Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 02-23-2019, 09:46 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,749
I could do that, if I knew what "rep" means in this context. A single weightlifting cycle? A representative?
  #252  
Old 02-23-2019, 10:16 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
I thought it meant "represent" in the broader sense of "be associated with", as someone from Chicago might say "I'm repping Chicago" if asked where they were from. But that doesn't seem exactly right in this context.
  #253  
Old 02-24-2019, 02:33 AM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Raygun View Post
Someone mentioned that SESTA/FOSTA passed in the Senate 97-2. I want to clarify that, while I think that's terrible, Harris in particular should be judged far more harshly for her anti-sexwork stance. Most politicians are anti-sexwork as a knee-jerk response. It's really not a priority for them, and they likely don't give it much thought. Harris is different. She led the crusade against Backpage despite law enforcement telling her that it would increase trafficking. Again, she views this as a major accomplishment. Many sex workers, a significant portion of whom are POC and trans, have been forced back onto the street where their incomes -- not to mention their lives -- are at risk. This is a personal issue for me.

If you don't think you know any sex workers, trust me, you do. You just don't know it.
Hmm, thanks for this. I was never for Harris, but wow does she go after the low-hanging fruit (of course, she was a prosecutor, that's horse-trading by nature)...these establishment candidates remind me of characters from "Starship Troopers!"
  #254  
Old 02-24-2019, 02:58 AM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
What you call opportunistic lying is what the rest of us call pragmatism, not letting the perfect be the enemy of what's good or what's possible, and all that.
So I'm really curious (since Obama was mentioned): what the hell was that stunt he pulled twice for the cameras pretending to drink Flint water???

Seriously, I can't imagine what possible benefit there was to that. It was just so bald-faced, so patented a lie...I don't actually know whether the water's safe now but I do know that at most he took a very quick and very, very tiny sip -- seemed like he just wetted his lips to me, really...so what was the point of that??? Like what was gained, what was the "pragmatism" all about in that stunt???

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I am a progressive and I appreciate that Bernie has made progressivism great a gain. However, the brutal reality is that, even today, progressives simply haven't been all that effective in convincing the rest of the voting population that we should vote for the things that we value. Medicare for all? A $15 minimum wage? Universal income? Stronger unions? Some of these are good ideas, but it's not clear that a majority of the voting population would support even one of these in an actual vote in a major national election at the present time. And frankly, I doubt that happens until we have another Herbert Hoover moment.
Agreed. I'm thinking we're gonna get our Herb Hoover despite hopes for Yang's U.B.I.
  #255  
Old 02-24-2019, 10:24 AM
andros is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 10,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidChou View Post
...what the hell was that stunt...
Here's one take. https://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11591894/obama-flint-water

Messaging is important, as is context.
  #256  
Old 02-24-2019, 11:26 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by andros View Post
Here's one take. https://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11591894/obama-flint-water

Messaging is important, as is context.
Interesting. And it brings back a memory to me -

In my early days in pediatrics I went to a CME at Harvard on Child Neurology. While there they had us attend that week's Grand Rounds presentation in which it so happened the key studies that drove legislation on lead were presented. Before these studies it was unclear if the association of blood level levels with decreased IQ measurements were on the basis of the lead or were a marker for other environmental items that travelled with SES. What they did was study upper middle class families renovating brownstones and found the associations as well, even at blood lead levels lower than previously felt meaningful. A few IQ points worth on average. Comment from the back of the room from a Harvard MD/researcher, paraphrasing from memory: "When we were all young we were all exposed to much more environmental lead than there is now, leaded gas, lead paint, it was all around. Pretty sure we were all at lead levels of 10 to 15 if not 15 to 20 ...." Response - "Yes, and all of you would have been 2 to 5 IQ points smarter if you had not ... the meaningful impact is at the population more than the individual level ..."

So yeah a tough balance in the messaging. Letting lead levels in water get that high was unconscionable. The ideal level of lead in water is none. The harms and the immorality cannot be minimized. But the historic context is that kids in Flint then were NOT doomed to brain damage as a result. Allowing kids and parents to internalize that as an unavoidable fate when it was wrong would also have been unconscionable. In longer term context longer term policies have been effective.
Quote:
The study, which appears in the Journal of Pediatrics, found a decrease in Flint childhood blood lead levels, from 2.33 micrograms per deciliter in 2006 to 1.15 micrograms per deciliter in 2016 -- a historic low for the city. The mean blood lead level in 2015 during the height of the water crisis was 1.3 micrograms per deciliter, up from 1.19 in 2014 before the water source switch. ... For Flint children, risks of the most severe consequences of lead exposure -- which are most concerning when exposure is prolonged over years -- are low compared to children growing up in the city a decade earlier ...
So this follows themes across threads in this forum. Obama did understand science and was pretty good at helping explain it, at combating irrational fears without dismissing justifiable concerns and need for action. Explaining the balanced middle is a tough job and hard to do in a sound bite screams for clicks world.

Last edited by DSeid; 02-24-2019 at 11:29 AM.
  #257  
Old 02-24-2019, 02:43 PM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by andros View Post
Here's one take. https://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11591894/obama-flint-water

Messaging is important, as is context.
But that doesn't explain why he didn't just gulp the whole damned cup down...aides could've sbustituted Dasani reverse-osmosis water for all anyone would know...that's what I don't understand -- what we would now call the Trumpian incompetence of the stunt as stunt.
  #258  
Old 02-24-2019, 02:49 PM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Interesting. And it brings back a memory to me -

...
Thanks for that!! Fascinating!!!


Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
So this follows themes across threads in this forum.
What do you mean here, exactly??

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Obama did understand science and was pretty good at helping explain it, at combating irrational fears without dismissing justifiable concerns and need for action. Explaining the balanced middle is a tough job and hard to do in a sound bite screams for clicks world.
But it was so patently false -- it's just so absurd to not gulp the whole thing down...doesn't it all just look sneaky, the way he so carefully and so quickly put his lips to the water and was done???
  #259  
Old 02-24-2019, 03:02 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,807
I see him gulping the water.
  #260  
Old 02-24-2019, 04:00 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,584

The Moderator Speaks


What does Flint have to do with Harris?

Stay focused, people.
  #261  
Old 02-24-2019, 04:02 PM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
I see him gulping the water.
It's a poor stunt, is the point. Not convincing for most, AFAIK. So if the point was to demonstrate safety, why didn't he take a normal gulp?

Unless, of course, you believe he really just happened to have been coughing twice and just happened to have needed to only wet his lips and wasn't trying to demonstrate anything at all...yes, it's statistically possible. Just seemed very strange for a man widely renowned for his command of optics.
  #262  
Old 02-24-2019, 06:25 PM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
How does anyone parse this? A tweet of @Jeremy_Ellwood seen on Facebook the other day:

Quote:
Dear @DNC:
In 2015, we told you we WILL NOT vote for Hillary. We were told you don't need our votes. You coronated her. She lost. You blamed us progressives. Let me explain 2020 as shortly as possible: We will not vote for Kamala Harris. I recommend you take that to heart.
Instead of exploding in anger, my initial reaction, I posted "Kamala Harris FTW! I love her!" That got no reaction. The only other comment was "What don't they like about her?" That also went unanswered.

All I see there is destructive glee from a so-called progressive at helping Trump to win and threatening to do it again. No logical relevance to Kamala Harris about the DNC "coronating" (that isn't a real word, you know). Nothing about finding ways to help America become better. Just mindless destructiveness for its own sake. smh
  #263  
Old 02-24-2019, 06:33 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,253
What is there to parse? It pretty simply says progressives of his ilk will not accept Harris. What is the difficulty?

Last edited by CarnalK; 02-24-2019 at 06:34 PM.
  #264  
Old 02-24-2019, 06:34 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna View Post
How does anyone parse this? A tweet of @Jeremy_Ellwood seen on Facebook the other day:



Instead of exploding in anger, my initial reaction, I posted "Kamala Harris FTW! I love her!" That got no reaction. The only other comment was "What don't they like about her?" That also went unanswered.

All I see there is destructive glee from a so-called progressive at helping Trump to win and threatening to do it again. No logical relevance to Kamala Harris about the DNC "coronating" (that isn't a real word, you know). Nothing about finding ways to help America become better. Just mindless destructiveness for its own sake. smh
Yes, tha attacks from the kremlin begin. Isn't he from NZ anyway?

I have made no secret of the fact I dont like some of her politics. But I even said that to balance out the "old white guy" as Prez i could see her as Veep, so I dont hate her. But she is low on my preferred choices.

Last edited by DrDeth; 02-24-2019 at 06:37 PM.
  #265  
Old 02-24-2019, 07:28 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna View Post
How does anyone parse this? A tweet of @Jeremy_Ellwood seen on Facebook the other day:



Instead of exploding in anger, my initial reaction, I posted "Kamala Harris FTW! I love her!" That got no reaction. The only other comment was "What don't they like about her?" That also went unanswered.

All I see there is destructive glee from a so-called progressive at helping Trump to win and threatening to do it again. No logical relevance to Kamala Harris about the DNC "coronating" (that isn't a real word, you know). Nothing about finding ways to help America become better. Just mindless destructiveness for its own sake. smh
There will always be idiots saying idiotic things. There will always be someone saying "you better not nominate X!". All we can do is pick the candidate we think best represents our values and will have the best chance to win.
  #266  
Old 02-24-2019, 07:33 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,749
Who is Jeremy Elwood, and why should I care what he says?
  #267  
Old 02-24-2019, 07:43 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Who is Jeremy Elwood, and why should I care what he says?
Nobody asked you to care about anything.
  #268  
Old 02-24-2019, 07:47 PM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
Because it raises concern that the insidious destructive politics that attached to Bernie last time, secretly backed by Putin, is raising its ugly head again. Time to be forewarned.
  #269  
Old 02-24-2019, 07:59 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna View Post
Because it raises concern that the insidious destructive politics that attached to Bernie last time, secretly backed by Putin, is raising its ugly head again. Time to be forewarned.
Yes, this is a good point. We should keep this in mind for any poorly or anonymously sourced attacks on Democratic candidates.
  #270  
Old 02-24-2019, 09:18 PM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
What's so irritating about @Jeremy_Ellwood is reusing the same tired attack line they used against Hillary 4 years ago, without even bothering to come up with anything relevant for today. The flat-out lazy idiocy of it all.
  #271  
Old 02-24-2019, 09:20 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,224
I wonder how much the Kremlin pays him?
  #272  
Old 02-24-2019, 09:27 PM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
I looked into who had posted that stupid tweet on FB and it was a Tulsi Gabbard enthusiast, whose cover picture is Gabbard campaigning side-by-side with Bernie. If Gabbard is a progressive, I'm Marie of Roumania. Idiocy upon idiocy!
  #273  
Old 02-24-2019, 10:24 PM
Gerald II is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
From your cite at the New York Times"

"Before Ms. Harris answered the question, Charlamagne tha God interjected, asking her to say what she listened to while she smoked in college. Everyone laughed, before D.J. Envy appeared to return to his original question.

“Was it Snoop?” he asked.

“Oh yeah, definitely Snoop,” Ms. Harris said. “Tupac for sure.”

My bolding. The use of "it" suggests that she was referring to what music she listened to as she smoked pot.
Yes, she previously claimed she smoked pot once in college and it was a joint. DJ Envy asked her "What do you listen to? I know you have to go, but what does Kamala Harris listen to?"
Meaning, what do you currently listen to.

Then CTG asks immediately, "What was you listening to when you was high? What was on? What song was playing?"

She laughs and exclaims, "Oh my goodness."

DJ Envy then asks, "Was it Snoop?"
Past tense, so he was piggybacking on CTG's question.

Kamala Harris replies, "Definitely Snoop, Tupac for sure..."

Then DJ Envy asks "What do you listen to now? What's your favorite hip-hop artist."
Then she replies that she really likes Cardi B.

You're right it's not a big deal when it comes to all the problems in our country, and it's a drop in the bucket compared all the lies Trump tells on a daily basis.

I took it as her attempt to appeal to pander to the youth crowd. Silly, but that's it.
I did think it was wrong that The Washington Post and MSNCB felt the need to do damage control for her. WaPo has a video where they try to explain it away, and one of the hosts at MSNBC said that FOX was lying about the whole thing.

Last edited by Gerald II; 02-24-2019 at 10:25 PM.
  #274  
Old 02-25-2019, 07:14 AM
Jragon's Avatar
Jragon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 10,546
Harris actively fought to prevent trans prisoners from getting SRS in prison. She wass a prosecutor who actively led the fight against (voluntary) sexworkers. She has a wonderful quote about why we should keep or increase prison funding instead of education. As far as I can tell, she doesn't even seem to see much wrong with our absurd sentencing lengths and incarceration volume. These are completely valid criticism and incredibly actively damaging viewpoints for a lot of people.

This is before you even hit the "far left" part of the equation where the likes of prison abolitionists and anarchist who proudly chant ACAB live.

This is not some bit of purity politics. It's life or death for a lot of people. Can you not see why a lot of people, especially trans folk and sex workers (which often overlap) and those who care for them may be incredibly against voting for her?

Now, yes, I have to acknowledge that even in the sphere of things about her that are concerning not everything is bad, the proposed reduction of bail for criminal offenses, for instance, is good. But by and large with her background, not just as a prosecutor, but as someone who fought tooth and nail for specific policies, it's hard for me to believe she'd even throw half the people I care about a bone, much less champion their rights.

I'll still vote for her, absurdly begrudgingly, if she gets the nomination, she's almost certainly better than Trump and our shit electoral system ensures third parties don't work mathematically... but I'm extremely concerned she's just going to worsen our absurd approach to crime, law enforcement, under an air of liberal friendliness and legitimacy (which isn't anything new, to be fair. See: Bill Clinton's entire approach to crime; See: Obama's use of ICE).

I swear people are already closing the Democrat Criticism Window. Not every vehement criticism of a candidate is the Kremlin sowing discord. Yes, yes, we have intelligence that they plan to do that and have likely started already. But Harris, in particular, has an incredibly concerning record that only becomes more concerning the farther left you are. She does not appeal to the far left. She does not appeal to center-right Third Way Democrats who are leery about this whole "UHC" or "Green New Deal" thing, I'm confused about why anybody is pushing her so far, she seems like the candidate that appeals to the most narrow possible band of slightly-but-not-too-left Democrats who are vaguely sympathetic to social democracy.

Last edited by Jragon; 02-25-2019 at 07:15 AM.
  #275  
Old 02-25-2019, 09:06 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jragon View Post
... I swear people are already closing the Democrat Criticism Window. Not every vehement criticism of a candidate is the Kremlin sowing discord. ...
There is a difference between the sorts of issues you raise and the link that Johanna calls attention to and the distortion of comments made to create silly gotchas out of bupkiss.

That said,
Quote:
... trans folk and sex workers (which often overlap) ...
makes one wonder what "often" means.

To quote from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey Executive Summary -
Quote:
Respondents reported high rates of experience in the underground economy, including
sex work, drug sales, and other work that is currently criminalized. One in five (20%)
have participated in the underground economy for income at some point in their lives—
including 12% who have done sex work in exchange for income—and 9% did so in the past year
It is in my mind a stretch to call someone who "ever" exchanged sex for income a "sex worker", a further stretch to call even those "ever" or "in last year" 12 or 9% "often", and even more of a stretch to imply that such means the converse, that a high fraction of all sex workers are trans.

From what I understand the explanation for the numbers of transpeople who have ever exchanged sex for money is desperation for money due to severe discrimination. As sex workers they are often subject to abuse and victimization.

Seems to me order of business is to fight against that discrimination, not to facilitate sex work as a viable option.

This seems to be the basis of the sex worker complaint against Harris. She
Quote:
pursued legal cases including child sex trafficking charges against the “adult” personals website Backpage. She also cosponsored the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA) in the Senate, which was signed into law by President Donald Trump as part of a package with FOSTA (Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017) on April 11, 2018.

“It’s despicable that Backpage & its executives purposefully designed Backpage to be the world’s top online brothel,” tweeted Harris, a few months prior to the charges filed through the Office of the Attorney General.

Harris long advocated for the shutdown of Backpage–which eventually came to pass on April 6, 2018, when the FBI seized it because of the website’s reported connections to child sex trafficking.
One consequence was that it made it harder for independent sex workers to do business via the net, "forcing" them to do business in riskier ways (finding other, legal, work is not an option I guess).

Personally I find the shut down of child sex trafficking a pretty big plus. And I cannot fault her for doing the job of making breaking the law harder to do. YMMV.

OTOH the fighting against SRS for prisoners who need it seems like a bigger hit on her.

This sort of discussion about issues is not suspicious for being Kremlin sowed and is in my mind reasonable to air out.

How do other candidates stack up on making it easier for sex workers to do business by internet sites? On the issue of SRS for prisoners and other items regarding trans-discrimination?
  #276  
Old 02-25-2019, 09:49 AM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
OTOH the fighting against SRS for prisoners who need it seems like a bigger hit on her.
It does.

However, in the intervening years, she may have come around and become more enlightened on the issue. Like Obama eventually did on marriage equality. Let's push her to make a policy position of it now, then we'll re-evaluate.

Here in Great Debates just about 10 years ago, Doper sentiment was heavily against SRS for trans prisoners. I had to argue against otherwise liberal Dopers saying, and I quote, "Not just no, but Oh Hell No." Against Dopers citing a badly flawed and outdated, misleading survey claiming that SRS didn't help gender dysphoria. If Dopers have so come around in the meantime to consider this opposition a "hit" against a Democratic candidate, then Harris can too. There's been great and fairly rapid progress in just the last few years. Ten years ago, there were no healthcare insurance plans that covered SRS. Now they're commonplace! Harris has to be aware of this and take it into consideration when she thinks it over now.
  #277  
Old 02-25-2019, 09:59 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,807
I hope I was not one of those "Not just no, but Oh Hell No." Dopers, but I will say that I learned a bunch from Una's threads and cites in particular and that my ignorance has been vastly reduced regarding these issues even over the past five years, let alone ten. Yes, growth should be allowed. Still it is sometimes hard to assess what is growth and what is disingenuous self-serving political positioning in an election season.
  #278  
Old 02-25-2019, 10:12 AM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
As to the Kremlin smears, they're all revved up already:
A foreign disinformation campaign is targeting Democrats ahead of 2020, report says
Quote:
The four targets are Sens. Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren, all of whom are running for president, and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas, who's expected to run, the report said. The coordinated social-media attacks seem to exist to sow discord between Democrats by circulating fake images, with one example showing a blackface doll in Elizabeth Warren’s kitchen. Politico also reported that a tweet employed 'racist and sexist stereotypes' to humiliate Harris, the most targeted of the four.
  #279  
Old 02-25-2019, 12:35 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
How do other candidates stack up on making it easier for sex workers to do business by internet sites?
The FOSTA-SESTA bill passed the House and Senate by overwhelming margins. Exactly 2 Senators voted against it. (And one of them was Rand Paul, of course.) Chances of finding any serious candidate for the presidency who wants to be known as the pro-sex worker candidate are probably not very good.
  #280  
Old 02-25-2019, 01:44 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
The FOSTA-SESTA bill passed the House and Senate by overwhelming margins. Exactly 2 Senators voted against it. (And one of them was Rand Paul, of course.) Chances of finding any serious candidate for the presidency who wants to be known as the pro-sex worker candidate are probably not very good.

Harris made it a crusade in CA, however. But simply voting for it should not be a hindrance.
  #281  
Old 02-25-2019, 01:51 PM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jragon View Post
our shit electoral system ensures third parties don't work mathematically
Hey, just wanted to share this bit I only learned about myself literally yesterday:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

It's the "First Past the Post Voting Problem" that explains why a two-party system is actually a mathematical* inevitability.

Just as a FYI, if you like nerd porn. ;-)


* In the sense of Game Theory.
  #282  
Old 02-25-2019, 01:57 PM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jragon View Post
I'm confused about why anybody is pushing her so far, she seems like the candidate that appeals to the most narrow possible band of slightly-but-not-too-left Democrats who are vaguely sympathetic to social democracy.
Yeah...so you don't know??

I've been spelunking through this whole thread to get a sense* of why I see her in the papers all the time...I mean besides Smollet -- she was in the papers all the time before that, too....

I'm thinking she's just the safe corporate candidate "the powers that be" believe will stick. I hate to sound so conspiratorial but I can't get any other sense of what the big deal is.

Anyone know, thanks!


* Of course, it could be argued that anyone interested in such a thread would already be a supporter and thus wouldn't be discussing why they support her in the first place, understanding one another already.
  #283  
Old 02-25-2019, 04:17 PM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
No, Dr. Seid, you didn't post in that thread.
This one: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=426629

Twelve years ago, we were still struggling to communicate to the public that we deserved any human rights at all. I'm very thankful for all the progress since then. I think it's reasonable to expect that a smart cookie like Kamala Harris is able to change with the times without presuming bad faith on her part.
  #284  
Old 02-25-2019, 05:10 PM
Jragon's Avatar
Jragon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 10,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
To quote from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey Executive Summary - It is in my mind a stretch to call someone who "ever" exchanged sex for income a "sex worker", a further stretch to call even those "ever" or "in last year" 12 or 9% "often", and even more of a stretch to imply that such means the converse, that a high fraction of all sex workers are trans.

From what I understand the explanation for the numbers of transpeople who have ever exchanged sex for money is desperation for money due to severe discrimination. As sex workers they are often subject to abuse and victimization.

Seems to me order of business is to fight against that discrimination, not to facilitate sex work as a viable option.
Well, ignoring anyone who makes a career out of sex work, the fact of the matter is that the discrimination and circumstances that force this aren't going away any time soon, even if you try your hardest. Sure, I'd love to get rid of the circumstances that force anyone into sex work (an legalize it regardless), but until then we need to have channels available so the people who are forced into it for whatever reason can do it as safely as possible.

Yes, the whole Backpage situation was a mess, and the child trafficking is a huge blow against it. I can honestly see shutting it down, but the legislation in question also prevented any similar site from opening, even a hypothetical one that didn't participate in child trafficking. Yes, yes, sex work is illegal, but again, it being illegal is incredibly unsafe, and even if you maintain it should be illegal, that's no reason to put the people who are forced into it (via financial reasons as opposed to trafficking) in even more danger.

As for the trans prisoners and SRS thing, the brief she filed was in 2015. Which isn't that long ago, granted significant motion can happen in 4 years.

Last edited by Jragon; 02-25-2019 at 05:11 PM.
  #285  
Old 02-25-2019, 05:31 PM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidChou View Post
I'm thinking she's just the safe corporate candidate "the powers that be" believe will stick. I hate to sound so conspiratorial but I can't get any other sense of what the big deal is.
What makes Harris a “corporate” candidate?
  #286  
Old 02-25-2019, 07:48 PM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleonast View Post
What makes Harris a “corporate” candidate?
The Kremlin, of course.
  #287  
Old 02-25-2019, 08:40 PM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleonast View Post
What makes Harris a “corporate” candidate?
She's all over the media, even before the Smollet hoax unraveled, and when I go looking for stuff on why she's so popular, I see it's because she's a black woman who can argue tough-on-crime to placate whites.

Sounds like the color-by-the-numbers Demoratic Leadership Council playbook.

Then I just found out today that she's still hasn't even a policies page up yet!
  #288  
Old 02-25-2019, 08:46 PM
DavidChou is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna View Post
The Kremlin, of course.
I'm not sure how the Democrat hysteria over unregistered Russian influence peddling via social media dismisses my remark, but if you're for her I am curious why you are if she doesn't even have a policies page up yet despite all the media attention.
  #289  
Old 02-26-2019, 04:07 AM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
It puzzled me too, which is why I immediately went to her campaign page on FB and sent them a message about it.
  #290  
Old 02-26-2019, 04:10 AM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
Calling her "corporate" is just another retread of old attacks on Hillary Clinton. The trolls can't even think up any new smears that even apply to the woman!
  #291  
Old 02-26-2019, 05:15 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,825
Corporate donations were pouring in for Clinton. It wasn’t a smear.

It remains to be seen whether Mass Incarceration Harris can capture that Suprepredator Clinton money-making magic.

Last edited by WillFarnaby; 02-26-2019 at 05:16 AM.
  #292  
Old 02-26-2019, 06:37 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,807
Aint he cute?
  #293  
Old 02-26-2019, 08:08 AM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,278
People genuinely like her. She excites them. You can think of no explanation for her popularity other than a conspiracy by corporations? If someone is popular, it must be a conspiracy? She refuses to accept donations from corporate PACs. 2016 called; it wants its conspiracy theories back. It's pathetic how lazy the haters have gotten. At least come up with something that isn't so laughably outdated. The only Democratic "hysteria" going on here is hysterical laughter at how dumb these attacks are.
  #294  
Old 02-26-2019, 08:37 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,825
It was a conspiracy theory to point out Clinton received huge amounts of corporate money?
  #295  
Old 02-26-2019, 08:45 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,749
What are you responding to, WillFarnaby? We're talking about Kamala Harris, here.
  #296  
Old 02-26-2019, 08:54 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidChou View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleonast View Post
What makes Harris a “corporate” candidate?
She's all over the media, even before the Smollet hoax unraveled, and when I go looking for stuff on why she's so popular, I see it's because she's a black woman who can argue tough-on-crime to placate whites.

Sounds like the color-by-the-numbers Demoratic Leadership Council playbook.

Then I just found out today that she's still hasn't even a policies page up yet!
How would any of that make Harris a “corporate” candidate?
  #297  
Old 02-26-2019, 09:38 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
What are you responding to, WillFarnaby? We're talking about Kamala Harris, here.
Post 293

An attempt by the poster to undermine criticism of corporate-financed candidates like Harris by associating concerns with conspiracy theories.
  #298  
Old 02-26-2019, 11:54 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,749
But you weren't talking about Harris; you were talking about Clinton. Maybe it's true that Clinton was a corporate candidate, but that doesn't mean that it makes sense to re-use the label for Harris.
  #299  
Old 02-26-2019, 12:25 PM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
But you weren't talking about Harris; you were talking about Clinton. Maybe it's true that Clinton was a corporate candidate, but that doesn't mean that it makes sense to re-use the label for Harris.
The poster tried to delegitimize criticism of Harris by associating the criticism with “conspiracy theories” about Clinton. If you have a problem with the introduction of Clinton to the discussion you have the ability to correct yourself and leave me be.
  #300  
Old 02-26-2019, 01:25 PM
Superdude is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Fortress of Solidude
Posts: 10,378
In the interest of full disclosure, WillFarnaby, I reported that post. It (my reason for reporting it) had nothing to do with the corporate aspect. It was about the term "SuperPredator," which, in my opinion, was an unnecessary dig in a thread where everyone was being civil to each other.

Of course, I'm not a moderator, so that's just one person's opinion.
__________________
I can't help being a gorgeous fiend. It's just the card I drew.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017