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

Monday, November 20, 2017

OTP 20 November 2017: Sheriff’s official suspended 10 days over Cubs World Series sneak-in

A high-ranking official in Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart’s office had to pay a price for allowing others to avoid having to pay the price of admission last year to a Cubs World Series game at Wrigley Field, newly obtained records show.

Mike Anton, a deputy chief with the sheriff’s police who makes about $120,000 a year, was suspended for 10 days for giving security IDs to two people so they could get in to a 2016 Cubs World Series game, the records show.

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 20, 2017 at 08:01 AM | 1172 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off-topic, politics, world series

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 9 of 12 pages ‹ First  < 7 8 9 10 11 >  Last ›
   801. Morty Causa Posted: November 23, 2017 at 09:53 AM (#5580545)
How would you ever have such a thing? You make a lot of sound arguments for the materialist basis of reality, then start in with special pleading for men. While males often have it rougher than females (for instance, male gender socialization is enforced at school-age, female at puberty), but as Greg argues (I think) with that socialization comes greater freedom.

What's the nature of that special pleading I'm engaging in? If anything, I would think it's manifestly the other way around when it comes to special pleading.

As for males having greater freedom, that freedom comes with severe risks--indeed, one of the risks is losing that freedom through death, injury, and prison (whether actual or "rehab"). Females hardly ever suffer the criminal penalties that males do. Our legal and judicial system doesn't like bringing women before it. Most of this is due to custom based on outdated views about women, but, still, it will do all it can to overlook and minimize (comparatively) her transgressions. If a man and woman commit a crime, the man almost always is deemed the principal and the woman the lesser. He gets it good and hard, and she tends to be excused under the rubric of being under his control or spell. She isn't charged with crimes as often, and when she is, she doesn't suffer penalties as severe. But, we excuse that because we males tend to think we gain something by deferring to a sacrosanct concept of woman's nature. It goes without saying for the most part, but we males think women are better and deserve extra consideration (and, mirabile dictu, women concur). Some men gain from this, but at the expense of other men. And they like it that way. Makes 'em feel like the only bull in the pasture.
   802. Greg K Posted: November 23, 2017 at 09:59 AM (#5580546)
Did he tell her she was in great physical shape?

It's a bit of an open question.

Buckingham was negotiating with Richelieu (who had just arrived on the scene at the time), but there was a French court faction which hoped to displace Richelieu. As the Queen (Anne of Austria) was not a fan of Richelieu, she seemed like she might be an instrument to oust him, and so there appears to have been a bit of a conspiracy to draw Buckingham and Anne together and let the sparks fly.

At one point a bunch of lords and ladies were taking a stroll through the palace gardens, and Buckingham and the Queen separated from the herd and took a turn ahead of everyone else. So they were alone for a few moments, at which point the Queen screamed and by the time everyone rushed to her she was flushed and Buckingham had scampered off.

It was probably some kind of cultural miscommunication, as there are plenty of examples of Englishman acting like savages in the more decorous courts of the continent. When Buckingham and the future Prince Charles visited the Spanish court to put the final touches on Charles' marriage to a Spanish princess, they both developed a reputation for being real boors. Buckingham lounging around with his feet on the furniture, even when his Prince was in the room. And Charles had a couple episodes a bit like Buckingham's with Anne, where he leapt over a garden wall to have a conversation with his bride-to-be, only to have her look at him like he had just whipped his dick out and then flat out ignored him.

So what probably happened was the Queen was acting all coquettish (as was her personality), and Buckingham read that as being the sign to make his move. It's entirely possible that the Queen was giving the sign, but the "move" she was acceding to was something a bit less overt than whatever Buckingham tried. Even after the banishment Buckingham and Anne still exchanged personal letters and seemed to have affection for one another. And just before the banishment they had another meeting where Buckingham knelt at her sickbed and have a fairly lengthy private conversation, which was interrupted a few times by the Queen's hand-maidens trying to inform Buckingham that what he was doing bordered on sexual assault.

The whole exchange is a fun little exercise in the differences in courtly behaviour between England and the continent (and a reminder that in many ways in the early 17th century England was the uncultured backwater of Europe). Part of the blame of course is on the fact that the early 17th century English court was, in effect, the Scottish court of James I. There's a funny story of James meeting his wife for the first time, a Danish princess, and she being shocked when he tried to kiss her in "the Scottish fashion". Unfortunately we don't have the details on what that fashion was, but throughout their married life Anne of Denmark was disgusted with the informal way James held court, drinking and goofing around with his inferiors. It's likely that young Charles' trip to Spain in 1623 had a deep impact on him, and he realized that England was in need of some civilization which he brought as King in the 1630s.
   803. Morty Causa Posted: November 23, 2017 at 10:06 AM (#5580547)
Certainly, I was including mental traits within those biological imperatives.

Speaking of the social function of insecurity, in the dichotomy of risk-taking male and passive/play-it-safe female, there seems like an intuitive argument to see freedom (in its vaguest of general senses) as a virtue which provides a social function to men who have to go out there and make a name for themselves. Individual sovereignty in (and credit for) your actions is part of the drive.

See that Times article on Baumeister. It isn’t that females don’t take risks. It’s more that the risks taken by the respective sexes are materially different, with men more prone to have to do that which results in a greater likelihood of death or grievous injury. One sex plays a studied game of poker for slight but more certain winnings while the other is throwing the dice risking it all for a big payoff. But I would never say females don’t risk anything. Indeed, until well into the 20th century, for most females simply giving birth was pretty risky. In fact, I think if the mentality that exists today existed back then throughout history we’d have gone extinct.

But how ideas and biological forces like that adapt themselves into social and political systems don't seem especially clean, and can, at times, be counter-intuitive. The biological social function of the virtue might get all mixed together with the inherent virtue of the virtue itself (to be a bit awkward). So freedom evolves as a exclusive biological imperative, but the expression of that virtue in social or cultural terms becomes so successful that everyone wants in. I think throughout history societies have taken behavioural biological imperatives or virtues and adapted and applied them in all sorts of counter-productive (from a biological point of view) ways.

This is really interesting to consider. The scope here probably doesn’t allow us to do it full justice, but the bedrock, biology, gives rise to social and political organizations, which competing interests within it give rise to an articulation of opposing ideologies (or philosophies and metaphysics, if you prefer) in order to justify self-interest, and we become over time inclined to see what’s an overarching manifestation as bedrock, a bottom-line root. Religion is obvious, but there are other ideologies. Great thing about divorcing one from the other is at some point that you don’t have to think. You justify your worldview because, goddammit, it’s just right. You simply hold others to your precious strictures (backed by unquestioned censure and laws with penalties) and bask in your superior sensibilities.

As Richard Dawkins once said, we didn't evolve to procreate, strictly speaking. We evolved to have sex. Procreation is kind of a side effect. Moreover, evolution as a cultural contingent allowed us to develop ways to circumvent procreation.

EDITed
   804. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 23, 2017 at 10:07 AM (#5580548)
The whole exchange is a fun little exercise in the differences in courtly behaviour between England and the continent (and a reminder that in many ways in the early 17th century England was the uncultured backwater of Europe). Part of the blame of course is on the fact that the early 17th century English court was, in effect, the Scottish court of James I. There's a funny story of James meeting his wife for the first time, a Danish princess, and she being shocked when he tried to kiss her in "the Scottish fashion". Unfortunately we don't have the details on what that fashion was, but throughout their married life Anne of Denmark was disgusted with the informal way James held court, drinking and goofing around with his inferiors. It's likely that young Charles' trip to Spain in 1623 had a deep impact on him, and he realized that England was in need of some civilization which he brought as King in the 1630s.


What a sorry lot the Stuarts were. The male rulers anyway.
   805. Morty Causa Posted: November 23, 2017 at 10:17 AM (#5580552)
Not Charles II.
   806. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 23, 2017 at 10:26 AM (#5580554)
I'll leave it to our expert, but my impression is he mismanaged the government almost as badly as his father.
   807. Greg K Posted: November 23, 2017 at 11:17 AM (#5580570)
See that Times article on Baumeister. It isn’t that females don’t take risks. It’s more that the risks taken by the respective sexes are materially different, with men more prone to have to do that which results in a greater likelihood of death or grievous injury. One sex plays a studied game of poker for slight but more certain winnings while the other is throwing the dice risking it all for a big payoff. But I would never say females don’t risk anything. Indeed, until well into the 20th century, for most females simply giving birth was pretty risky. In fact, I think if the mentality that exists today existed back then throughout history we’d have gone extinct.

This is kind of what I had in mind with active and passive insecurity. The risks women face seem largely out of their hands. Would this encourage a kind of fatalist, or even superstitious type of insecurity as opposed to the biological drive to a more active insecurity that drives men to action?

I guess that's what I find interesting about the linked article. How biology acts to create different male and female worldviews or behaviours.

I recall reading an anthropological article about baseball players a while back, in which luck and superstition played vastly different roles in how players see their hitting vs. their fielding, which this reminds me of.
   808. Greg K Posted: November 23, 2017 at 11:30 AM (#5580575)
I think the one thing we can say with some degree of certainty is that Charles II was the most competent of the Stuarts.

I tend to think James gets a bad rap, but if I had to choose one King to pitch one game for me, out of the bunch I'd take Charles II without blinking.

Whig history lumped him in with the other Stuarts, largely due to his backing of the Tories late in his reign, but he does stand out. Most of all, for appreciating the limits of what was possible for a King, which had always escaped Charles I. Until his final years, Charles II was much better at balancing factions than Charles I (though James I wasn't too bad at that either). He also scores bonus points for promoting the sciences.

Charles II comes across as an able King, which is more than you can say for Charles I. Like James, he was probably losing control at the end. His obsession with the French alliance kind of boxed him into a corner by the end, and his firm support of the Tories set up some dangerous factionalism within English politics. But on the whole, he comes across as a politician who knew what he was doing.

Of course, I'm pretty far from an expert on Charles II and the post-Civil War period in general. So I'd take this with a grain of salt.
   809. Swoboda is freedom Posted: November 23, 2017 at 12:37 PM (#5580584)
Happy Thanksgiving to all. I think we can all take a day off from insulting each other, all of you jerks. ;)

I am grateful for my family, even if 15 of them will be here today for dinner.
   810. Greg K Posted: November 23, 2017 at 12:40 PM (#5580586)
Happy Thanksgiving to all. I think we can all take a day off from insulting each other, all of you jerks. ;)

Thanksgiving was last month up here, so I'll continue with the belligerence, thank you very much.
   811. Lassus Posted: November 23, 2017 at 12:41 PM (#5580587)
Thanksgiving was last month up here, so I'll continue with the belligerence, thank you very much.

Congratulations on the 30-day head start you got on destroying the people who were already there.
   812. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 23, 2017 at 01:02 PM (#5580591)
Just the immediate family for us today. I just fired up the deep fryer. Taught my daughter to make apple pie this morning.
   813. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 23, 2017 at 01:04 PM (#5580593)

See that Times article on Baumeister. It isn’t that females don’t take risks. It’s more that the risks taken by the respective sexes are materially different, with men more prone to have to do that which results in a greater likelihood of death or grievous injury. One sex plays a studied game of poker for slight but more certain winnings while the other is throwing the dice risking it all for a big payoff. But I would never say females don’t risk anything. Indeed, until well into the 20th century, for most females simply giving birth was pretty risky.
Until well into the 20th century, females weren't given much of a choice as to whether to take that risk.
   814. Random Transaction Generator Posted: November 23, 2017 at 02:24 PM (#5580603)
Celebrity Perv Apology Generator

As a person who was born in an era before women were “people,” harassment is completely unacceptable — especially when people find out about it. It was simply boys locker room talk, and of course now I realize my behavior was wrong. In conclusion, I will wait 2-3 years before reappearing in film and TV and just sort of hope you all forget about this.


...

As the father of daughters, I am deeply ashamed (but not “sorry” because that means I’m guilty of something). I imagined that any woman would have been thrilled to see a tiny penis peeking out from below my pasty, middle-aged paunch like the head of a geriatric albino turtle moments from death, and of course now I realize my behavior was wrong. In conclusion, I have chosen to live my life as a gay man so if you say anything bad about me now you’re homophobic.


...

As a male feminist, my actions do not align with my values, nor represent who I am as a person. It was a very long time ago, and of course now I realize my behavior was wrong. In conclusion, I’m not saying the victim is a “liar,” I’m just saying “she’s not telling the truth about the thing that happened because maybe it didn’t even happen.”
   815. dog poop god Posted: November 23, 2017 at 02:33 PM (#5580604)
It goes without saying for the most part, but we males think women are better and deserve extra consideration (and, mirabile dictu, women concur). Some men gain from this, but at the expense of other men. And they like it that way. Makes 'em feel like the only bull in the pasture.

Why is it we think that? We skip around the obvious facts of life in these discussions, even turning things on their head like Sugar regarding the battle of the sexes.

Men are by and large expendable as they compete to prove themselves as the best mate for the most desirable females. Which largely means demonstrations strength and fitness. What is the woman's job beyond demonstrating through her appearance she can deliver healthy babies.

Now we can and do #### around with the superficials, as we can think all kinds of superficial things to camouflage the more basic facts of life.

I certainly think many of them myself and am quite willing to be contradicted when I get 'em backwards. Because they can bear young, women are more valuable than the vast majority of men.
   816. dog poop god Posted: November 23, 2017 at 02:47 PM (#5580607)
Listened to the ongoing Hollywood and Crime podcast on Young Charlie Manson. Not a big fan of podcasts, including this ham sandwich of one. It luridly rehashes the murder investigation while flashing back to Manson's youth and earlier criminal career. Something to do while driving.

Any podcast suggestions that show the best in form? I do think This American Life was excellent.
   817. Greg K Posted: November 23, 2017 at 03:03 PM (#5580609)
Any podcast suggestions that show the best in form? I do think This American Life was excellent.

There is an absolutely fabulous one on Early Stuart England. But although I've recorded the first few episodes none of them are posted online yet.

I like Mike Duncan's "Revolutions" Podcast. Self-contained sessions on the English Civil War, the American Revolution, that French one, the Haitian Revolution...a whole long whack of inter-connected narratives surrounding Bolivar and South American independence. He's working his way through 1848 right now. I could do without the asides into military history, but it's fun, listenable stuff. Someone on here originally recommended it, I forget who.
   818. Lassus Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:23 PM (#5580635)
We managed to avoid discussing Trump at dinner and instead talked about the shift in baseball now vs. Ted Willams and ages past.
   819. simpleton & childlike gef the talking mongoose Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:46 PM (#5580641)
I just posted this on the recipe thread --

Lassus, did you ever share that banana bread recipe I inquired about on (IIRC) OTP about a month ago? If so, I missed it during one of my occasional brief hiatuses (hiati?) from the board.
   820. Howie Menckel Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:50 PM (#5580642)
We managed to avoid discussing Trump at dinner and instead talked about the shift in baseball now vs. Ted Willams and ages past.

Coked!

I was going to ask how many times Trump was mentioned at your Thanksgiving dinners.
mine = zero.

I thought sexual harassment scandals might get a mention, but no.

the lifelong undefeated streak of ever witnessing any discord created by anyone at a holiday get-together continues.

a case might be made that it's good to have a cogent discussion - but why take a chance?
;)
   821. PreservedFish Posted: November 23, 2017 at 09:11 PM (#5580643)
Zero politics talk at my Thanksgiving table. We had one lifelong Republican (that hates Trump with a passion), one swing voter (I think she hated Hillary and Trump equally), and 6 committed liberals.
   822. Lassus Posted: November 23, 2017 at 10:10 PM (#5580645)
Lassus, did you ever share that banana bread recipe I inquired about on (IIRC) OTP about a month ago? If so, I missed it during one of my occasional brief hiatuses (hiati?) from the board.

No, I suck.

I'll get it to you via FB tomorrow.
   823. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 23, 2017 at 10:21 PM (#5580646)
I was going to ask how many times Trump was mentioned at your Thanksgiving dinners.


Love.
   824. Lassus Posted: November 23, 2017 at 11:06 PM (#5580648)
We had zero Trump, and I personally headed off a National Anthem protest discussion just about two segues before it began.
   825. BDC Posted: November 24, 2017 at 08:42 AM (#5580661)
I don't think Trump, but we did cover the issue of Nude Joe Barton.
   826. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 08:54 AM (#5580665)
I don't think Trump, but we did cover the issue of Nude Joe Barton.

Here's one way to diffuse those sort of discussions: List all the politicians who've been accused of sexual harassment or worse, and have the women at the table rate them on a kavorka scale of 1 to 10.
   827. Swoboda is freedom Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:02 AM (#5580666)
Any podcast suggestions that show the best in form? I do think This American Life was excellent.


I like Mike Duncan's "Revolutions" Podcast


I will second The Revolutions one. I also like Dan Carlin's Hardcore History.

I love the Poscast with Joe Posnanski and Michael Schur. That is quite funny. Also for stupid funny, I listen to "How did this get made?", which reviews bad movies in a funny way.
   828. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:45 AM (#5580674)
Recovered a memory this morning that may partly explain why I argue for taking it easy on Franken.

It was second grade, we'd just been at recess and were lined up to take turns at the water fountain. After getting my fill, I went off to unfill in the restroom. On my way back to class, the last girl in line was at the fountain. Her name was Courtney, blonde bob, short red dress and shiny black patent leather shoes. But not attractive because she had something wrong with her spindly legs that caused her to run like a complete spaz.

Anyway, she was leaned over getting a drink and without the slightest thought in my head I gave her a pat in the caboose. I believe she responded with some surprise, but the clearer memory is of mean ol' Mrs. Ragan (who kept a jar of used chewing gum to be exchanged with yours if you were caught chewing in class) snatching me up and dragging me down to the principal's office.

So humiliating; even moreso when I was forced to apologize in front of the whole class to Courtney for my inappropriate behavior.

Second grade was a weird time -- I also was wrongly accused of using the girls bathroom and had to be escorted by another kid for dunno how long. There were also some weird bondage fantasies of spelling bees in our underwear... well, never mind. Hell, I didn't even know what dick meant.

So perhaps the beginnings of my lifelong distrust of authority. And I'm still an ass man.
   829. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:56 AM (#5580679)
I like Mike Duncan's "Revolutions" Podcast.


Congratulations on the 30-day head start you got on destroying the people who were already there.


Last night listened to this podcast, which was about altering questionable traditions, including confederate statues, not through erasure but ruination -- actually, I think White suggested removal to a garden of statues and letting them fall to ruin. Better, take 'em to a cemetery with the graves of confederate dead to moulder with the corpses.

The focus of White's podcast are an archaic revival, but he brings a lot of erudition to the table of the domininant civilization he'd like to see dislodged.

Regardless, you should listen and judge for yourself, particularly if you like Australian accents...

Did I already mention the exchange student from Adelaide with the long blonde hair?
   830. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:31 AM (#5580685)
I don't think Trump, but we did cover the issue of Nude Joe Barton.


Both at mine. As typical, an all liberal/modern liberal crowd with longtime friends who are Brooklyn by way of Ohio, with a bunch of Trump-voting family members staying back. I relayed the story of telling a bunch of people my thing about regardless of the polls, there was no way Hillary was winning Ohio and of course they nodded and laughed and fully agreed (and took another opportunity to belittle Ohio). The people who only know the Midwest from what they read in the NYT and Washington Post of course cited the polls and were still surprised at Hillary's Rust Belt performance and we all scoffed and shook our heads knowingly.

538, LOL.

I relayed my great stock market/great economy/polls are divorced from votes theory and put Trump's odds of re-election at just shy of 50-50. Even the Ohioans couldn't go quite that high -- they're at around 35 -- and the born and bred East Coasters looked at me like I had four Three Mile Island eyes. We all agreed that the R's were going to take a beating in the House next year and that Trump would wind up triangulating more.

We all reduced the Joe Barton thing to the simple proposition that it's never, ever a good idea to send your junk over the Internet.
   831. Greg K Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:31 AM (#5580686)
Last night listened to this podcast, which was about altering questionable traditions, including confederate statues, not through erasure but ruination -- actually, I think White suggested removal to a garden of statues and letting them fall to ruin. Better, take 'em to a cemetery with the graves of confederate dead to moulder with the corpses.


I'll probably give that a listen tonight.

Does he mention Memento Park in Hungary? Seems like another option when you inherit monuments to a world you'd rather not celebrate any more.
   832. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:34 AM (#5580687)
Oh, yeah -- Al Franken, too and we had some native Minnesotans and Upper Midwesterners. I repeated what I've said here -- that the "groping" photo was staged because there were two people "sleeping" with their military garb still on. Even in an audience of several liberal or leftist women, I survived unscathed without a lot of pushback. Pretty much everyone thought he shouldn't be kicked out.
   833. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:06 AM (#5580693)
that the "groping" photo was staged because there were two people "sleeping" with their military garb still on

So you've never fallen asleep sitting up, fully dressed? Now that Franken has multiple accusers for groping, we'll see who else throws in the towel.
   834. Swoboda is freedom Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:07 AM (#5580695)
Does he mention Memento Park in Hungary? Seems like another option when you inherit monuments to a world you'd rather not celebrate any more.

I went there. It was ok, but some Hungarians, the one who suffered, don't like it. Makes it seem kitschy rather than real.
   835. Swoboda is freedom Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:09 AM (#5580698)
200+ dead in mosque in Egypt. Car bomb, then shooting.
   836. Greg K Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:12 AM (#5580699)
I went there. It was ok, but some Hungarians, the one who suffered, don't like it. Makes it seem kitschy rather than real.

It does seem to be a problem with Ostalgie or Soviet Kitsch. How much of it is driven by young hipsters who have little or not direct experience with Communism?
   837. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:13 AM (#5580700)

We had zero Trump, and I personally headed off a National Anthem protest discussion just about two segues before it began.
I initially misread this as "headed off to a National Anthem protest..."
   838. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:15 AM (#5580701)
I relayed the story of telling a bunch of people my thing about regardless of the polls, there was no way Hillary was winning Ohio


Of course, the polls also said that there was no way Hillary was winning Ohio.
   839. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:32 AM (#5580707)
Does he mention Memento Park in Hungary?

Perhaps -- I believe he talks about re-imagining displays in today's context. One reason not to just them down is you obliterate the lived history of people oppressed under those public symbols. He also talks about actually winning battles and not dying heroically on Twitterburger Hill.
   840. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:35 AM (#5580709)
834 -- so maybe those oppressed sbould have greater voice in the new treatment, and not more top down displays of power?

I thought it notable that right after Charlottesville, the majority of blacks did not want the statues just taken down.
   841. greenback wears sandals on his head Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:46 AM (#5580710)
We managed to avoid discussing Trump at dinner and instead talked about the shift in baseball now vs. Ted Willams and ages past.


Coked!

Weird. There was no discussion of politics at my family's Thanksgiving dinner, but my sister did accuse me of being a cocaine addict.
   842. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:04 PM (#5580713)
but my sister did accuse me of being a cocaine addict.

"I don't use it to get high, I just like the way it smells."
   843. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:11 PM (#5580714)
There was no discussion of politics at my family's Thanksgiving dinner, but my sister did accuse me of being a cocaine addict.


My family hasn't had a political argument at a holiday gathering in decades. We do have frequent battle royales about what ####-ups various family members are. Present company definitely not excluded.
   844. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:20 PM (#5580716)
. I repeated what I've said here -- that the "groping" photo was staged because there were two people "sleeping" with their military garb still on. Even in an audience of several liberal or leftist women, I survived unscathed without a lot of pushback.
People forced to associate with you are smart enough now not to bother to engage with your trollish arguments; people who voluntarily choose to associate with you -- if any -- are dumb and unhinged enough to actually pay attention to your trollish arguments.

As always, the hallmark of a trollish argument is that it's so vague that it's either empty or nonsensical. If "staged" means that the photographer didn't happen to wander by while he was doing it, but rather he planned it with the photographer, then yes -- but so what? If "staged" means that Tweeden was aware of what he was doing, and deliberately made it look like she was sleeping to cooperate in creating the picture, then it would be exceedingly odd that Franken didn't raise that defense. He claimed it was a joke; he never claimed it was consensual and that she cooperated. Either way, whether someone else is sleeping in the periphery of the picture -- one actually has no way to know whether he is, since the guy's wearing sunglasses -- is utterly irrelevant to anything.
   845. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:23 PM (#5580718)
what ####-ups various family members are.

That I was absent due to work hopefully rendered such discussion moot in my fam.
   846. Greg K Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5580720)
The more experience I have with other people and families the more I'm starting to think that mine is weird. I don't think my family has had an argument or heated exchange since my brother was in his teenage "shut up, mom!" phase. I always thought that was normal, but maybe it isn't.

My mom's side anyway.

My dad has eight siblings, so everyone is always yelling at those family functions. Though it's tough to tell if those are arguments or just the volume necessary for conversation.
   847. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:36 PM (#5580724)
My better half was off visiting her late stepfather's family in WV. His brother spent the eve cracking dirty jokes to her and another lovely step-step-sibling.

Sleeping arangements were not discussed, as visitors were staying in a motel.
   848. Hysterical & Useless Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:02 PM (#5580729)
I'm still an ass man.


You left out the comma!

Joking! Sorry, just couldn't resist.

Hope no one ate too much, or more too much than they were prepared to eat.
   849. PreservedFish Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:27 PM (#5580732)
The more experience I have with other people and families the more I'm starting to think that mine is weird. I don't think my family has had an argument or heated exchange since my brother was in his teenage "shut up, mom!" phase. I always thought that was normal, but maybe it isn't.


My wife's family is like this - it's tough to imagine a more wholesome and drama-free holiday. I love raising my kids in that atmosphere, but as for me personally, all the warm happy feelings get a little cloying after a while. My side of the family is very civil and friendly, and unlikely to do battle during any one holiday, but there have been at least a few legendary shouting and a couple severed relationships: spouses that essentially never see their in-laws because they hate each others' guts. Last night my mother jokingly yelled out loud "it's time to start talking about politics," playing on how cordial and uncontroversial the event had been, but my mother-in-law would never even dream of discussing politics at the dinner table.
   850. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:40 PM (#5580739)

Joking! Sorry, just couldn't resist.

Hanging meatball leftovers.
   851. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:42 PM (#5580740)
All hail The Furred Reich!

It’s the first day of the convention in Philly, and outside the Hilton, a group of furries stand in a circle, sipping cocktails and smoking cigarettes. Most are dressed in some sort of animal attire: There are bears, wolves and even dragons. It’s hot outside, so not everyone is wearing a full-body fursuit; those are poorly ventilated, and many furries say they’re too expensive (they can cost more than $3,000). Some simply wear animal heads or just ears. The only requirement for being a furry, attendees tell me, is saying you are a furry. These furries want a judgment-free environment, one that allows them to be themselves—hairballs and all. “We’re trying to create the world we want to live in,” says a Canadian marbled fox named Xiao Mei. “Like the Stonewall of the ’70s.”

But when it comes to the alt-right, the furries are definitely passing judgment. Just ask a goat named Dionysius, who announced his arrival in Philadelphia with a cryptic post on Gab, a social media site for people banned from Twitter. “Made it to Philly, funny how a fifth of Jack Daniels makes the drive go faster. Always happy to meet new friends who hate commies like I do.” He knew he’d have to do most of that meeting outside the convention because he—and some of his friends—were banned from it for threatening furries. Before the convention, he spent $105 to commission artwork of his “fursona,” or furry alter ego, throwing Junius and two other furries out of a helicopter—a nod to a right-wing meme about how an Argentine junta killed dissidents during the 1970s. (Fan art is popular among furries, who pay artists to draw their fursonas.) Dionysius had planned to commission a new drawing, showing him running over another furry in a truck (someone leaked the plans on Twitter). He’s also part of the Furry Raiders, a Colorado-based group that wears the allegedly Nazi-inspired armbands.

Junius doesn’t think Dionysius would throw him out of a helicopter, and when he learned of the artwork, he thought it was silly. “These people hate me and other folks enough to invest their time, energy or money on lavish hate fan art,” he says. But the imagery was threatening enough that he and others felt Dionysius and the alt-furries shouldn’t be allowed to join in the flocculent festivities. On Twitter, Junius posted an old photo of Dionysius—a squat, bearded man in a Carolina Panthers jersey— leaning on a massive blue truck. “For public safety's sake,” he posted, “if you see this truck or this man, report to staff.”

Drayne the Wolf, the convention’s chairman (his real name is Randy Hill), agreed. “We did not set out to make a political statement,” he says of the ban. “But we had to make sure the attendees felt safe.”

Dionysius thinks his banishment was an overreaction—and one typical of what he calls “social justice warriors.” He says he commissioned the artwork in response to left-wing furries threatening to punch “Nazi furs” (they didn’t actually punch them). “I would like to note that punching someone is an action that can be done very easily at a furry convention,” he says. “No one has ever brought a helicopter to any furry convention that I know of. I chose that setting, as well as the cartoony style, precisely because I did not want to make it a threat.”

The alt-furries believe their group is misunderstood. Len Gilbert, a prominent alt-furry, says they are not Nazis, and most of the members are not white supremacists or national socialists either. Gilbert’s name is a pseudonym, one he used to pen a furry erotic novel, The Furred Reich, about a young Nazi officer’s encounter with an anthropomorphic female snow leopard. He keeps his fursona a secret to allow him to attend furry conventions without getting banned, punched in the face or both.
   852. Greg K Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:45 PM (#5580743)
Fan art is popular among furries, who pay artists to draw their fursonas.


Weirdos. Talk about the decline of civilization!
   853. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:58 PM (#5580750)
Whoa, Chelsea Clinton and Ivanka Trump just tweeted basically the same thing:
Clinton: "Malia Obama’s private life, as a young woman, a college student, a private citizen, should not be your clickbait. Be better."
Trump: "Malia Obama should be allowed the same privacy as her school aged peers. She is a young adult and private citizen, and should be OFF limits."

Still waiting on Laura Bush, Dorthy Bush Koch, and Amy Carter to make statements.
   854. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:01 PM (#5580751)
Weirdos. Talk about the decline of civilization!

No kink-shaming in this spot, Mr. Fox! I like to think he goes by Gregory by the way.
   855. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:04 PM (#5580753)
I like to think he goes by Gregory by the way.


Not G.K. Foxy?
   856. PreservedFish Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:07 PM (#5580754)
Nazi-punching was controversial here, but can we at least all agree that there is a moral imperative to punch Furry Nazis?
   857. Greg K Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:14 PM (#5580759)
Unfortunately the joint Chelsea/Ivanka campaign has backfired.

Because now I'm curious to know what is going on in Malia's private life.
   858. Greg K Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:18 PM (#5580760)
Not G.K. Foxy?

I initially read this as a G.K. Chesterton reference. But upon reflection I realized I was over-thinking things.

My very first stuffed animal (given to me by my uncle the day I was born) is named Focksie Loxy. Since then his nephew, Focksie Loxy Jr. has come along.

Ironically the senior Focksie is a fairly immobile catcher, whereas the junior one is one of the rangiest centerfielders around.

   859. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:31 PM (#5580765)
Because now I'm curious to know what is going on in Malia's private life.


Yeah, had it not been for people on Twitter saying the press shouldn't be going after Malia Obama, I never would have realized they did. Apparently, Malia was spotted kissing some English dude at the Harvard-Yale football game.
   860. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:38 PM (#5580768)
I was involved in a sports discussion tonight. What would you rather watch, hockey or volleyball (non-beach)? For me it was the latter in a walk.


Fro me it's the latter, but just by a nose; both sports to me are like watching paint dry.
   861. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:46 PM (#5580769)
Have you ever actually watched paint dry? It can be quite fascinating. Much more interesting than anything the NFL presented yesterday.
   862. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:55 PM (#5580770)
For the NFL I'm basically down to watching 1st to 3rd downs of non-blowout games, doing the 30-second advance to get to the next play. I consider a team down by 17 to be out of the game -- not that they can't come back but I'll skip ahead until I find that they've closed the gap to 14.

I don't watch replay reviews, kickoffs, punts, or FGs <55 yards unless we're heading down the stretch.

   863. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:03 PM (#5580774)
NHL hockey is fantastic live.

For the NFL I'm basically down to watching 1st to 3rd downs of non-blowout games, doing the 30-second advance to get to the next play.


Why bother?

Most sports are interesting as a game reporter. Basketball can have the most improbable finishes, and football is more interesting on the sidelines where there's some risk of getting walloped.
   864. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:05 PM (#5580778)
Weirdos. Talk about the decline of civilization!


Meh. Some people like to dress up as possums. Some people like Dave Mathews Band. It's illegal to deal with either of them rationally.
   865. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:14 PM (#5580781)
Have you ever actually watched paint dry? It can be quite fascinating. Much more interesting than anything the NFL presented yesterday.

A ####### Gender Studies conference would've provided far more thrills than that alleged football game last night.
   866. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:16 PM (#5580783)
Lowry:

Ending a model of abuse

It’s been nearly two months, and a geologic age, since the New York Times ran its initial report on Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein’s sexual predation. It’s difficult to think of any piece of journalism that has ever wrought such an instant change in American life. First, more allegations against Weinstein flooded in, and then against other Hollywood, media, and political figures, many of them rapidly defenestrated upon credible allegations of sexual misconduct. A heightened awareness around sexual harassment is roiling multiple industries in what is a low-grade cultural revolution.

Any revolution has its pitfalls. There will be false allegations that will be believed. There will be a conflation of relatively minor infractions with criminal acts. And, in all likelihood, there will be an over-correction that will create its own wrongs. But a model of predation practiced by scruple-less powerful men is getting destroyed before our eyes, and it’s a very good thing.


Thought experiment:

Set aside lewd or inappropriate behavior on the part of men in power towards women. Set aside sexual assault or rape or any form of coercion or criminal or disgusting behavior. So set aside the behavior of Harvey Weinstein or Louis CK or James Toback in the main. And focus just on a scenario where this happens, for example:

A Hollywood producer invites a young actress to dinner to discuss a significant role in one of his movies. The actress is trying to make a name for herself. She accepts his invitation to dinner. The producer is very polite and nice and respectful. As dinner is winding down he invites her up to his hotel room. She willingly goes, *with* the understanding that he is essentially offering her the role in exchange for sex. They get up to his room and he, again, is very nice and respectful, offers her some wine, and then he leans in for a kiss. There's a tacit understanding between the two of them that if she sleeps with him he will give her the part. She willingly sleeps with him and he in fact gives her the part.

1. Should this practice be eliminated? Is it wrong in your estimation?

2. Do you think that this practice gives young women trying to break in to Hollywood an unfair advantage over young men trying to break in to Hollywood?

3. What percentage of young actresses trying to make a name for themselves would in fact prefer to see this practice eliminated, do you think?

4. Assume arguendo that the above scenario is not objectionable. Should it still be eliminated because it can't exist without also causing Weinstein-type behavior?
   867. Hysterical & Useless Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:18 PM (#5580785)
Somebody turned on the TV in the room where I was yesterday, so I saw a few plays of the Cowboys - Chargers game yesterday. Was not inspired to watch more. Closed my eyes and took a nice nap before dinner.
   868. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:23 PM (#5580788)
For the NFL I'm basically down to watching 1st to 3rd downs of non-blowout games, doing the 30-second advance to get to the next play.


Why bother?


I like watching great athletes compete at athletic competitions I find interesting. For the NFL I'm only interested in the quarterbacks. The rest of the players in the NFL, while elite and doing something I couldn't do it in a million years, aren't doing anything I find interesting. I don't find punts or kickoffs interesting or field goals unless the game is on the line, etc.

The FG kickers for example don't stand out. All of them are basically as skilled relative to each other, or if they're not then they're not employed for long. Same with the runningbacks. If there were a FG kicker who was booting 70 yard FGs I would find that very interesting; but nobody is doing that. Unlike in baseball when there is a huge difference between the elite home run hitters and the 15-HR hitters, for example.
   869. Hysterical & Useless Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:28 PM (#5580793)
1. Should this practice be eliminated? Is it wrong in your estimation?

2. Do you think that this practice gives young women trying to break in to Hollywood an unfair advantage over young men trying to break in to Hollywood?

3. What percentage of young actresses trying to make a name for themselves would in fact prefer to see this practice eliminated, do you think?


1) Would such a practice be considered "wrong" in any other profession? eg, recruiting for...a law firm?
2) With unscrupulous heterosexual producers, yes.
3) Probably close to 100%. How many men do we suppose would like to have the "advantage" of potentially gaining roles by having sex with a Weinstein-like person of whatever gender?

ETA (1) Yeah, I think it's wrong. (2) Though if they resist, it likely turns into a disadvantage.
   870. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:34 PM (#5580794)
Here’s your leftover turkey: The case for Hillary Clinton 2020

MATTHEW ROZSA
11.24.2017•6:00 AM
SALON


Link. Although I've changed my previously oft-stated view; I no longer think Hillary will make a serious try for the D nomination in 2020. The change in the culture on sexual assault caused by Weinstein has ruined any chance Hillary has of trying to make a serious run in 2020. Oh, she might still throw out some desperate feelers, but I think even she now realizes that she's done as a viable candidate, due to the way the culture is coming around -- two decades late as it may be -- to properly viewing her behavior with respect to Bill's treatment of women.
   871. McCoy Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:41 PM (#5580800)
So I guess that means Trump has no chance at reelection then.
   872. PreservedFish Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:54 PM (#5580804)
1. Should this practice be eliminated? Is it wrong in your estimation?

It's wrong for a bunch of reasons. (If I were a money guy behind the producer/director, I'd be furious that he's making casting decisions based on who will sleep with him.) But I don't know how one would eliminate it. Do you mean should it be illegal? I don't know. Is it illegal to sleep with a purchasing agent in order to secure your business a big contract?

2. Do you think that this practice gives young women trying to break in to Hollywood an unfair advantage over young men trying to break in to Hollywood?


Not a significant one. Mostly it gives loose girls an unfair advantage over chaste ones.

3. What percentage of young actresses trying to make a name for themselves would in fact prefer to see this practice eliminated, do you think?

Almost all of them. Only those that would eagerly employ the tactic would like to see it preserved, I imagine, and wouldn't be likely to admit to it. I couldn't guess what percentage that is. Maybe it's a lot, actually.

4. Assume arguendo that the above scenario is not objectionable. Should it still be eliminated because it can't exist without also causing Weinstein-type behavior?


I don't know how to answer this. Not sure what "eliminate" means here really. But anyone involved in this behavior, even if we all know it to be 100% consensual, should be nervous as hell about it, don't you think?
   873. Greg K Posted: November 24, 2017 at 04:06 PM (#5580807)
Is it illegal to sleep with a purchasing agent in order to secure your business a big contract?

My rule of thumb for ethical questions is, if Meredith on The Office was ok with doing it, so am I.
   874. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 04:16 PM (#5580810)
I no longer think Hillary will make a serious try for the D nomination in 2020. The change in the culture on sexual assault caused by Weinstein has ruined any chance Hillary has of trying to make a serious run in 2020. Oh, she might still throw out some desperate feelers, but I think even she now realizes that she's done as a viable candidate, due to the way the culture is coming around -- two decades late as it may be -- to properly viewing her behavior with respect to Bill's treatment of women.

Hmmmmm, maybe one of these days you'll apply this insight to how it might affect Trump's re-election chances.
   875. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 04:22 PM (#5580812)
1. Should this practice be eliminated? Is it wrong in your estimation?
Well, I'd certainly argue it was suboptimal, but it's not criminal and shouldn't be actionable either.
2. Do you think that this practice gives young women trying to break in to Hollywood an unfair advantage over young men trying to break in to Hollywood?
No. Women and men are generally competing for different roles. It helps women willing to sleep with someone to get ahead an advantage over women who aren't willing. (Calling it an 'unfair' advantage is question begging, though; even leaving out the casting couch scenario, people willing to go the extra mile will have an advantage over those who aren't. The young actor who is willing to fetch the director's dry cleaning will be more likely to get cast than the one who says "I'm an actor, not a gofer.")
3. What percentage of young actresses trying to make a name for themselves would in fact prefer to see this practice eliminated, do you think?
I can't speak for them, but I imagine that most would. I mean, women who honestly don't mind sleeping with the boss to get ahead would prefer the casting couch. But I've got to imagine that this is a small minority of women. (I mean, sleeping with a Hemsworth to get ahead might be one thing, but Harvey Weinstein isn't exactly prime beef.)
4. Assume arguendo that the above scenario is not objectionable. Should it still be eliminated because it can't exist without also causing Weinstein-type behavior?
Not sure what you mean by "Weinstein-type behavior." You mean that if the practice is allowed, then that will lead those in power to assault women who aren't willing to cooperate? That's a fair concern. But I also don't know what you mean "be eliminated." Do you mean outlawed? Or that studios should fire the producers/directors/etc. who are exposed?
   876. Random Transaction Generator Posted: November 24, 2017 at 04:27 PM (#5580815)
1. Should this practice be eliminated? Is it wrong in your estimation?


Yes, on both counts. All you need to know is that if ALL of the women aren't willing to do it (because they feel it's wrong, or WOULD do it but THIS producer is Harvey-the-Hutt looking), then the talent pool available for acting roles in movies is automatically limited by this action. The limiting factor isn't the skill of the actress, or the script, or the character, or the requirements for actual performance (time, travel, effort), but based entirely on something completely independent.

Take it a step away from the movie producer, and make it the head of the Screen Actors Guild. What if a requirement to become a Hollywood performer (joining the union) for EVERY actress (or actor) was that you had to perform oral sex on the president of the Screen Actors Guild?

Would that practice be acceptable? Would it be considered wrong?
   877. BDC Posted: November 24, 2017 at 04:36 PM (#5580816)
As H&U and Fish were saying, movies are just a workplace. Let's take mine, and replace "producer" with "supervising professor" and "actress" with "doctoral candidate." (Hardly a far-fetched scenario.)

Then we get:

1. Should this practice be eliminated? Is it wrong in your estimation?

Yes, and I can't imagine it's right in anyone's estimation.

2. Do you think that this practice gives young women trying to break in to academia an unfair advantage over young men trying to break in to academia?

Quite the opposite. The implication is that young men are going to be judged by their talent, and young women by their perceived attractiveness and their acquiescence. Non-hot women don't even make the first cut, while men of any attractiveness are judged on objective work-related criteria. Changes the composition of the applicant pool, doesn't it? If anything, things are slightly fairer in Hollywood, where attractiveness is a legitimate job qualification, and (as David says) men and women usually don't compete directly for acting roles.

3. What percentage of young researchers trying to make a name for themselves would in fact prefer to see this practice eliminated, do you think?

Ninety-nine point nine-five. There's always somebody.

#4 involves too much arguendo for me :)
   878. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 04:42 PM (#5580820)
1. Should this practice be eliminated? Is it wrong in your estimation?

It's clearly wrong, and it'll be eliminated as soon as enough women out their predators for future would-be predators to take the hint. Obviously at this point we've only seen the tip of the iceberg in terms of actual names being named, but then just a few years ago who would've predicted that gay marriage would come along so quickly?
   879. PreservedFish Posted: November 24, 2017 at 05:07 PM (#5580822)
Would it be bad if there were an informal but universal understanding that dating a woman that you are directing is just not done? If I were a producer and wanted to knock boots with a prospective actress I met today, I'd stay far away until the casting or filming had completed.

I guess producers are often working multiple projects - I'd want to make it clear "as long as we're seeing each other, you will not be cast in a PFish Studios project."
   880. The Yankee Clapper Posted: November 24, 2017 at 07:45 PM (#5580843)
They probably have a backup plan:
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Time Magazine called to say that I was PROBABLY going to be named “Man (Person) of the Year,” like last year, but I would have to agree to an interview and a major photo shoot. I said probably is no good and took a pass. Thanks anyway!

I'd go with Aaron Judge, but that might be a year too early.
   881. Howie Menckel Posted: November 24, 2017 at 08:00 PM (#5580846)
Harvey Weinstein would not be the worst person ever chosen as Time Man of the Year.
   882. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 08:13 PM (#5580847)
Harvey Weinstein would not be the worst person ever chosen as Time Man of the Year.

Well, considering that Hitler, Khomeini and Stalin (twice) were given that honor, I'd say that's a reasonable statement.

But for this year, who else could it be BUT Trump? Who else better represents The Ugly American writ large?

Hell, I've heard they've even got his cover photo all picked out.
   883. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:05 PM (#5580852)
But for this year, who else could it be BUT Trump?


Putin.
   884. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:13 PM (#5580853)
But for this year, who else could it be BUT Trump?


Putin.


Bezos
   885. Sleepy's not going to blame himself Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:20 PM (#5580855)
From the twitterverse, courtesy of NY Daily News:
"Hollywood just called to say that I was PROBABLY going to be named the next James Bond but I would have to agree to an interview and a major photo shoot. I said probably is no good and took a pass. Thanks anyway!" English comedian David Schneider tweeted.
   886. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:25 PM (#5580857)
But for this year, who else could it be BUT Trump?

Putin.


Okay, make them co-winners. It'd only be fitting.
   887. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:22 PM (#5580864)
99.95 percent of women against using sex for financial advantage? Sure, nobody wants to be coerced, but once again, female agency is being written out of the picture. As well as the complexity of human motivation vs. human explanation.

Sure, women will go for the hottie, all else being equal. But a male's social status is entwined with his attractiveness to women from junior bigh onward. As women dress to impress other women, they date for the same reasons.

Sorry if this sounds retrograde, but I find it hard to believe this lies outside the realm of OTP experience. Maybe many of you found a completely equal partner early in life. Or through trial and error have one now. It'd be interesting to hear the women's talk amongst themselves.
   888. Random Transaction Generator Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:25 PM (#5580865)
Harvey Weinstein would not be the worst person ever chosen as Time Man of the Year.


Time could do the silly thing of choosing no one specific and giving the award to "Victims Stepping Forward", or to "Women" in general, like when they chose "You" (and had a mirrored cover) and "The Computer".
   889. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:31 PM (#5580866)
It's rarely strictly mercenary. Financial success means higher status, better fitness, better wardrobe, dental care, etc. That the man has something to offer, to give.

I'm willing to be contradicted on this score. People live and learn in time to value intangibles.
   890. dog poop god Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:34 PM (#5580869)
Bezos

Worse than Trump, Putin, and Weinstein combined. At least if you work under him.
   891. Sleepy's not going to blame himself Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:16 PM (#5580872)
Since being reappointed head of the Communist Party, and the US dropped out of the TPP and abandoned Syria to Russia, Xi is probably the new "most powerful person in the world". He's probably a good choice. Though he already won it in 2013, so maybe go with MBS?

Or maybe pick Rocketman, just to tweak Trump's nose.
   892. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:33 PM (#5580876)
Hopefully the People of the Year in 2020 will be the millennial voters.

Historic turnout of young voters in Virginia election poses problem for Republicans

RICHMOND — As bad as the overall outcome of Virginia’s recent election was for Republicans, there was one facet of the vote that raises special alarm for the party’s future.

That’s the performance of young voters, who came out in historic numbers and overwhelmingly cast their ballots for the Democratic candidate for governor, Ralph Northam.

While Republicans have been wrestling with an aging demographic for some time, analysts say the unpopular actions of President Trump are pushing away a new generation.

“One of the biggest challenges facing the Republican Party in Virginia and nationwide is that the Republican Party has become toxic to a lot of young voters,” said Bob Holsworth, a longtime Virginia political scientist. “I think Trump has exacerbated a trend that was emerging, and it has become very problematic.”...

Young voters — who are often among the least-engaged, especially in a nonpresidential election — had a turnout rate of 34 percent, according to an analysis of exit polling by a group at the Tisch College of Civic Life at Tufts University. That’s up from 26 percent in the 2013 governor’s race and double the youth turnout in 2009.

And that surge of millennials was a windfall for Democrats: Sixty-nine percent of those voters supported Northam, vs. 30 percent for Gillespie.

The same trend held when measured in different ways. In precincts adjacent to college campuses, turnout was up 8 points over 2013 and Northam won 72 percent of the vote, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project.

In precincts not adjacent to colleges but where voters age 40 and younger make up more than 60 percent of the population, turnout was up 7 points and Northam won more than 81 percent of the vote, the VPAP analysis found.

Virginia’s results suggest that the rise of young voters is a serious problem for Republicans nationwide.

Recent studies by the Pew Research Center found that millennials — generally defined as those age 18 to 35 in 2016 — are fast becoming the largest single bloc in the electorate. By 2020, there will be more millennial and Gen X voters than baby boomers.

And millennials have routinely polled as more left-leaning than other segments of the population....

“Young people have increasingly moved away from the Republican Party, given its perceived status as being the anti-immigrant party and not being tolerant of alternative lifestyles,” said Mark Rozell, dean of the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University.

“I find even with my students who are Republican-leaning, on social or cultural issues they’re very libertarian for the most part,” Rozell said. “As long as the Republican Party is seen as not embracing or accepting people as they are, be they gay, transgender, immigrants and the like, that’s a big turnoff to young voters these days.”


The Virginia results, he said, are “a wake-up call to the Republican Party about the way things are going to go for them next year” in congressional races across the country....

There are a host of progressive and grass-roots groups aiming specifically to get a large turnout of young voters for Democratic candidates, and they were taking credit for the big showing.

"At least three voter registration and mobilization groups had a presence on our campus, and there may have been more at some of the bigger campuses,” said Quentin Kidd, a political scientist at Christopher Newport University in Newport News.

At Virginia Tech, in fact, the progressive group NextGen Virginia staged a petting zoo to get students to come out to vote. The group spent $3.3 million statewide and knocked on 350,000 doors as part of its efforts.

After Northam’s win, NextGen crowed in a letter to supporters that “it’s clear young people and people of color made the difference in this historic election . . . If anger at Donald Trump and the GOP continues to drive turnout up through the 2018 election cycle, when young people will be the largest bloc of eligible voters, we could be looking at a progressive wave powered by millennial voters.”

Kidd said evidence of the youth trend’s staying power can be found in the crop of new Democrats elected to the General Assembly, who are far younger — and more female — than the current legislature.

“Half these new delegates are probably millennials,” he said. “The impact of the millennial generation on the electorate is going to be pretty profound, and Democratic candidates tend to be the beneficiary of this far more than Republicans are.”


But I'm sure that Trump 'n' Mitch 'n' Paul will think of something!
   893. Jay Z Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:46 PM (#5580878)
But for this year, who else could it be BUT Trump? Who else better represents The Ugly American writ large?


They did Trump last year. It should be The Stupids. They've done group, conceptual Man Of The Year multiple times.
   894. Jay Z Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:49 PM (#5580879)
I can't speak for them, but I imagine that most would. I mean, women who honestly don't mind sleeping with the boss to get ahead would prefer the casting couch. But I've got to imagine that this is a small minority of women. (I mean, sleeping with a Hemsworth to get ahead might be one thing, but Harvey Weinstein isn't exactly prime beef.)


I'm sure they would, but you, as a libertarian, would be against restricting trade, right? The casting couch is certainly a form of trade.

If the casting couch were eliminated, it would just mean more roles for the Tori Spellings. The producers would still have power, they'd be prohibited from vending their wares one way, so the others would rise in prominence.
   895. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 25, 2017 at 01:09 AM (#5580885)
[892] I really hope so. As someone whose social network is primarily made of people between 23 and 31 years old, I certainly feel like most of my generation doesn’t give a #### about politics and the ones who do, did before 2016. I have a few Bernie or Bust friends who didn’t vote in 2016, despite my long Facebook posts begging them to, who will likely vote Democrat in 2018, but otherwise can’t think of any new voters. I’ve been to a few Indivisible meetings and been the only person there under 40 years old leaving me wondering where all the young activists are. But, I also realize my personal experience is far removed from reality (eg half the Republicans I knew personally voted for either Garry Johnson or Evan McMullin). After Brexit there was a huge spike in Millenials voting in the UK parlementary elections, though so maybe this really will be what brings out the Millenials here. From what I’ve seen, Trump’s approval rating among voters under 30 years old is around 20%, so if we can just vote at the same rate as everyone else, we can make a big wave.
   896. Lassus Posted: November 25, 2017 at 07:01 AM (#5580898)
Re: Thanksgiving dinner discussions, "I repeated how brilliant I consider myself" is pretty standard Thanksgiving day fare. It's hilarious that anyone imagines they were admired by their audience for such behavior.
   897. dog poop god Posted: November 25, 2017 at 07:03 AM (#5580899)
They did Trump last year. It should be The Stupids.

All the people who thought Trump would never be elected President?
   898. Greg K Posted: November 25, 2017 at 07:09 AM (#5580900)
Re: Thanksgiving dinner discussions, "I repeated how brilliant I consider myself" is pretty standard Thanksgiving day fare. It's hilarious that anyone imagines they were admired by their audience for such behavior.


One is reminded of Francis Bacon's response to one of Edward Coke's many blow-hard attempts at intimidation: ‘Mr. Attorney, I respect you: I fear you not: and the less you speak of your own greatness, the more I will think of it’
   899. Morty Causa Posted: November 25, 2017 at 07:24 AM (#5580901)
"All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then Success is sure." Mark Twain
   900. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 25, 2017 at 08:11 AM (#5580905)
[892] I really hope so. As someone whose social network is primarily made of people between 23 and 31 years old, I certainly feel like most of my generation doesn’t give a #### about politics and the ones who do, did before 2016. I have a few Bernie or Bust friends who didn’t vote in 2016, despite my long Facebook posts begging them to, who will likely vote Democrat in 2018, but otherwise can’t think of any new voters. I’ve been to a few Indivisible meetings and been the only person there under 40 years old leaving me wondering where all the young activists are. But, I also realize my personal experience is far removed from reality (eg half the Republicans I knew personally voted for either Garry Johnson or Evan McMullin). After Brexit there was a huge spike in Millenials voting in the UK parlementary elections, though so maybe this really will be what brings out the Millenials here. From what I’ve seen, Trump’s approval rating among voters under 30 years old is around 20%, so if we can just vote at the same rate as everyone else, we can make a big wave.

There are no guarantees in life, but my optimism about 2018 lies in one thought: It's much easier to visualize the actual damage Trump and his goon squad of GOP enablers are doing to the country now that he and his Darth Vaderish cabinet are in office than it was to imagine the extent of that damage before he was actually elected president.
Page 9 of 12 pages ‹ First  < 7 8 9 10 11 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
LA Podcasting Hombre of Anaheim
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 11 December, 2017 - GOP strategist: Moore would have 'date with a baseball bat' if he tried dating teens where I grew up
(2277 - 10:33pm, Dec 15)
Last: PepTech

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(2016 - 10:32pm, Dec 15)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

NewsblogRyan Thibs has his HOF Ballot Tracker Up and Running!
(459 - 10:21pm, Dec 15)
Last: Ziggy: The Platonic Form of Russell Branyan

NewsblogDerek Jeter Was Once the Captain. But Now He’s the Apprentice. - The New York Times
(96 - 8:57pm, Dec 15)
Last: fra paolo

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 12-15-2017
(9 - 8:48pm, Dec 15)
Last: Der-K: downgraded to lurker

NewsblogTaking Back the Ballparks - Mariners voting thread
(20 - 8:41pm, Dec 15)
Last: Omineca Greg

NewsblogA's reportedly acquire OF Stephen Piscotty
(6 - 7:13pm, Dec 15)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOT: Winter Soccer Thread
(361 - 6:41pm, Dec 15)
Last: Biff, highly-regarded young guy

NewsblogWinter Meeting Signings
(29 - 6:37pm, Dec 15)
Last: charityslave is thinking about baseball

Gonfalon CubsLooking to next year
(347 - 5:46pm, Dec 15)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

NewsblogESPN: Bob Costas wins Hall of Fame's Frick Award for broadcasting
(23 - 5:02pm, Dec 15)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogMets agree to two-year deal with Anthony Swarzak
(22 - 4:52pm, Dec 15)
Last: Dog on the sidewalk

NewsblogOT Gaming: October 2015
(717 - 3:52pm, Dec 15)
Last: GGIAS (aka Poster Nutbag)

Sox TherapyA Container of Milk, A Loaf of Bread and a Dude Who Can Hit Home Runs
(30 - 2:39pm, Dec 15)
Last: jmurph

Hall of Merit2018 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(394 - 2:23pm, Dec 15)
Last: Fridas Boss

Page rendered in 0.7004 seconds
47 querie(s) executed