US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5622

There is growing concern over the decline of fisheries and the overall health of the ocean: scientists estimate that 90% of stocks are fished at or beyond sustainable limits, habitats like coral reefs are threatened by ocean acidification, and large areas of ocean and coastlines are polluted. What efforts would your administration make to improve the health of our ocean and coastlines and increase the long-term sustainability of ocean fisheries?

...

Trump does not mention the ocean, fish, fisheries, coral reefs or coastlines in his answer. Grade: 0/5

...

Johnson favors taking "reasonable steps to protect coastlines and territorial waters," but he does not define what "reasonable" means. Global efforts, he says, should focus on "international agreements and allowing consumer-driven market forces to reduce over-harvesting and ocean pollution," completely ignoring the extent to which market forces have fueled the problem in the first place. Grade: 0/5

On October 18 2016 00:43 Liquid`Drone wrote:


Don't diss state-run media. Aren't PBS and NPR basically your best outlets in terms of facticity? ;p Same story for most functional democracies that have state-run media imo, NRK is best in Norway, BBC in Britain, SVT in sweden. Then when regimes are less democratic and transparent, they end up being disasters, but there's nothing intrinsically problematic about state-run media as long as proper precautions are taken and strong ethical standards are maintained.

On October 18 2016 00:48 TheTenthDoc wrote:
It's worth noting that state-run media and media run by the head of state's family and news executives from his campaign are kind of an apples and oranges comparison.

On October 18 2016 00:43 Liquid`Drone wrote:


Don't diss state-run media. Aren't PBS and NPR basically your best outlets in terms of facticity? ;p Same story for most functional democracies that have state-run media imo, NRK is best in Norway, BBC in Britain, SVT in sweden. Then when regimes are less democratic and transparent, they end up being disasters, but there's nothing intrinsically problematic about state-run media as long as proper precautions are taken and strong ethical standards are maintained. I'd argue that the clickbait/sensationalism tendencies are more ubiquitous with for-profit media than the 'wants to paint sitting government in positive light' tendency is of state-run media.

On October 17 2016 23:35 zlefin wrote:

I'm not familiar with that community, how much cred do those people have in that community? how influential will their statement be?

On October 18 2016 00:17 PhoenixVoid wrote:

I guess it's nice having Trump TV either way. Either you win and get your own propaganda arm, or lose and broadcast your ideas 24/7 and stir the pot more.

will become 'irredeemable'.

You vastly underestimate how much damage losing will do to his reputation; the riots that are likely to follow the election won't exactly help.

On October 18 2016 00:53 Toadesstern wrote:

yeah agree. Doesn't even have to be just news. Educational stuff as a for-profit model just sounds awful to me. Not really a TV watcher myself but glad there's something out there that doesn't need to entertain their viewers to get in money.

quick question: what are the chances for Clinton to officially give up on Utah and ask her voters to vote for McMullin there? Or same question for Johnson?
538 currently has Trump at roughly 8-9 points ahead of Clinton, but Clinton is at about 26, McMullin is at 26 and Johnson at 10. If less than half of Clinton people vote McMullin in Utah that goes third party oO
I guess since only 6 electoral votes not worth it for Clinton?

On October 18 2016 00:53 Toadesstern wrote:
quick question: what are the chances for Clinton to officially give up on Utah and ask her voters to vote for McMullin there? Or same question for Johnson?
538 currently has Trump at roughly 8-9 points ahead of Clinton, but Clinton is at about 26, McMullin is at 26 and Johnson at 10. If less than half of Clinton people vote McMullin in Utah that goes third party oO
I guess since only 6 electoral votes not worth it for Clinton?

On October 18 2016 00:49 Plansix wrote:

NPR is the best news outlet in the US right now for on the hour news coverage. Their coverage of the election is the best going right now. For profit broadcast news is a pretty bad model for the goals of journalism.

On October 18 2016 01:24 Logo wrote:



Zero Percent Chance.

That same thing backfired horribly for the republicans, I don't think people like the idea of trying to game the election math. It also would play into reinforcing the things people dislike about Clinton.

Also it's entirely possible that McMullin or Johnson voters will deflect to Clinton anyways as the election draws closer.

On October 18 2016 01:28 Toadesstern wrote:

Maybe some Johnson voters but the McMullin vote I don't see helping Clinton overall. Sure some went Clinton -> McMullin and would return to her in that case but more people went Trump -> McMullin and would probably go back to Trump or not vote at all before going for Clinton.

Funnily enough 538 is giving McMullin about twice the chances to win Utah than it's giving Clinton. Maybe on the basis that some people do that themselves come election day without her having to say a word?

On October 18 2016 01:25 Thieving Magpie wrote:


Lets not move to quickly on that--the big issue right now is the move towards ratings/clicks based profit models that cares over about the results of each article instead of the performance of the paper as a whole. In the past when you had to purchase the entire paper to get your comics/sports/news, now it is ala carte and it shoves off any topic or writer that is focusing on non-popular headlines.

Not that journalism in the past did no wrong, but before you needed to make a paper that was a totality, one that would be as liked by both comics only readers, sports only readers, etc... Ala cart means that if your certain topic was not exciting it means you get replaced by more sports/comics.

On October 18 2016 01:32 Logo wrote:


I'm not seeing that? 538 is showing me the chances at 7.5% Clinton and 6.0% McMullin.

On October 18 2016 01:20 ImFromPortugal wrote:


he will spin it as fraud and rigged elections.

I can see russia giving an helping hand to TrumpTV and other outlets that are already established.

The internet will be here as well, reddit , 4Chan, it can snowball pretty quickly.