Timex
3417
A bunch of those guys aren’t going to get 1%.
ShivaX
3418
I just gave up on a Facebook argument about Biden.
Two black men telling me that black people hate Biden and he’s terrible. I point out that Biden leads in polling with African-Americans and cite the polls. They say it’s all lies and every black person hates him.
I couldn’t even. I’m sure he’s not beloved or anything, but the reality is that he does lead the polls. It’s not like I’m out there making up polls or something. I even get why he’s probably leading (because they think he can win and Biden is better than Trump), but when I pointed that out they came back with “all black people hate him and he’s the worst ever” at which point I gave up. It was like arguing with a Trump supporter on Twitter.
SlyFrog
3419
People believe their own local echo chambers man. You see it everywhere. And they will make up whatever rationalizations they need to in order to avoid coming to grips with the reality of things.
God, the Internet is killing it today.
I’d laugh, but I can only do so in English.
I’m lost, sorry. What does twitter handle Adrian have to do with Alexandra Petri?
Let me check the link sorry I’m on a phone
Yes, it is. That’s the joke.
I can’t read the article though, it’s paywalled.
From the commentary on that poll:
Among all 20 candidates, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Julián Castro earned the highest scores for their debate performances relative to their favorability rating before they took the stage, according to the voters in our poll. Bernie Sanders and Cory Booker also rated well, but their scores were more in line with their pre-debate favorability. Meanwhile, voters didn’t exactly think Beto O’Rourke did badly on Night 1, but his grades were underwhelming given his popularity.
Here you go:
GUTHRIE: Congressman O’Rourke, do you support a marginal individual tax rate of 70 percent on the very highest earners?
BETO O’ROURKE: One way to unite a large group of people is to have one guy slightly bother everyone, and for this reason, in pursuit of party unity, I am going to respond in Spanish! We can all agree that hearing more Spanish at a debate is a welcome thing! But I will go one step further and say that I am equally confident that we can todos agree that THIS was exactly how we wanted it to happen!
GUTHRIE: What was your answer to the question about marginal tax rates?
O’ROURKE: Muchos años después, frente al pelotón de fusilamiento, el coronel Aureliano Buendía había de recordar aquella tarde remota en que su padre lo llevó a conocer el hielo.
GUTHRIE: Yes or no?
O’ROURKE: I believe that taxes should be fair.
I’m looking at the same article at fivethirtyeight, and I would suggest that those are not the numbers that matter. Look at the section at the bottom titled “The popularity contest.”
If our goal is to defeat Trump with a candidate who has coattails, then the key number is “unfavorability” ratings. If that number is high, GOP operatives will have a big target audience to urge to stay home. If that number rose a lot in front of a national audience, it is ominous where this is going.
By that measure, Warren looks very, very good. Harris and Castro pretty good, too. Buttigieg (who I had been following) some cause for concern.
Of course, Biden’s unfavorability of 19 and Sanders 17.5 aren’t as bad as some of these lesser knows with those kinds of numbers. And with Sanders, unfavorability actually inched down a tiny bit. But still.
It’s the (fairly memorable to those who have read it) opening sentence of Cien años de soledad (A Hundred Years of Solitude).
“Many years later, as he faced the firing squad, Colonel Aureliano Buendía was to remember that distant afternoon when his father took him to discover ice.”
I never read it… In my school that was for AP English students. I saw the bit about a firing squad and I assumed it was gibberish. Yeah I thought Marquez was gibberish I’m uncultured.
It’s really a mind-blowing work. I’m glad I read it when I was young (in grad school, pre WWW) before the “fire hose of information” environment that we live in now.
It’s pretty much the most admired opening sentence in 20th century literature. I’d give it another try, it’s a gorgeous, perfect novel.
Sharpe
3435
So in the gerrymandering thread, @Timex brought up the idea of Dems winning elections by increasing turnout, given the relatively low turnout in US elections.
This is of course a good idea, and would solve many problems and overcome many obstacles.
So, how do we it?
How do we increase Dem turnout in a significant way to affect election results?
The obvious solution is to act like Republicans to win over the Mythical Moderates.
Just hate the gays, blacks, women, and poors juuuust a lil bit, and success’ll come rolling in like manna from the Christian, definitely real and not a hilarious fever dream, Heaven.
