Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 443

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time

I highly doubt it was a hacker. If so, they would have done something more obvious than liking a video.

It was either a staffer or the man himself. And yes, warb. Staffers use politicians accounts all the time, in general more often than the actual politicians do.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Either way, some low level minion is probably going to be thrown under the bus to make this go away if they did the deed or not.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

I highly doubt it was a hacker. If so, they would have done something more obvious than liking a video.

It was either a staffer or the man himself. And yes, warb. Staffers use politicians accounts all the time, in general more often than the actual politicians do.

+2

Author
Time

In Waebler’s America, everything is logical and has a reason.

Author
Time

*sigh*


E!-A!-G!-L!-E!-S! EAGLES!!!
SUPERBOWL CHAMPS!!!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

The account has his name on it. It is his account.

Sure. And it’s his face on the billboard, and so on. When your name and face are regularly handed off to others to create a message to associate with it, sometimes the best you can do is pull the offending material after-the-fact and presumably identify/deal with the person who created it. If you consider Twitter passwords to be sacrosanct things only to be given to people with the highest vetted clearance, you would be (perhaps properly) horrified by how it works every day in much of the world, where the intern gets handed it on day 1.

If it is the case that any new intern gets handed the password on day 1, I would suggest changing the name of the twitter account. Maybe change it to “Ted Cruz campaign” or “The Office of Ted Cruz” or “Ted Cruz INC” or “The Staff of Ted Cruz”. Something that indicate it is a twitter account belonging to his group(what it is called), and not his own private twitter account.

But, politically, he can’t. Cruz represents about 28 million constituents (which is appalling but true). And yet people who go through the trouble of writing to (or e-mailing, or tweeting, etc) their Senator want to feel like they got a one-on-one exchange with a US Senator, where their opinion was, at least temporarily, given the undivided attention of someone who could actually help. Which is ridiculous even for a decent Senator, let alone the likes of Cruz.

If you get a response back from “the office of Ted Cruz”, or “one of about twenty interns who just started working this month for Ted Cruz” – yes, it’s honest and accurate, but it’s politically counterproductive. It gives the voter the (probably accurate) impression that the Senator most likely will never set eyes on what most people write to them, which doesn’t exactly make you have good feelings about them come re-election time. So they keep up the facade of “oh yes, you’re really communicating with me personally” because it makes them seem like the sort of Senator people want to have.

It’s not just social media. Write a letter, and you’ll get a letter back signed by the Senator (well, with a printed image of the Senator’s signature). The return address will say the office of so-and-so, but the letter itself will look personal. I’m dating myself here, but I wrote a letter to the newly-elected Bernie Sanders when he was in the House, and when he actually wrote back it was like Christmas. OMG! Mr Smith goes to Washington WORKS! Woohoo citizen democracy! But seriously, upon reflection, it was just a form letter.

Showbiz and politics. Not so different after all.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

I suppose that is true.


E!-A!-G!-L!-E!-S! EAGLES!!!
SUPERBOWL CHAMPS!!!

Author
Time

Are you guys implying that letter I got from Santa was faked?

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

To be fair, Warb isn’t saying Cruz himself made the post, with it being his account. Warb said Cruz is responsible for (and therefore has control of) posts since it’s his account, and thus needs to be more careful with whom he gives access, which I agree with.

From my understanding, whether politicians give account access to staff is not the issue, but rather the wisdom of giving access to any-staffer-or-their-dog. To suggest that Cruz has no control whatsoever of his own account I think unnecessarily absolves him of any responsibility over it. It’s his account, therefore he is responsible. If he or his staff gave access to his or their staff, apparently doing so was unwise given the outcome.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yhwx said:

This PewDiePie guy doesn’t look good.

https://kotaku.com/indie-dev-calls-for-copyright-strikes-against-pewdiepie-1803099736

I listened to a podcast on the topic of DMCA’ing Let’s Plays.

https://headgum.com/robot-congress/robot-congress-46-pewdiepies-dmca-dilemma

Apparently Campo Santo is definitely legally within their rights to DMCA any and all Let’s Play content of their games, given that the “license” on the FAQ page of their website is (by default under the law) revocable at any time to any individual, and the work is not original but derivative. However, Campo Santo would not be able to sue PewDiePie for the money he already previously made under said license.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

I think the DNC as a whole is partially to blame. The very fact that there is a superdelegate system, disproportionally and undemocratically favoring the voice of the elite, allowed Hillary to grab the nomination when the more likeable Bernie Sanders might have defeated Trump. The fact that the so-called “Democrat” Party represents something so opposite, the fact that the “people’s party” favors the highest ranking officials over the layman by an astronomical ratio, and the fact that the corruption in the nomination process is so widespread, all indicate to me that that they sealed their own fate by pushing HRC to the front of the line. Those who feel that Democratic politicians are morally superior to Republican politicians are simply selective in what facts they recall.

Author
Time

darth_ender said:

I think the DNC as a whole is partially to blame. The very fact that there is a superdelegate system, disproportionally and undemocratically favoring the voice of the elite, allowed Hillary to grab the nomination when the more likeable Bernie Sanders might have defeated Trump. The fact that the so-called “Democrat” Party represents something so opposite, the fact that the “people’s party” favors the highest ranking officials over the layman by an astronomical ratio, and the fact that the corruption in the nomination process is so widespread, all indicate to me that that they sealed their own fate by pushing HRC to the front of the line. Those who feel that Democratic politicians are morally superior to Republican politicians are simply selective in what facts they recall.

The Republican politicians just about all spinelessly endorsed Trump. Case closed on moral superiority.


E!-A!-G!-L!-E!-S! EAGLES!!!
SUPERBOWL CHAMPS!!!

Author
Time

The DNC superdelegate argument is tough because Hillary still won the popular vote.

Author
Time

Everybody says ‘Bernie would have won’ or ‘Bernie wouldn’t have won,’ but I won’t really believe either until I see some polling data.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

The DNC superdelegate argument is tough because Hillary still won the popular vote.

He was saying that the fact that the superdelegate system exists is a factor, not just its results.