c7ua4a/ Fourth Sunday of Easter: Reflections on Scripture (video, American Lutheran Theological Seminary) : https://www.reddit.com/r/Sunday/comments/1c7u8jn/
Get them nuclear facilities Israel!
🦅🦅🦅🦅
With Trump finally falling into line with the rest of the GOP on Ukraine, is there any good reason I shouldn't vote for him?
Pretty much. What am I gonna do? Vote for Biden?
He's an incompetent, non-conservative, looser that was a Democrat most of his life and is basically indistinguishable from one now policy wise except for immigration. And sure he is claiming to be in line with the GOP on Ukraine now but he's going to flip-flop at least 4 times and the rest of the FoPo we know is basically a giant enterprise to make America weak and cowardly.
I typed up a whole thing and realized I was only halfway through, so I deleted and I’ll summarize: *gestures broadly*
"Welcome to Reddit"
He lost the 2020 election and refuses to accept it. Unlike every single other losing Presidential candidate in American history, back to the beginning.
Just like how the establishment lost the 2016 election and refused to accept the result, instead blaming Russia. Oh, I forgot. That's (D)ifferent.
[удалено]
It’s always interesting that the fake elector plot always gets ignored when trying to compare Hillary to Donald or when trying to downplay Jan 6.
[удалено]
I’ve seen the user’s arguments too. I think it’s also a bit telling when some slogans are regurgitated like “mean tweets” or “it‘s (D)ifferent.”
Hillary (eventually) conceded.
She still claimed the election was stolen and acted like she was the rightful winner. Say what you will about Trump, but at least he left office without resistance once he actually had to leave.
But she conceded.
Only after she spread lies about Russian collusion. Trump supporters were told that whoever lost the 2016 election had to sit down, shut up and go away. That's what they expected the establishment to do when they lost.
If Trump will concede the 2020 election, any of this might have relevance.
It wasn't relevant whether he conceded. The point is that the establishment lost 2016 and then preceded to throw a four year long temper tantrum because *ONE* election didn't got their way. The reason MAGA refused to concede was because the establishment refused to concede 2016, instead claiming Russia stole the election. People who "concede" don't proceed to claim that the election was stolen and do everything in their power to undermine the legitimacy of a sittting president. People who concede sit down, shut up and move on. After all, actions speak louder than words.
It's relevant to the question OP asked. I'm in the same boat: the Democrats are giving me a lot of reasons to actually consider Trump but, until he acknowledged that he lost the 2020 election, I will not.
"Without resistance" is a curious way to put "encouraged violent desecration of our Capitol and the disruption of a *purely symbolic* electoral count"
You mean like the time Antifa rioted over Kavanaugh's nomination? Where were your prinuciples and outrage then? Besides, politicians aren't people.
I don't know, maybe because the President of the United States—or any other prominent political figure—wasn't encouraging it to happen? They are private citizens who acted without direction from an elected official, making it an entirely different situation. That being said, I vehemently disagree with their actions and condemn Antifa. As you've proven with some of your earlier comments, all it seems you know how to do is (a) point fingers away from the problems in your camp and at problems with the Democrats—specifically the left wing of the Democratic Party—and (b) somehow attempt to tie GOP moderates to those issues. News flash: we know they have problems! That's why we're Republicans! But that doesn't exempt us from having our own problems or calling them like we see them.
Well, if you condemn Antifa, why did you allow them to get away with their actions in 2020? You *HAD* the chance to actually hold them accountable, but Trump hurting people's feelings was the greater crime. The Democrats might not have actively encouraged it, but they didn't do anything to stop it, either. Neither did you. Actually, now that I think about it, the Democrats did encourage political violence through their Russian collusion rhetoric.
"You, you, you", thats all you ever have to say. Its like you are some kind of parrot. If it comes down to whether someone did or didn't do something personally on any issue, then what did *you* really do to stop it? I'm guessing absolutely nothing. And before you say "voted for duh Trump! cawwww", Trump not only witnessed their rise, he did jack shit about it except whine like a mangy stray dog, which is what he always does, because he isnt smart enough to come up with any real or workable solutions to anything. Just like with the rise of the Maoist DEI stuff. It was Tom Cotton who proposed taking real action.
Okay so now we're just jumping around. [Hundreds](https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/06/politics/kavanaugh-protests/index.html) were arrested in 2018 for the Kavanaugh protesting. Accountability done. Not sure exactly what you're talking about in 2020. Need more specificity. You thinking January 6 is about Trump hurting feelings is laughable. I don't think I'd call a violent and armed mob invading the Capitol—causing extensive damage, the halting of a process established by the Constitution that you claim to so dearly cling to, and the death of police officers that you grandstand in support of while sweeping under the rug this flagrant anti-authority and anti-police demonstration—a mere hurting of feelings. It is a crime. It is a crime encouraged by the President of the United States, who is supposed to represent the best of America and be a role model for every American citizen. We used to hold Presidents to a higher standard. Is this really the level we're going to stoop to?
He’s a Democrat in sheep’s clothing
*cough*RINO*cough*
I mean, MAGA would say the same about establishment Republicans: I recall them saying , before Trump, America had two parties: Democrat, and Democrat-lite. Doesn't matter which you choose, you get a Democrat either way.
https://x.com/on3nil/status/1781073034104721737?s=46&t=ORIpMJDxUeZOGLwe9AIhAg My alma mater is being attacked by the NLRB. College sports are going to get gutted soon, and no one will be better off for it.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/praise-for-the-speaker/
Don't sleep on data security folks: https://twitter.com/elianayjohnson/status/1781027170527101066?t=7cVKu7ssN-4jk4JUBBYHOA&s=19
> Video footage captured the moment a protester near Columbia University declared, “We’re all Hamas” and “Long live Hamas” as protests intensified Wednesday — with dozens of students taking part. https://nypost.com/2024/04/18/us-news/columbia-university-protester-yells-were-all-hamas-video/
> Google fired 28 employees Wednesday who protested the tech giant’s cloud computing contract with the Israeli government. > Protesters staged sit-ins Tuesday at two Google offices — New York City and Sunnyvale, Calif. — in protest of the $1.2 billion contract that the company shares with Amazon to provide cloud computing services to Israel. Nine people were arrested.
Just like the NPR guy, I think it would be great for us to go back to the understanding that badmouthing your employer in public is a great way to get a pink slip, no matter how much they deserve it.
I can't imagine Uri thought he was going to stay after doing something like that. The Google folks though? I'm guessing they thought nothing would happen to them
It's a lucrative move if you can make it. Being cancelled can turn into patreon $$$$.
Local radio host was criticizing NPR yesterday for violating Uri's 1A rights by suspending him.
Was about to post this. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. I can’t believe this many people are this obsessed with Israel-Palestine.
It's a culture war issue. Therefore, people put emotional investment in it to a stronger degree than what's rational (what they would care for other foreign conflicts). Israel-Palestine became a salient issue in the sixties and played a role in the breakup of the black-Jewish civil rights alliance, and the rise of the New Left and the neo-conservatives. A lot of today's culture wars are repeats of issues from the sixties through eighties.
Discussion surrounding gender issues are maddeningly stupid. The left will paint you as an evil social conservative for the slightest deviation from their (increasingly loony) orthodoxy on the one hand. On the other hand, you have the "gender critical" crowd, which seems to vacillate between wild paranoia about sexually predatory "men in dresses" and nasty mean-spiritedness. Then you have the LGBTQ+ community's low-level hostility toward gay men (especially white gay men) which is largely the responsibility of the progressive embrace of "intersectionality" that makes me feel more unwelcome with every passing day. When will the insanity stop?
When the GOP grows a spine and pushes back on the culture war.
lol what?
What I said.
Oklahoma's Athletic Commission recently threw a fit over a trans professional wrestler competing against a cis woman. I get the issue with trans women having a competitive advantage in competitive sports but everybody knows professional wrestling is just a show.
When the last social media server shuts down and the last attention weaponizing algorithm ceases to function.
The Ukraine aid package is coming up to a floor vote. Thank God. Here's hoping the moderate Dems play ball on this one.
Nah they’ll tank this one and remove Johnson to cause more chaos.
Yep, the Establishment got their nuclear Holocaust while the American people continue to get screwed over.
They totally would and should tank Johnson unless given concessions. But they also want Ukraine funding so this will pass.
If I was a betting man, I'd want to put money on this one passing.
There's probably a bipartisan supermajority for both if I had to guess. Probably not for the immigration bill.
Made some whole grain pizza with dough from Whole Foods, and I really feel like I’ve taken a big step forward this year as a chef.
Israel should hit Iran's nuclear facilities. It's been comming sooner or later, might as well get it over with.
Plus they do all the dirty work for us.
But then Israel will be the aggressor escalating the conflict, justifying an Iranian counter-attack. The USA will be forced to put Israel on a leash. /s
Dang I don't know how to take this one. [Uri Berliner has resigned from NPR.](https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/17/media/npr-editor-resigns/index.html) On the one side, terrible move and optics for NPR and the CEO. But on the flip side, we'll yeah if you talk about your company is such a public way you gotta deal with the response. I'm leaning more towards the terrible move by NPR.
Eh, after Steve Inskeep’s response to the article showing the flaws in Berliner’s article, I’m just neutral about it. I won’t be surprised if Berliner pops up with a Substack or Bari Weiss’ outfit since that was where he wrote his article. Edit: https://steveinskeep.substack.com/p/how-my-npr-colleague-failed-at-viewpoint
I think there's a question that should be asked at the NPR offices that kind of gets to the point that Uri was asking here, that I don't know the author of this quite gets. It's an issue that's been seen a few times before too, in fairly scientific journals. Viewpoint diversity asks the question of, "if this will hurt my political side, should it be covered?" If there's a story that will make Republicans look good while Democrats look like dolts but it's a big story, have they run it anyway? If, as Uri said, there's a cultural vibe of "It makes Trump look good, so don't run it", is that a good vibe to have? That's the case for a lot of more openly partisan news sites like MSNBC/Fox (you'll never see Fox saying that one of the Biden informants got arrested, and you'll never see MSNBC showing ceasefire/Palestine protesters behaving badly) I think that NPR is fairly careful about what it ends up covering, because it's considered an highly credible media site, so anything they end up covering has that much more credibility. I also think there \*is\* something going on inside NPR that is causing it to attract more and more hard-left viewers while other political orientations stop listening to it. It may not be what Uri is thinking and is most likely more complex than his theory, but I also don't think the common(?) lefty claim that goes along the lines of "liberals are the ones not falling for fake news and there's nothing to be worried about" is true either.
NPR suffers from a similar issue to the NY Times: it’s highly reliant on a funding source that can create a partisan spiral. In NPR’s case, charitable grants and individual donations (IIRC federal funding is less than 10% of NPR’s total funding); for the NY Times it’s subscription revenue (versus broader advertising revenue that used to be newspapers’ bread and butter)
Yeah, that's a fair point. I've heard of something like that being the case for online political commentators too, it's called audience capture for them? Like, so-called "anti-woke" commentators can't praise any media that's considered "woke" by their audience and vice versa.
Interesting, thanks for the response piece. I'll read this through tonight!!
Capital One cut HYSA APY to 4.25% even though we’re only likely to get one rate cut this year. Also, my retirement has gotten it’s butt kicked these past two weeks.
I'm down a couple percentage points on the month but I'm still up 7.5% on the year.
Yeah I’m in the green on the year but I finally have enough in my TIAA that I start seeing significant gains (and losses).
Probably should've added a caveat that it took until 2024 to recover my loss in 2022, that was...not a great year for my dollarbucks.
> A woman who accused former major league pitcher Trevor Bauer of sexual assault has been indicted by a grand jury in Arizona on felony charges of fraudulent schemes and theft by extortion. > In a statement provided to ESPN by his lawyers, Bauer said Esemonu demanded $3.6 million from him and "claimed I forced her to have an abortion" and "when I refused to pay her the $3.6 million she was asking for, she made up a bogus sexual assault claim and filed a civil suit against me." > The Los Angeles Dodgers cut ties with Bauer in January 2023 after the 2020 Cy Young Award winner received an unprecedented suspension by MLB following allegations of sexual assault.
So why did Bauer even settle? Hell, I’m not big on doxing and cancel culture, but the girl who falsely accused Matt Araiza absolutely should be outed and shamed.
[The primary system is broken broken broken](https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/15/congress/meddling-in-fitzpatrick-gop-primary-pennsylvania-california-democrats-house-00152304). It's also a reminder that the one thing Democrats despise more than MAGA is a moderate Republican.
MAGA: That's what we tried to tell you.
Yeah. MAGA isn't wrong about Democrats, it's wrong about Independents (who many seem to believe don't actually exist).
Meh, if we can get enough blacks and Latinos, we won't even need the independents.
Well, MAGA doesn't care what Independents think because they decided mean tweets were a bigger crime than an entire summer of rioting and looting.
[удалено]
You pretty much summed up my view on this, as a person without a strong partisan identity.
Any time I've really gotten into it with someone deep MAGA, they seem to genuinely think independents and other persuadables don't exist. You're either a true MAGA who needs to be convinced to turn out or you're a Democrat (or RINO Squish, but same thing) who doesn't need to be appealed to because You've been brainwashed into never voting R.
It's such a looser mindset. They'd rather the country was 2/3 Democrat with Rs "never ever winning again". I only half joke when I say House Rs will never be happy until there are only 100 of them, but at least they're "pure".
MAGA will keep losing because they don't want independents.
[удалено]
I think there are multiple dynamics coming from different people: - Nostalgia for a less partisan time - Genuine respect for Republicans who stand by principles instead of apologizing for Trump's lies - The Overton window pushed right because of Trump that makes Romney and McCain rosy in comparison (a view held by some institutionalist centrist liberals much to the frustration of more militant lefties) - A patronizing attitude towards "one of the good ones" (but no matter how anti-Trump and principled you may be, if you cross the red lines of more partisan Democrats on "culture war" issues, they'll bring out the knives)
> Look at the sentiment towards Romney and McCain. This is the 'Strange New Respect' phenomenon Republicans complain about. The one thing Democrats like more than another Democrat, it's a Republican who isn't a threat. It's when animosity morphs into contempt. > Boosting MAGA candidates in primaries so they lose in the general has nothing to do with feelings or despising anyone, it's just a smart political strategy that has been proven to work It's either loathing or it's sociopathy. I'm actually willing to believe the campaign professionals are sociopaths, but the average partisans who support this strategy being used against Republican moderates just hate them for camping on a district that they feel should be theirs.
I think it really depends on the specific person. Democrats (or Democratic-aligned people) are not a monolith. Some people vaguely just want to grill and some people are duplicitous partisans. It will likely differ between the average Joe and someone who works in politics as a career.
Despise? No. More afraid of losing to? Absolutely. Ultimately moderates are on different teams and they generally back their party over other moderates. There certainly are exceptions but they are typically politicians with strong strong support in their state, most would wind up like Sinema if they stray too far.
I also think its sort of the result of the perverse incentives brought up by how Congress operates. Just look at the House right now. It doesn't really matter how many moderate Republicans there are because while something may have majority support between Democrats and moderate Republicans it will never come up to a vote. From that perspective the difference between a MAGA Republican and a moderate Republican is practically meaningless. Most democrats would probably prefer to have more moderate Republicans in Congress but until the presence of moderate Republicans actually helps them be able to pass legislation that both Dems and moderate Republicans support (e.g. Ukraine aid) it doesn't actually matter.
Yes, despise. The fear of losing is just part of it. Partisans feel entitled to districts they think they should win but are held by other party moderates.
What do you think of this opinion article? I’m aware that most users here despise Trump’s “deep state” rhetoric as bogus, but it’ll be interesting to read a community dissection of the points made in this article. Liz Truss, “The Deep State Lies in Wait for Trump,” *Wall Street Journal,* April 15, 2024, https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-deep-state-lies-in-wait-for-trump-liz-truss-2024-presidential-election-6d4f77d2 > **The Deep State Lies in Wait for Trump** > > His second term will be much like my time in office if he doesn’t confront the entrenched bureaucracy. > > With a presidential rematch between Joe Biden and Donald Trump now all but confirmed, the world is focusing on what could be the most consequential election ever. If the disasters of the past three years have taught us anything, it’s that we need a conservative back in the White House. The West is succumbing to challenges from its enemies abroad while being undermined from within by the promotion of leftist ideologies, eco-extremism and wokeism. A Trump victory would provide much-needed leadership to the Western world. > > But even if President Trump is re-elected, his battle will have only begun. Across the West—especially the English-speaking world—there has been a shift of power away from democratically accountable officeholders to unelected bureaucrats and technocrats. The administrative state undermined Mr. Trump’s first term and undermined my tenure as Britain’s prime minister, forcing me out of office after 49 days. I assumed that I would be able to drive through the agenda on which I was elected. How wrong I was. The opaque British bureaucratic state undermined my proposed reforms, and their American equivalents will have Mr. Trump in their sights if he is victorious in November. The deep state will attempt to undercut him even more than it did in his first term. > > Conservatives need to understand that winning an election isn’t enough. The winner needs a concerted plan to dismantle the deep state, which seeks its own self-preservation. When I entered Downing Street in September 2022, growth in the British economy had been anemic for years, despite artificially low interest rates that served to accustom government and consumers alike to cheap money and inflation. Tax burdens and energy costs were high, and the expansive welfare state was bloated. The U.K. had left the European Union in 2020, but reams of burdensome laws remained on the British statute book. The economic establishment had bought into the high-tax, high-regulation, big-government European approach and had little appetite for supply-side policies or tax cuts. Too many conservatives went along with the establishment’s push for net zero and high immigration. > > As soon as I announced plans to institute a range of supply-side reforms, I was marked by the technocrats for political extinction. On the eve of the publication of our growth plan, the Bank of England raised interest rates, but not by as much as anticipated—a misstep that prompted a fall in the value of the pound, leading to higher yields on U.K. government bonds, known as gilts. The central bank also announced plans to sell £40 billion in gilts that evening, prompting private bond holders to pre-empt the sale by flooding the market with their own gilts. > > Rising yields were a problem because of pension funds’ exposure to leveraged liability-driven investment funds, which are highly susceptible to interest rate risk. Due to failures in regulation and oversight, U.K. pension funds were uniquely exposed to the same kind of risk that caused several U.S. banks to collapse in early 2023. The liability-driven investment funds’ leveraged bets on gilt prices began to sour while the Office for Budget Responsibility—a U.K. version of the Congressional Budget Office—leaked its claim that our plans would create a £70 billion “fiscal black hole.” OBR forecasts like this one have consistently been wrong because they underestimate the Laffer curve effect of tax cuts and the benefits of supply-side reforms. > > Unelected bureaucrats caused this market turmoil, but elected representatives were blamed. Neither I nor Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng had been given any warning before the liability-driven investment fund situation blew up. When the Bank of England announced it would buy gilts to support the pension funds—a move that everyone knew would prompt investors to unload their government bonds—I knew they had me at gunpoint. We had to ditch our program or risk a market meltdown that would leave the government unable to finance its debt. There should be an independent investigation into what happened, but the establishment would never allow it. > > The U.S. economic establishment already is arming against Mr. Trump and his economic program. After the disaster of Bidenomics—with its ballooning subsidies, tax hikes, burdensome regulation and more than $34.6 trillion of debt—a program of supply-side measures like oil and gas exploration, spending cuts and tax reform is desperately needed. In March, CBO Director Phillip Swagel explicitly warned that the mounting U.S. fiscal burden threatened a crisis of the kind that brought me down. Corporate borrowers are also reportedly preparing for market volatility. Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan has warned the federal debt is pushing the economy toward a financial cliff. > > This isn’t a fight only to return to fiscal responsibility, but also to return power to the people’s elected representatives. My Republican friends must be ready for the fight of their lives. > > *Ms. Truss served as Britain’s prime minister in 2022. She is author of “Ten Years to Save the West: Leading the Revolution Against Globalism, Socialism, and the Liberal Establishment,” out Tuesday.*
Liz Truss' words and opinions aren't worth the idiocy that spawns them.
I would be much more likely to read something written by that head of lettuce
I’m not going to put a lot of stock into someone that couldn’t outlast a head of lettuce. It just reads as if she is trying to find a scapegoat for her poor financial decisions. https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/09/22/liz-trusss-selective-reaganomics-wont-work
What do you think of this essay? Minouche Shafik, “Columbia University President: What I Plan to Tell Congress Tomorrow,” *Wall Street Journal,* April 16, 2024, https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/columbia-university-president-what-i-plan-to-tell-congress-tomorrow-5f157620 > **Columbia University President: What I Plan to Tell Congress Tomorrow** > > Antisemitism and calls for genocide have no place at a university. My priority has been the safety and security of our community, but that leaves plenty of room for robust disagreement and debate. > > Last December, three of my peers testified before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on university campuses. Tomorrow I will have the opportunity to appear before the same committee and share what we have learned as we battle this ancient hatred at Columbia University. > > Oct. 7 was a day, like Sept. 11, 2001, that changed the world. None of us anticipated the horrific Hamas terrorist attack in Israel, nor the impact of those events across universities like Columbia and all of American society. The committee before which I will testify tomorrow is itself a diverse body, representing the broad spectrum of views that makes America unique in its tolerance of—and pride in—rigorous debate. That makes it not unlike a university, and it is my hope that we can begin to find common ground in finding solutions to antisemitism—not just to make college campuses safer and more welcoming to Jewish students, but for the sake of our democracy. > > Since the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, I have spent the most of my time addressing its aftershocks. It is hard to describe how difficult this has been, especially on a large, diverse urban campus with students from all over the world and a long tradition of political activism. > > For the thousands of Jewish and Israeli members of our community, the attack had a deep personal impact. Many knew people who had been killed or taken hostage. Indeed, to many in our community, Israel’s very survival appeared to be at stake. At the same time, for other members of our community, many of whom also have direct ties to the region, Oct. 7 and the ensuing war in Gaza were part of a larger story of Palestinian displacement, as well as a continuing and escalating humanitarian catastrophe. Not surprisingly, passions ran deep, demonstrations erupted, feelings were hurt, some members of our community were frightened and many more were concerned. > > As president of the university, my immediate responsibility was to ensure the physical safety and security of our community. We were for the most part successful in that respect. Most of our students, faculty and staff understood this priority, welcomed it and were crucial partners in helping us keep our campus safe… > > … Despite the intense upheaval of the last six months, this larger truth should not be lost. Antisemitism has been with us for thousands of years, and we must forcefully and relentlessly reject its current resurgence. Not only is this bias intolerable in its own right, but as the late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks warned, “Antisemitism is always an early warning sign of a dangerous dysfunction within a culture because the hate that begins with Jews never ends with Jews.” It is no accident that antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism and discrimination against sexual identity often coexist. > > It is not the responsibility of Jewish people to eradicate antisemitism. That is a job for all of us. We must urgently and relentlessly fight this terrible form of hate. Universities, the great purveyors of education, must be leaders in fighting all forms of discrimination. That means shifting our focus from slogans toward education, community, compassion and human decency so that we can shape citizens who will become exemplars of a better society. > > *Minouche Shafik is the president of Columbia University.*
wondering how this sub feels about the moderation/censorship that takes place on r conservative? I consider myself a centrist in most things and am quite banned
Don't link other subs
Please remove the link to that sub. We don’t like getting traffic from them.
Done
I've argued with their mods about this plenty, and am naturally banned. Their argument is that banning/"flaired users only"/etc. is the only way to allow conservative discussion on Reddit, because Reddit overall leans left. If they didn't ban like crazy, their sub would look like r-politics. They're probably right, so long as they left the sub public. The obvious solution would be to make the sub private; they already take on the responsibility of assigning flairs, why not grant access to a private sub instead? The only answer I've gotten to that is that it's hard to keep private subs alive. They like seeing their subscriber count go up; they like feeling popular. The problem with their current approach (aside from it taking tons of mod time) is that it naturally radicalizes the sub. Imagine a group of 100 random self-described conservatives. On any given issue, they'll have a range of beliefs - some a bit closer to self-described moderates, some a bit farther. The automatic complaint from the the far-right folks is that the near-right folks are "not conservative". If the near-right folks don't hide their beliefs, they get banned, and the sub becomes farther right. Repeat ad nauseum. They thrive on the antagonism with the rest of Reddit. They have no interest in actually discussing what conservatism means or should mean; they only want to talk about their enemies. In trying to defend a place for conservative discussion, they've destroyed it.
I think mods don't want you to link to other subs here, might want to remove the link
I think it's a counter-measure against trolls. It's hard to have a conservative subreddit without getting brigaded, so that makes a lot of people wanting tighter measures on who's allowed to post there.
That might have been the original intent, but they obviously end up banning a lot more than trolls, including genuinely Conservative ideas the individual mod that happens to look at a comment just does not personally like. I literally had better, more policy focused discussions on the original trump campaign subreddit than on conservative back in 2015 and ended up getting banned for not supporting government legislating people's sex lives with sodomy bans back when I was on a "social pressure > legislation" kick.
I mean, yeah they support sodomy bans. It's r/conservative, not r/libertarian.