This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
If I'm reading the Colorado Secretary of State rules correctly, he would have to file a Notice of Intent for Write-in, which the Secretary of State must evaluate and can only list as an eligible write-in candidate if the submitting agent is truely eligible. The opinion and a few dissents both make clear that these rules apply to Presidential elections, with at most some quibbling about how much of the terms for qualifications apply to non-write-in candidates :
The majority opinion's logic would hold that Secretary of State should (and must!) refuse to list Trump as a write-in candidate; votes for an ineligible write-in "will not be counted".
It's... not clear when the Notice of Intent must be filed. The Colorado Secretary of State page says 67 days before the date of the election (December 30th?), but the statute says 85, which would be... December 17ish. I'm not sure if the difference arises because the law has changed since 2022, or what.
How much that matters varies. The actual selection of a candidate doesn't have statutory (well, technically, the state law requires "Each political party shall use the results of the election to allocate national delegate votes in accordance with the party's state and national rules.") or Constitutional procedures, and Colorado's GOP have long been ground zero for fuckery on those matters.
The state's GOP have 37 (out of 3,469) delegates, but even before this opinion, the state GOP was threatening to move to a caucus system. It'll be an absolute clusterfuck, though, especially given the already-fraught results after 2016.
More options
Context Copy link