CatBus

DuracellEnergizer said:

CatBus said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

TV’s Frink said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

One of these animes tells the truth, but the other lies. You can ask only one of them one question. Or something.

You just made me imagine an anime based on the life of Donald Trump and I hate you for it.

And it’s hentai, too.

No tentacle, no tentacle. You’re the tentacle!

Tentacle hentai with Donald Trump. R’lyeh has risen.

http://monster.wikia.com/wiki/Azathoth

Azathoth is a deity in the Cthulhu Mythos and Dream Cycle stories of H. P. Lovecraft and other authors. Its epithets include The Nuclear Chaos, The Daemon Sultan and The Blind Idiot God, who unintentionally created the universe & sits at the center of it. He is said to be a swirling mass of tentacles reaching an impossible size.

In spite of his impossible size, Azathoth’s doctors have claimed he is not technically obese.

DuracellEnergizer said:

TV’s Frink said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

One of these animes tells the truth, but the other lies. You can ask only one of them one question. Or something.

You just made me imagine an anime based on the life of Donald Trump and I hate you for it.

And it’s hentai, too.

No tentacle, no tentacle. You’re the tentacle!

Rondan said:

Hi Catbus
I noticed at line 94 when 3PO meets R2 at the Jawas He says “R2, it is you! It is you!” But in the swe-full he says is = är in italic to make it stand out because 3PO puts some load on the word. Do you want to keep the format or should I remowe it? Other than that the SW subtitle is now finished. I am now working on ESB, but it will be much faster because I copy/paste from ESB:r with a few tweeks to make the subtitle work. Do you want the subtitle now or do you want to wait for ESB? Or until I am finished with ROTJ?

I believe our Swedish subtitles are straight from the Nordic GOUT, while our English subs are pretty much from scratch, which would explain differences. I don’t mind if the emphasis tags don’t match between languages. You can choose whatever seems best in Swedish.

I’d prefer to receive the subtitles for all three films at once, if that’s possible. I know there’s some deadlines coming up with a new release of ESB DeEd 2.5 at some point, but so far it seems like we’ll have enough time. If it seems like we won’t be able to get all three before the next release, then one or two would also be fine.

Mrebo said:

CatBus said:

Tyrphanax said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Everyone should be concerned about the fact that Russia did and continues to fuck with our elections. Regardless of whether or not they tried to help Trump win. But nah, that’s just a worry and not an actual thing.

Ditto with gerrymandering. Although that’s not connected to Russia…yet.

We should be worried about everything Russia is doing. I was only commenting on the collusion/coordination thing. It’s wonderful that Democrats are finally waking up about Russia, even if for partisan reasons.

That doesn’t mean as much when Republicans are now actively being apologists for and refusing to stand up to Russia and Putin. Even though Obama and the Democrats used to be softer on Russia, they were never as pathetic and weak as the Republicans are now.

The GOP congress passed the sanctions law against Russia last year. Trump hasn’t led on this issue and that is a major problem but we’ve not bowed to Russia in Syria or anything like that. I also don’t think it behooves our government to be relentlessly hostile to Russia.

I mean, sure, but they’re relentlessly messing with us (100% common knowledge now that they interfered with our elections, and various votes around the world, and will continue to do so), and we probably shouldn’t let that go. Perhaps it doesn’t behoove our government, but just laughing off the fact that they put millions of dollars and thousands of hours towards choosing our President (regardless of who it was) is a dangerous thing to do.

If Putin ever goes and Russia has a decent, non-tyrannical leader, maybe we can play nice then.

There are plenty of different ways to do this though. The Obama way was to kick the legs out from under oil/natural gas prices and use the Magnitsky Act to target Russian corruption. That was the “bad cop” part. The “good cop” part was to try to involve Russia in various multilateral diplomatic efforts, give them a chance to be a good actor on the world stage. Basically we were as friendly as could be diplomatically, but economically, we were very aggressive with Russia. Who knows what mix future administrations would use, but it would and should be a mix.

Prices are decided by the market. What exactly are you crediting Obama for?

Although US is a top producer, we don’t necessarily have much effect on world prices due to transport issues (slightly more expensive local natural gas is more feasible than faraway slightly cheaper gas, if the transport costs are greater than the difference). Diplomatically, Obama is credited with arranging to keep Saudi production high to the point of self-inflicted harm throughout his term, and unlocking natural gas availability by aiding various pipeline initiatives, and opening up Iran.

I actually don’t know how much credence to give those credits, but it’s a pretty common attribution. US production is still very high under Trump but world prices have rebounded from their low levels under Obama.

Re Magnitsky Act, it was an unprecedented intrusion into a country’s domestic affairs, albeit corrupt and horrific affairs. It was a diplomatic blunder that focused on the wrong things. “Carrots and sticks” don’t work if they’re not understood as such. It was a hopelessly naive approach. We need a good strong dose of realpolitik.

Presumably, if the Magnitsky Act only dealt with people who did business in Crimea, we could get the approval of the Ukrainian government and then we wouldn’t be intruding into a country’s domestic affairs at all. And then take it global, so every country has a Magnitsky Act. The Magnitsky Act was really the first sign that the US was finally waking up about Russia. But I think we could stand to be more awake. There’s lots more we could do along these lines – mutual extradition agreements specifically for Russian-backed separatists (so fighters picked up in Ukraine could be held in the US, since we’re all fighting the same fight and it greatly reduces the chances of a rescue operation), helping seek damages when Russia fails to pay its rent to Ukraine for use of Sevastopol facilities (once we convince Ukraine to charge that rent), etc.

Tyrphanax said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Everyone should be concerned about the fact that Russia did and continues to fuck with our elections. Regardless of whether or not they tried to help Trump win. But nah, that’s just a worry and not an actual thing.

Ditto with gerrymandering. Although that’s not connected to Russia…yet.

We should be worried about everything Russia is doing. I was only commenting on the collusion/coordination thing. It’s wonderful that Democrats are finally waking up about Russia, even if for partisan reasons.

That doesn’t mean as much when Republicans are now actively being apologists for and refusing to stand up to Russia and Putin. Even though Obama and the Democrats used to be softer on Russia, they were never as pathetic and weak as the Republicans are now.

The GOP congress passed the sanctions law against Russia last year. Trump hasn’t led on this issue and that is a major problem but we’ve not bowed to Russia in Syria or anything like that. I also don’t think it behooves our government to be relentlessly hostile to Russia.

I mean, sure, but they’re relentlessly messing with us (100% common knowledge now that they interfered with our elections, and various votes around the world, and will continue to do so), and we probably shouldn’t let that go. Perhaps it doesn’t behoove our government, but just laughing off the fact that they put millions of dollars and thousands of hours towards choosing our President (regardless of who it was) is a dangerous thing to do.

If Putin ever goes and Russia has a decent, non-tyrannical leader, maybe we can play nice then.

There are plenty of different ways to do this though. The Obama way was to kick the legs out from under oil/natural gas prices and use the Magnitsky Act to target Russian corruption. That was the “bad cop” part. The “good cop” part was to try to involve Russia in various multilateral diplomatic efforts, give them a chance to be a good actor on the world stage. Basically we were as friendly as could be diplomatically, but economically, we were very aggressive with Russia. Who knows what mix future administrations would use, but it would and should be a mix.

Mrebo said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

I still don’t understand why the Probe isn’t examining trump’s tax returns.

They may be.

But Mueller would have to satisfy a reasonable cause standard.

Yep, as with all things Mueller, we wouldn’t know if he had the returns or not until they showed up as Exhibit A in a trial. I’d assume he’s had them for a long time. He didn’t hire all those financial crimes experts for their skills in tracing cyber-espionage.

Mrebo said:

The Russia and gerrymander worries provide cover for the horrible management of the DNC and other failures by the Democrats. Convenient.

Oh, you don’t have to tell me how Democrats can always snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, they are very adept at that. Nevertheless, if the Democrats beat Republicans by 9 points and fail to take the House (my current projection), I think gerrymandering may just be a weensy bit more central to the cause of their failure than any failures at the DNC (and assuredly, there will be some of those). Much as the Democrats stormed the Virginia Assembly races just recently by ten points, but failed to win control of the Assembly. Was gerrymandering just a convenient scapegoat for mismanagement there? Hardly.

Mrebo said:

I haven’t seen evidence of “coordination.” I will be surprised if it results in findings of collusion and charges you describe. The proof will be in the pudding.

During the campaign, there was the Russian agitprop that showed up on Sputnik, only to be withdrawn shortly afterward (presumably because it was easily proven false). But within hours that same agitprop still shows up in a Trump speech. That was the first and probably biggest of the pre-election evidence of coordination.

You make a good observation that, “Scandal can even happen around events that never actually transpired, or are completely routine events.”

Some of the revelations however unseemly or ethically dubious are not really shocking. Foreign countries try to influence our policy all the time with direct lobbying or through intermediaries, or through people who agree with them. Under a harsh light I think we’d find unclean hands in any administration and especially among hangers on.

Russia trying to influence our policy isn’t shocking at all, nor is the fact that they can get some traction now and again. It’s the end-to-end management of an entire campaign, ownership of a candidate, and the deep, aggressive, and unapologetic complicity of the Americans that’s new.

An argument could be made for a permanent special counsel to keep an eye on these things in every administration.

There is no doubt in my mind at all that a future sane government will revise the existing special counsel laws, as the current ones have now been clearly demonstrated as woefully inadequate. What form that would take is conjecture.

I’ll be surprised if the GOP holds the House. Why are you so…pessimistic?

Your standard accepted rule of thumb for the past few cycles (used by the likes of 538 and RCP) is that Democrats need to win by 8-9 percentage points to break even in the House. Some of the gerrymandering legal cases (such as PA) may reduce that hurdle, but that’s nevertheless a very high hurdle (it turned 2012’s slight Democratic victory at the polls into a crushing defeat in terms of allocated seats). I’m adding to that the impact of aggressive Russian interference, which last time added around 3 points to that hurdle due to Russians targeting close Congressional elections – that’s a little bit of a wildcard, though, because it could be worse due to the Feds not doing anything to stop it, or it could be better because people are more aware this time around. But basically my thinking right now is that Democrats need a complete and utter wipeout – a 12-point victory – to get a 50/50 flip-the-coin shot at the House. And right now they’re polling ahead in the generic ballot, but not even that much ahead, and the races always get closer when you have actual candidates and campaigns going on. An 11-point victory at the polls would be an historic rout under normal circumstances – but unless something changes, I see it as a formula for Republicans holding the House.

The Russia bit is a big wildcard, I admit. It’s also possible the Russians sit this one out or even sabotage the Republicans, in an attempt to sow discord and watch us eat ourselves. But frankly I think Trump is too important of an asset for them to throw away. I think they’ll try just as hard, if not harder, to keep him in place than they did to put him there.

Gerrymandering decisions are another wildcard–a few more states get fair districts and the Democratic hurdle becomes that much smaller. But I’m not thinking that will happen.

Mrebo said:

CatBus said:

Mrebo said:

CatBus said:

So for those watching the Mueller witness show (making inferences from minor public announcements, because that damn ship doesn’t leak), there’s the carrots (Flynn, Gates, etc) and the sticks (Manafort). But Mueller just handed out an unusually large carrot. Complete immunity, granted to a nasty piece of work who could easily go down for a lot of unsavory shit. I’m hoping he got something equally large in return. And I hope Nader has a security detail, because he could be ratting on any or all of about four different organizations that like to assassinate people for fun and profit.

Questions I have include:

1. What is the crime?
2. Does this have anything to do with Russia?

You mean the crime being granted immunity or the crime being investigated? If the former, Nader is ick personified – there’s some indicators of that in the article of the sort of crimes being granted immunity. If the latter, we don’t know even that much – all of the specifics are behind the scenes and we don’t see any results until there’s an indictment. As I said, the Mueller team just doesn’t leak so you have to infer a bit. Nader organized the Seychelles meeting between Russian bankers/mobsters and the Trump team (Kushner et al and for some reason Erik Prince IIRC), so that’s the likely link to the Russia investigation. But again, we don’t know much until the indictments come out.

I think it was only Prince, a big supporter of Trump, who was at the Seychelles meeting.

Do you think a big scandal of collusion will be uncovered?

Scandal/collusion/uncovered all depend on how you define them. “Collusion” is a generic term for activities that vary between illegal and legal. “Scandal” is a social phenomenon, again that can be about something illegal or legal. Scandal can even happen around events that never actually transpired, or are completely routine events. Scandal is about society’s reaction more than the thing itself. “Uncovering” is dependent on the gullibility/denial spectrum of the observer. You can have nothing at all and convince people something has been uncovered, or you can have a mountain of evidence and people saying the jury’s still out.

Evidence of coordination between Trump’s team and Russian intelligence services has been in the public domain since before the election (something Rep. Schiff has been keen to point out after Rep. Nunes said they couldn’t find any evidence of it), so in that sense the collusion is already uncovered, and was a scandal for some and not for others. However, what Mueller’s doing is looking specifically for illegal acts surrounding and related to that collusion, so he may or may not uncover significantly more than the public already knows. That depends a bit on whether and when Mueller’s investigation is shuttered, and what sort of contingency plans he has in place to continue the investigation in that event (offloading to state AG’s and/or foreign law enforcement). The trick is, we don’t really know any of that, but we can be pretty certain that Mueller’s investigation is the only US investigation with federal resources & authority actually looking to see if crimes were committed (as opposed to the Senate and House investigations, or state AG’s). I’m frankly shocked that Mueller is still able to do his job today, and I still really doubt he’ll be permitted to see the investigation through to its conclusion, so we’ll be stuck with partial results in the end.

If I were a betting man, I’d say Mueller’s investigation, before it’s shut down, will still lead to more evidence of arguably legal/arguably illegal collusion, but few if any charges filed on these issues. This in itself will be a fairly huge scandal for some and not for others. He will also file charges (and in fact, he already has) of obstruction/lying to investigators/witness tampering/destruction of evidence which are not about the collusion itself, but about the coverup. Again, I predict this will be a fairly huge scandal for some and not for others. Lastly, I predict a raft of charges of money laundering/tax fraud/bribery/corruption/RICO-type things (such as those charges already filed against Manafort), again not really about the collusion itself, but about illegal things uncovered during the course of the investigation.

At the end you’ll have a fairly unsatisfactory conclusion: the Trump campaign will be exposed to have colluded with Russian intelligence services in an arguably illegal manner, many staffers and high ranking officials will be charged with a broad range of crimes, from obstruction to money laundering. And Trump supporters will still say that collusion is not a crime and this was all a witch hunt by the liberal Comey/Mueller/Rosenstein cabal, a fishing expedition that merely netted a few dozen high-ranking or cabinet-level bad apples who were just low-level volunteers after all.

And, most importantly, I’m still predicting the Republicans will hold the House and Senate in 2018 (although I’m predicting Democrats will win a landslide in terms of votes cast), and that this is when the Mueller investigation will definitely be shut down if it hasn’t been already. So regardless of charges filed, impeachment will never be considered for any officials at any level, and I think Trump will have a strong chance of re-election in 2020. The House and Senate may, however, decide to launch an investigation into Mueller.

EDIT: Unless you’re just asking if I personally think it’s likely there was scandalous illegal collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence services. In which case, I have a much shorter answer: yes.

Mrebo said:

CatBus said:

So for those watching the Mueller witness show (making inferences from minor public announcements, because that damn ship doesn’t leak), there’s the carrots (Flynn, Gates, etc) and the sticks (Manafort). But Mueller just handed out an unusually large carrot. Complete immunity, granted to a nasty piece of work who could easily go down for a lot of unsavory shit. I’m hoping he got something equally large in return. And I hope Nader has a security detail, because he could be ratting on any or all of about four different organizations that like to assassinate people for fun and profit.

Questions I have include:

1. What is the crime?
2. Does this have anything to do with Russia?

You mean the crime being granted immunity or the crime being investigated? If the former, Nader is ick personified – there’s some indicators of that in the article of the sort of crimes being granted immunity. If the latter, we don’t know even that much – all of the specifics are behind the scenes and we don’t see any results until there’s an indictment. As I said, the Mueller team just doesn’t leak so you have to infer a bit. Nader organized the Seychelles meeting between Russian bankers/mobsters and the Trump team (Kushner et al and for some reason Erik Prince IIRC), so that’s the likely link to the Russia investigation. But again, we don’t know much until the indictments come out.

So for those watching the Mueller witness show (making inferences from minor public announcements, because that damn ship doesn’t leak), there’s the carrots (Flynn, Gates, etc) and the sticks (Manafort). But Mueller just handed out an unusually large carrot. Complete immunity, granted to a nasty piece of work who could easily go down for a lot of unsavory shit. I’m hoping he got something equally large in return. And I hope Nader has a security detail, because he could be ratting on any or all of about four different organizations that like to assassinate people for fun and profit.

The rot goes all the way through. Well, 86% of the way through.

The amounts spent at those two Trump properties comprised 86 percent of the RNC’s February expenses that were categorized specifically as “venue rental and catering.”

Of course, that leaves out the money those properties earned from other sources as a direct result of being chosen by the RNC as the venue.

And yes, to be fair, we should compare that to what percentage Trump properties earned before 2016. I’m pretty comfortable saying without even looking that it was a lot less.

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

https://thinkprogress.org/20000-illinois-republicans-voted-for-nazi-7bbeeb7631fd/

The former head of the American Nazi Party ran for the Republican nomination of Congress in Illinois’ 3rd Congressional District. No Republican stepped up to oppose him.

On Tuesday, despite his vocal Holocaust denial, his anti-Semitic rhetoric, and his white supremacist views, 20,339 Illinois Republicans, according to preliminary totals, cast their ballots for Arthur Jones.

Jones’ Nazi-sympathies were not a secret going into election day. His campaign website features a slideshow of pictures of him speaking at white nationalist events. He is a perennial candidate who has previously run for U.S. House, Chicago alderman, and mayor of Chicago, and even mayor of Milwaukee. Chicago media extensively covered the race. The Anti-Defamation League warned voters of his record. The chairman of Illinois Republican Party even disavowed him, saying “The Illinois Republican Party and our country have no place for Nazis like Arthur Jones. We strongly oppose his racist views and his candidacy for any public office, including the 3rd Congressional District.”

Still, a stunning portion of the GOP primary electorate opted to cast their ballot for Jones rather than nobody. This includes, according to unofficial totals as of Wednesday morning, 13,158 voters in suburban Cook County (more than 70 percent of 18,595 GOP primary ballots cast), 4,093 voters in Will County, 3,023 voters in the City of Chicago, and 65 voters in DuPage County.

While the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of the House GOP, dismissed Jones last month as “a fringe candidate who has been doing this for over a decade with with no real connection to the GOP,” his campaign platform mirrors President Trump’s agenda. Jones’ campaign website promises to “put America first” with border protections, the elimination of “Sanctuary Cities”, no “amnesty for illegal aliens,” gun rights, and a repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

unbelievable. I hope he doesn’t have a chance in the general election. This is really sad.

Optimist: He was the only option on the Republican primary ballot. 20,000 Republicans voting for a guy who is the only candidate for this particular office listed on the Republican primary ballot is not unbelievable. With no other options, I imagine many wouldn’t bother to learn much about him.

How many voting Republicans are there in this jurisdiction? How many Republicans voted in this election? Even if a nazi is the only person on the ballot, I still wouldn’t vote for him/her. I would cast a write-in vote. I doubt it was all that unknown that a nazi was on the ballot.

Pessimist: Now he’ll be the only candidate on the general ballot with an (R) next to his name. With no other candidates with an (R) next to their name, how many Republicans still wouldn’t bother to learn much about him?

Real Pessimist: How many Republicans would bother to learn much about him, and think he sounds pretty good?

This is one time where the Democrat should run all kinds of negative campaign ads. It needs to be gotten out there in that jurisdiction that they have nazi on the ballot.

The thing is, there’s no downside for the Nazi. If the Democrat runs attack ads, he plays victim to win sympathy using lines that by now are already well-worn and familiar to everyone (“You can’t say hardly anything these days without getting called a racist, amiright guys?”). If anyone (particularly the media) gives him any attention at all, then his message is magnified and spread to various sick minds throughout Illinois. If everyone ignores him, he’s got a (slim) chance of winning based entirely on voter ignorance.

That’s why Nazis are unlike other political ideologies. They don’t buy into that whole idea of “convince the voters/may the most popular ideas win” foundation of democracy, not one bit. To them, elections are nothing more than a tool to win power and followers, and winning and losing elections isn’t really that relevant. If they win, elections are great, but no longer necessary once they’re in charge. If they lose, elections are rigged by a conspiracy please subscribe to our newsletter. Media is the same. If media likes them, free speech is great, but no longer necessary once they’re in charge, if media hates them, free speech is rigged by a conspiracy please subscribe to our newsletter. Same with law enforcement – that’s nothing more than a weapon they can use against opponents, maintaining a civil society has nothing to do with it. They know they’re not liked. They know they’re not popular, and they wear their unpopularity as a badge of honor. They see the tools of democracy as toys that they can rig to take over regardless of how things are supposed to work. They operate outside political norms, and if you treat them like just another political ideology instead of a national security problem, you are going to find yourself in trouble.

You are the one that said maybe the Republican voters didn’t learn much about the guy. I am saying maybe the Democrats should teach them about the guy they just voted for.

I’m saying winning the election isn’t what he’s after, so Republican voters learning about him isn’t relevant.

Well I and I think any sane person is concerned about a nazi winning an election, so voters(and the includes Republicans) learning about him is relevant.

Sure. Sane people can, and most likely will, prevent him from winning the election. But sane people winning the election does not mean he loses. It just means he’s the same as he is today, but with a longer mailing list and better funding.

Well right now it is choice between him the same as he is today but with a longer mailing list and better funding, and him in Congress. I think I will pick him the same as he is today but with a longer mailing list and better funding. I’d rather not have a nazi in Congress.

And that’s why we haven’t had good luck stopping Nazis in the last seventy years. We treat them like any other political party, and think defeating them at the ballot box is where it ends.

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

https://thinkprogress.org/20000-illinois-republicans-voted-for-nazi-7bbeeb7631fd/

The former head of the American Nazi Party ran for the Republican nomination of Congress in Illinois’ 3rd Congressional District. No Republican stepped up to oppose him.

On Tuesday, despite his vocal Holocaust denial, his anti-Semitic rhetoric, and his white supremacist views, 20,339 Illinois Republicans, according to preliminary totals, cast their ballots for Arthur Jones.

Jones’ Nazi-sympathies were not a secret going into election day. His campaign website features a slideshow of pictures of him speaking at white nationalist events. He is a perennial candidate who has previously run for U.S. House, Chicago alderman, and mayor of Chicago, and even mayor of Milwaukee. Chicago media extensively covered the race. The Anti-Defamation League warned voters of his record. The chairman of Illinois Republican Party even disavowed him, saying “The Illinois Republican Party and our country have no place for Nazis like Arthur Jones. We strongly oppose his racist views and his candidacy for any public office, including the 3rd Congressional District.”

Still, a stunning portion of the GOP primary electorate opted to cast their ballot for Jones rather than nobody. This includes, according to unofficial totals as of Wednesday morning, 13,158 voters in suburban Cook County (more than 70 percent of 18,595 GOP primary ballots cast), 4,093 voters in Will County, 3,023 voters in the City of Chicago, and 65 voters in DuPage County.

While the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of the House GOP, dismissed Jones last month as “a fringe candidate who has been doing this for over a decade with with no real connection to the GOP,” his campaign platform mirrors President Trump’s agenda. Jones’ campaign website promises to “put America first” with border protections, the elimination of “Sanctuary Cities”, no “amnesty for illegal aliens,” gun rights, and a repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

unbelievable. I hope he doesn’t have a chance in the general election. This is really sad.

Optimist: He was the only option on the Republican primary ballot. 20,000 Republicans voting for a guy who is the only candidate for this particular office listed on the Republican primary ballot is not unbelievable. With no other options, I imagine many wouldn’t bother to learn much about him.

How many voting Republicans are there in this jurisdiction? How many Republicans voted in this election? Even if a nazi is the only person on the ballot, I still wouldn’t vote for him/her. I would cast a write-in vote. I doubt it was all that unknown that a nazi was on the ballot.

Pessimist: Now he’ll be the only candidate on the general ballot with an (R) next to his name. With no other candidates with an (R) next to their name, how many Republicans still wouldn’t bother to learn much about him?

Real Pessimist: How many Republicans would bother to learn much about him, and think he sounds pretty good?

This is one time where the Democrat should run all kinds of negative campaign ads. It needs to be gotten out there in that jurisdiction that they have nazi on the ballot.

The thing is, there’s no downside for the Nazi. If the Democrat runs attack ads, he plays victim to win sympathy using lines that by now are already well-worn and familiar to everyone (“You can’t say hardly anything these days without getting called a racist, amiright guys?”). If anyone (particularly the media) gives him any attention at all, then his message is magnified and spread to various sick minds throughout Illinois. If everyone ignores him, he’s got a (slim) chance of winning based entirely on voter ignorance.

That’s why Nazis are unlike other political ideologies. They don’t buy into that whole idea of “convince the voters/may the most popular ideas win” foundation of democracy, not one bit. To them, elections are nothing more than a tool to win power and followers, and winning and losing elections isn’t really that relevant. If they win, elections are great, but no longer necessary once they’re in charge. If they lose, elections are rigged by a conspiracy please subscribe to our newsletter. Media is the same. If media likes them, free speech is great, but no longer necessary once they’re in charge, if media hates them, free speech is rigged by a conspiracy please subscribe to our newsletter. Same with law enforcement – that’s nothing more than a weapon they can use against opponents, maintaining a civil society has nothing to do with it. They know they’re not liked. They know they’re not popular, and they wear their unpopularity as a badge of honor. They see the tools of democracy as toys that they can rig to take over regardless of how things are supposed to work. They operate outside political norms, and if you treat them like just another political ideology instead of a national security problem, you are going to find yourself in trouble.

You are the one that said maybe the Republican voters didn’t learn much about the guy. I am saying maybe the Democrats should teach them about the guy they just voted for.

I’m saying winning the election isn’t what he’s after, so Republican voters learning about him isn’t relevant.

Well I and I think any sane person is concerned about a nazi winning an election, so voters(and the includes Republicans) learning about him is relevant.

Sure. Sane people can, and most likely will, prevent him from winning the election. But sane people winning the election does not mean he loses. It just means he’s the same as he is today, but with a longer mailing list and better funding.

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

https://thinkprogress.org/20000-illinois-republicans-voted-for-nazi-7bbeeb7631fd/

The former head of the American Nazi Party ran for the Republican nomination of Congress in Illinois’ 3rd Congressional District. No Republican stepped up to oppose him.

On Tuesday, despite his vocal Holocaust denial, his anti-Semitic rhetoric, and his white supremacist views, 20,339 Illinois Republicans, according to preliminary totals, cast their ballots for Arthur Jones.

Jones’ Nazi-sympathies were not a secret going into election day. His campaign website features a slideshow of pictures of him speaking at white nationalist events. He is a perennial candidate who has previously run for U.S. House, Chicago alderman, and mayor of Chicago, and even mayor of Milwaukee. Chicago media extensively covered the race. The Anti-Defamation League warned voters of his record. The chairman of Illinois Republican Party even disavowed him, saying “The Illinois Republican Party and our country have no place for Nazis like Arthur Jones. We strongly oppose his racist views and his candidacy for any public office, including the 3rd Congressional District.”

Still, a stunning portion of the GOP primary electorate opted to cast their ballot for Jones rather than nobody. This includes, according to unofficial totals as of Wednesday morning, 13,158 voters in suburban Cook County (more than 70 percent of 18,595 GOP primary ballots cast), 4,093 voters in Will County, 3,023 voters in the City of Chicago, and 65 voters in DuPage County.

While the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of the House GOP, dismissed Jones last month as “a fringe candidate who has been doing this for over a decade with with no real connection to the GOP,” his campaign platform mirrors President Trump’s agenda. Jones’ campaign website promises to “put America first” with border protections, the elimination of “Sanctuary Cities”, no “amnesty for illegal aliens,” gun rights, and a repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

unbelievable. I hope he doesn’t have a chance in the general election. This is really sad.

Optimist: He was the only option on the Republican primary ballot. 20,000 Republicans voting for a guy who is the only candidate for this particular office listed on the Republican primary ballot is not unbelievable. With no other options, I imagine many wouldn’t bother to learn much about him.

How many voting Republicans are there in this jurisdiction? How many Republicans voted in this election? Even if a nazi is the only person on the ballot, I still wouldn’t vote for him/her. I would cast a write-in vote. I doubt it was all that unknown that a nazi was on the ballot.

Pessimist: Now he’ll be the only candidate on the general ballot with an (R) next to his name. With no other candidates with an (R) next to their name, how many Republicans still wouldn’t bother to learn much about him?

Real Pessimist: How many Republicans would bother to learn much about him, and think he sounds pretty good?

This is one time where the Democrat should run all kinds of negative campaign ads. It needs to be gotten out there in that jurisdiction that they have nazi on the ballot.

The thing is, there’s no downside for the Nazi. If the Democrat runs attack ads, he plays victim to win sympathy using lines that by now are already well-worn and familiar to everyone (“You can’t say hardly anything these days without getting called a racist, amiright guys?”). If anyone (particularly the media) gives him any attention at all, then his message is magnified and spread to various sick minds throughout Illinois. If everyone ignores him, he’s got a (slim) chance of winning based entirely on voter ignorance.

That’s why Nazis are unlike other political ideologies. They don’t buy into that whole idea of “convince the voters/may the most popular ideas win” foundation of democracy, not one bit. To them, elections are nothing more than a tool to win power and followers, and winning and losing elections isn’t really that relevant. If they win, elections are great, but no longer necessary once they’re in charge. If they lose, elections are rigged by a conspiracy please subscribe to our newsletter. Media is the same. If media likes them, free speech is great, but no longer necessary once they’re in charge, if media hates them, free speech is rigged by a conspiracy please subscribe to our newsletter. Same with law enforcement – that’s nothing more than a weapon they can use against opponents, maintaining a civil society has nothing to do with it. They know they’re not liked. They know they’re not popular, and they wear their unpopularity as a badge of honor. They see the tools of democracy as toys that they can rig to take over regardless of how things are supposed to work. They operate outside political norms, and if you treat them like just another political ideology instead of a national security problem, you are going to find yourself in trouble.

You are the one that said maybe the Republican voters didn’t learn much about the guy. I am saying maybe the Democrats should teach them about the guy they just voted for.

I’m saying winning the election isn’t what he’s after, so Republican voters learning about him isn’t relevant. There’s no way he comes out of this with fewer followers than he went in with, win or lose. It’s a win/win, because Nazis know how to play the media and elections.

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

https://thinkprogress.org/20000-illinois-republicans-voted-for-nazi-7bbeeb7631fd/

The former head of the American Nazi Party ran for the Republican nomination of Congress in Illinois’ 3rd Congressional District. No Republican stepped up to oppose him.

On Tuesday, despite his vocal Holocaust denial, his anti-Semitic rhetoric, and his white supremacist views, 20,339 Illinois Republicans, according to preliminary totals, cast their ballots for Arthur Jones.

Jones’ Nazi-sympathies were not a secret going into election day. His campaign website features a slideshow of pictures of him speaking at white nationalist events. He is a perennial candidate who has previously run for U.S. House, Chicago alderman, and mayor of Chicago, and even mayor of Milwaukee. Chicago media extensively covered the race. The Anti-Defamation League warned voters of his record. The chairman of Illinois Republican Party even disavowed him, saying “The Illinois Republican Party and our country have no place for Nazis like Arthur Jones. We strongly oppose his racist views and his candidacy for any public office, including the 3rd Congressional District.”

Still, a stunning portion of the GOP primary electorate opted to cast their ballot for Jones rather than nobody. This includes, according to unofficial totals as of Wednesday morning, 13,158 voters in suburban Cook County (more than 70 percent of 18,595 GOP primary ballots cast), 4,093 voters in Will County, 3,023 voters in the City of Chicago, and 65 voters in DuPage County.

While the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of the House GOP, dismissed Jones last month as “a fringe candidate who has been doing this for over a decade with with no real connection to the GOP,” his campaign platform mirrors President Trump’s agenda. Jones’ campaign website promises to “put America first” with border protections, the elimination of “Sanctuary Cities”, no “amnesty for illegal aliens,” gun rights, and a repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

unbelievable. I hope he doesn’t have a chance in the general election. This is really sad.

Optimist: He was the only option on the Republican primary ballot. 20,000 Republicans voting for a guy who is the only candidate for this particular office listed on the Republican primary ballot is not unbelievable. With no other options, I imagine many wouldn’t bother to learn much about him.

How many voting Republicans are there in this jurisdiction? How many Republicans voted in this election? Even if a nazi is the only person on the ballot, I still wouldn’t vote for him/her. I would cast a write-in vote. I doubt it was all that unknown that a nazi was on the ballot.

Pessimist: Now he’ll be the only candidate on the general ballot with an (R) next to his name. With no other candidates with an (R) next to their name, how many Republicans still wouldn’t bother to learn much about him?

Real Pessimist: How many Republicans would bother to learn much about him, and think he sounds pretty good?

This is one time where the Democrat should run all kinds of negative campaign ads. It needs to be gotten out there in that jurisdiction that they have nazi on the ballot.

The thing is, there’s no downside for the Nazi. If the Democrat runs attack ads, he plays victim to win sympathy using lines that by now are already well-worn and familiar to everyone (“You can’t say hardly anything these days without getting called a racist, amiright guys?”). If anyone (particularly the media) gives him any attention at all, then his message is magnified and spread to various sick minds throughout Illinois. If everyone ignores him, he’s got a (slim) chance of winning based entirely on voter ignorance.

That’s why Nazis are unlike other political ideologies. They don’t buy into that whole idea of “convince the voters/may the most popular ideas win” foundation of democracy, not one bit. To them, elections are nothing more than a tool to win power and followers, and winning and losing elections isn’t really that relevant. If they win, elections are great, but no longer necessary once they’re in charge. If they lose, elections are rigged by a conspiracy please subscribe to our newsletter. Media is the same. If media likes them, free speech is great, but no longer necessary once they’re in charge, if media hates them, free speech is rigged by a conspiracy please subscribe to our newsletter. Same with law enforcement – that’s nothing more than a weapon they can use against opponents, maintaining a civil society has nothing to do with it. They know they’re not liked. They know they’re not popular, and they wear their unpopularity as a badge of honor. They see the tools of democracy as toys that they can rig to take over regardless of how things are supposed to work. They operate outside democratic norms, and if you treat them like just another political ideology instead of a national security problem, you are going to find yourself in trouble.

Warbler said:

https://thinkprogress.org/20000-illinois-republicans-voted-for-nazi-7bbeeb7631fd/

The former head of the American Nazi Party ran for the Republican nomination of Congress in Illinois’ 3rd Congressional District. No Republican stepped up to oppose him.

On Tuesday, despite his vocal Holocaust denial, his anti-Semitic rhetoric, and his white supremacist views, 20,339 Illinois Republicans, according to preliminary totals, cast their ballots for Arthur Jones.

Jones’ Nazi-sympathies were not a secret going into election day. His campaign website features a slideshow of pictures of him speaking at white nationalist events. He is a perennial candidate who has previously run for U.S. House, Chicago alderman, and mayor of Chicago, and even mayor of Milwaukee. Chicago media extensively covered the race. The Anti-Defamation League warned voters of his record. The chairman of Illinois Republican Party even disavowed him, saying “The Illinois Republican Party and our country have no place for Nazis like Arthur Jones. We strongly oppose his racist views and his candidacy for any public office, including the 3rd Congressional District.”

Still, a stunning portion of the GOP primary electorate opted to cast their ballot for Jones rather than nobody. This includes, according to unofficial totals as of Wednesday morning, 13,158 voters in suburban Cook County (more than 70 percent of 18,595 GOP primary ballots cast), 4,093 voters in Will County, 3,023 voters in the City of Chicago, and 65 voters in DuPage County.

While the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of the House GOP, dismissed Jones last month as “a fringe candidate who has been doing this for over a decade with with no real connection to the GOP,” his campaign platform mirrors President Trump’s agenda. Jones’ campaign website promises to “put America first” with border protections, the elimination of “Sanctuary Cities”, no “amnesty for illegal aliens,” gun rights, and a repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

unbelievable. I hope he doesn’t have a chance in the general election. This is really sad.

Optimist: He was the only option on the Republican primary ballot. 20,000 Republicans voting for a guy who is the only candidate for this particular office listed on the Republican primary ballot is not unbelievable. With no other options, I imagine many wouldn’t bother to learn much about him.

Pessimist: Now he’ll be the only candidate on the general ballot with an (R) next to his name. With no other candidates with an (R) next to their name, how many Republicans still wouldn’t bother to learn much about him?

Real Pessimist: How many Republicans would bother to learn much about him, and think he sounds pretty good?

During one of our last gun control threadcraps, I mentioned that some of the numbers about guns in the US are hard to reconcile between sources, because while gun ownership rates are either holding steady or in a slight decline, the actual number of guns owned has risen pretty steeply. i.e. if you just take the number of guns and divide by the number of people, that will incorrectly tell you that everyone in the US has one or more guns, because the US currently has more guns than people. The truth is, more-or-less the same percentage of Americans have owned guns for decades, but the new trend is that some are now stockpiling them.

Scientific American now has an article about this gun-stockpiling phenomenon and an overview of the data/demographics behind it.

The short, broad-brush answer to the first part of that question is this: men, who on average possess almost twice the number of guns female owners do. But not all men. Some groups of men are much more avid gun consumers than others. The American citizen most likely to own a gun is a white male—but not just any white guy. According to a growing number of scientific studies, the kind of man who stockpiles weapons or applies for a concealed-carry license meets a very specific profile.

Suspiciouscoffee just went meta.

TV’s Frink said:

we’re all going to die

chyron8472 said:

Back to the topic though, I really don’t understand why people are apologist or have blinders on for Trump. They’ve decided they like the man, and it therefore makes him infallible.

I’ve said it before, but it’s results. For some people, if he delivers the results they want, everything else can be forgiven. While certainly there are some that are so blinded that they actually think Trump is a wonderful human being, many more of them think he is fairly awful but tax cuts, or fairly awful but Gorsuch, or fairly awful but white power. Yes, I’m certain there are even a few Nazis who shake their heads and say “I know we’re all ultimately just about murdering people, but couldn’t we have come up with a better spokesperson?”

But to get to the point of “what does it take for people to see how bad he is?” the answer at some point is nothing. Trump’s shooting a guy on 5th Avenue comment was accurate. Some of his supporters would just say yeah he shot a guy but tax cuts, or he shot a guy but Gorsuch, or he shot a guy but white power. Some may peel off if there’s publicly-available ironclad indisputable direct physical evidence that Trump committed treason and then ate a baby afterward, but I doubt even in that case he’d go under 36% support.

Maybe there’s a relationship between typical travel time from nearest reasonable pizza joint to your house and love for Papa Murphy’s.

My data points are: 2.5 minutes, not interested in Papa Murphy’s

There’s a rule that DnD food must be lowbrow. It’s in the Cook’s Handbook I think. Gourmet food can get a pass if it’s greasy enough.

Sounds like the phone call was unprotected as well.

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

cooled off and partially congealed

Mmm, but I’m also the guy who orders a hot chocolate at the coffee shop (I don’t drink coffee) and has to wait another 45 minutes until it’s cool enough to drink.

Why not just order powdered cocoa and then cook it at home?

Turns out the real life solution is to order a kids hot chocolate. Added bonus is you can sometimes drink it out of a Barney cup.