So all of these answers have some truth to them, but they are also missing a key factor. The heritage foundation exists because they are paid tons of money by billionaires to sit around and come up with ways to strengthen their dominance over society. The left simply doesn’t have many supporters with that level of wealth. While it’s possible to do this on a voluntary basis it’s a lot harder than getting paid to do it.
It’s not just republicans. Voters have been concerned about Biden’s age since 2020 but democratic leaders have been insisting it was fine anyway. The debate was the first time most voters saw Biden speaking at length in a non-scripted manner in a while, and it looked very not fine.
Weird I wonder why that didn’t work when I voted for Hillary.
It will achieve what its proponents wanted, which is forcible removal of the homeless from wealthy neighborhoods. People with power in society will again be protected from any possible discomfort or guilt about their lifestyle, and any impetus to provide programs to help such people will evaporate.
I haven’t seen that one but from what I’ve read, polling showed a similar level of disparity in performance—with about two thirds of viewers giving the edge to Trump and Reagan respectively. Also, the Reagan campaign had access to Carter’s debate prep notes so it was a bit of a unique circumstance.
That’s a tough one. There’s no obvious moral calculus to translate between lives lost and quality of life.
I tend to think drafting is similar to slavery—it’s a grave violation of basic human rights and should only be considered under the most extreme circumstances where the alternative is clearly worse.
It might depend on the exact nature of the authoritarian regime. Or maybe I’m just not comfortable with either outcome and so I don’t want to answer the question.
Unfortunately, a candidate dropping out like this is almost unheard of, so the downsides are pretty uncertain. Personally I think people are a little too worried about this but there certainly is some risk that what seems like a good candidate under casual examination ends up having some fatal flaw or hidden scandal.
I guess when the people being drafted have a higher likelihood of being killed by an invading army without the draft than with it. Tough to assess though.
One bad debate is one thing but this was maybe the worst debate performance in history. And Biden’s polling was already quite bad prior to this. These polls show essentially no advantage in sticking with Biden, which is highly unusual for an incumbent. It’s likely to only be worse after the new information gets factored in.
That said, you’re right that we likely need all of the information from new polling to decide on the correct path. But if democrats are smart they are at a minimum setting up an alternative candidate at this point.
Do you know what the word tankie means? Because I don’t think the people you are describing are tankies. Progressives, democratic socialists, maybe some anarchists, or just Palestinian liberation people of all stripes but tankies no. Tankies are not supporting the Democratic Party because they don’t generally believe in democracy. If they were to vote it would be third party or maybe even for Trump in the hopes the west will destroy itself.
Tankies are dangerous so please don’t dilute the meaning of the word that way.
Are we going to though? I have my doubts.
Shit I was not aware of this. I’ve just seen his YouTube channel.
Andrew Callaghan. Just sit there an ask Trump simple questions with a vibe so chill he self destructs without any outside interference.
In one single election, yes. It means nothing, especially when you understand that his job is not to generate an accurate prediction, it’s to energize core supporters into donating to the campaign.
By the way, you can make the same argument in reverse—Trump always overperforms his polling right? If that prediction is accurate then Biden is absolutely going to get trounced. Now I don’t necessarily think this is correct, but it’s a slightly more sophisticated version of the fallacy you are falling prey to here.
Lol no that’s not how any of this works. If I flip a coin and correctly pick the outcome in 2024 will you start paying me to forecast elections?
Party strategists always say their party is going to do well. It’s part of their job. I don’t think this is particularly meaningful, unless you think there’s some particular methodology he has access to that’s better than Silver’s.
OK so probably a translation issue. But to respond to your statement, if your city announced it would punish illegal parking with penalties ranging from 3 years imprisonment to fucking murder, which would you be more concerned with? And which would you rather local journalists make you aware of? Would you really be criticizing their clickbait headlines if they ran a similar story?
Like I said, focusing on the more severe possible punishment makes perfect sense in this context. Not to mention that all of the punishments are extremely excessive.
I mean I think it makes sense to focus on the most severe possible punishment in this context.
That said, I did not find any mention of the death penalty in the linked page. I do not speak Chinese so I was relying on the translation feature in my browser, so I’m not sure if it was mistranslated, the article is wrong about that, or what. Curious if anyone has further information on this.
What are you referring to here? Your statement seems to contradict not just the headline but the entire article.
Yeah I do enjoy him but he’s definitely got a different vibe. Much more satirical.