[HN Gopher] Truck driver leads NJ Senate president after spendin...
___________________________________________________________________
Truck driver leads NJ Senate president after spending $153 on
campaign
Author : busymom0
Score : 175 points
Date : 2021-11-03 20:02 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nbcphiladelphia.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nbcphiladelphia.com)
| LiquidSky wrote:
| Something's weird here:
|
| "State campaign finance records show a slate of candidates
| including Durr raised more than $10,000 during their campaign but
| spent only $153: $66.64 at Dunkin to buy food and drinks for
| staff and $86.67 for paper flyers and business cards."
|
| So he raised more than $10,000, but reports only spending $153.
| Then how much did he raise? Where did the remaining money go? And
| how did he pay for things like the video ads linked below or
| other outreach efforts if he only reported spending $153 on
| donuts and paper?
|
| Is this a situation where outside donors/PACs financed everything
| so on paper he himself spent nothing?
| [deleted]
| vmception wrote:
| What's weird about that. The campaign collected that much and
| didn't spend it.
|
| The PACs financing everything wouldn't be reported as the
| $10,000 raised so you are conflating issues there.
|
| It doesn't cost anything to put a video on the internet. He
| only needed to reach more than 30,000 people in his 1 district.
| If you look closely at more expensive campaigns, you'll see a
| lot of wasted money.
| busymom0 wrote:
| > how did he pay for things like the video ads linked below
|
| Watch his ad:
|
| https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1455899165230354448?s=20
|
| The "ad" looks like it could have been easily created on an old
| phone. It's a very basic ad, nothing special. Look at his
| twitter feed. The campaign material all looks very basic like
| it was created by his kids or someone. (Not saying that's a bad
| thing - I kinda like it as it looks more grassroots).
|
| https://twitter.com/edwarddurr1/status/1418710865625354240
|
| And based on archive, the day before election, his twitter only
| had 1556 followers meaning he didn't do any "online" reach out.
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20211101185415/https://twitter.c...
|
| Also notice the top header photo on his archive twitter. It's
| just a stock photo with watermark still on the pic. Looks like
| an extremely lean campaign.
|
| In a past interview from August, he stated:
|
| > "Well, I'm a numbers guy and I've looked at the numbers over
| the years," Durr said in an August interview conservative
| commentator Elizabeth Nader. "We have a district that is 150,00
| voters. Senator Sweeney has never broken 32,000 votes .... and
| so I felt if he can't even get half the district, that means
| there's numbers out there to be taken, and you just have to get
| people to come out and vote. I believe if they come out and
| vote, we could win," Sweeney said.
|
| Reaching out and getting 20% to vote isn't that hard in a 150k
| size. So this looks like simply approaching maybe a few
| thousand families and houses and asking them to vote for him.
| vxNsr wrote:
| I mean the transition from talking about his kids to a shot
| of gravestones is... jarring, it's def a home made video and
| that's what makes it work.
| vmception wrote:
| This is impressive, but what is more impressive to me, and this
| is a non-partisan statement, is how people are not afraid of
| being blocked and ostracized by their partisan friends and just
| pick the opposition party to run for anyway.
| busymom0 wrote:
| In our current climate, being blocked and ostracized has lost
| all meaning. Look at the Lt. Governor race in Virginia last
| night. Black woman, ex-marine, homeless shelter operator ran as
| GOP and won. Twitter mob and media blames it on "racism" as
| usual.
|
| > "When you overuse an accusation and everyone can see it's
| just a cynical and self-serving weapon of character
| assassination rather than an actual conviction, you trivialize
| it and drain it of its potency for when it's merited, so that
| nobody cares any longer when it's hurled." - Glenn Greenwald
| vmception wrote:
| Its nice to see it play out. It wasn't clear what the outcome
| of this idea would be, in LA and NYC (parts of the country I
| frequent) it is very common to see people with very prideful
| exclusionary rhetoric in favor of left goals. In person, on
| twitter, directly on their profile on dating apps, at comedy
| clubs vilifying moderates and independents in their routines.
|
| So it is interesting to these election results reported as a
| consequence from elected officials attempting to actually go
| further left.
|
| Regarding your observation about the Lt. Gov, it is nice to
| see more independent and random amalgamations of American
| ideals within black American candidates, as people have
| overly discounted the possibility of any minority objectively
| prioritizing a political goal above physical attributes they
| were born with, which is an extremely discriminatory
| assumption that people are still comfortable making.
| koolba wrote:
| There's a reason that ballots are supposed to be cast behind a
| curtain.
| detaro wrote:
| I know this is more charged in the US, but you can still _vote_
| for whoever you like and just not tell people you don 't want
| to tell about it.
| vmception wrote:
| I'm referring to the people running. This guy spent $150 on
| Dunkin donuts and put himself out there, home address and
| everything.
| tw04 wrote:
| He's got a "don't tread on me" flag flying in his front
| yard. I don't think any of his acquaintances were unsure of
| his political beliefs.
| nverno wrote:
| It's usually associated with libertarian nowadays, but
| he's running republican? I like the "Don't tread on me"
| flag as it signifies personal liberty and strength of the
| individual, but I'm not partisan by any measure.
| post_break wrote:
| I find this part hilarious "Durr said he entered the race after
| being denied a concealed carry permit despite having a clean
| record."
|
| So the state with one of the most strict gun laws burns someone,
| and now he's probably going to win. I wonder if he's going to
| start turning screws to get their permit issue laws changed. Did
| you know in NJ you can not posses hollow point bullets? You can
| go to jail. 18 months in prison. You need to be extremely careful
| when driving through that state so you don't forget if you have
| some in the car.
| beervirus wrote:
| New Jersey has some of the absolute worst gun laws in the
| country.
| busymom0 wrote:
| New Jersey is an example of the 30 day delay and often those
| 30 days turn into 7-8 months. I know several people there who
| went through this last year when the riots were happening and
| they wanted to purchase a firearm for the first time only to
| realize how strict the laws were. Ironic enough, they had
| themselves voted in these laws which were now causing them
| the problems. This changed the minds of at least 10 friends
| of mine on gun control.
|
| Tim Pool, popular YouTuber went from anti-2A to SUPER-PRO 2A
| last year and he's from New Jersey and went through this
| process. Here's forums of people complaining about this. You
| can find several similar examples:
|
| https://www.njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/97756-pis.
| ..
|
| https://bearingarms.com/staff-ba/2021/03/26/new-jersey-
| gun-p...
| akomtu wrote:
| Most of the time the voters are given no choice or a couple
| bad choices. For example, I liked Bernie for his ambition
| to reform healthcare, but of course that was bundled with
| anti 2A rhetoric.
|
| It would be interesting if candidates had to declare their
| intents in a formal way, just like a phone app has to
| formally request access to mic and cam, and if they are
| elected, they'd have to stay within the bounds they'd
| requested. So a guy who wanted to reform healthcare
| wouldn't be able to change his mind later and start
| reforming education.
| lolbert wrote:
| Tim Pool is "best-friends-with-nazis" and a known liar, and
| not living in New Jersey (instead, in a remote compound in
| Maryland). There is no reason at all to believe he has a
| change in belief, much less any reason at all to mention
| him, especially using his 'experience' as a pro-gun
| argument.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Gun control is over in Virginia at least. The Lt. Governor's
| election campaign was her at a gun range. And Governor Youngkin
| is also pro-2A.
|
| When 25.8% of the shootings are coming from Chicago which has
| just 0.8% population, maybe it's time to focus on gangs instead
| of making life miserable for legal gun owners.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Democrats still control the senate in virginia so I'm not
| sure gun control is over.
|
| Biased because I live in Chicago, but it's legitimately
| impossible to stop gangs as long as it's possible to get a
| gun. As soon as someone is arrested there are 5 kids ready to
| take their place. The only solutions to gun violence here are
| end poverty or stop guns from out of state from entering the
| city.
| busymom0 wrote:
| > stop guns from out of state from entering the city
|
| Stop letting them use gun control to ignore the underlying
| issues in the community.
|
| ME: Chicago has strict gun control but high gun violence.
|
| Gun Control: They get guns from states with loose gun
| control.
|
| ME: But those states don't have the same gun violence
|
| Gun Control: Places in Chicago are poor & neglected so
| there's more violence.
|
| ME: BINGO, it's a socioeconomic issue not a gun issue!
|
| Last I checked on July 13, Chicago has 25.8% of shootings
| despite having 0.8% of the population.
|
| Mexico has extremely restrictive laws regarding gun
| possession. There is only one gun store in the entire
| country, and it takes months of paperwork to have a chance
| at purchasing one legally.
|
| Similar in India. Making guns illegal doesn't stop any of
| that. In India, underground criminals make the guns out of
| everyday stuff. And now a days, 3D printing had made this
| process even easier.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| > Stop letting them use gun control to ignore the
| underlying issues in the community.
|
| I'm glad we agree that poverty is the root cause of gun
| violence, but realizing that does nothing to stop gun
| violence. Poverty isn't something that can be solved with
| the snap of a finger, although I certainly think we are
| on the right track. What do you think we should do to
| stop gun violence in the mean time? Nothing is a valid
| answer, but I don't think it's acceptable to a majority
| of people in this country.
| [deleted]
| subsubzero wrote:
| You take guns away and they use knives and cleavers. Look
| to London for what would happen with guns being banned. The
| solution is to not ban an object but provide opportunities
| for people. Jobs, education, paths that pave roads to a
| career. Nothing drives more people to crime than feeling
| like they are in a hopeless situation.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| Are you seriously suggesting we compare the deaths (you
| can include injuries if you like) from guns in the US
| with those caused by knives in the UK? Do you understand
| how this comparison is going to come out?
| busymom0 wrote:
| > knives and cleavers
|
| or vans here in Canada.
|
| According to the FBI homicide stats for US, 297 people
| were murdered by a rifle in 2018 in the US.
|
| 1,515 on the other hand murdered with knives, 443 from
| blunt hammers, 672 with hands, feet:
|
| https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-
| the-u.s.-...
|
| EDIT: I specifically stated "rifle" not all guns. Because
| saying we need to take away all guns is pie in the sky
| thinking. Dems run on "taking away AR-15" but the stats
| show that isn't going to achieve anything.
|
| In 2008, there were 800k-3 million defensive uses of
| guns.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29101364
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| The bit you missed out from that link was:
| Total firearms: 10,265
| sharkmerry wrote:
| >> According to the FBI homicide stats for US, 297 people
| were murdered by a rifle in 2018 in the US.
|
| Holy misleading data excerpts batman...
|
| there were 10k homicides by gun, but you choose 1 type of
| gun and not the most common.
|
| 2014 - 2018 knives 1545 -> 1515 Blunt objects 431->443
| Hands, feet 668->672 Guns 7803->10265
| busymom0 wrote:
| I stated "rifle" not all guns. Because saying we need to
| take away all guns is pie in the sky thinking. Dems run
| on "taking away AR-15" but the stats show that isn't
| going to achieve anything.
|
| In 2008, there were 800k-3 million defensive uses of
| guns.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29101364
| colinmhayes wrote:
| 2/3 of murders were with guns. Would people still kill
| each if they didn't have guns? obviously. Would they do
| it less? Hard to say since research into gun violence is
| banned by the government.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| > Hard to say since research into gun violence is banned
| by the government.
|
| It's not banned. The government isn't going to fund it,
| but you've jumped the shark if you think that means it is
| banned.
|
| And part of the reason it's not being funded is that this
| is political in nature. How do you look at the hundreds
| of thousands of assaults that were thwarted with guns
| used in self-defense? Guns are primarily used for self-
| defense. How do you measure the lives saved? And when an
| attacker is shot and killed, is that a life saved or a
| life lost? This is a political debate not a scientific
| debate. Once you accept that the rapist shot to death and
| the person who commits suicide as being the same as some
| random person shot to death, then you've already
| politicized the work.
|
| It's also far outside the purview of the CDC, which is
| what this "banned" canard is about - the left wanted the
| CDC to treat "gun violence" as a thing -- like "fist
| violence" -- or "knife violence" -- why do they always
| want to classify disagreement as a "disease"? Everything
| is a "safety" or "health" issue with them, amenable to
| handing our public policies over to some bureaucrat.
| Fortunately there was sufficient pushback to block
| funding of that. That is what your outrage is about.
|
| But don't worry, there is a push to classify racism as a
| disease and have the CDC lab coats study it, so you will
| get some politicized "public health" research to tide you
| over.
|
| In the meantime, you are welcome to donate to one of the
| many think-tanks that do these studies on guns, violence,
| and criminality - of all political persuasions. There are
| lots of studies even without bringing the public health
| bureaucracies into the mix.
| busymom0 wrote:
| > Hard to say since research into gun violence is banned
| by the government.
|
| That's plain false.
|
| The reason they stopped studying because it didn't fit
| the narrative.
|
| In 2008, there were 800k-3 million defensive uses of
| guns:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29101364
| colinmhayes wrote:
| > Nothing drives more people to crime than feeling like
| they are in a hopeless situation.
|
| Couldn't agree more, which is why eliminating poverty was
| the first solution I said. We're doing that.
| Unfortunately it takes decades to work because of the
| shit family dynamics that exist. Should we just let gun
| violence run rampant until then?
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| When 15% of world gun deaths are coming from the USA which
| has just 4.25% of the world population, perhaps it's time to
| focus on national level issues instead of using excuses.
| busymom0 wrote:
| > gun deaths
|
| That's a meaningless stat. The point of my Chicago stat is
| that vast majority of the shootings are coming from gang
| members. A gang member shooting another gang member isn't a
| relevant stat. And shootings in self defence is one of the
| purposes of owning a gun (though not what the 2A is only
| for).
|
| That's like saying my daughter would be safer to live in my
| home country India where she may not get shot but she may
| get raped late at night. Or like saying Afghanistan is
| safer somehow?
|
| Estimated 800,000 to 2.45 million defensive uses of
| firearms per year in 1993 national survey.
|
| https://www.cga.ct.gov/PS94/rpt/olr/htm/94-R-0798.htm
|
| Another 2008 study by National Academy of Sciences showed
| 500,000 to more than 3 million "Defensive Use of Guns".
| Simply having the gun on your or brandishing it prevented
| crimes from happening. This was in 2008. That numbers is
| even higher now.
|
| Source:
|
| https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/3
|
| Page 15 of the study talks about the defensive use part.
| You can download the PDF by using the "guest" option and
| entering any random email (doesn't have to be real).
| Another related source:
|
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulhsieh/2018/04/30/that-
| time-...
|
| > "Almost all national survey estimates indicate that
| defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as
| offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses
| ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the
| context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms
| in 2008."
|
| > "In 1996, 1997, and 1998, the Centers for Disease Control
| and Prevention (CDC) conducted large-scale surveys asking
| about defensive gun use (DGU) in four to six states.
| Analysis of the raw data allows the estimation of the
| prevalence of DGU for those areas. Estimates based on CDC's
| surveys confirm estimates for the same sets of states based
| on data from the 1993 National Self-Defense Survey (Kleck
| and Gertz 1995). Extrapolated to the U.S. as a whole CDC's
| survey data imply that defensive uses of guns by crime
| victims are far more common than offensive uses by
| criminals. CDC has never reported these results."
|
| > "One CDC official in the 1990s openly told the Washington
| Post that his goal was to create a public perception of gun
| ownership as something "dirty, deadly -- and banned." Given
| that history, I can't dismiss Kleck's critique."
|
| How do you propose these people -
| wives/daughters/elderly/handicapped/living close to
| cartels/over 800K-3 million defensive uses should defend
| themselves?
| yeuxardents wrote:
| Thats not exactly correct. You can own hollow points in NJ, but
| you may only transport them from place of purchase to your
| home, or from your home directly to the range where you intend
| to shoot them, or from range back to home.
|
| It is most certainly illegal to use hollow points in any
| instance in a case of self defense, even if the self defense is
| warranted.
| post_break wrote:
| If that's the case, it's still completely dumb. If you shoot
| someone in self defense with ball ammo it's definitely going
| to over penetrate and keep going possibly hitting anyone or
| anything behind the threat.
|
| And what happens if you are driving from the range and
| experience a flat tire, have to use the restroom, an
| emergency where you need to go somewhere else. Bad laws.
| busymom0 wrote:
| > It is most certainly illegal to use hollow points in any
| instance in a case of self defense, even if the self defense
| is warranted.
|
| That makes no sense and if that's the case, it's definitely
| unconstitutional.
| xanaxagoras wrote:
| Also, who shoots hollow points at the range? They're super
| expensive.
| to11mtm wrote:
| Random guess; Carve-out intended for off duty LEOs?
| mikestew wrote:
| _It is most certainly illegal to use hollow points in any
| instance in a case of self defense_
|
| What the hell else am I supposed to do with hollow points but
| shoot someone? Target practice? That's a waste of good ammo
| and money. I lean left enough to feel that our gun laws are
| _way_ too lax, but this particular law as described is just
| pointless posturing. It reminds me of "cop killer bullets".
| Umm, you mean rifle rounds, that can penetrate an armored
| vest? No, you mean a Teflon coating?[0] Well, turns out...
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teflon-coated_bullet
| tootie wrote:
| It's so bonkers. America has the most unfettered gun ownership
| laws in the developed world by a mile and somehow it's still a
| political wedge that can outweigh healthcare, fair taxation,
| education.
| post_break wrote:
| Show me someone who is for healthcare, unions, college, but
| also doesn't want to take a black marker to the second
| amendment, I'll wait. Until the left stops going after guns,
| single issue voters will keep voting the way they do.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| Show me someone who opposes single-payer healthcare,
| unions, affordable college costs but also believes that the
| second amendment did not and does not constitute an
| unfettered right to do more or less anything with guns.
| I'll wait. Until the right stops viewing the 2nd amendment
| as the benchmark issue, progressives will continue to see
| their position on it as just another part of their uniform
| opposition to a more modern society.
| Intermernet wrote:
| Have you ever considered why there is a strong correlation
| between beliefs in healthcare, unions and college and a
| belief in gun control laws?
| busymom0 wrote:
| New Jersey (along with NY, CA) has the most unconstitutional
| gun control laws in America.
|
| If I have a daughter who's returning home late at night from
| University, I would want her to be armed for her own
| protection. Things like "taxation" are not the most important
| thing to her.
| willvarfar wrote:
| It would be better to live in the kind of country where
| girls can walk home at night safely without guns?
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Yup, now OP just has the choice to make...completely
| rewrite American society, or go down to the gun store and
| buy a gun.
| busymom0 wrote:
| I am originally from India.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| When my daughter(s) returned home late at night (or perhaps
| better described as early in the morning) in Berlin, they
| didn't need guns, and the taxes helped pay for a
| transportation system that meant they didn't need to drive
| either.
| [deleted]
| AlbertCory wrote:
| "turning screws"??? He's (presumably) going to be a legislator.
| One of many. He's not an executive, let alone a dictator.
| schoolornot wrote:
| New York and specifically, New York City has the same issue.
| Year long application approvals with concealed carry permits
| granted at the discretion of the NYPD. There were supreme court
| arguments about this very issue today.
| neves wrote:
| Does USA has laws about candidates publishing their spending?
|
| It looks like USA does not has laws to force candidates about his
| political party. I couldn't identify it from the candidate
| propaganda.
| LatteLazy wrote:
| The truck driver is running as a Republican. That's a political
| part in the US (elsewhere it just means someone opposed to
| monarchy).
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| America runs on Dunkin'
| cdot2 wrote:
| According to this website he won but according to ballotopedia he
| lost?
| detaro wrote:
| link? I can't find any results on that level on ballotopedia
| yet?
| busymom0 wrote:
| If you can sign up to DecisionDesk, you can see it:
|
| https://results.decisiondeskhq.com/nov-2-2021-elections
| gowld wrote:
| No.
|
| https://ballotpedia.org/New_Jersey_State_Senate_elections,_2...
| s5300 wrote:
| Hmm.
|
| Can't quite put my finger on it, but this type of thing rings a
| bell.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Looking at decision desk, he's leading with 96% in:
|
| New Jersey State Senate 3
|
| CANDIDATE | VOTES | PERCENT
|
| Edward Durr GOP | 32,682 | 51.85%
|
| Steve Sweeney DEM (Incumbent) | 30,352 | 48.15%
|
| 63,034 votes. Estimated 96% in. DDHQ, Updated 2021-11-03,
| 5:00:25 PM
|
| https://results.decisiondeskhq.com/nov-2-2021-elections
| Someone1234 wrote:
| According to this[0] New Jersey State Senate District 3 has
| an _eligible_ population of around 176,344 (74.9% of total)
| in 2010. So roughly a 35.7% turnout (with a lot of
| assumptions and bad data).
|
| I wish turnout was higher just so candidates were more
| representative no matter who ultimately won. But
| realistically when a single person represents over 150K
| citizens, it is hard to call it very representative
| regardless.
|
| [0]
| https://ballotpedia.org/New_Jersey_State_Senate_District_3
| busymom0 wrote:
| > eligible population of around 176,344
|
| That's misleading. It's the 158,476 registered voters that
| matter. Also has a very large unaffiliated voter base of
| 57,808 (36.5%).
|
| > The district had 158,476 registered voters as of July 1,
| 2021, of whom 57,808 (36.5%) were registered as
| unaffiliated, 57,660 (36.4%) were registered as Democrats,
| 40,620 (25.6%) were registered as Republicans, and 2,388
| (1.5%) were registered to other parties.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey%27s_3rd_legislativ
| e...
| tannhauser23 wrote:
| A newspaper had incorrectly called the race for the incumbent
| earlier yesterday. Ballotpedia possibly reflected that info.
| barney54 wrote:
| Here's his campaign ad.
| https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1455899165230354448?s=20
|
| South Jersey obviously isn't very happy with New Jersey's
| leadership.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Love it how basic and down to earth his ad is.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| sort of like how GW Bush was the one you'd rather have a beer
| with (than Al Gore)?
|
| When will Americans realize that being "the sort of down to
| earth person you'd rather have a beer with" is not a
| qualification for political office?
| wyager wrote:
| This truck driver has a bit more credibility when signaling
| "down to earth" than GWB.
|
| People like down to earth politicians because it's less
| likely they're aspirational psychopaths who will sell out
| their selectorate.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| > This truck driver has a bit more credibility when
| signaling "down to earth" than GWB.
|
| GWB won a national election for the presidency against a
| man a least twice as smart as he was. I'd say GWB had
| immense credibility at signalling his "I'm the guy you'd
| want to have a beer with" credentials.
|
| > It's less likely they're aspirational psychopaths
|
| Why is it less likely? "Down to earth" is just as likely
| to be an affectation as anything else.
|
| People like "down to earth" because * it
| gives the impression that the candidate is not that much
| smarter than the voter, and American voters hate people
| who seem to be smarter than they are. * it
| gives the impression that the candidate is "just like"
| the voter, even though this is incredibly unlikely to be
| true. American voters love the idea of leaders who are
| "just like us".
| busymom0 wrote:
| Career politicians like Bush vs Gore comparison to a
| truck driver isn't fair.
|
| The "down to earth" doesn't just mean how someone talks.
| A career truck driver isn't highly likely to get into
| politics to seek power and money unlike career
| politicians.
| [deleted]
| Loughla wrote:
| I mean, it's just the old argument of does the power
| corrupt or do the corrupt seek out power.
|
| I believe it's the power itself. I do not believe
| politicians go into politics exclusively for what they
| can gain. I believe many, if not most, really believe
| their ideas are best and can help people. . . the graft
| and corruption just sort of comes in later when they
| realize all that is possible.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Career politicians definitely stay in to seek power and
| money. But a life time truck driver isn't likely going
| for that I think.
| Loughla wrote:
| Why?
|
| Don't truck drivers want money and influence as well, or
| are they somehow inherently different for reasons that I
| do not currently understand?
| BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
| I know a lot of nurses and caregivers eventually suffer
| from compassion fatigue and burnout. Might it also be the
| case that politicians develop a similar disconnect the
| longer they are in office?
| renton_wal wrote:
| Spoken like a true technocrat
| xboxnolifes wrote:
| When the non-down-to-earth types act in office in such a
| way to win their vote.
| tootie wrote:
| That's not the outcome I'd actually want. I want voters
| to be rational. Not candidates who are better at appeals
| to emotion.
| CWuestefeld wrote:
| grandparent didn't say anything about appeals to emotion.
| The meaning could just as easily be "down to earth gives
| me just the facts without a lot of spin" - ie, the
| opposite of what you're thinking.
| CWuestefeld wrote:
| I assume that "rather have a beer with" is a proxy for "has
| similar values to me" and "seems honest". Those seem
| reasonable qualifications for at least some offices.
|
| What would you place higher, for which offices?
| Fezzik wrote:
| I think most people, even here on HN where folk are
| relatively educated, are woefully unawares as to what
| goes in to governing (diplomacy, financial literacy on a
| massive scale, legislating, and so forth). Sam Harris
| summarized the problem well 13 years ago in general
| terms: "Ask yourself: how has "elitism" become a bad word
| in American politics? There is simply no other walk of
| life in which extraordinary talent and rigorous training
| are denigrated. We want elite pilots to fly our planes,
| elite troops to undertake our most critical missions,
| elite athletes to represent us in competition and elite
| scientists to devote the most productive years of their
| lives to curing our diseases. And yet, when it comes time
| to vest people with even greater responsibilities, we
| consider it a virtue to shun any and all standards of
| excellence. When it comes to choosing the people whose
| thoughts and actions will decide the fates of millions,
| then we suddenly want someone just like us, someone fit
| to have a beer with, someone down-to-earth--in fact,
| almost anyone, provided that he or she doesn't seem too
| intelligent or well educated."
|
| https://www.newsweek.com/sam-harris-sarah-palin-and-
| elitism-...
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| I'd rank higher than beer-ability: *
| ability to hold, and describe, contradictory ideas
| * ability to convey complex policies in a way that
| doesn't bore people * ability to pick the right
| people to work with, and specifically the avoidance of a
| "yes-men" bubble * ability to listen to and have a
| reasonable understanding of scientific advice *
| previous independent out-of-country, out-of-language
| travel experience * display a clear understanding
| of the full scope of political ideology, and of why their
| positions are what they are * be awesome in the
| media of the day
| CWuestefeld wrote:
| Let me note that you didn't cite what office these
| qualifications hold for. I don't mean to single you out
| here: it seems that this is usually how it goes.
|
| But I'd like to suggest that there are very different
| qualifications for executives, legislators, and parts of
| the judicial system (when they are electable). Like,
| maybe a legislator needs to have that ability to work
| with science that you mention, in order to devise the
| best possible policies. But that seems much less
| important for an executive, who needs more of your anti-
| yes-man quality than does a legislator. And so forth.
| woah wrote:
| Sounds like this is your own beer-ability criterion,
| except you have a taste for more intellectual drinking
| buddies than most.
| BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
| Likability has always been a factor in democracies. It
| serves as a proxy for trust and a proxy for similarity.
|
| Both major political parties try to use the "down to
| earth/have a beer with" PR move. AOC was celebrated for
| being a bartender prior to being elected. She was quite
| literally someone who you could share a beer with.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| I've never encountered a bartender that would drink on
| the job, so I doubt you could have shared a beer with
| AOC, at least not while working.
| BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
| I thought I was being clever with that idiom but yeah
| it's not _quite_ accurate if the other person isn't also
| drinking. I guess I was trying to capture the idea of
| "having a beer in the company of".
| busymom0 wrote:
| > have a beer with
|
| A truck driver being down to earth is very different from
| career politicians like Bush.
| UnpossibleJim wrote:
| I don't think Tipper Gore's crusade against profanity in
| music helped push "Democratic Ideals" that AL Gore was
| saying he exemplified, either.
| FredPret wrote:
| Being on the same wavelength as the people is a critical
| quality in a leader. Otherwise you end up with arrogant
| technocrats
| onemoresoop wrote:
| Sure, but how about a clueless puppet you can have a
| drink with in the office?
| op00to wrote:
| You got that from a campaign ad? Wow, you're easily swayed.
| mbostleman wrote:
| Not speaking for them, but the ad doesn't say anything about
| the happiness of South Jersey constituents. So I wouldn't
| expect they got it from ad. I think the article a more likely
| source.
| nostromo wrote:
| A Republican just won an election in Seattle City Government for
| the first time in three decades. This election has seen some big
| shifts in the electorate, even in some deeply-Democratic areas.
|
| https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/republica...
| celtain wrote:
| To be clear though, that was a somewhat unusual race, e.g. the
| incumbent progressive Democrat probably would have won if he
| hadn't been knocked out in the primary.
|
| The ex-Democrat, Obama/Clinton/Biden-voting Republican who won
| benefited greatly from the fact that her opponent had some
| pretty radical views, too radical even for Seattle.
| spoonjim wrote:
| The primary system is so corrosive. If American
| constitutional government is to survive the primary system
| needs to end. You need to be rich or a wingnut to win a
| primary.
| jdavis703 wrote:
| Biden is not particularly rich. Yet he ran against two
| billionaires and defeated them. Nor is he far left. Bernie
| Sanders, Elizbeth Warren and Mike Gravel were all
| substantially more left leaning.
| vkou wrote:
| Seattle city primaries look nothing like federal
| congressional/presidential primaries.
|
| They are best described as two-round run-off elections,
| which, while not perfect, are generally preferable to
| first-past-the-post.
| vkou wrote:
| Seattle has always been a socially liberal, bend-over-
| backwards for business town. It's how it can legalize
| marijuana and magic mushrooms, while having 11,000 people
| living in tents and homeless shelters.
|
| Unsurprisingly, since nobody likes seeing tents in city
| parks, and by the I-5 on-ramps, the city voted for a slate of
| politicians that will... Maintain the status quo. There's no
| plan for getting ~5,500 people housed.
|
| Four years from now, we'll be exactly where we are today.
| voz_ wrote:
| I don't want status quo, but I also don't want them housed.
| I want the ones that steal, rape, squat in parks, do drugs,
| sell drugs, defecate in public, and litter to all be thrown
| in jail.
| SirSourdough wrote:
| And I want people who lack compassion and consideration
| housed at the bottom of the ocean, but we can't all win.
| animal_spirits wrote:
| Compassion would mean to have love and hope for those who
| you disagree with, not the desire to throw them in the
| bottom of the ocean.
| nostromo wrote:
| Is this a paradox? Because it sounds like you may end up
| there yourself.
| SirSourdough wrote:
| Perhaps. But I'd rather be there for lacking compassion
| for the inconsiderate and intolerant than for punching
| down at the most vulnerable people in our society.
| Hopefully I'll at least end up in a different house than
| the commenter I initially replied to...
| BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
| "Compassion and empathy are the utmost of virtues. If you
| lack it, you deserve to be cast out from society. Because
| you lack the compassion I so freely give, you have
| forfeited the right to receive any from me." /s
| spoonjim wrote:
| Are you signing up to pay for that personally?
| Fauntleroy wrote:
| The thirst for punishment over improvement ultimately
| keeps the problem going. Any chance you'd prefer to break
| the cycle rather than continue it?
| advrs wrote:
| Are you suggesting that jail (aka expensive housing
| funded by the public) is the most effective solution to
| these crimes/behaviors? For example, do you think the
| population of people who defecate in public are going to
| be deterred due to the threat of imprisonment?
| argomo wrote:
| Is jail appropriate for litterers? Seems extreme, but I
| might be able to get behind it. Let's start with the
| folks who throw fast food wrappers out on the interstate
| though, not the homeless we wish to criminalize.
|
| Throwing them in jail seems like the worst of both
| worlds... it burns my tax dollars and does nothing to
| rehabilitate anyone.
| klyrs wrote:
| That's up to the police to decide. If they don't like a
| law, they don't enforce it.
| jackorange wrote:
| The police don't sentence people to jail.
| psadauskas wrote:
| You should watch last weekend's episode of Last Week
| Tonight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liptMbjF3EE
| voz_ wrote:
| No thank you. He is the tucker carlson of the left. I try
| to stay away from talking heads that remove all nuance
| from the debate.
| lalaithion wrote:
| So you want the government to house them at taxpayer
| cost!
| klyrs wrote:
| Three squares, a roof, _and_ jobs for all the police,
| judges, guards, and lawyers involved. Oh, and a criminal
| record to ensure that future employment will be even
| harder upon their eventual release. And another jail with
| at least 5,000 beds. Taxes gotta go somewhere, I guess...
| jterrys wrote:
| I'm not up to date on city politics, but I had a friend that
| used to live in Seattle for a while. She kind of hightailed
| it outta there once she found a remote job because of the
| homelessness/drug problem. Told me people protested the
| museum downtown for installing architecture that made setting
| up homeless tents hostile, and that the city's solution to
| the drug problem (induced by already decriminalizing hard
| drugs) is to decriminalize and make drugs more available.
| soperj wrote:
| You say that like the war on drugs is the solution? Do you
| think that any of these people don't use drugs because it's
| a crime? It's just making their life worse.
| iammisc wrote:
| > It's just making their life worse.
|
| That's quite literally the point. If you talk to any ex-
| addict, you'll notice they all say that they quit once
| something that made their life worse forced them to
| reconsider. At some point you hit rock bottom and then
| can get your life together.
| twofornone wrote:
| As I've gotten older I've realized that there's something
| to be said for the discouraging effect that laws have on
| certain behaviors. Yes, people are still going to do
| drugs if they're illegal; but some proportion of the
| population is less likely to take the risk. Is it enough
| to justify the drug war? Maybe not. But I don't think
| it's quite as cut an dry as "legalize all drugs to end
| drug abuse" or "ban all drugs to end drug use".
|
| Perhaps it was only an implementation problem, and the
| answer lies in saner but still restrictive drug laws.
| There's no excuse for example for the scheduling of
| marijuana and mushrooms which precludes research.
| ajmurmann wrote:
| I recently learned that drugs have become more dangerous
| and more damaging not due to customer demand, but because
| of the war on drugs. You need to transport a lot less
| fentanyl than cocaine for the same effect strength. Meth
| also had changed to work without ingredients we have
| banned. This has made meth much more damaging. I wonder
| what things would look like if we just took the Portugal
| route.
|
| https://www.econtalk.org/sam-quinones-on-meth-fentanyl-
| and-t...
| a9h74j wrote:
| Coincidently, I just listened to this. (Perhaps we saw
| the same recommendation on HN.) 100% recommend, and the
| whole podcast approach at econtalk.org is very
| interesting. Economics plus life-of-the-mind.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| https://transformdrugs.org/blog/drug-decriminalisation-
| in-po...
| bpodgursky wrote:
| Progressives lost a "safe" city council seat (and nearly
| another) and the mayor. It wasn't a normal election.
| vkou wrote:
| The mayor, Jenny Durkan was not progressive, either in
| platform, or in what she did (which was mostly sit around
| on the sidelines) over the past four years.
|
| So, not much changed with the mayor's office.
| changoplatanero wrote:
| because the other candidate was seen as an extreme left-winger
| nostromo wrote:
| That's been a selling point in Seattle for a long time.
|
| Apparently she was just a bridge too far with tweets like
| these:
|
| https://www.twitter.com/ntkallday/status/1287215672372625410
|
| https://www.twitter.com/ntkallday/status/1282015687603417089.
| ..
|
| Or deleted tweets like "I have not taken any of this anti
| bias training but i for sure hate this country"
|
| Keep in mind, 40% of votes went to this candidate.
|
| Her campaign manager's tweets were even worse, going so far
| as wishing death on (her words) "kkkops."
| busymom0 wrote:
| > YAY! Thank you to the heroes that set the Children's Jail
| on fire.
|
| > This is a nice start. Lookin good Kenosha. (entire car
| lots burnt to the ground)
|
| And she was running to be the Attorney?
| trts wrote:
| She got 41% of the vote
| https://projects.seattletimes.com/2021/election-
| results/#Key...
| voz_ wrote:
| The progressive take at the moment is that law and order
| is evil, better to have cities like SF where criminal
| thugs punch sweet old asian women in the street and rob
| them.
| qqqwerty wrote:
| And the right wing tried to stage a coup and thinks our
| elections are rigged. Crazies everywhere!
| [deleted]
| ruined wrote:
| my glass-almost-half-full take on this is that a significant
| chunk of the electorate was willing to vote for the candidate
| that literally supports burning down jails, which is
| astonishing no matter how you look at it
| Erik816 wrote:
| A "Republican" who has previous run as a Democrat and has voted
| for Democrats in all recent presidential elections. This says
| less about any shift in the electorate than it does about the
| extremism of the Seattle left.
| jimmygrapes wrote:
| You ever go running with an energetic medium-large dog?
| Sometimes they are just so excited they want to sprint away,
| much faster than you can possibly bring yourself to go. It's
| not that you wouldn't love to go that fast, you just can't,
| and you have to pull the younger, more dependent dog back to
| a tolerable pace for you. You're still running, just at a
| pace that doesn't cause injury. You're also making sure that
| the dog doesn't get off the leash and cause any harm or get
| unintentionally harmed.
| iammisc wrote:
| If seattle is anything like Portland, attaching the GOP to
| your name is toxic. So the idea that they elected him despite
| the (R) next to his name is something.
| bingohbangoh wrote:
| right, a shift in the electorate.
| nostromo wrote:
| I agree that Seattle is a little bonkers, but I disagree that
| this isn't a larger shift.
|
| NJ and Virginia governorships were both supposed to be easy
| wins for incumbent Democrats. So far, one has lost and one is
| too close to call.
| bingohbangoh wrote:
| For those unaware, Murphy (D, incumbent) was ~20% _up_ back
| in July.
|
| It's shocking its even close.
| Covzire wrote:
| The vaccine mandates being overt fascism was one reason, at the
| very least this gave Republicans a huge boost in turnout.
| advrs wrote:
| That word has completely lost all meaning and historical
| context at this point, hasn't it?
| TbobbyZ wrote:
| How about authoritarianism?
| newfonewhodis wrote:
| If anything, localities voting out incumbents is an
| example that the US is anything but totalitarian.
|
| I wish people would actually do some reading before
| spouting BS on anonymous online forums.
| [deleted]
| fdemoz wrote:
| It is absolutely insane how hard-left this forum has gotten
| just in the past 2 years.
|
| HN has _always_ leaned left because of the super majority of
| tech being concentrated in the SF Bay area which is one of
| the leftiest parts of the country.
|
| However, it is absolutely DISGUSTING the amount of people
| that are 100% in favor eternal mask mandates, lockdowns and
| forced vaccinations, a.k.a. VIOLENCE. All the people on this
| site advocating for that VIOLENCE should be ashamed of
| themselves.
| fdemoz wrote:
| Democrats were calling parents terrorists and sicking the FBI on
| them, all the while, allowing for those parents daughters to be
| literally RAPED by other kids in the school and not doing a
| fucking thing about it.
|
| Actions have consequences. I don't think democrats have any clue
| how decimated their party is going to be in a few years.
| baldeagle wrote:
| Meanwhile in Texas, each State Senate District has 940,178
| people. 70,000 people in a state senate district just seems more
| workable.
| inglor_cz wrote:
| With 29 million people, Texas has more inhabitants than the
| entire Australia, which is divided into several states.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| In theory it's possible for TX to split into 5 states.
|
| https://www.honestaustin.com/texapedia/texas-split-divide-
| in...
| SllX wrote:
| In theory, it's possible for Texas to split into any number
| of States. I wouldn't put money on it.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > In theory, it's possible for Texas to split into any
| number of States.
|
| Such a theory (this really refers to the Texas-specific 5
| state theory upthread; your "any number" theory, which
| presumably is the same theory that applies to any State,
| is valid, but not unilateral like the 5-state theory)
| exists, but it requires starting with a dubious
| interpretation of the act annexing Texas, and then flatly
| ignoring the act _admitting_ Texas.
| inglor_cz wrote:
| I was surprised to learn that independent Texas actually
| maintained a diplomatic mission in London. The building
| still exists.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Legation
| tootie wrote:
| The two US senators for South Dakota got fewer than 300,000
| votes each and both won by a mile. Curtis Sliwa got more votes
| than either of them while getting trounced in the NYC mayoral
| election.
| inthegreenwoods wrote:
| How much did the GOP spend?
| inthegreenwoods wrote:
| How much did the GOP spend and where did they get the money?
| droptablemain wrote:
| Maybe this will inspire more working-class people to run for
| political office.
| gumby wrote:
| This is the reason politicians get salaries.
| reaperducer wrote:
| The vast majority of elected offices in the United States are
| unpaid.
| voz_ wrote:
| I am not sure that is correct.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| I don't think you know what you're talking about, as
| evidenced by your failure to follow up with citations.
|
| In any case, the office he's running for IS paid. So what
| exactly is your point? That _other_ elected offices are
| unpaid? Who cares?
|
| One reason to pay them (not that it works very well) is to
| make them less susceptible to bribery. In some Third World
| countries, it's _expected_ that government officials will
| supplement their income with bribes.
| WillPostForFood wrote:
| Do you have a citation for that? Interesting if true,
| however 100% of State and Federal legislators are paid.
| psychlops wrote:
| Curious, I Googled a bit, but can't find a definitive
| source. It is true that most politicians are local. Here
| is an infographic that shows 96% are local:
|
| https://poliengine.com/blog/how-many-politicians-are-
| there-i...
| LurkersWillLurk wrote:
| I don't have a written source, but I think it's safe to
| say that the majority of elected offices in the United
| States are local/municipal, and many (most?) of those are
| unpaid. And if they're not unpaid, they usually only pay
| a few thousand a year, if that.
| greenburger wrote:
| Serval states only pay a small amounts. New Hampshire is
| the smallest I'm aware of at $100/ year.
| gumby wrote:
| Given many are at the municipal and school board level I
| suppose that's true, but they are barely "politicians". For
| example Palo Alto has professional management and then an
| unpaid city council (they take turns being mayor). There
| are no political parties.
|
| How well does this work? It's a mixed bag. The professional
| managers get things done but managed to build a little
| empire (lots of middle management) which is now hard to
| dislodge. The non-professional council members couldn't
| keep up. Also there are waves of the real estate interest
| taking over the council for a while and screwing up
| priorities.
|
| Compared to that, a few who were on the job full time might
| have been better.
| jackorange wrote:
| I liked his premise. It's a good idea, appeal to the people who
| aren't voting.
| jefftk wrote:
| It is an extremely difficult idea to put in practice: people
| who historically haven't voted, especially in local
| elections, are notoriously difficult to convince to vote. So
| even if you identify a situation where you can appeal
| strongly to the average non-voter, that is super hard to turn
| into a win.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| Where / how can similar situations be identified? That is,
| consistemtly low turn out rate in an area where the incumbent
| isn't that highly rated? With such info, a dare I say agile
| "start up" party could make 2022 very interesting.
| clarge1120 wrote:
| Interesting idea.
| xwdv wrote:
| Wow, there really is nothing more powerful than an idea whose
| time has come.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| What is the idea?
| twofornone wrote:
| I'll say it. People are tired of progressive extremism, like
| at once insisting that "CRT isn't being taught in schools"
| while with the other hand supporting CRT inspired school
| programs that teach racial awareness to children, and in
| particular white guilt to white children. You can look it up
| on the VA website, where CRT is explicitly mentioned as a
| part of primary school curriculum.
|
| This is arguably the biggest elephant in the room -
| independents and moderate democrats are increasingly speaking
| openly about the fact that the democratic party is overtly
| anti-white. Search for it on reddit; before today at best
| such comments would be downvoted and at worst grounds for a
| ban. Now they're sitting at the top of the comment chains.
|
| The election results in NJ and VA so far seem to mark a
| turning point. Hopefully soon enough to avoid the pendulum
| swinging back into true reactionary white supremacy - you
| know, the genocide kind. Meanwhile out of touch limousine
| liberals are doubling down on twitter and in media and
| blaming white supremacists for the election upsets.
| Something's going to break, one way or another.
| akomtu wrote:
| And I like how they've been hiding behind the "progressive"
| label, as if pushing for electric vehicles and the identity
| politics are equally progressive ideas.
|
| That's something that bad guys have been doing for long
| time: they pick a good idea or symbol and attach themselves
| to it. This is how nazists have turned swastika (an ancient
| holy symbol) into something evil and how the supporters of
| the identity cult are destroying the image of the true
| progressives.
| malcolmgreaves wrote:
| From one white man to another white man: you're not being
| attacked, democrats aren't anti-white (have you looked at
| the leadership? very white indeed!), and you are still
| living in the system that our white ancestors made for us.
| Other people not being oppressed as much doesn't mean your
| liberties are at risk. It's OK to teach and learn about how
| racist people made racist systems.
|
| You don't need to feel guilty, unless you are out here
| actively supporting racist systems? If you're trying to use
| the social privileges that come with being a white man in
| America to dismantle racist structures, then you're doing
| great! If you're tried and don't want to do that work, ok,
| understandable: just don't throw in your two cents I'd you
| see other people doing this intense labor.
| remarkEon wrote:
| >It's OK to teach and learn about how racist people made
| racist systems.
|
| Read: your ancestors are racist, and made a racist system
| for you
|
| >You don't need to feel guilty, unless you are out here
| actively supporting racist systems?
|
| Read: here comes the guilt trip
|
| >If you're trying to use the social privileges that come
| with being a white man in America to dismantle racist
| structures, then you're doing great! If you're tried and
| don't want to do that work, ok, understandable: just
| don't throw in your two cents I'd you see other people
| doing this intense labor.
|
| Read: there it is.
|
| At some point I figured people would realize this
| Kafkaesque formulation really turns people off. Any
| disagreement with the premise - any at all - and you are
| now required to retreat to claiming you're not a "racist"
| in front of someone who has set the rhetorical boundaries
| where such a claim is rejected outright, always. I
| actually think that's really the point, and it's nothing
| more than a new and pathological way to bully someone.
| omegaworks wrote:
| This race has proven that it doesn't actually matter
| whether or not white people are being attacked (they're
| not) or whether CRT is even being taught in schools (it's
| not). Republicans effectively created a media moral panic
| around "Critical Race Theory" and it paid off for them in
| spades.
| twofornone wrote:
| Look, first off, I'm not a white man. Second, I wasn't
| trying to debate whether this is right or wrong, only
| explaining why parents are voting out democrats. However
| I do take offense to your implication that teaching white
| children concepts like white privilege in a way that
| instills white guilt, and molding them to accept
| unilaterally determined reverse discrimination, does not
| constitute oppression.
|
| It's quite possible to teach about racism and
| discrimination and slavery without burdening white
| children with what amounts to a rehashed original sin,
| obligating them to accept reverse racism as though it is
| the only way to correct historic wrongs which they had no
| part in.
|
| >You don't need to feel guilty, unless you are out here
| actively supporting racist system
|
| This is dishonest, because it is a refrain used to guilt
| people into supporting progressive policies by
| implication that they are racist if they don't,
| completely sidestepping the argument over whether such
| policies are sound.
|
| >If you're trying to use the social privileges that come
| with being a white man in America to dismantle racist
| structures, then you're doing great!
|
| This is also dishonest, because it sidesteps the question
| of whether or not white men are actually privileged to
| such an extent that artificially correcting for said
| privilege (i.e. creating institutional racism) is
| justified. It also ignores the question of whether our
| institutions are _actually_ racist - to a modern
| progressive this is a given, but the science is
| ultimately based on correlation and conjecture. The
| strongest proof that pundits have of institutional racism
| is inequality of outcome; however in a perfect
| meritocracy it is irrational to conflate equality of
| opportunity with equality of outcome. See Nordic
| countries for an example.
|
| To summarize, my primary points are twofold: the way that
| antiracism is being taught to white children is
| potentially harmful, and the degree to which our systems
| are actually unequal because of racism on behalf of
| whites is not nearly as certain as militant activists
| seem to believe. Before you downvote, recognize that I am
| communicating the perspective held by voters that are
| dramatically underrepresented online. And to an
| increasing degree they are not white, minorities do not
| appreciate the implication that they will forever be
| saddled with the burden of past oppression unless the
| white man steps in and helps them.
|
| Incidentally, I have do have a personal stake the this
| matter, because the same points used to justify reverse
| discrimination against whites can trivially be aimed at
| Jews, given their drastic overrepresentation among
| positions of power and wealth. I personally don't think
| people realize how dangerous it is to teach such racial
| awareness to _children_ , especially in such a
| discriminatory manner.
| xwdv wrote:
| It would probably not be healthy for my karma to go deeper.
| vadfa wrote:
| Coming to this website every day to get downvoted and
| flagged is something not to worry about. I mean, have you
| read the things people say here? The ideas that are
| popular? Do you really want to be "the upvoted guy"?
| [deleted]
| Loughla wrote:
| Seriously, what idea? This adds nothing to the conversation
| here.
| LurkingPenguin wrote:
| This is bad news. If too many truck drivers run for public
| office, the supply chain problems are only going to get worse.
| jonathankoren wrote:
| Good. Too many politicians run unopposed and take reelection for
| granted. This how you get more responsive governance.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| Yes. But why would that be? Because the two main parties are
| more of cartel? And less like true competition?
| jonathankoren wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering
| umvi wrote:
| Any (relatively) unbiased sources that explain how NJ got into
| this predicament? Just current leadership being out of touch with
| the wants/needs of NJ citizens?
| bingohbangoh wrote:
| Not trying to dunk, but comments like this -- assuming that a
| blue collar, republican challenger is automatically bad -- says
| a lot more about the OP than it does about the situation.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Well running as a republican would mean he's a member of and
| supports the republican party, is that not how that works?
| Otherwise one would run as an independent.
|
| If you associate yourself with a group that's known to be
| scum then that will reflect badly on you regardless of your
| actual character.
| bingohbangoh wrote:
| The Republican party, much like the Democratic party, is a
| wide tent with many people. Local races involve a lot more
| complicated characters. You'd run as Republican because
| they're the default choice in a lot of places. Or you could
| lose and say its on principle I guess.
| uselesscynicism wrote:
| Predicament? A regular Joe beat a career politician for local
| representative. In what world is that a predicament?
|
| Or are you so completely partisan that having an R next to his
| name makes him obviously the wrong choice, even though he was
| liberal enough to be palatable to New Jersey voters (not
| exactly a paragon of conservatism)?
| stickyricky wrote:
| There is an interesting story about Madigan in Chicago. Ran the
| Illinois machine. Corrupt as all hell. A college student
| decided to run against him and collected enough signatures to
| get on the ballot. Madigan typically ran unopposed. Well come
| to find about, of the 500 people who signed the petition to get
| this kid on the ballot, 1200 rescinded their support.
|
| You do the math. These people aren't loved. They just know how
| to work the system to keep the outsiders out. The article says
| in a district of 150k, the NJ Senate President never received
| more than 30k votes. 20% of the population was dictating
| policy. Its no surprise that, when given the choice, people
| will vote their preference.
| [deleted]
| syngrog66 wrote:
| > Well come to find about, of the 500 people who signed the
| petition to get this kid on the ballot, 1200 rescinded their
| support.
|
| > You do the math.
|
| I did and, well...
|
| _squints at those numbers_
| stickyricky wrote:
| "The Chicago-School of Mathematics".
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| People where I live get a ballot and a book in the mail weeks
| before the election with details for all the candidates and
| questions, and all you have to do is drop it in the outgoing
| mail. Takes no more than 30min of your time, maybe 1 hour if
| you are a slow reader. And yet, less than 20% voter
| participation.
|
| It is ironic that turnout for national elections, where their
| vote is moot is much higher. But for school boards, county
| positions, and city positions that actually have an effect on
| day to day life and expenses, people do not care as much.
| stickyricky wrote:
| WA? That's how it was in Vancouver when I lived there. Best
| system I've experience so far. Also felt the government was
| very fair and in line with the community.
| mynameisash wrote:
| I'm in WA now, came from MN. It infuriates me thinking
| about voting in-person: my wife and I used to go to our
| city hall, wait in line maybe a half hour to 45 minutes.
| We'd snake our way through the line, get our IDs checked,
| fill out these forms _just so_ , and if you get a
| technicality wrong, you'd have to work with someone to
| fix it. Yadda yadda, finally you'd have time in a booth
| to cast your vote.
|
| But now in WA, my wife and I typically make our morning
| coffee, sit out on the patio, read through the voter
| guide to understand what the arguments for and against a
| particular ballot initiative are and the statements given
| by individuals. We vote together, sign our ballot, seal
| it up, then we drive three blocks to a local drop site
| (only because I prefer doing that versus putting it in my
| mailbox).
|
| It's super easy to participate in the system here, and in
| my jaded perspective, that's exactly why certain people
| and organizations hate it so much.
| acheron wrote:
| The secret ballot is normally considered a cornerstone of
| democracy. Mail in voting completely destroys that. In my
| jaded perspective, that's exactly why certain people and
| organizations love it so much.
| HarryHirsch wrote:
| Indeed. It's not unheard of that a local election in
| Britain is invalidated because of voting irregularities -
| someone collected ballot papers and made sure the vote
| goes to their man. I hear that that happens in ethnic
| enclaves in Miami as well.
|
| The vote doesn't have to be convenient, but it absolutely
| has to be safe. Voter intimidation is impossible with in-
| person voting.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I think you can have a secret ballot with mail in too if
| you drop it off in person.
| koolba wrote:
| Indeed. If you think the results from yesterday were a
| shellacking, imagine the carnage if there was no early or
| mail-in voting. In VA in particular there were ballots
| cast as early as late September. Given the turn of the
| contest in the final weeks, nobody could say with a
| straight face they would have all lined up to vote for
| McAuliffe in person. There's a reason certain groups want
| to bank those votes in advance.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| No one is forced to vote early with mail in ballots.
| jamroom wrote:
| Mail in voting is still secret ballot - you have an
| internal "secrecy sleeve" that is in turn mailed in an
| outer envelope. The outer envelope signature is compared
| to the signature on file, and then the internal envelope
| is removed but is not opened in the same location.
|
| https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/wa_vbm.pdf
|
| https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/11/politics/barr-secret-vote-
| fac...
| koolba wrote:
| That doesn't stop a determined group of canvassers from
| going door to door and pressuring people to fill out
| their ballots on the spot while they wait on their
| doorstep. It's also a perfect time to offer a bribe or
| incentive for a speedy completion.
|
| There's no way that any form of remote ballot is going to
| be as secure as doing it in person. It's just not
| possible because you will never know the provenance. Like
| most things that involve the legal system, it's not the
| law abiding that we're worried about.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| While the concerns are true, I am not sure if they are
| applicable to a society with higher levels of trust like
| I assume much of the US is in.
|
| At least it is not a problem I know about where I live.
| donarb wrote:
| If there were canvassers knocking on doors and offering
| bribes for ballots you would hear about it here in
| Washington state. People here take their voting rights
| seriously.
| BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
| I actually wonder how viable it would be to devise a
| targeted ballot spoiling attack.
|
| Picture this:
|
| Have a canvasser or harvester pick up mail in ballots.
| They take it to a safe house and open the envelopes. If
| it's a vote for the candidate they don't like, put marks
| on it so it doesn't get counted. Place it in a new return
| envelope.
|
| You've just cancelled that person's vote. If someone
| checked that their vote was counted they wouldn't be able
| to see that it was spoilt.
|
| You could potentially just throw away the ballot too, I
| doubt most people check that they were actually received.
| But it does seem slightly more likely to raise eyebrows.
| I'm sure you could chalk it up to just getting lost at
| the post office.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Yes. OR is the same.
| BikiniPrince wrote:
| The book is terrible. I toss it out and read the proposal
| or at the worst look it up on a few sites that track
| issues. There is not enough information for complex
| issues and the wording in my experience is very biased.
| It takes me more time to vote, but at least I can make an
| informed decision.
| wrycoder wrote:
| 0.1% were dictating policy. The other 19.9% of the votes were
| just following directions.
| caseysoftware wrote:
| Grew up near Chicago but long gone before this happened so I
| looked it up:
|
| > _Krupa needed 473 valid signatures of ward residents to get
| on the ballot. He filed 1,729 signatures with the Chicago
| Board of Election Commissioners. He earlier said he filed
| 1,703 but missed a page of signatures._
|
| > _A crew of mysterious political workers -- perhaps they
| were Buddhist monks, or the gentle sun people known as the
| Eloi, or maybe Madigan precinct captains -- filed 2,796
| petitions of revocation of signature. That means 2,796 ward
| residents filed legal affidavits that they wanted their
| signatures taken off Krupa's petitions._
|
| > _The Madigan men filed 187 affidavits of revocation
| matching Krupa signatures. But Dorf, a progressive who'd done
| election work for the late Mayor Harold Washington and former
| President Barack Obama, put in a Freedom of Information Act
| request asking the board to give him all the revocations
| affidavits that were filed._
|
| > _All 2,796 of them._
|
| > _"And that's where the fraud comes in, that's where the
| felonies come in," Dorf said. "Almost 2,800 affidavits were
| filed. But only 1,726 people signed petitions for Krupa. And
| of the 2,800 affidavits, the 13th Ward could only find 187
| signatures that matched._
|
| > _Subtract 187 from 2,796 and you get 2,609 -- that's a lot
| of possible felonies, either perjury or voter intimidation._
|
| Ref: https://www.chicagotribune.com/columns/john-kass/ct-met-
| chic...
| BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
| We've got some pretty convincing evidence of corruption and
| election fraud here.
|
| BUT, rest assured this is extremely rare and these same
| people wouldn't dare tamper with _any other_ kind of
| election. Nor would this happen anywhere else in the United
| States. Anyone who asserts an election was subject to fraud
| is attacking democracy itself. /s
| ejstronge wrote:
| > Anyone who asserts an election was subject to fraud is
| attacking democracy itself. /s
|
| I trust you are referring to problems with the 2020
| election? I would appreciate learning what analogies you
| see between mob-like coercion and the election
| BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
| Yes, for the most part. I do not think the doubts and
| suspicious anomalies are new or unique to the 2020
| election, though.
|
| As for the mob-like coercion, I don't think there was
| this same kind of intimidation going on in 2020. I was
| using this concrete example of election fraud to refute
| the oft-touted assertion that voter fraud is vanishingly
| rare in the United States, and, it is never serious
| enough to affect an election.
|
| In a naive way I hope it opens the door to people being
| willing to accept the idea that if fraud can happen in
| big corrupt cities, it can happen elsewhere and we should
| tighten up our oversight laws.
| moffkalast wrote:
| And I assume those 2,609 were then charged and went to
| prison right? Right?
|
| Ah who am I kidding.
| dlp211 wrote:
| It's not that simple. There was a multi-million dollar (I
| believe it was $18MM) coordinated campaign against Sweeny in
| 2017 that failed. It wasn't about offering voters a choice,
| they've had choices in the past.
| stickyricky wrote:
| You're right its not. But there's something to be said for
| voting for one of two insiders or an insider versus an
| outsider.
|
| I don't think Mr. Durr's achievement is replicable. In my
| opinion, significant election reform is necessary.
| jhawk28 wrote:
| Something was mentioned about 150k total voters, but only 32k
| ever voted for the incumbent.
| dsr_ wrote:
| 150,000 people eligible to vote. 32,000 votes for the
| incumbent. Hence, 118,000 people who would either vote for
| someone else or could be persuaded to come and vote.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Yep. DecisionDesk shows GOP got 32,682 whereas the
| incumbent DEM got 30,352 with 96% in.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| Many NJ residents work(ed) in NY. Of which, many are high
| earners who could be contributing significant amounts to the
| state tax rolls but NY claims income tax from anyone who
| commutes there. To make up the difference towns have to jack up
| property taxes. Things should hopefully change with remote work
| not happening in NY anymore.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| NJ's debt per taxpayer is multiple standard deviations above
| the norm. On the order of $60k per taxpayer versus $10k to
| $20k in other states. That is just at the state level, who
| knows what is going at the city level, and there are a ton of
| tiny fiefdoms with highly paid personnel.
|
| https://www.truthinaccounting.org/library/doclib/FSOS-
| Bookle...
|
| I do not see anyway out of repaying these debts from previous
| decades with higher taxes compared to other states.
| pvarangot wrote:
| The same way Hillary lost to an extreme right wing populist
| reality TV star. Leadership is dumber than what they think and
| just there because they are the least incompetent of the
| political caste, but they act as if they were the all righteous
| saviors while delivering nothing of value to their voters
| except for campaign promises.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| The 2020 election mobilized certain demographics in NJ to vote,
| and there's been a moderately successful campaign to paint the
| sitting governor as literally Hitler for the last two years.
| newsclues wrote:
| Systemic corruption
| PKop wrote:
| Quoting Durr in Politico: [0]
|
| Durr said Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy's coronavirus executive
| orders, vaccine and school mask, unemployment benefits snafus
| and a general distrust of the South Jersey Democratic machine
| that has dominated the region for years all contributed to his
| strong performance.
|
| Sweeney, Durr said, "never challenged" Murphy during the
| pandemic. "You have the debacle of
| unemployment. The masking of the kids in school. You have
| Senator Sweeney trying to take away peoples' medical freedom
| rights. I think the perfect storm was that he stepped
| into a pile of you-know-what and couldn't get out of it
| because he didn't know which way to turn. I just tapped
| into the right focus."
|
| [0] https://www.politico.com/states/new-
| jersey/story/2021/11/03/...
|
| I think many people, if they aren't exposed to it or live
| around it, underestimate the massive anger and frustration that
| exists towards the Covid restrictions and policies, and vaccine
| mandates.
| ajmurmann wrote:
| Yeah, the pandemic has really highlighted how many people
| rather adjust their world view and deny basic facts when
| accepts something that's uncomfortable or just plainly don't
| want to make even the smallest sacrifice for society.
| clarge1120 wrote:
| Define "the smallest sacrifice".
| davidw wrote:
| I'm beginning to come around to this point of view: https://n
| ewsletters.theatlantic.com/peacefield/617c7b245793d... - we
| are not a serious nation.
|
| There's a global pandemic caused by an airborne pathogen, and
| people throw an absolute hissy fit over a minor inconvenience
| like masks. My kids wear them all day long in school, and
| while they don't love them, they are not constantly whining
| about them like some adults.
|
| My grandparents, on the other hand, dealt with wartime
| rationing for years (and they were lucky, because they lived
| in a place where they could hunt) because our country was in
| a global battle with Nazis. And all that after the
| depression.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Kids have the most psychological development from looking
| at people's faces, emotions and smiles. Saying that's a
| "minor inconvenience" is silly. Especially since there's
| negligible risks for them.
|
| And mandating something which neither prevents catching,
| nor transmitting the virus is definitely not a "minor
| inconvenience".
|
| EDIT: In my last sentence, I wasn't referring to masks. I
| was referring to vaccine mandates which the truck driver
| also ran on.
| davidw wrote:
| > And mandating something which neither prevents
| catching, nor transmitting the virus is definitely not a
| "minor inconvenience".
|
| They have studied this though. Actual scientists, not
| people on Youtube or Facebook, and they have found that
| masks diminish the transmission of COVID-19. This is kind
| of what you'd expect with something airborne.
| clarge1120 wrote:
| The risk from infection is small enough to be considered
| zero. There is no reason to mask the children.
| tehjoker wrote:
| Explain that to the kids that died or the older relatives
| that got sick from the infected kids.
| busymom0 wrote:
| > Explain that to the kids that died
|
| At least 9 out of 10 children in the ICUs in North
| Carolina were obese.
|
| https://www.wfae.org/health/2021-09-30/novant-
| says-9-of-10-c...
|
| The iron-fisted one-size-fits-all approach has never been
| used in medicine and health except COVID.
| tehjoker wrote:
| Nice of you to discard anyone with a health problem.
| irthomasthomas wrote:
| "Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97%
| and medical masks 44%" (For medical professionals)
|
| https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long
|
| Why does everyone promote cloth masks, instead of proper
| N95 masks?
| davidw wrote:
| In Italy (we visited relatives this summer), everyone was
| wearing surgical masks, with some N95 here and there. No
| one had cloth masks. Surgical masks are cheap and easy to
| make and a country as wealthy as the US could ensure that
| everyone has an ample supply. We could probably even do
| that with N95's at this point.
| irthomasthomas wrote:
| Surgical masks are cloth masks.
| ajmurmann wrote:
| BuT If iT DoEsnT WoRK 100% oF tHe TimE It DOesNt wOrK!!
| rayiner wrote:
| By how much, and is it worth it? The first is a
| scientific question. The second is a political question.
| Americans fail because neither side recognizes the
| difference.
|
| Other developed countries are not masking kids as young
| as we are doing. Countries like France are rescinding
| mask mandates now. For us, there is no end in sight, even
| in highly vaccinated areas.
| davidw wrote:
| We went to Italy over the summer, and mask usage was
| ubiquitous. Nothing fancy, just the basic surgical ones.
| They are required in schools there because children come
| into contact with adults.
|
| "Is it worth it" is an ongoing question; at some point,
| it's probably not, but we're not there just yet. Our
| vaccination rates are still pretty low. And remember: the
| bellowing about masks started before we even had
| vaccines.
| rkk3 wrote:
| > Our vaccination rates are still pretty low
|
| Not really, 221 Million have had it-least 1 shot in the
| US and another 73 Million are under 18 and are at almost
| no risk (558 total deaths).
| b9a2cab5 wrote:
| "we're not there just yet" is a political decision, not a
| scientific one.
| davidw wrote:
| Yes, but it can be based on more objective statistics
| though, like the local hospital being overrun with COVID
| patients, as ours was over the summer.
| busymom0 wrote:
| I wasn't referring to masks in that statement. I was
| referring to vaccine mandates.
| [deleted]
| PKop wrote:
| Blocking the faces of children in the prime of their
| life, where they need to develop social skills through
| interaction and facial expression, is madness.
|
| The covid risk for children is a rounding error. This is
| not prudent risk management; mind-boggling for someone
| from the tech industry who should be able to do a cursory
| look at statistics and dismiss this practice out of hand.
| generalk wrote:
| > Blocking the faces of children in the prime of their
| > life, where they need to develop social skills through
| > interaction and facial expression, is madness.
|
| [Citation needed.] I am unable to find a single reliable
| source that says mask wearing has any sociological or
| psychological effect on children or anyone else.
| Anecdotally, I haven't seen anything like that. Just
| typical kids. > The covid risk for
| children is a rounding error.
|
| Again, who says that's true? Can't find it. The Ohio
| Department of Health maintains a dashboard[1] for this,
| which indicates that it's significant enough to track,
| and the numbers there sure aren't "rounding error"
| numbers.
|
| Assuming what you meant is "children are less likely to
| develop severe symptoms," and also that that's true: they
| can still spread the virus to the adults they live with
| in their homes, or the many adults that share the school
| building they're in. (Did you think we just shove kids in
| an adult-less environment, or that teachers are somehow
| immune?)
|
| [1]: https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19
| /dashboa...
| busymom0 wrote:
| > I am unable to find a single reliable source that says
| mask wearing has any sociological or psychological effect
| on children or anyone else.
|
| You are looking for the wrong thing. Look for what the
| benefits of things like smiling and seeing smiling faces
| has on people's emotional health.
|
| > A happy face signals positive emotions, as well as
| attachment availability, care, support, and credibility
| [7,8,9]. Recently, Tamir and Hughes [10] argued that
| positive social signals such as smiling faces not only
| serve ultimate goals (e.g., forming strong bonds) but
| they are also rewarding in and off themselves.
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6356968/
|
| https://www.healthline.com/health/baby/when-will-my-baby-
| smi...
|
| Hiding the main part of your face - the smile is not
| healthy for people, and especially not for kids whose
| entire social skills development heavily relies on these
| things.
| wrycoder wrote:
| I see maskless parents shepherding their masked small
| children around. The kids are obviously self conscious
| about the masks, and at the same time, they appear to be
| proud to wear them.
| busymom0 wrote:
| > they appear to be proud to wear them
|
| Being proud to be "obedient" is not always a good thing.
| Also this cannot be generalized. Plus it doesn't make
| something being mandatory right, especially when looking
| at people's smiles is crucial for kids development.
| vadfa wrote:
| Kids are proud to wear something that makes it harder for
| them to breathe and recognise the emotions of others?
| Give me a break...
| PKop wrote:
| Masks don't stop covid, nor do the current vaccines stop
| infection, but we keep going with it like anything will
| change.
|
| We are not a serious nation, but I'd argue it's because we
| do things like mask children in school, a cohort that faces
| an infinitesimal risk from Covid but a real and obvious
| risk of _psychological and social harm_ from the negative
| effects of blocking their faces all day in critical periods
| of their social development.
|
| You've looked at the death rates, or the total deaths of
| children from covid over the entire pandemic, and concluded
| this practice is a necessary and healthy choice given the
| negatives? Why?
| judahmeek wrote:
| You mentioned statistics in another comment of yours,
| just slightly above this one.
|
| Can you show me statistics regarding this "real and
| obvious risk of psychological and social harm" of
| children wearing masks?
| twofornone wrote:
| That's disingenuous. These statistics won't necessarily
| manifest for years, if they're teased out of sociological
| data at all. Someone has to go looking for them in the
| first place, and in this environment its unlikely that
| anyone will stick their neck out to suggest that masks
| are counterproductive.
|
| This is the danger of politicized science. It becomes one
| sided and a-scientific.
| generalk wrote:
| Sure, a cloth mask won't STOP Covid. But the science
| indicates that community mask wearing does decrease
| transmission rates as mask wearing rates go up.[1]
|
| Similarly, the current vaccine does not prevent
| infection, but it significantly reduces symptoms and
| helps reduce the amount of people who'd otherwise be
| hospitalized with COVID-19.[2]
|
| Death rates are the most serious metric to look at (and
| it's abysmal), but certainly not the only metric. Long-
| term effects of the virus aren't well understood, but
| individuals have reported brain fog or lack of sense of
| taste/smell long after clearing the flu-like symptoms.[3]
| Folks who get sick and transmit the virus, or are
| severely hospitalized, have still been affected.
|
| Most children do not have issues masking in school unless
| trusted adults are telling them it's a problem. I have
| two sons, both of whom mask at school with no complaint,
| and the school has a full mask mandate except at
| mealtimes for those eating. Neither the school nor the
| district have reported any instances of psychological or
| social harm, and I'm having a hard time finding a
| credible source that believes that's true.
|
| So, we have a set of assumed (or just plain made up)
| negatives, and a whole host of scientifically proven
| benefits. When folks say we are not a serious nation,
| they mean that this debate is even happening in the first
| place. The reasonable asks: a facemask indoors in public,
| and a vaccine. Against a worldwide pandemic that's killed
| over 700,000 in the United States alone and shut down our
| hospital systems in some cities.
|
| [1]: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/sc
| ience-br... [2]: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nco
| v/vaccines/keythings... [3]: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavi
| rus/2019-ncov/vaccines/keythings...
| atkailash wrote:
| Why do people forget that it's not just that children are
| mostly safe. Sure that may be true...but they carry that
| home to family who absolutely are at risk. That is why
| it's a useful mitigation.
|
| Why do people forget that an infectious disease doesn't
| stick to just one person? Do they not get what infectious
| means?
| sjg007 wrote:
| Stop spreading disinformation.
| VRay wrote:
| https://covid19.healthdata.org/japan?view=daily-
| deaths&tab=t...
|
| Basically no lockdown other than shutting down bars at 8
| PM, plenty of exposure between proximity to China and
| super-crowded trains
|
| The difference between Japan and the USA is their
| ubiquitous mask use
|
| We went on a 20 year jihad over a single 9/11's worth of
| preventable deaths in the USA, and yet we can't be
| bothered to take any action when we're racking up a 9/11
| every couple of days?
|
| https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-
| america?view...
| irthomasthomas wrote:
| Are you serious? Japan has THE HIGHEST life expectancy in
| the world! And America is ranked 34. Maybe your source
| isn't very honest, if they failed to point this out?
|
| https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/japan-life-expectancy
| impostergc wrote:
| Compare obesity between the two nations and I think
| you'll find the culprit.
| pvarangot wrote:
| I would be ok with the orders if they really thought they
| were going to help. I was ok with the initial lockdowns,
| politicians where scared, and acted fast the best way they
| could.
|
| Most orders after that where just polling their voters to
| see what they could do and look like "they are doing
| something" but angering the least people possible. That's
| bullshit, and even the governor of San Francisco and the
| governor of California where found bending their policy or
| breaking the rules multiple times.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Probably it doesn't help that political leaders all over
| the world wear masks only for photo shoots. Internet is
| full of videos how they take masks off the second after
| shoot is over.
|
| People rightfully consider this to be a hypocrisy.
| jbigelow76 wrote:
| _People rightfully consider this to be a hypocrisy._
|
| Hypocrisy can effectively dampen voter turnout of your
| supporters if they are idealistic enough. But it's an
| absolute non-factor if you can sufficiently demonize your
| opponent(s) and their positions, just look at Trump and
| how he has wrapped Evangelical America around his little
| finger.
| themgt wrote:
| _Fully vaccinated people no longer need to wear a mask in
| most settings._
|
| _The choice is yours: get vaccinated or wear a mask until
| you do._
|
| - The White House, May 14, 2021
|
| https://www.facebook.com/WhiteHouse/videos/its-vaxxed-or-
| mas...
| davidw wrote:
| 'When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you
| do, sir?'
|
| It looked like things were improving, and the more
| contagious Delta variant (or, as the airline likes to
| write, B.1.617.2) turned up.
|
| Where I live in Oregon, our hospital was overflowing with
| people towards the end of summer, to the point where
| people have died because they couldn't get 'elective'
| surgery. In that kind of situation, you use a 'defense in
| depth' strategy, which includes both vaccines and masks.
|
| It's really not that big of a problem to wear one.
| busymom0 wrote:
| > 'When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you
| do, sir?'
|
| That's not the problem. The problem is that those who
| were saying the "now correct" thing prior to the
| "experts" changing their minds were first called
| misinformation. The "experts" make definitive statements
| without any nuance and when they get proven wrong, they
| don't apologize.
|
| For example the Press Secretary said "this is the
| pandemic of the unvaccinated" a week ago and then couple
| days later, she tested positive.
|
| Here's another example:
|
| > "We don't talk enough to you about this, I don't think.
| One last thing that's really important is, we're not in
| the position where we think that any virus, including the
| Delta virus, which is much more transmissible and more
| deadly in terms of unvaccinated people, the -- the
| various shots that people are getting now cover that.
| You're OK. You're not going to -- you're not going to get
| COVID if you have these vaccinations." - Biden said on
| Jul 22.
|
| I posted in July on HN that Israel's data shows this
| statement is literally not true. But I was called
| misinformation.
| COGlory wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxFhMVIPodk
|
| Rossman is biased, but the facts do speak for themselves here.
| I couldn't believe this video
| dlp211 wrote:
| That's an hour long video, could you provide a TL;DW?
| jrs235 wrote:
| OMG! New Jersey is going to be like a timeshare... some
| people are going to be stuck or have to pay someone to take
| their house. Hopefully they'll be able to get away from tax
| obligations though by letting the government take their
| property to pay the ungodly property taxes! I always thought
| Illinois was bad... "Hold my beer." - New Jersey
| jrs235 wrote:
| If you are a New Jersey pension fund recipient (and you're
| smart), you moved out of New Jersey as quickly as possible.
| rlt wrote:
| > how NJ got into this predicament?
|
| Possibly due to attitudes like describing an average citizen
| beating a career politician as "a predicament"
| dmz73 wrote:
| I am not form the U.S.
|
| I think the problem is not that average citizen managed to
| beat the career politician, that is (possibly?) the good
| part.
|
| In my view the problem is that this average citizen now has
| to deal with other career politicians and if he doesn't have
| the experience in these dealings, his constituents will
| probably end up worse off.
|
| What is the solution?
|
| I don't know, I am an average citizen so I would prefer
| someone who has more knowledge about these things to work on
| it and then present options to us average citizens in a clear
| and unbiased manner.
| FredPret wrote:
| I know right, we're watching democracy in action. This is
| what a really good system looks like
| moffkalast wrote:
| It's still a pretty shit system. A good system would have
| more than 2 people and instant runoff.
| WhisperingShiba wrote:
| GOT 'EM.
|
| Real talk, I think there is a certain level of education we
| should desire for politicians, since generally speaking, it
| denotes a certain dedication to understanding many facets of
| society. That said, career politicians are completely bogus
| all the way through.
| gumby wrote:
| There is a minor way in which this situation can become a
| predicament. Outsiders who become governors don't tend to
| have a network or know how the mechanisms work, so tend to
| either get nothing done or end up having little input into
| things being done by those who _do_ know those things.
|
| But having an outsider as a legislative member is generally a
| good thing.
|
| In California we have term limits, so no member of the
| legislature (or any other position) can have the time to
| develop expertise. This gives lobbyists a lot more power.
| travoc wrote:
| For those who think government has too much power, getting
| nothing done isn't as bad as it seems.
| gumby wrote:
| I kinda like having speed limits, food safety rules,
| building codes, courts, free vaccines (removing barriers
| to _your_ vaccination helps me, just as mine helps you)
| and a bunch of other things governments do.
|
| Having lived in countries both with and without generally
| well meaning and competent government, in my experience
| the former is vastly better despite its manifold faults.
| [deleted]
| hooande wrote:
| People turned out to vote for the marquee election, the
| governor's race, and voted for that party all the way down the
| ballot. Almost anyone from the republican party would have
| wound up in the same position
| throwaway6734 wrote:
| My gut take is that the removal of the SALT deduction had a
| huge impact in NJ due to the very high property taxes
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I doubt the vast majority of people (probably less than 10%)
| in NJ are paid enough to be affected by SALT since standard
| deduction went up so much. Property plus state income tax
| liabilities would have to be more than $12.5k/$25k
| single/married for people to have been affected.
|
| I would bet on school closings and the trend of higher
| taxes/less government services, but the latter is unavoidable
| due to the outlier amounts of debt NJ has.
| throwaway6734 wrote:
| >According to recent reporting, if we reinstated the SALT
| deduction, nearly a third of New Jersey residents -- almost
| three million people -- would get tax relief. As many as
| 80% of them have incomes of $216,000 or less. Hardly the
| 1%.
|
| https://www.northjersey.com/story/opinion/2021/05/17/salt-
| de...
|
| NJ has very high property tax rates and high home values
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| The writer used the word "average", but it would be
| clearer if they used median, or quintiles or deciles. I
| could not find a source for the report they claim to be
| saying 3 million people in NJ would benefit.
|
| NJ income tax is ~4%, and average property taxes are not
| that high:
|
| https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/03/njs-average-property-
| tax...
|
| It would be nice to find statistics by percentile, but I
| would find it hard to believe that many single households
| are living in houses paying $8k+ property tax, and
| married households are paying $16k in property tax.
|
| I use $8k and $16k because that would mean the remaining
| $4k and $8k would be for income tax for a person earning
| $100k/year (78th percentile) or a couple earning $200k
| per year (83rd percentile).
|
| https://dqydj.com/income-percentile-by-state-calculator/
|
| Edit: the best way to figure out if the SALT caps hurt or
| not is to see if the amount of people itemizing on
| federal returns increased or not. I cannot find any NJ
| specific statistics, but IRS says only 11% of tax filers
| itemized in 2019.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-03 23:01 UTC)