|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 01 2016 10:32 Plansix wrote: The law is in place to protect kids and I can't think of that last time it was brought against to consenting adults. It was only 13 years ago that SCOTUS ruled sodomy laws unconstitutional, and if I were you I would consider how you would feel about someone who had said what you just did back then in the context of homosexuality.
|
On March 01 2016 10:34 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 09:40 zulu_nation8 wrote: recs? Drudge seems okay seems cuz it's funny. Looking mainly for aggregator sites. The millennial focused startups like ozy are pretty bad Drudge should be a go to place. All you really need is to supplement it with something that skews more left.
Could you give some recommendations?
|
If you are a parent and have sex with your son/daughter (over 18 and consenting) you are by definition a sex offender in many states, on par with pedophiles and rapists. I'm not talking about minors.
|
On March 01 2016 10:38 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Probably old news to some but i just found out Bill Clinton is a superdelegate.
Fair and balanced right?
no more unfair than superdelegates in general
|
On March 01 2016 10:43 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 10:32 Plansix wrote: The law is in place to protect kids and I can't think of that last time it was brought against to consenting adults. It was only 13 years ago that SCOTUS ruled sodomy laws unconstitutional, and if I were you I would consider how you would feel about someone who had said what you just did back then in the context of homosexuality. If you're super invested in boning your cousin or something like that, go for it as long as they are into it. I don't think a DA is going to press charges if they find out.
|
On March 01 2016 10:44 zulu_nation8 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 10:34 xDaunt wrote:On March 01 2016 09:40 zulu_nation8 wrote: recs? Drudge seems okay seems cuz it's funny. Looking mainly for aggregator sites. The millennial focused startups like ozy are pretty bad Drudge should be a go to place. All you really need is to supplement it with something that skews more left. Could you give some recommendations? Politico is fine if you want something strictly political.
|
People with large influence in the democratic party are superdelegates, so as a former President Bill would be a superdelegate. Barack Obama, Al Gore and Carter are also superdelegates.
These are people who are overwhelmingly Democratic and are invested in the party as opposed to the common voter who sways from right to left. That said, it's only ~700 superdelegates in total. While it's a large number, these are elected Democratic officials.
|
The crux of Ted Cruz's campaign has long been mobilizing the Christian right to his side, working to galvanize enough evangelical voters to topple Donald Trump.
The Texas senator even launched his campaign at Liberty University, which claims to be the world's largest Christian college, declaring that "God isn't done with America yet."
Cruz talks with the cadence of a megachurch pastor, and exhortations of his faith are a mainstay at every campaign rally. His strategy in targeting the most conservative religious voters worked in Iowa, but the wheels came off in South Carolina and Nevada.
Now, if he can't fully convert religious voters in many critical Southern states set to vote on Super Tuesday, his campaign could be beyond resurrection.
"I think for him to continue to lose evangelical votes to Donald Trump is a fatal blow to the rationale for his campaign," said Bruce Haynes, a GOP strategist and president of the bipartisan consulting firm Purple Strategies. "He speaks openly of the relevance of his candidacy in churches and has openly identified that a key part of their winning strategy is evangelical voters. That's his base, but he's not carrying that base."
The so-called SEC primary runs through states that are likely to have even more evangelical voters than the states that have voted so far. Cruz himself has only raised expectations about Super Tuesday, calling it "the most important day in this entire cycle."
According to 2012 exit polls, in Alabama 80 percent of GOP primary voters described themselves as evangelical. In Tennessee, 68 percent of Republican voters were born-again Christians. And in Georgia, 68 percent of primary voters four years ago were evangelicals.
Source
|
If you want something leftwing that isn't biased b/w Bernie and Hillary, Talking Points Memo is pretty good
I like Politico, they seem balanced
Mother Jones is very editorialized and very leftwing, but they are kind of balanced between liberal candidates and do some solid reporting
TheHill is pretty centrist... I think
WSJ is a little more right leaning
WaPo is unapologetically liberal and is pretending not to suck Bernie's dick
NYTimes is leftish and suffering a bit of an identity crisis
Time is meh, I think a little left leaning but quality has declined
NPR is a somewhat liberal, probably has one foot in the Hillary camp
CNN is a pretty centrist, a little liberal perhaps
Fox is rightwing
NYPost is pretty rightwing, basically Murdoch's mouthpiece
Those are my main news sources. I don't count Vox, Buzzfeed, Washington Times, as real news and I don't use NBC, MSNBC or ABC much though they are pretty liberal I would think.
|
On March 01 2016 10:56 Deathstar wrote: People with large influence in the democratic party are superdelegates, so as a former President Bill would be a superdelegate. Barack Obama, Al Gore and Carter are also superdelegates.
These are people who are overwhelmingly Democratic and are invested in the party as opposed to the common voter who sways from right to left. That said, it's only ~700 superdelegates in total. While it's a large number, these are elected Democratic officials.
They aren't all (formally) elected, some are lobbyists.
|
WaPo is liberalish but they're not sucking Bernie's dick that's nonsense. These days they're more anti-Trump. The war path is insane.
|
On March 01 2016 10:56 Deathstar wrote: People with large influence in the democratic party are superdelegates, so as a former President Bill would be a superdelegate. Barack Obama, Al Gore and Carter are also superdelegates.
These are people who are overwhelmingly Democratic and are invested in the party as opposed to the common voter who sways from right to left. That said, it's only ~700 superdelegates in total. While it's a large number, these are elected Democratic officials.
I am curious, what does it mean for them to be "overwhelmingly democratic", in comparison to the 'common voters' ? I don't think there is any merit to a claim that your average democrat "sways from left to right" - not that it should matter, at all.
|
On March 01 2016 11:06 Deathstar wrote: WaPo is liberalish but they're not sucking Bernie's dick that's nonsense.
The Daily 404 (their newsletter) was jizzing over him for the last month or so, and they did a full 180 from Hillary to "Bernie is srs bsns and super legit" awhile ago (IIRC after one of the debates, I think pre-NH). I would wake up every morning, check my email on my phone and see headlines about feeling the bern.
Though I guess a fair assessment is that they've dropped any pretense of journalistic integrity and are blatantly milking the nomination races for views.
Oh BTW Travis: the thing about Bernie being the amendment king... well turns out most of those amendments he got tacked on died along with the bills they were part of.
|
On March 01 2016 11:07 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 10:56 Deathstar wrote: People with large influence in the democratic party are superdelegates, so as a former President Bill would be a superdelegate. Barack Obama, Al Gore and Carter are also superdelegates.
These are people who are overwhelmingly Democratic and are invested in the party as opposed to the common voter who sways from right to left. That said, it's only ~700 superdelegates in total. While it's a large number, these are elected Democratic officials. I am curious, what does it mean for them to be "overwhelmingly democratic", in comparison to the 'common voters' ? I don't think there is any merit to a claim that your average democrat "sways from left to right" - not that it should matter, at all. It is extremely unlikely that they would use their influence to overturn a popular vote. It is a good way to lose an election. The electoral college is technically not required to vote the same way their state did either. Part of politics is based on a respect for the process, rather than creating rules to force the process to be "fair".
|
On March 01 2016 10:53 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 10:43 oBlade wrote:On March 01 2016 10:32 Plansix wrote: The law is in place to protect kids and I can't think of that last time it was brought against to consenting adults. It was only 13 years ago that SCOTUS ruled sodomy laws unconstitutional, and if I were you I would consider how you would feel about someone who had said what you just did back then in the context of homosexuality. If you're super invested in boning your cousin or something like that, go for it as long as they are into it. I don't think a DA is going to press charges if they find out. You should be able to come out against laws where the government interferes with the sexual privacy of adults in any context, not just in circumstances that don't seem taboo to you. Otherwise, you aren't for the principle, you're just for what's fashionable - which gay pride now is, in contrast to the law's treatment of incest or sex work.
|
On March 01 2016 11:07 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 10:56 Deathstar wrote: People with large influence in the democratic party are superdelegates, so as a former President Bill would be a superdelegate. Barack Obama, Al Gore and Carter are also superdelegates.
These are people who are overwhelmingly Democratic and are invested in the party as opposed to the common voter who sways from right to left. That said, it's only ~700 superdelegates in total. While it's a large number, these are elected Democratic officials. I am curious, what does it mean for them to be "overwhelmingly democratic", in comparison to the 'common voters' ? I don't think there is any merit to a claim that your average democrat "sways from left to right" - not that it should matter, at all.
Considering this is a nomination process for the Democratic Party, there is merit to say that people who are dedicated to the party and have results (winning elections). should have greater say than the average Democratic voter. I'm more referencing the Democrats who are switching over to Trump with that part (there are many registered Democrats who are effectively Republicans).
|
On March 01 2016 11:14 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 10:53 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2016 10:43 oBlade wrote:On March 01 2016 10:32 Plansix wrote: The law is in place to protect kids and I can't think of that last time it was brought against to consenting adults. It was only 13 years ago that SCOTUS ruled sodomy laws unconstitutional, and if I were you I would consider how you would feel about someone who had said what you just did back then in the context of homosexuality. If you're super invested in boning your cousin or something like that, go for it as long as they are into it. I don't think a DA is going to press charges if they find out. You should be able to come out against laws where the government interferes with the sexual privacy of adults in any context, not just in circumstances that don't seem taboo to you. Otherwise, you aren't for the principle, you're just for what's fashionable - which gay pride now is, in contrast to the law's treatment of incest or sex work. I am not super opposed to remove the law or amending it to protect children specifically. But it is pretty low on the issue that influence my vote. Right above the candidate's stance on Anime.
|
On March 01 2016 11:08 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 11:06 Deathstar wrote: WaPo is liberalish but they're not sucking Bernie's dick that's nonsense. The Daily 404 (their newsletter) was jizzing over him for the last month or so, and they did a full 180 from Hillary to "Bernie is srs bsns and super legit" awhile ago (IIRC after one of the debates, I think pre-NH). I would wake up every morning, check my email on my phone and see headlines about feeling the bern. Talking about the Washington Post, am I the only one who feels Chris Cilizza's articles are usually extremely superficial, with Buzzfeed-like click-bait titles, and generally terrible? Pretty much every time I read an article with substance on washingtonpost.com/politics/, I know he didn't write it.
|
On March 01 2016 11:08 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 11:06 Deathstar wrote: WaPo is liberalish but they're not sucking Bernie's dick that's nonsense. The Daily 404 (their newsletter) was jizzing over him for the last month or so, and they did a full 180 from Hillary to "Bernie is srs bsns and super legit" awhile ago (IIRC after one of the debates, I think pre-NH). I would wake up every morning, check my email on my phone and see headlines about feeling the bern. Though I guess a fair assessment is that they've dropped any pretense of journalistic integrity and are blatantly milking the nomination races for views. Oh BTW Travis: the thing about Bernie being the amendment king... well turns out most of those amendments he got tacked on died along with the bills they were part of. 
I'm not saying use WaPo alone but if you're not a rightwinger WaPo is pretty good for you in providing social and economics news. They may have felt the bern for a while but at the moment they're tame 
BloombergView is a source that I enjoy reading
|
On March 01 2016 11:13 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 11:07 travis wrote:On March 01 2016 10:56 Deathstar wrote: People with large influence in the democratic party are superdelegates, so as a former President Bill would be a superdelegate. Barack Obama, Al Gore and Carter are also superdelegates.
These are people who are overwhelmingly Democratic and are invested in the party as opposed to the common voter who sways from right to left. That said, it's only ~700 superdelegates in total. While it's a large number, these are elected Democratic officials. I am curious, what does it mean for them to be "overwhelmingly democratic", in comparison to the 'common voters' ? I don't think there is any merit to a claim that your average democrat "sways from left to right" - not that it should matter, at all. It is extremely unlikely that they would use their influence to overturn a popular vote. It is a good way to lose an election. The electoral college is technically not required to vote the same way their state did either. Part of politics is based on a respect for the process, rather than creating rules to force the process to be "fair".
Except the superdelegates are specifically there to be able to overturn the popularly supported candidate. We could discuss why it hasn't happened, but even DWS said that's what they are there for.
Every time we hear about the delegate count with them included, you're seeing them being used as they usually are. Actually overturning a nomination was always an idle threat as has been mentioned it would be the end of the campaign.
|
|
|
|