Yes, you’re right, I see that now. I couldn’t read the original (paywalled) story, but it’s a pretty exceptional set of circumstances. Thanks for the correction!
orald
1582
TargetSmart is one of our vendors and Tom knows his data.
"Tom Bonier, chief executive of the Democratic data firm TargetSmart, found that since the Supreme Court’s ruling overturning Roe, women led men among new voter registrations in Kansas by nearly 40 percent. In Wisconsin, where a strict abortion ban took effect, the gap was nearly 17 percent, he said, and in Michigan it was more than 7 percent.
Bonier said he double-checked the Kansas numbers five times after calculating them last week.
“Generally when you analyze this type of data and you look at the Election Day,” Bonier said, “you get excited when you see movement outside the norm by five or six points.”
Evil assholes. All of them.
KevinC
1585
Dark times. I find everything about that story deeply disturbing.
That story seems to be slanting coverage and using misleading wording in order to provoke outrage.
-
This has nothing to do with Roe-V-Wade being overturned as Nebraska hasn’t had a chance to change laws since then. This investigation predates that supreme court decision. Heck the governor of NE just gave up recently on trying to convene a special session to restrict abortion as an informal poll of legislators indicated the support wasn’t high enough for it to be an automatic win.
-
Facebook didn’t just give out DMs to encourage prosecution. There was a judge saying they had to and I’d expect FB to comply with a legal court order.
It is a tragic story of how a teen who didn’t want to be mother got stuck in a situation where abortion access was piss-poor. Which describes most of Nebraska outside Omaha and Lincoln. It’s a shame that the local hick county wants to make a criminal example of this. But I also think the article is deliberately misleading and smacks of clickbait.
I’d dearly love to disagree with @Tortilla, but if you don’t know by now that anything you put into any online service is no longer private and available to be used against you in court, I just don’t know what to say.
Alstein
1588
Actually, in this case you defy the court order. This is a good and evil issue.
Some laws are so evil that one should be punished for compliance with them.
orald
1589
I posted this in the midterms thread, but an interesting primary result from yesterday was the special election for Minnesota’s 1st District. Republican Brad Finstad defeated Democrat Jeff Ettinger as expected by a margin of 51 percent to 47 percent. But this is a district with a R+15 partisan lean, and Ettinger overperformed significantly. I did not follow this race but I wonder if this is another manifestation of the SOCTUS’ Dobbs decision.
Special elections are a whole 'nuther animal so hard to know what this tells us about November, but I thought it interesting.
I can see where you are coming from, but I have reservations. When people start deciding that their own outraged moral sense trumps the rule of law then the inevitable result is unrest, armed conflict, and the collapse of society. If you want to make the argument that the current American society isn’t worth saving and violence/uprising/civil war and the assorted suffering and death are preferable then your position is logically consistent but not one I can agree with.
At a certain extreme, maybe, but essentially all civil protest / civil disobedience is a form of deciding that your moral sense trumps the law and acting on that decision. And most of the time it doesn’t lead to armed conflict or the collapse of society.
Aren’t these the companies that comply with Chinese law enforcement? In what world will they refuse the US?
They won’t.
I don’t really blame Facebook for supplying the data to the cops. They had a warrant and it was executed per the law.
I think the story is more useful as a reminder warning to everyone that their “private conversations” on any online medium is 100% not at all private. If the provider can get that data then the law can too.
Canuck
1594
So I have a few ongoing FB conversations going, nothing at all incriminating of course. If I were to delete that conversation (which I normally don’t do if it’s someone I plan on conversing with again in the future), would it be permanently gone or would FB still have access to it if the authorities happened to come a knocking?
Timex
1595
I would be working under the assumption that anything you put up on facebook would be accessible to authorities forever. Even if it were deleted from their production servers, it’s likely that data still exists in some form in historical backups for at least some period of time, and could be pulled if authorities demanded it.
Menzo
1596
Yep, only two-way encryption can ensure that what you say online is protected, and most law enforcement agencies are trying to get rid of that, too.
Even if you were to delete your conversation on your end, you can be sure that doesn’t delete it for the other party.
That’s why, say, even if you were able to nuke your Gmail account permanently, all those emails you sent to all of the other Gmail accounts in your address book exist, functionally, forever.
I mean, the working assumption you have to live with is that everybody in the world will see and know the worst thing you’ve ever said or done on the internet.
Alstein
1599
If the choice is between armed conflict and what is objectively evil, the horrors of civil war are the better option, especially when surrender is death. Not everyone can just lay low.
I’m willing to buy peace at a high price, but not an unreasonable one. I think with Republicans the only way to buy peace is going to be through showing that getting their way will be too high a price for them.
Would it be entirely outlandish to say that if the Republicans get their way, they might get rid of women’s voting rights and re-establish segregation and “Whites-Only” establishments (ostensibly for safety reasons)? At this point after Roe v Wade, it feels like every dystopian future is possible.
