Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, March 05, 2014

OTP - March 2014: Russia denies calling shots in Ukraine’s Crimea standoff

Only Babe Ruth calls shots!

At a press conference for Kremlin-controlled media on Tuesday, Putin reiterated his position that Moscow has the right to use “all means” necessary to protect ethnic Russians and vital military assets in Ukraine, first among them the Black Sea fleet in the Crimean port of Sevastopol.

 

Bitter Mouse Posted: March 05, 2014 at 08:54 AM | 3254 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: lies, politics, war

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 14 of 33 pages ‹ First  < 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 >  Last ›
   1301. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 01:36 PM (#4671656)
Wherein I get accused of being, am compared with, two people thought of as Nazi appeasers. And I am being "beyond pathetic". Grow up.

Lindbergh and Baldwin were both appeasers, agreed. And a little later you wrote that, because Putin isn't Hitler, therefore, it's doubtful he has an interest in taking over eastern Ukraine. I was with someone a few minutes ago who had earlier this morning interacted with a mid-level State Department official who, along with his colleagues, increasingly believe that the Russians will go in.
   1302. The Good Face Posted: March 14, 2014 at 01:39 PM (#4671662)
Nope. But I don't think there is the same causality between incarceration rates and the drop in violent crime that you do.


Wow. Who could have possibly seen that coming.

Generally you are better off not assuming what I believe. You are wrong enough in your own beliefs, I would rather care take mine. There are some here who I would feel comfortable in making assumptions about what I believe (Andy, Lassus, snapper even), but you are not one of them. And even those I am comfortable with will likely be surprised on occasion.


The next time you surprise me will be the first time.

Also, why so prickly? It was a question (rhetorical admittedly), not a statement.
   1303. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 14, 2014 at 01:41 PM (#4671663)
You aren't going to get Vladimir Putin to do what you want by being nice to him.


And I said this where?

That, like the idea that he's in fact "weak," is faculty lounge nonsense.


And you think his actions in Ukraine are from strength? Manifest idiocy, caused by your infatuation with war and violent solutions (or other issues I guess).
   1304. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 14, 2014 at 01:45 PM (#4671667)
2013 political piece quoted:
If Young... doesn’t [run], the seat — which President Obama narrowly won — would probably be a toss-up.

And it was. So where's the apocalypse?

The seat's up for reelection in less than eight months, Are the GOP prohibitive favorites to hold it? Have the Democrats removed it from their pickup opportunities list?

If the Democrats had found another 4,000 votes and taken the special election, would they be in ascendance? Would the GOP be reeling, and abandoning their anti-Obamacare rhetoric?
   1305. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 14, 2014 at 01:47 PM (#4671670)
because Putin isn't Hitler, therefore, it's doubtful he has an interest in taking over eastern Ukraine.


Not what I wrote. I was writing about snapper's contention regarding the slippery slope of first Ukraine, then the world. I am sure he would love to take over the eastern Ukraine and perhaps the whole world. What he actually does, where that leads and its relation to our actions is what we are discussing.

I would never doubt that strongman dude in country X would attack country Y. History is full of instances. I am disputing the cause of such invasions (I don't think US weakness is at all what has caused his actions in Ukraine and more than US weakness caused his earlier actions in Georgia). And also I suspect the amount of pain those actions will cause him, without the west ever needing to become directly involved in a hot war situation, will stop any "and then the world" type escalations from Putin.
   1306. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 14, 2014 at 01:54 PM (#4671687)
Lindbergh and Baldwin were both appeasers, agreed. And a little later you wrote that, because Putin isn't Hitler, therefore, it's doubtful he has an interest in taking over eastern Ukraine. I was with someone a few minutes ago who had earlier this morning interacted with a mid-level State Department official who, along with his colleagues, increasingly believe that the Russians will go in.

I'm upping my 50-50 to 55-45. If I had to bet, I'd bet yes.
   1307. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 01:55 PM (#4671689)
I would never doubt that strongman dude in country X would attack country Y. History is full of instances. I am disputing the cause of such invasions (I don't think US weakness is at all what has caused his actions in Ukraine and more than US weakness caused his earlier actions in Georgia). And also I suspect the amount of pain those actions will cause him, without the west ever needing to become directly involved in a hot war situation, will stop any "and then the world" type escalations from Putin.

OK, that's not appeasement. (EDIT: Wait a sec, please define "the amount of pain those actions will cause him." Are you for or against strong economic sanctions against Moscow?)

Indeed, Georgia was a test case and W failed it so how on Earth do you or anyone else excuse Obama and HRC for the "reset" button policy shift mere months after the military occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia?
   1308. Greg K Posted: March 14, 2014 at 01:59 PM (#4671695)
OK, that's not appeasement. (EDIT: Wait a sec, please define "the amount of pain those actions will cause him." Are you for or against strong economic sanctions against Moscow?)

I could be wrong, but I think he's referring to the cost associated with holding annexed territory, not (or at least not directly) American policy.
   1309. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 02:01 PM (#4671696)
This makes me sad:
The sailor who randomly kissed a nurse in Times Square, leading to one of the most iconic photographic images of World War II, has died.

Glenn Edward McDuffie passed away Sunday in Texas at the age of 86, according to KVUE.com.

McDuffie claimed for years he was the strapping sailor who planted one on the lips of the swooning nurse on August 14, 1945 — the day Japan’s surrender was announced in the U.S. — a spontaneous, euphoric moment that was captured by a "Life" magazine photo, which came to symbolize the end of World War II.

In 2007 forensic artist Lois Gibson confirmed McDuffie was in fact the smooching sailor.

McDuffie said he was inspired to kiss the pretty passerby upon realizing that the Japanese had surrendered, meaning that his older brother would soon be released from a Japanese prison camp.


   1310. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 02:04 PM (#4671701)
I could be wrong, but I think he's referring to the cost associated with holding annexed territory, not (or at least not directly) American policy.

OK, but I hope you're wrong.
   1311. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 14, 2014 at 02:22 PM (#4671724)
I could be wrong, but I think he's referring to the cost associated with holding annexed territory, not (or at least not directly) American policy.


I don't think they are totally separate things. I think there is a cost exogenous of anything the US (or other western power) does. To the extent they don't want to abide Russian troops in their nation there will be a cost (see Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and so on).

There is also a cost the US can impose. There is also a cost the other western powers can impose (which is MUCH larger than what Obama can do, short of outright war). There is also the economic cost above and beyond all of that - Russia paid a large price for the initial actions in Ukraine. There are also other costs, such as future diplomatic costs.

For example some analysts believe that one of the reasons China and the USSR broke apart as they did were USSR action in Hungary and later Czechoslovakia and other places. It made China nervous that the USSR was invading other communist countries and the excuses it was using to do so. To be sure there were other causes for the split, but to an extent the actions of the USSR had a future cost.

Now take all those costs and add them up. I think it is a pretty big number, even without any direct military intervention or even promises of such. And then you compare that to the gain from what has been done in Ukraine. I think it ends up being more cost than benefit, and it escalates even more if Putin continues farther, especially if Putin starts towards NATO countries.

Yes if he is insane Putin might just keep rolling and invading, but if he is insane then nothing the US can do is going to stop it, short of total war.

I am willing to play the odds, because war is not just expensive for RUssia, it is really expensive for everyone and should be an absolute last resort.

Regarding economic sanctions, like I said above the US is a bit player in this space. We don't have much economic leverage with Russia. Our allies have MUCH more, so they have to go along or what we do means very little. Not that we shouldn't (edit: forgot the negative, my bad) impose sanctions, but without Europe following along it is pretty puny in impact. There are limits to what even a superpower can do.
   1312. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 02:31 PM (#4671738)
Regarding economic sanctions, like I said above the US is a bit player in this space. We don't have much economic leverage with Russia. Our allies have MUCH more, so they have to go along or what we do means very little. Not that we should impose sanctions, but without Europe following along it is pretty puny in impact. There are limits to what even a superpower can do.

As was the case with Iran sanctions imposed over the past 20 years, the United States led and Europe followed. Freezing Russian assets and prohibiting Putin's croines from getting visas to the United States are hardly insignificant acts. And should Europe do the same, these undertakings will cripple Russia's economy.
   1313. steagles Posted: March 14, 2014 at 02:42 PM (#4671747)
As was the case with Iran sanctions imposed over the past 20 years, the United States led and Europe followed. Freezing Russian assets and prohibiting Putin's croines from getting visas to the United States are hardly insignificant acts. And should Europe do the same, these undertakings will cripple Russia's economy.
someone's starting to sound like a hilary voter.
   1314. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: March 14, 2014 at 02:53 PM (#4671756)
That, like the idea that he's in fact "weak," is faculty lounge nonsense.

And you think his actions in Ukraine are from strength?


his actions arise from a combination of political/economic weakness and relative* military strength.
Plus the fact that he's pretty amoral, as evidenced by his poisonings of overseas critics of his.


*relative as in relative to Ukraine, and secondarily relative to whatever force we could easily project there.

   1315. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 14, 2014 at 03:09 PM (#4671771)
Yes if he is insane Putin might just keep rolling and invading, but if he is insane then nothing the US can do is going to stop it, short of total war.

There is a long list of Russian rulers, not previously thought to be insane, who wished to expand the country's borders beyond its current limits, certainly to include Ukraine, Belarus & the Baltics. Asserting that Putin is sane and therefore could not have designs on other countries is wishcasting of the highest order.
   1316. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 14, 2014 at 03:31 PM (#4671792)
Asserting that Putin is sane and therefore could not have designs on other countries is wishcasting of the highest order.


Not what I said. I said if he does want to keep going then nothing short of total war will stop him, and I don't think that is the case based on how he has acted.

He might very well have designs on other countries, and in fact I stated he might want to rule the whole world. Doesn't mean he will succeed and doesn't mean we need to assume that is the case.
   1317. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 14, 2014 at 03:34 PM (#4671793)
BTW, I agree with 1314.
   1318. Ron J2 Posted: March 14, 2014 at 03:39 PM (#4671796)
I don't think there is the same causality between incarceration rates and the drop in violent crime that you do.


See for instance the statistics for Canada which does not incarerate nearly the same number of people as the US and also shows a drop in violent crime.
   1319. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 14, 2014 at 03:44 PM (#4671800)
See for instance the statistics for Canada which does not incarerate nearly the same number of people as the US and also shows a drop in violent crime.


The increase and then reduction of lead is a much better causal factor for violent crime. Especially when you realize that that a large part of the huge US incarceration rates involve non-violent drug criminals.

   1320. Srul Itza Posted: March 14, 2014 at 03:46 PM (#4671804)
There is a long list of Russian rulers, not previously thought to be insane, who wished to expand the country's borders beyond its current limits, certainly to include Ukraine, Belarus & the Baltics. Asserting that Putin is sane and therefore could not have designs on other countries is wishcasting of the highest order.


So you're saying he is going to attack the Baltics, three member states of NATO? And that wouldn't be insane?
   1321. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 03:55 PM (#4671813)
As was the case with Iran sanctions imposed over the past 20 years, the United States led and Europe followed. Freezing Russian assets and prohibiting Putin's croines from getting visas to the United States are hardly insignificant acts. And should Europe do the same, these undertakings will cripple Russia's economy.


Russia has the world's eighth-largest economy. There is no way that even Europe and the US can 'cripple' it. We can impose an economic cost, via sanctions, but that will of course hurt our economy as well as Russia's. Of course, we can afford it more, since we are wealthier, but whether it's worth spending $200 for every American to cost the Russians $120 for every Russian is another question.
   1322. Srul Itza Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:01 PM (#4671818)
I feel some small sympathy for the Ukrainians, but at the end of the day, I don't really give that much of a damn about them. There are limits to my empathy.

I do not trust Russia, and I really do not trust Putin, and I would like to see him and Russia both weakened.

I think the net result of a Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine is going to be very negative for Russia. There will be major sanctions, even from Europe. At this point, Merkel would find it very hard to climb down from what she has said. Our military ties to Eastern Europe would probably increase. Calls to reinstate the missile defense would be heard from both sides of the aisle. The cuts to our Defense Budget would likely be reduced, at least in part. European efforts to wean themselves from Russian Gas addiction would increase. And I think Russia would find the occupation to be more expensive than they expected, and the benefits far less.

So in my own geopolitical calculation, I am kind of hoping Putin does roll tanks into Ukraine.

Sorry about that, Ukies.
   1323. Srul Itza Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:06 PM (#4671823)
Also, at the end of the day, it may even be better for the Ukraine. If Putin goes all the way to Kiev, all hell breaks loose. But if you end up with a de facto division of the country, splitting up two groups who have shown themselves to be congenitally incapable of working together to govern the country or getting along, then the Western Ukraine might have a better chance of integrating with the West, while the Eastern Ukraine has the benefit of being once more snugly embraced by their Soviet, er, Russian compatriots.
   1324. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:08 PM (#4671825)
someone's starting to sound like a hillary voter.

Haven't you heard? Hillary's gone berserk and her chance for the presidency has been destroyed.
   1325. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:10 PM (#4671827)
So you're saying he is going to attack the Baltics, three member states of NATO? And that wouldn't be insane?


That would in fact be insane and a sign that Putin really is not a generic thug but is rather Hitlerian.
   1326. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:13 PM (#4671829)
Russia has the world's eighth-largest economy. There is no way that even Europe and the US can 'cripple' it. We can impose an economic cost, via sanctions, but that will of course hurt our economy as well as Russia's.

And the Mets were the tenth-best team in the National League from 1962-67 so they must have been formidable too? Even a Russian economy with a $2.5T GDP is hardly a juggernaut, SdeB. Among other things, it is heavily dependent on energy sales; any meaningful export reductions will hurt them big time.
   1327. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:13 PM (#4671830)
Asserting that Putin is sane and therefore could not have designs on other countries is wishcasting of the highest order.


asserting that Putin is sane is not wishcasting, it is far more likely than not that he is not insane.

Asserting that he is insane OTOH is... (do we have a word for the opposite of wishcasting, I mean "unduly pessimistic" would do but it doesn't quite have the snarky ring to it that wishcasting does.

)
   1328. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:14 PM (#4671833)
Sorry about that, Ukies.

If that happens, I'm sure the Jews of Ukraine -- most of whom appear to side with Kyiv -- will be oh, so safe.
   1329. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:19 PM (#4671837)
That would in fact be insane and a sign that Putin really is not a generic thug but is rather Hitlerian.

Unless we continue to disarm, and Putin can co-opt a couple of NATO states into opting opt of the defense.

Quite frankly, if Putin invaded the Baltics today, I think it's 50-50 that our alleged C-in-C would actually use military force to stop him.

Edit: We guaranteed Ukraine's borders in order to get them to give up their nuke. Why should our guarantee of the Baltics hold more weight.
   1330. The Good Face Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:25 PM (#4671842)
See for instance the statistics for Canada which does not incarerate nearly the same number of people as the US and also shows a drop in violent crime.


Demographics go a long way towards explaining that.
   1331. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:29 PM (#4671846)
Even a Russian economy with a $2.5T GDP is hardly a juggernaut, SdeB. It is heavily dependent on energy sales; any meaningful export reductions will wreak havoc


The EU can do that, we really can't. The country that can inflict the most economic pain on Russia is Germany, let's see how far Merkel is willing to go



   1332. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:29 PM (#4671847)
   1333. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:30 PM (#4671850)
most of whom appear to side with Kyiv


where are you getting that from?
   1334. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:34 PM (#4671857)
If that happens, I'm sure the Jews of Ukraine -- most of whom appear to side with Kyiv -- will be oh, so safe.

Wait, why are we more concerned about Jewish Ukranians than non-Jewish Ukranians?
   1335. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:34 PM (#4671858)
So you're saying he is going to attack the Baltics, three member states of NATO?

Having designs on isn't quite the same as attacking, at least immediately. However, look for Putin to be playing the long game, and I doubt that this is the last time we'll see him use a mix of domestic thugs and unidentified troops to destabilize a neighboring country, essentially manufacturing a crisis that then "needs" Russian intervention.
   1336. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:39 PM (#4671860)
Having designs on isn't quite the same as attacking, at least immediately. However, look for Putin to be playing the long game, and I doubt that this is the last time we'll see him use a mix of domestic thugs and unidentified troops to destabilize a neighboring country, essentially manufacturing a crisis that then "needs" Russian intervention.

Of course, he's not going to flat out declare war and invade. He'd manufacture a crisis, like in Crimea and Georgia, and then infiltrate troops to "protect the Russian minority".

You want to bet that Obama has the guts to invade to liberate the Baltics after they've been occupied by semi-stealth? Or would he talk loudly, but eventually accept the fait accompli?
   1337. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:44 PM (#4671863)
Wait, why are we more concerned about Jewish Ukranians than non-Jewish Ukranians?

Wow, I completely misread Srul's comment. In any event, remember when the Russians practically begged the Chechens to go their own way and declare independence from Moscow? Good times.
   1338. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:46 PM (#4671864)
Wow, I completely misread Srul's comment. In any event, remember when the Russians practically begged the Chechens to go their own way and declare independence from Moscow? Good times.

OK, I figured something must be off. That comment was not like you.
   1339. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:51 PM (#4671866)
where are you getting that from?

I have contacts here and in Kyiv who believe that to be the case.
   1340. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 04:54 PM (#4671869)
OK, I figured something must be off. That comment was not like you.

LOL. For some strange reason, I thought Srul was saying that the Jewish community would be better off with Russian control of eastern Ukraine. Très bizarre.
   1341. GregD Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:05 PM (#4671874)
I have contacts here and in Kyiv who believe that to be the case.
Jason, totally sincere question: How concerned are you by the anti-semitic wing in Ukrainian politics? I don't for a second buy Putin as protector of the Jews, but I am also somewhere between curious and concerned about what to my unexpert eyes looks lik a base of Ukrainian anti-semitic politicians in the new coalition.
   1342. steagles Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:15 PM (#4671878)
this is kind of a rabbit hole to jump into, but if you're bored, feel free to go through it
In my opinion, President Clinton, at the very least, conspired to commit murder at least 56 times. In my opinion, the President has abused his power for his own political gain, betrayed the public trust and will continue to do so unless the American people wake up and see the man for what he really is.

In the last decade, primarily in the last four years, Clinton has known several people who have died "mysteriously" or "accidentally." I can not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had a hand in these deaths. I am not trying to prove that he did. My goal is to present the facts that are known, look at them as a composite, rather than individual isolated events, and then ask this one crucial question: Was it in the best interests of the president for these people to be dead?

Over the next three days, I am going to ask that question fairly often. What is the connection in all of these deaths? Every person involved, from two young boys in Arkansas to Vince Foster, all posed a potential threat to the president and his bid for re-election.
   1343. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:24 PM (#4671881)
Demographics go a long way towards explaining that.

That this even needs to be pointed out it is rather incredible.
   1344. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:30 PM (#4671885)
Demographics go a long way towards explaining that.


not having any cultural base similar to the US south goes even longer
   1345. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:34 PM (#4671886)
How concerned are you by the anti-semitic wing in Ukrainian politics? I don't for a second buy Putin as protector of the Jews, but I am also somewhere between curious and concerned about what to my unexpert eyes looks lik a base of Ukrainian anti-semitic politicians in the new coalition.

What sort of world do we live in when you feel the need to preface with "Jason, totally sincere question?" :-)

Until Yanukovych opened fire on the Maidan protestors, I was very concerned by the bigots among the anti-Russian population. Here's just one example: Before the recent tumult, Svoboda, which now holds the Ministry of Defense portolio, was best known for one of their top lawmakers calling Mila Kunis a "dirty Jewess."

A delicate balancing act is required. As I have said before, Ukraine has had a shameful record vis-a-vis its Jewish population. On the other hand, the Kremlin's own history ain't so grand either.

Moreover, Russia is not a normal country. Most nation-states crave quiet borders but Russia craves instability in its near abroad, even chaos. Stirring up anti-Semitism and fears of Islamic radicalism in Ukraine is in Putin's interest and he is doing just that as we speak.
   1346. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:38 PM (#4671889)
Quite frankly, if Putin invaded the Baltics today, I think it's 50-50 that our alleged C-in-C would actually use military force to stop him.

That's what Putin's testing. He's got almost three more years with Obama -- plenty of time to gobble up territory.

The missile defense installations in 2009 were also a test.

   1347. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:45 PM (#4671893)
not having any cultural base similar to the US south goes even longer

You're blaming southern culture for the mostly black-on-black carnage occurring in America's inner cities?
   1348. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:46 PM (#4671894)
#1332: From The Monkey Cage - The Challenges Democrats Face In 2014 (in two graphs).

That's a lot of data in the service of a simple idea. I think I can boil it down further.

Midterm results for the incumbent president's party:
1958, 1966, 1974, 1982, 1994, 2006, 2010-- major loss
1954, 1978, 1986-- sizable loss
1970, 1990-- moderate loss
1962, 1998-- negligible
2002-- moderate gain

In other words, if Obama makes 50% gains in personal popularity amid an economic revival, he should be rewarded with a large midterm loss.
   1349. Srul Itza Posted: March 14, 2014 at 05:54 PM (#4671899)
As I have said before, Ukraine has had a shameful record vis-a-vis its Jewish population. On the other hand, the Kremlin's own history ain't so grand either.


Today is your day for understatement, I guess. ;-)

You are correct, I was not suggesting that the Jews -- or anyone, including the Russians -- in Eastern Ukraine would be better off under neo-Soviet rule. But some of the Russians there seem to think they would be. Be careful what you wish for . . .

If the Russians take over, I think the Jews in Eastern Ukraine would be better off in Western Ukraine, because I think everyone in Ukraine would be better off not being ruled by Putin. Jews in Eastern or Western Ukraine would be better off being Jews somewhere other than Ukraine, regardless of who runs the place. (FYI, I'm Galitz on my mother's side).
   1350. JE (Jason) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 06:21 PM (#4671904)
Today is your day for understatement, I guess. ;-)

(FYI, I'm Galitz on my mother's side).

Not much is said today about the plight of Jews in post-Great War Europe who were stuck in between the nascent states of Poland and Ukraine (in addition to regions well inside the latter state). IIRC, some 60,000 Jews were killed in these pogroms between 1917-21 at the hands of Ukrainian militia, Red Army, White Army, and Poles.
   1351. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 06:38 PM (#4671909)
(FYI, I'm Galitz on my mother's side).

Was not familiar with the term, but I am as well on my father's side.
   1352. zenbitz Posted: March 14, 2014 at 06:54 PM (#4671916)
You're blaming southern culture for the mostly black-on-black carnage occurring in America's inner cities?


I won't make such a claim but ironically (in the non Alanis sense) there is a non-zero cultural overlap between White Redneck culture and Black culture. For obvious reasons.
   1353. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 07:02 PM (#4671921)
I won't make such a claim but ironically (in the non Alanis sense) there is a non-zero cultural overlap between White Redneck culture and Black culture. For obvious reasons.

Very true. Yet Appalachia, which is about as White Redneck as you can get, has a crime rate well below the national average, and a violent crime rate of half the national average, despite being disastrously poor.

http://theweek.com/article/index/255505/appalachia-the-big-white-ghetto

So, I wouldn't go blaming Rednecks for violent crime just yet.
   1354. GregD Posted: March 14, 2014 at 08:29 PM (#4671935)
What sort of world do we live in when you feel the need to preface with "Jason, totally sincere question?" :-)

Until Yanukovych opened fire on the Maidan protestors, I was very concerned by the bigots among the anti-Russian population. Here's just one example: Before the recent tumult, Svoboda, which now holds the Ministry of Defense portolio, was best known for one of their top lawmakers calling Mila Kunis a "dirty Jewess."

A delicate balancing act is required. As I have said before, Ukraine has had a shameful record vis-a-vis its Jewish population. On the other hand, the Kremlin's own history ain't so grand either.

Moreover, Russia is not a normal country. Most nation-states crave quiet borders but Russia craves instability in its near abroad, even chaos. Stirring up anti-Semitism and fears of Islamic radicalism in Ukraine is in Putin's interest and he is doing just that as we speak.


Thanks a lot!

I just didn't want you to think I was trying to do a ridiculous gotcha. I get that there are imperfect choices, as always, just was curious on your take on how to balance our convergence of interests with Ukraine against some of the characters we will have to deal with.

   1355. GregD Posted: March 14, 2014 at 09:03 PM (#4671948)
Very true. Yet Appalachia, which is about as White Redneck as you can get, has a crime rate well below the national average, and a violent crime rate of half the national average, despite being disastrously poor.
I have seen two different numbers, one the one that article cites of well below average violent crime. Others that cite extremely high murder rates. Is it possible one set of data is bad? Murder rates usually are the most-reliable. Or that people in Appalachia kill each other but don't robbery or other personal crimes? I don't know.

But just as a quick survey:
Leslie County, KY (where I used to live) had a murder rate in 2009 above Philly's and behind Oakland's.

If you look at KY crime stats (from 2009) you will see see that the per capita murder map is darkest, by far, in Appalachia (map following page 8). Every single county but two in the highest quartile for murder per capita is in the Appalachian Regional Commission, though a couple of them would skirt the boundaries of how some people might define Appalachia. One county that isn't is a overwhelmingly white (90+%) county in what I would call the Green River region but others might call it otherwise. The other is a river county that is 95% white.

Eyeing the map, you would get a significant relationship if you measured homicide rate against % white population; large parts of Appalachia have a higher murder rate than Louisville or than far western Kentucky.

Now per capita numbers can always get funky in small counties, as these are. My understanding, from relatives in KY law enforcement, is that the particular counties vary but the pattern is pretty consistent; the big homicide rates are in eastern KY.


Tennessee is harder to find by county, though a lot has been written about the extremely high crime rate in Appalachian Campbell County. If you play around with the crime mapyou can see a lot of high-ranking towns in northeastern TN. It is especially striking to compare the small towns of eastern TN to the small towns of western TN in the old cotton belt. I don't though take anything from Pigeon Forge's extremely high ranking in crime, since tourist towns always have a high per capita ranking.
   1356. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 09:06 PM (#4671949)
Now per capita numbers can always get funky in small counties, as these are. My understanding, from relatives in KY law enforcement, is that the particular counties vary but the pattern is pretty consistent; the big homicide rates are in eastern KY.


Could it be these counties are below average nationally, but still above average for Kentucky?

It seems odd that something like this could be in dispute?

It's hard to find data by "Appalachia", but this:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/4tabledatadecoverviewpdf

shows KY and WV with well below avg. violent crime rates, and somewhat below average murder/manslaughter rates. Tennessee is above average.
   1357. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 09:10 PM (#4671953)
I don't though take anything from Pigeon Forge's extremely high ranking in crime, since tourist towns always have a high per capita ranking.


Everyone who visits Dollywood gets robbed of their dignity. I prefer Euro-Dollywood in Alabama.
   1358. GregD Posted: March 14, 2014 at 09:47 PM (#4671971)
Could it be these counties are below average nationally, but still above average for Kentucky?

It seems odd that something like this could be in dispute?
On murder per capita the rates in Appalachian Kentucky are flat-out high, not high in relation to Kentucky. I mentioned that Leslie County would at times be one of the very most-dangerous places to live in the country, based on murder per capita.

Here's one way of getting at it without trying to calculate this myself. Jefferson County (which has for the last decade been exactly equivalent to Louisville) has a murder rate of about 13 per 100,000 (the metro area scores lower than the city/county when national stats rank by that). Basically around Pittsburgh and Washington D.C.

14 Appalachian counties in Kentucky have clearly higher murder rates than that in Kentucky in that they are in a higher quartile; 7 others are in the same quartile as Louisville in the state but the map doesn't break down whether they fall just above or below Louisville. (If you're really interested in subregional variance, southeastern Kentucky/northeastern TN seems to stand out, as northeastern Kentucky has a big wave of counties with no murders until you get right to the WV border. The area around the Cumberland Gap has been one of the most-violent places in the US for at least 150 years, though people argue over whether the Civil War created the culture of violence when guerrillas took over, or it just revealed an enduring violent place to the nation's attention.)

The U.S. as a whole is around 5, with some variance. Kentucky's is usually about the same.
   1359. GregD Posted: March 14, 2014 at 09:52 PM (#4671973)
A prosecutor in northeastern TN whom I once knew used to say the good news is there's no stranger crime. The bad news is half the people you know want to beat your head in. He believed murder was different there in that it went in waves based on grudges and feuds and retribution, and so would go wild for a year or two, then drop to nothing once they put a few people away, then bubble up again. But that was before meth so it may be different now.
   1360. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 14, 2014 at 09:58 PM (#4671975)
A prosecutor in northeastern TN whom I once knew used to say the good news is there's no stranger crime. The bad news is half the people you know want to beat your head in. He believed murder was different there in that it went in waves based on grudges and feuds and retribution, and so would go wild for a year or two, then drop to nothing once they put a few people away, then bubble up again. But that was before meth so it may be different now.

That would be consistent with relatively high murder rates and low overall violent crime rates.
   1361. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 14, 2014 at 10:26 PM (#4671980)
How bad is the political climate for Congressinal Democrats? Some are touting their support of George W. Bush:
A longtime House Democrat in electoral jeopardy this fall says he supported former President George W. Bush more than President Obama. Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.), first elected in 1976, is a top target of Republicans in a state where Obama has long been deeply unpopular.
. . .
Asked if Obama had been good for West Virginia overall, he replied, “Probably not.”  “I probably have supported George Bush more than I have Barack Obama,” Rahall said.


   1362. Lassus Posted: March 14, 2014 at 11:01 PM (#4671987)
I wonder who Clapper will support in 2016, because NOT OBAMA isn't very interesting, or useful. It's reminiscent of the NOT ACA plan his party has put forward. Very compelling stuff indeed.
   1363. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:20 AM (#4672001)
See for instance the statistics for Canada which does not incarerate nearly the same number of people as the US and also shows a drop in violent crime.


Demographics go a long way towards explaining that.

That this even needs to be pointed out it is rather incredible.


What? Different demographics in Canada explains why Canada has had a drop in violent crime, without incarcerating huge numbers like the US has? We are not talking about comparisons in crime rates between the US and Canada, we are talking about comparing changes in crime rates.

There was a rate of crime in Canada and that crime rate dropped in Canada. The demographic differences between the US and Canada has NOTHING to do with drop in crime in Canada from past to present. And Canada had that drop in crime without incarcerating huge numbers like the US has.

Why do you think that demographic differences between the US and Canada caused a relative drop in Canadian crime? What caused the relative drop in crime rate? It was not demographics, unless you are suggesting changes in Canadian demographics drove the drop in crime rate. It is not huge incarceration rates.
   1364. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:23 AM (#4672003)
Unless we continue to disarm, and Putin can co-opt a couple of NATO states into opting opt of the defense.


Disarm? Is this metaphorically? You realize the US spends MUCH more than Russia does on military right? And then if you include the other NATO countries the difference is crazy large. And Putin knows this.
   1365. tshipman Posted: March 15, 2014 at 02:26 AM (#4672008)
Why do you think that demographic differences between the US and Canada caused a relative drop in Canadian crime? What caused the relative drop in crime rate? It was not demographics, unless you are suggesting changes in Canadian demographics drove the drop in crime rate. It is not huge incarceration rates.


Lead explains all of this.

Lead also explains crime in southern US and Appalachia. Good news everybody! We don't have to go searching for bullshit dumps like "southern culture" or whatever. Lead turns out to be a really good explanation!
   1366. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 15, 2014 at 08:09 AM (#4672026)
Disarm? Is this metaphorically? You realize the US spends MUCH more than Russia does on military right? And then if you include the other NATO countries the difference is crazy large. And Putin knows this.

Disarm = increase rate of military spending by less than in previous years
   1367. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: March 15, 2014 at 08:28 AM (#4672027)
Disarm = increase rate of military spending by less than in previous years


Typical hippie, show you a graph of temperatures going up a few degrees and you cry that we'll be cooked in an century but show you a graph of a decreasing rate of military spending and you won't admit we're on a path to disarmament.
   1368. Lassus Posted: March 15, 2014 at 09:03 AM (#4672031)
   1369. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 15, 2014 at 10:06 AM (#4672041)
Politics/polling analyst Charlie Cook looks ahead to November:

It's surprising how many people who avidly follow American politics don't seem to appreciate that elections are both seasonal and cyclical in nature.

If one side had a more successful election six years earlier, that party likely will lose [Senate] seats this time around. So, in 2014, we are looking at a group of seats last up in 2008. That was a year when President Bush's poll numbers were depleted by the Iraq War and his handling of Hurricane Katrina, and further depressed by the financial crisis and the country's subsequent tumble into a deep recession. The GOP suffered a net loss of eight seats that year. The Democratic success back then explains why the party has 21 seats up this year, including six in heavily Republican states, compared with only 15 GOP seats, only one of which is in a Democratic state.

Because 2010 was a terrific year for Republicans, the GOP will have 24 seats up in 2016, seven of which are in states carried by Obama in 2012. Democrats will have only 10 seats up that year, none in a state Obama carried by fewer than 5 points.

The 2010 cycle was a horrific one for Democrats, who lost six governorships. This year, Republicans are generally overexposed in gubernatorial races, defending 22 seats to just 14 for Democrats. Nine of the Republican governorships (almost half) are in states Obama carried. Only one of the Democratic seats, Arkansas, is in a state where Romney prevailed in 2012.

Looking at this November's midterms, then, the wind certainly appears to be blowing in favor of Republicans. The main question is whether it is a light, moderate, strong, or hurricane-force wind. In terms of cycles, on the other hand, Democrats picked up just eight House seats in 2012, after having lost 63 seats in 2010 and having gained 52 seats in the solid Democratic years of 2006 and 2008 combined. The House is pretty much sorted out, and minimal change can be expected. Republicans look likely to pick up a handful of seats.

But because Republicans won so many governorships — 23 — in 2010, they should be prepared to lose seats this year. The only question that remains is to what extent the seasonal partisan winds and the GOP's midterm-election-turnout edge will offset a scenario otherwise favorable to Democrats. [We currently predict] Democrats will net two to four governorships.

Both seasonal and cyclical forces are working against Senate Democrats, suggesting a really bad year for the party in the upper chamber. [We currently foresee] Republicans picking up four to six Senate seats. A bigger gain of seven or more seats is more likely for Senate Republicans this election than a smaller gain of three or fewer.



It should be noted that a little less than a year before the 2012 election, Cook predicted that Obama "faced an uphill battle" for reelection, and that Republicans would lose 5-10 seats in the House but pick up six in the Senate. Cook's "best case scenario" was that the Democrats would restrict their losses to three Senate seats. (He got the House right.) By September 2012, he was sidling towards for Obama: “I’m looking at an incumbent who for all the world looks unelectable to me, but is running such a better campaign." He finally projected that Obama was likely to win, in mid-October.

"Don't pay attention to the horse race," Cook had advised in November 2011, because Obama's Gallup popularity numbers were the key indicator of his election fate. According to Gallup, Obama was mired in the mid-40s for virtually every day of the 2012 campaign.
   1370. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 15, 2014 at 11:35 AM (#4672063)
   1371. GregD Posted: March 15, 2014 at 11:39 AM (#4672065)

Lead explains all of this.

Lead also explains crime in southern US and Appalachia. Good news everybody! We don't have to go searching for ######## dumps like "southern culture" or whatever. Lead turns out to be a really good explanation!
I am strongly pro-lead as an explanation for crime but I think this is a big oversell.

The most-optimistic lead researchers say that the combination of lead paint and leaded gasoline produced a general spike in the 1960s-late 1990s that was especially exacerbated in high-lead areas. Then unleaded gasoline and the shift in paint and the regulation of lead rates in apartment buildings led, once the already leaded-up kids moved into the criminal justice system, to a generation of youths who commit crimes at a level comparable to what it was before the spike.

But they always qualify this with reminders that before lead 1) crime existed--lead didn't create crime, 2) crime has always existed at different rates in urban vs non-urban environments, lead didn't create that difference though it exacerbated it since cities were lead zones, 3) nations have always had different crime rates, 4) frontier/border zones always have higher crime rates and 5) there are some anomalous regions that have always had crime rates higher than you would predict from a satellite zone. The American South has for criminologists since the 1880s, since essentially the beginning of criminology, been with parts of Italy ground zero for trying to figure out regional variation. I agree that honor can be so nebulous as to be meaningless. But that just means we need a better explanation; honor's lack of utility doesn't disprove the long-term difference in historical crime rates by region. No region stays the same, and there are reasons to think that some of the regional variations are washing out, but that doesn't mean they haven't existed or don't still have some trailing effect.

The end of lead, optimistically but I think realistically, means that the spike of the 1960s-1990s is gone, but that takes us back to realities 1-5.

   1372. GregD Posted: March 15, 2014 at 11:48 AM (#4672067)
Politics/polling analyst Charlie Cook looks ahead to November:
Thanks. I hadn't seen that. A handful of R gains in the House, 4-6 gain in the Senate, and a couple of Dem pickups in the governors' races sounds reasonable at this point. A booming or crashing economy or some transformative event could obviously shift things over the summer, but I wouldn't be shocked if in November we're posting about something exactly like that. For the oddity of it, I'll predict a 5-seat R pickup in the Senate and poor Joe Biden stuck in Washington every day of the session as the tiebreaker when he'd rather be saying foolish things in Iowa.
   1373. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: March 15, 2014 at 12:48 PM (#4672079)
Even a Russian economy with a $2.5T GDP is hardly a juggernaut, SdeB.


It's big enough to survive on its own. It's not North Korea.

Among other things, it is heavily dependent on energy sales; any meaningful export reductions will hurt them big time.


The thing being meaningful export restrictions are not really possible; the energy market is international, and in any case there are few alternatives for its main customers. Europe buys energy from Russia because Russian energy is cheaper than anywhere else.
   1374. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 12:52 PM (#4672080)
A longtime House Democrat in electoral jeopardy this fall says he supported former President George W. Bush more than President Obama. Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.)


We are all stunned that West Virginian Democrats don't like Barack Obama. We have never seen anything like that before.
   1375. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 15, 2014 at 12:54 PM (#4672082)
I'll predict a 5-seat R pickup in the Senate and poor Joe Biden stuck in Washington every day of the session as the tiebreaker . . .

On the House side, Republicans start in a strong position. They picked up 64 seats in 2010, one of their largest gains ever, and only lost 8 in 2012 despite Obama' re-election. The 2010 Census and subsequent reapportionment moved some seats between and within states, so the 2010 comparison isn't quite the same map, but the GOP would probably see regaining those 8 seats as a rough indicator that they had done as well as 2010. Looking at it another way, there are only 9 House Democrats in districts carried by Romney, and many of the remaining districts are Democratic strongholds, so the GOP can probably only win another ~10-15 seats before hitting a ceiling due to the heavy Democratic tilt of the other districts. Still, I think the GOP will be able to hold Democrats to less than 190 seats for the first time in almost 70 years.

The Senate map is still fluid, with primaries yet to be held in many states. I'd guess the GOP gains 6-10 seats, but it is a little early to be precise.
   1376. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:11 PM (#4672085)
A longtime House Democrat in electoral jeopardy this fall says he supported former President George W. Bush more than President Obama. Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.)

We are all stunned that West Virginian Democrats don't like Barack Obama. We have never seen anything like that before.

I suspect Nick Rahall doesn't fit your stereotype of a "West Virginia Democrat". He endorsed Obama over Clinton in 2008, voted for ObamaCare, opposes its repeal, and was even one of only 84 Congresspersons voting for the Progressive Caucus Budget. However, he is in electoral difficulty because "West Virginian Democrats don't like Barack Obama". So you got that right.
   1377. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:23 PM (#4672087)
Don't miss the Diversity = White Genocide parade in New York City today!


My favorite thing about that link is the graphic for the White Power march, where instead of a peaceful crowd of civil demonstrators marching through the streets, the graphic basically depicts a pitchfork mob.
   1378. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:25 PM (#4672088)
However, he is in electoral difficulty because "West Virginian Democrats don't like Barack Obama". So you got that right.


Yes, Clapper. The plurality of WV Democrats have never and continue to not like them that uppity negro in the Oval Office. As such, a pol running for office contingent on their votes needs to make sure that those voters realize he's more like a good old white boy like W. Bush than he is like that uppity negro in the Oval Office.
   1379. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:26 PM (#4672089)
I'd guess the GOP gains 6-10 seats, but it is a little early to be precise.


What 10 Senate seats will they gain, Clapper? Please elaborate.
   1380. greenback calls it soccer Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:34 PM (#4672091)
The plurality of WV Democrats have never and continue to not like them that uppity negro in the Oval Office.

Considering WV's history, I'd guess the problem is as much about coal as anything else. Plenty of hedge fund types support gay marriage and ObamaCare and restricting guns and whatever Obama's foreign policy is. But threaten to touch their carried interest loophole, and they'll show their fangs.
   1381. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:39 PM (#4672093)
CNN) -- Investigators now say that, according to automated electronic connections attempts by the ACARS data reporting system of Malaysia Flight 370, the airplane flew far to the west, in an entirely different direction than it should have been heading as per its original flight-planned route, which was to the north.

The 90-degree turn to the west might have been purely random if entered by a nonpilot or inexpert pilot who knew simply how to turn a single knob (called the heading bug) that could command the autopilot to make a turn to a new heading (or direction).

Investigators now believe, according to news reports, that after its transponder and ACARS radio were turned off, turns were initiated at GPS waypoints. These waypoints are essentially virtual checkpoints in the sky, defining markers charted by airspace regulators that create pathways in the air that airplanes follow to keep safely separated from each other. The waypoints are defined by an exact latitude and longitude and can be located by a number of the airplane's various navigators, including GPS. If the reports of the flight path are true, it is not a route that could happen by accident.

There are two ways the 777-200 could have flown on this path. After passing one waypoint, it could have been directed to fly to the next waypoint by a pilot turning the heading knob toward that exact place, a process that would require some piloting expertise. This would be very unusual, and a novice or pilot without much flying experience on this plane would not know to make these kinds of inputs or have any conceivable reason to do so.

The almost certain explanation would be that these waypoints were programmed into the flight management system of the 777-200, a task that would have been beyond the abilities of anyone but a professional pilot. The autopilot follows the course put into the flight management system by the pilots. That is, when the autopilot is not being manually controlled instead. The manual control part is easy. You turn a knob and the airplane goes where you ask it to. The flight management system part is very complicated. I am a commercial pilot, and I have done some training on the Boeing 777. Even after a few hours of professional instruction I would have been unable to program the flight management system to command the autopilot to fly the flight plan that Flight 370 reportedly flew.

This leaves us with one of two possible conclusions. Either the flight was commandeered by a group with at least one professionally trained pilot among them or one of the pilots in control programmed the new off-route flight plan into the flight management system.


This just gets weirder and weirder ...
   1382. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:39 PM (#4672094)
Considering WV's history, I'd guess the problem is as much about coal as anything else.


Perhaps, but until shown some sort of evidence to that end, I will continue to assume that Appalachia's problem with a black man is that he is a black man. Occam's Razor and all that.
   1383. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:51 PM (#4672100)
Considering WV's history, I'd guess the problem is as much about coal as anything else.

Yes, although I think they have also grown tired of the disdain that Democratic elites have directed toward their state. West Virginia has changed a lot since the days when even Mike Dukakis could win the state as a Democrat. Al Gore would have been President if he'd carried West Virginia. He didn't, and neither did John Kerry. Those suggesting Obama's race is his problem in West Virginia are showing their own ignorance.
   1384. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 15, 2014 at 01:57 PM (#4672103)
Yes, although I think they have also grown tired of the disdain that Democratic elites have directed toward their state. West Virginia has changed a lot since the days when even Mike Dukakis could win the state as a Democrat. Al Gore would have been President if he'd carried West Virginia. He didn't, and neither did John Kerry. Those suggesting Obama's race is his problem in West Virginia are showing their own ignorance.

Yeah, it's shocking that when you mock peoples' values and culture, and try to undermine the pillar of their economy, they stop supporting you politically.

   1385. greenback calls it soccer Posted: March 15, 2014 at 02:29 PM (#4672110)
Yeah, it's shocking that when you mock peoples' values and culture, and try to undermine the pillar of their economy, they stop supporting you politically.

Who is this 'you'? It isn't Obama. Rickey isn't representing D's in an official capacity any more than one of the White Genocide clowns is representing the R's.

As for destroying their economic pillar, many West Virginians just had the pleasure of first-hand experience of one of the 'externalities' of coal production. It does not speak well of their understanding of long-term consequences that they continue to tie themselves to coal.
   1386. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 15, 2014 at 02:30 PM (#4672111)
Obama down to 39% Job Approval In Gallup Poll, again.
   1387. greenback calls it soccer Posted: March 15, 2014 at 02:35 PM (#4672112)
Occam's Razor and all that.

It's coal country in a state that seceded from Virginia over slavery. Occam's Razor doesn't mean what you think it means.
   1388. GregD Posted: March 15, 2014 at 02:43 PM (#4672115)
Yeah, it's shocking that when you mock peoples' values and culture, and try to undermine the pillar of their economy, they stop supporting you politically.
I'm intrigued by the theory that Mike Dukakis showed respect for West Virginians' values and culture while Al Gore didn't. Love to see some evidence for that.

West Virginia has become increasingly southern; it once was much more politically like western Pennsylvania but now is politically more like southwestern Virginia. New Hampshire has become increasingly Democratic over the same period. It's part of a bigger shift. I think you could nominate a Hatfield and a McCoy on a unified Democratic ticket and still get walloped in West Virginia, and the state and local Democrats are in danger, just as the state and local Republicans in New England held on a while after they became uncompetitive in national races and have now fallen away. It is true that parts of WV are in the so-called "American" belt that stretches through KY and TN and into ARK that were the only counties to go stronger for Kerry than for Obama, but that's a marginal impact at this point. No Dem is going to win WV, though it's possible a different Dem pres candidate will be less of a drag on local Dems.
   1389. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 02:46 PM (#4672117)
Yeah, it's shocking that when you mock peoples' values and culture, and try to undermine the pillar of their economy, they stop supporting you politically.


That would explain the Obama/Clinton cross tabs for WV in 2008, I'm sure.

It's coal country in a state that seceded from Virginia over slavery. Occam's Razor doesn't mean what you think it means.


In that you think the culture of Appalachia is dictated by intrastate politics from 1860, I'm not sure I can have this conversation with you.
   1390. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:00 PM (#4672122)
Who is this 'you'? It isn't Obama. Rickey isn't representing D's in an official capacity any more than one of the White Genocide clowns is representing the R's.

As for destroying their economic pillar, many West Virginians just had the pleasure of first-hand experience of one of the 'externalities' of coal production. It does not speak well of their understanding of long-term consequences that they continue to tie themselves to coal.


The Democratic party has continued to move away from it's white working class roots. The party is dominated by rich white urban hyper-liberal, and minority groups. When a candidate mocks people who "cling to God and guns" don't be shocked when religious gun owners take the hint.

You know, a lot of people would rather work an honest job, experience some pollution, and die at 70, than live to be 80 on the Gov't dole. Of course, the inner city people on the dole, don't actually have any better health than the coal-mining types. The life expectancy of people without a HS education is collapsing (down 4 years since 1990) despite the much cleaner environment.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with modern coal technology. The obsession with being "Green" is stupid. We should all be thrilled to trade 2-3 years of life expectancy for and extra 0.5% GDP growth.
   1391. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:01 PM (#4672123)
What 10 Senate seats will they gain, Clapper? Please elaborate.

Do you rely on me for all your news? There's a lot of info out there on what seats are in jeopardy. Furthermore, I said "6-10 seats", and that "it is a little early to be precise". But since my views are in such demand, here's my breakdown on GOP Senate prospects:

Very Likely Gains: West Virginia, Montana, South Dakota.
Likely Gains: North Carolina, Arkansas, Louisiana.
Possible: Alaska, Michigan, Colorado, Iowa.
Keep An Eye On: New Hampshire, Virginia, perhaps even Oregon & Minnesota if Obama is below 43% in November.
   1392. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:01 PM (#4672124)
That would explain the Obama/Clinton cross tabs for WV in 2008, I'm sure.

The Clintons don't show obvious disdain for working class whites. It's no shocker they supported her over someone who openly mocks them.

If the Republican could figure how to shed the WSJ agenda, and come up with a platform to appeal to working class whites, they'd win the Presidency every time.
   1393. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:05 PM (#4672125)
The Clintons don't show obvious disdain for working class whites. It's no shocker they supported her over someone who openly mocks them.


When exactly has Obama "openly mocked" these poor put upon working class white folk?
   1394. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:06 PM (#4672126)
Do you rely on me for all your news?


No, but considering that cherry picking polls is quite literally all you seem to know how to do, I'd hate to take your toy away from you. Keep the children entertained with their baubles, and all that.

Mostly I just wanted to get you on record as to where this super duper wave of 10 Senate seats was going to come from, so I can mock you for it later.
   1395. Jim Wisinski Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:09 PM (#4672128)
There's absolutely nothing wrong with modern coal technology. The obsession with being "Green" is stupid. We should all be thrilled to trade 2-3 years of life expectancy for and extra 0.5% GDP growth.


Hokieneer might beg to differ, as well as his hundreds of thousands of neighbors who couldn't even shower safely at home for a few days
   1396. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:11 PM (#4672130)
We should all be thrilled to trade 2-3 years of life expectancy for and extra 0.5% GDP growth.


Spoken like a man who believes in fairy tales of an afterlife.
   1397. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:14 PM (#4672131)
Spoken like a man who believes in fairy tales of an afterlife.

Spoken as a man who has had serious health problems. Nobody should want to be 90, with all that entails.

When exactly has Obama "openly mocked" these poor put upon working class white folk?

Seriously?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/14/barackobama.uselections2008
   1398. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:15 PM (#4672132)
Hokieneer might beg to differ, as well as his hundreds of thousands of neighbors who couldn't even shower safely at home for a few days

And I had a tree fall on my house, and couldn't even live there for a week. Disasters happen.

You don't organize a society around a zero risk tolerance, although that's what leftists seem to want to do.
   1399. Mefisto Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:16 PM (#4672133)
The Democratic party has continued to move away from it's white working class roots.


This is wrong. The Dems do just fine with white working class voters outside the South. It's only in the South where those voters skew R. The reason for that I think we can leave to Occam's Razor.

If the Republican could figure how to shed the WSJ agenda, and come up with a platform to appeal to working class whites, they'd win the Presidency every time.


Wrong again. Not only do the numbers in the link above show the difficulty there, but white voters are becoming an increasingly smaller share of the electorate. The Rs got 59% of those voters last time and it's hard to see them doing better against an unblack candidate in a mediocre economy.

When a candidate mocks people who "cling to God and guns"


It wasn't mocking.

the inner city people on the dole


Ah, you and Paul Ryan.
   1400. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 15, 2014 at 03:17 PM (#4672134)
Obama down to 39% Job Approval In Gallup Poll, again.

Well, that's exactly what cost Obama the 2012 election, according to Charlie Cook.
Page 14 of 33 pages ‹ First  < 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Id of SugarBear Blanks
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogRon Washington Acknowledges Infidelity, Doesn’t Explain Why He Resigned
(59 - 12:06pm, Sep 20)
Last: JE (Jason)

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(299 - 11:58am, Sep 20)
Last: Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14!

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(3389 - 11:57am, Sep 20)
Last: GregD

NewsblogHBT: Talking head says Jeter is “a fraud” and “you are all suckers”
(41 - 11:56am, Sep 20)
Last: Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq.

NewsblogOT: September 2014 College Football thread
(284 - 11:50am, Sep 20)
Last: Pops Freshenmeyer

NewsblogKeri: How Washington Built a World Series Favorite
(51 - 11:45am, Sep 20)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogNew approach on offense has Pirates in playoff contention this season
(26 - 11:42am, Sep 20)
Last: BDC

NewsblogEn Banc Court May Call Foul on Bonds Conviction
(33 - 10:34am, Sep 20)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogAraton: The Other Side of a Derek Jeter Hustle Play
(35 - 9:43am, Sep 20)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogPedro pens a letter to Clayton Kershaw
(67 - 9:18am, Sep 20)
Last: toratoratora

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - September 2014
(288 - 9:13am, Sep 20)
Last: theboyqueen

NewsblogA’s lose Triple-A Sacramento affiliate
(91 - 8:49am, Sep 20)
Last: JE (Jason)

NewsblogJoe Girardi put Derek Jeter’s farewell tour ahead of the team
(203 - 12:49am, Sep 20)
Last: Omineca Greg

NewsblogDave Kreiger: New Baseball Hall of Fame voting rules
(78 - 12:47am, Sep 20)
Last: Booey

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-19-14
(89 - 12:39am, Sep 20)
Last: boteman is not here 'til October

Page rendered in 1.0867 seconds
53 querie(s) executed