netstack
Texas is freedom land
No bio...
User ID: 647
netstack
Texas is freedom land
17d ago
I couldn’t agree more. Even going last week in a Texas suburb, it was bustling. Local candidates out campaigning. An actual presence from both parties. And, of course, the powerful “I voted!” Sticker. Whoever thought of that was a genius.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
17d ago
Nah.
The traditional practice is dumping $2000 on a tacticool AR before Kamala bans them. Whether or not she wins, you must then sell it by Christmas. I figured I'd skip those steps and just buy ammo/accessories after the election, once prices sag.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
18d ago
Reality caught up to his brand of professional counterculture. Now he’s got to keep chasing the dragon.
Also, people will pay him for it.
“Influencers” are the natural consequence of applying Tumblr-style incentives to legacy media personalities. Balkanization encourages specialization, and Tucker is sliding towards a passionate, dedicated, decoupled-from-reality audience.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
18d ago
Militias? Sure, that’d count. Those are awfully few and far between.
I don’t believe I’ve given anyone a pass on looting and/or burning.
And I use the passive because I don’t believe “the left” is an agent.
It is possible that, after a Trump victory, some morons at a Mostly Peaceful™ protest go burn down the local 7-11. I don’t consider that organized violence any more than I consider the Charlottesville debacle organized.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
18d ago
I’m inclined to call it “normal social maneuvering” instead of anything about social science!
make a claim that makes you look good in such a way that there is no way to call it into question
That’s definitely the crux of it. Some claims can’t be made to some audiences. Some questions can’t be asked to others. I don’t know if I can come up with a better example.
Regarding the edit—yeah, I feel that. I have a hard time going for brevity.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
18d ago
I’ll take that latter bet.
I don’t think they’ll resist certifying unless there’s a Bush v. Gore level of doubt.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
18d ago
I bet on Trump after the assassination attempt. I don’t think anything since then has really changed his fundamentals. Harris is a significantly better candidate than Mecha-Biden, but I’m not sure how much that affects swing states. High confidence she wins the popular vote, though. Trump enthusiasts are wildly uncalibrated on this.
Democrats are unlikely to fight certification. I guess there’s a possibility of a Bush v. Gore cock-up leading to a serious legal challenge? Not the “throw shit at the wall” approach of the Kraken suits. Trump found those by making it a show of personal loyalty. Harris can’t and won’t command that kind of initiative. She’ll give a polite concession speech, and if she has to retract it like Gore, she will.
Trump supporters will pitch a fit if he loses. I was at the local gun store this weekend; it’s become fashionable to say things like “winning the vote is one thing, making it through the count is another.” A Democrat victory is presumed illegitimate. Trump will continue to pander to this sentiment, refusing to admit defeat. Again. That won’t actually lead to violence, mind you; Texas’ continued lean red will satisfy their honor.
In summary, there’s next to no chance of organized violence by anyone. It is possible that a Trump victory leads to riots in Democratic cities, but there would be zero chance (or expectation) of that changing outcomes. It’d be violence for frustration’s sake. Conversely, there’s near zero chance of random pro-Trump violence. Coordination on the level of 1/6 is more likely but still implausible. Nothing more complex will occur.
My overall experience? Pretty unpleasant. The discourse has been terrible and the vibes rancid. I am incredibly disappointed at how many intelligent, articulate users on this forum alone gave up all pretense of rigor.
I didn’t vote in 2012. Every Presidential election since then has been a referendum on Donald Fucking Trump. I’m ready for him to be out of the news. He doesn’t deserve to be rewarded.
I voted for Harris, and so should you.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
18d ago
Okay, but that example is actually rude, no? Demanding someone’s measurements is not normal. Neither is insisting someone recant. Calling someone a liar is almost always picking a fight.
An observer would come away from this conversation thinking both participants are assholes and possibly stupid.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
18d ago
Personally, I was invited. Zorba had to wait for my badge and gun to come in the mail before he could give me any permissions, though.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
21d ago
To be fair, I didn’t see it at first.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
21d ago
The surge in the 70s depends on Supreme Court jurisprudence which probably couldn’t have occurred before the New Deal. But I think capital punishment advocacy does date back to the 1800s. States like Michigan banned it early with explicitly Christian arguments.
Today’s split probably has more to do with partisan habits than with religion.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
22d ago
Christianity.
The Second Great Awakening was a hell of a drug.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
22d ago
It’s not happening, and if it is, it’s a good thing?
netstack
Texas is freedom land
22d ago
What? Who says that?
Trump has been normalized only in the sense that what would have been shocking for another candidate is blasé for him. He’ll do something scandalous, the media will insist it’s a scandal, and then everything will continue exactly as it was.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
23d ago
I don’t think there’s so much low-hanging fruit.
We already do physical ballots. Chain of custody. Adversarial counts. Auditable trails. What specific things do you think are missing?
I’d argue that most of the reasonable additions wouldn’t actually add integrity or the appearance of integrity. Not when one party has made skepticism a brand. Require ID, they blame the count. Confirm the recount, now it’s the voting machines. You could have OP’s transparent urn and someone would still go on Fox to say George Soros was behind it.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
23d ago
But as soon as you compress the ballots into a count--as soon as you move away from the pottery in an urn--you're leaving an opening. Motivated reasoners can and will jump on that just like they jumped on everything else.
We are already doing most of these millenia-proven strategies.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
23d ago
Oh, that's weird. The source looks right, and then it...concatenates? Is it treating it like how you can link to /comment/262705?
netstack
Texas is freedom land
24d ago
“Fundamentalism” was the term of choice for the 90s and 00s until W. was out of play. By the time Romney ran, it was a joke. For the new generation, who were at least familiar with the old, cringe atheists, a new term was required.
Well, it does have a history. White supremacists, blood ‘n soilers, people were happy to claim it. Which is, of course, why the oldest source on the Wikipedia page for “Christian nationalism” dates to 2016.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
24d ago
Yeah, it’s pretty congested. There’s a ton of stuff we want to broadcast.
I was going to say that going higher in frequency is more expensive due to requiring faster sampling, but then I realized I don’t know the receiver architecture. Do they just down convert everything to baseband?
Either way, there’s definitely historical reasons to want those tasty lower frequencies.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
24d ago
It must be “Everybody Votes ‘Campaign’,” coordinating neocon war hawks.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
24d ago
Politicians are much better at implementing fiscal and regulatory policy than making sweeping shifts in civil rights. They’re also more interested in doing the former. Niche Internet free-speech forums spend much more time thinking about freedom of expression than the average politician or the average American.
On the off chance that Walz becomes VP, then President, then is handed a draconian 1A bill by Congress, I suppose he’d be likely to sign it. I don’t consider this a likely outcome.
In the interest of the next few items on your list, I suggest voting for the candidate who won’t appoint her family members to diplomatic posts, hire his lawyers and golf buddies to consult, and otherwise funnel money to his own enterprises.
Bush v. Gore involved over 5.8 million votes. At least 113,820 of those marked multiple candidates and thus could not be counted. That suggests a 1.95% baseline.
Here MIT corroborates the 1% number, but they don’t give their source in turn.
I can’t remember if my voting machine even allowed that sort of error. It definitely said “CHOOSE ONE OR NONE.” next to each office. Did they use checkboxes or radio buttons?
Anyway, I don’t see any reason to invoke the Cathedral. Research is rare (but not verboten) because it’s hard, not because it’s existential. After the “butterfly ballots” it was a reasonably popular topic.
I think your search results were just clouded by news stories about polling error, which is much more important to organizations trying to make their predictions.
More options
Context Copy link