[awm]

It’s interesting in that long letter from Mr Lankford that he admits:

1. States run their elections, not the federal government.
2. Every state certified its result.
3. He has no evidence of significant fraud.
4. Congress doesn’t have the power to overturn the election result.
5. The Trump campaign lost all its court cases.

And yet he still supported the ridiculous Texas lawsuit and wanted to delay counting the votes by ten days for this ridiculous commission. He compares the election to the 1876 cycle when states actually sent multiple slates of electors even though that didn’t happen this time and again, he has no evidence of significant fraud.

He seems to think that we need to do something because “people think the election was stolen” without addressing the elephant in the room — that people think that because Trump keeps saying it (without any evidence). And he was horrified by the attempted coup but doesn’t seem to want to think about the reasons that happened either (Trump repeating that the election was stolen and telling his supporters to fight).

But some people just see what they want to see I guess.

[Winstonm]

awm, on 2021-January-15, 16:08, said:

It's interesting in that long letter from Mr Lankford that he admits:

1. States run their elections, not the federal government.
2. Every state certified its result.
3. He has no evidence of significant fraud.
4. Congress doesn't have the power to overturn the election result.
5. The Trump campaign lost all its court cases.

And yet he still supported the ridiculous Texas lawsuit and wanted to delay counting the votes by ten days for this ridiculous commission. He compares the election to the 1876 cycle when states actually sent multiple slates of electors even though that didn't happen this time and again, he has no evidence of significant fraud.

He seems to think that we need to do something because "people think the election was stolen" without addressing the elephant in the room — that people think that because Trump keeps saying it (without any evidence). And he was horrified by the attempted coup but doesn't seem to want to think about the reasons that happened either (Trump repeating that the election was stolen and telling his supporters to fight).

But some people just see what they want to see I guess.

Btw, I sent Senator Lankford a reply that said he is diminishing himself by supporting The Big Lie and that he should feel shame. As it turns out, he also pissed off the significant black community in Tulsa so he's now claiming he didn't realize that The Big Lie was aimed at disenfranchising mostly votes from areas of high black populations.

[pilowsky]

Winstonm, on 2021-January-15, 18:31, said:

Btw, I sent Senator Lankford a reply that said he is diminishing himself by supporting The Big Lie and that he should feel shame. As it turns out, he also pissed off the significant black community in Tulsa so he's now claiming he didn't realize that The Big Lie was aimed at disenfranchising mostly votes from areas of high black populations.

That's the problem with people that think things and have no insight. They just keep thinking them.
People used to think that plants grew because they ate the earth. Until van Helmont came along and proved them wrong.
People still think the Sun rotates around the Earth nothing I say will dissuade them from this delusion .

[thepossum]

barmar, on 2021-January-14, 13:55, said:

Just the usual Republican hypocracy. You're all for the free market and reining in government oversignt, as long as it allows you to propogate your agenda (e.g. raping the environment to fill the coffers of the 1%).

Hi Barrie. I will skip this comment and the use of you're and you since it does not apply to me. I have no association with republicans at all, but from what I have seen recently I am happy I never had to make a choice between Democrats or Republicans at an election. What frightens me these days is that simply standing up for freedoms, liberties and justice and what I believe is right (as someone from what I still regard as the left), so many who claim left or even social democrat tendencies these days have forgotten what it means. Their hypocrisy is legendary too and in my view puts that of the Republicans to shame. But I am not involved in US politics. I am concerned about implications of what is going on for the whole world and our personal and business freedoms, trust, and safety

I will add though that there is a huge amount of bullshit propagated for years from those claiming some environmental and scientific backing for their misinformation on social media. Many of them are putting profits and self-interested technology development ahead of the environment too. And they have had the Democrats, much of the Academe and many other powerful interests to back them up. I have observed serious misinformation from all sides of politics for years

[thepossum]

hrothgar, on 2021-January-14, 14:12, said:

"Crying Fire in a crowded theater" is typically used as the prototypical example where the government is justified in restricting free speech.

Trump's ability to post on some social media platforms was cut off after he incited a mob to attempt to overthrow a legitimate election.
Five people died in the resulting riots.

The US government would be perfectly justified in cutting off Trump's speech.

What we are seeing here is something very different. A number of private company's have determined that they don't want on their platforms. I wish that it had happened long before now.

Note: I am not aware of any members of Trump's family being permanently deplatformed. However, Twitter and the like are fact checking their claims.

Herein lies a large part of the problem and a failure to understand what is really going on and its implications for the world.
I actually see massive overreach, and also a failure of due process everywhere. I also see some powerful corporations grappling with difficult issues under immense one-sided political pressure over content on their platforms
I dont want to/cant comment on any individual issues or issues related to the Capitol protest/invasion/riot/case etc
However I have seen what appears to be overreach against President Trump in various areas of his personal and business life under what are still just allegations, and seriously politically charged.
I have also seen the other "mob" going after, not just the extreme element, but anyone vaguely associated with the Trump support base in ways that are rather alarming.
I see two mobs, and one with immense power in so many intitutions which is able to keep its hands clean while involved in its ongoing mob activities.

I would like to keep the disucssion to the implications for the rest of us in the world, and not the specifics of President trump, The Capitol etc. Otherwise we will never get anywhere and my point can be undermined by having to address all those details

[thepossum]

Hi Ken

Thanks for your response. I partially addressed in other comments above but will try to respond without getting into details over President Trump and the incident at the Capitol
I am more interested in the extent of the sanctions against one individual (albeit a very powerful one) and many of his political support base - I believe you still have a democracy, law, due process etc. Time will tell I guess

kenberg, on 2021-January-14, 15:17, said:

This is broadly phrased. I will respond tin a few ways.

1. The big issue of course was Trump addressing followers who then became a mob and attacked the capitol and the people in it. I am very confident that if I had done such a thing I would now be in jail with little hope of being out any time soon. I am fine with that. What Trump did has never come under the umbrella of protected speech nor should it.


2. Organizations such as the PGA have decided to keep their distance. What took them so long? Long before Trump became president I would trust him with neither my wallet nor my daughter. Well, granddaughter, but you get the idea. A list of people who regret ever doing as much as saying hello to DT is pretty long I think.

I cannot or do not really want to address these comments. However I for one have not seen the offending social media incitement which has led to such huge sanctions against so many. I also do not want to/cannot address actions of extreme elements of any political/other movement. I agree with you on the legal side and whoever is responsible for criminal activity. That is not what I see going on though

I'm interested in the broader issues and implications for much of the world, personally and corporately.

Quote

3. Now about social media, banned twitter accounts, banned Facebook postings etc. ......

I am unsure which if any of these issues are what you were getting at.

With relation to social media I am concerned about the pressures on social media and other corporate entities to use their rules to silence individuals across the board. The big-techs, no matter how much they claim to be individual private/public listed companies are essentially an oligopoly with huge power over the lives of many of us in the world. An across the board deplatforming of any individual and seemingly many of his political supporters, and even denial of access to platforms for whole internet communities etc goes way beyond any reasonable sanction and due process in any legal or political sense.

EDIT More to come. This issue is immense. And its hard enough responding to so many comments and responding quickly. And I'm actually trying to watch a 4 hour senate hearing about some of those issues faced by the social media companies. Its a huge issue and many like to undermine any attempt at raising concerns. Not you Ken, others

However after watching some of the Senate hearing and questions to Mr Dorsey and Mr Zuckerberg in relation to social media companies' actions to moderate their platforms it strikes me as a very one sided issue. And from my many years of involvement in social media socially and politically, and what I have observed over recent years there is more than enough provocative content, misinformation, and cruel content from elements of the left/Democrat/scientific/academic side as there is from the MAGAs etc Sadly they have all the power to protect them and attack the other side

I am also concerned at the tendency of many on that so-called progressive side to jump on people and misrepresent all the time. Its is regular tactic to try and undermine anything. However as someone who is outside the great powerful insitituions of government/academe etc, but with considerable knowledge on many issues, and also someone who has been very political my whole life; what I have observed on social media over recent years is concerning in the way certain political interests gang up on, silence anyone they dislike and in the end dominate whole platforms. And that de-platforming appears to be happening at all levels of platforms 9without wanting to get into too much detail of different players). Also who has the powers between government and corporations is an ongoing debate that many do not seem to understand. I am very concerned seeing the political pressure from one side against platforms to act (not just against crime) but against political opponents and others etc. I have seen extensive misinformation and misrepresentation and abuse of social media by many on all sides of politics, including those who claim the high ground

Here is the link to the hearings for those who have 4 hours to spare and havent watched it Senate Hearing on Social Media Moderation

[johnu]

Winstonm, on 2021-January-15, 08:21, said:

While I understand and have sympathy for your premise, besides what Richard pointed out keep in mind that some of those people who continued to receive paychecks were forced to do so because of their occupations and thus had their lives put in danger - think nurses, trash collectors, meat packers, etc. I think a bonus on top of their regular pay is the least we should do for them, don't you?

I think essential workers should have received bonuses, from their employers. Sure, it would be nice if the feds could give essential workers a bonus, but not at the expense of those who were forced into living on the edge through no fault of their own.

Jobless claims: Another 965,000 Americans filed new unemployment claims last week

I think many of those that have been unemployed or had their hours and pay reduced drastically would jump at the chance to have one of those essential worker jobs and receive a regular salary, even if they had increased risk of Covid. Even a 2nd $2000 payment isn't going to do much to pay for their back rent or mortgage payments, or other monthly expenses that have gone unpaid because the are broke and going into debt. Especially when many of them have had their income slashed or zeroed out for up to 9+ months, with the prospect of a minimum of 6 to 9 more months with a pandemic keeping the economy in turmoil. Many of the companies that laid off workers have closed permanently, and many more will close permanently before the economy recovers.

My solution to the problem of people getting stimulus checks who don't need them (or not nearly as needed as those who have lost their jobs)? Send out the checks, but pass a tax bill that taxes the stimulus checks at 100% if you haven't had an economic loss during the year. That way, the checks can go out ASAP and everybody who deserves a check will get one. I understand that this will cause problems for some people who are going to be taxed at 100% (or some lower percentage) but who spend the entire check and then don't have the money to pay the taxes. They are still a lot better off than somebody who has lost their job for a year plus.

[pilowsky]

The life of slime:
When I was an undergraduate one of our anatomy lecturers told us that he had done a research project on the slime mould Dictostylium discoideum.
What does this have to do with COVID-19 I hear you ask?
Slime moulds - like Bridge players - are social creatures. Unlike Bridge players, they are socialist when things are hard. When food is plentiful, and life is good, each of the unicellular organisms goes about its business happily.
When times are tough, they gather together into a slug and hunt for whatever is available together. In this way, they are like a squadron of aircraft or geese - preferably not at the same time, or they both end up in the Hudson.
The management by Trump of the COVID19 disaster is opposite in every way to the way that a slime mould would handle a crisis.
The only similarity between the slime mould and Trump’s cabinet seems to be the slimy outer coating that binds the individuals together.
In Trump-world, the response is to shuck off useful collaborative international organisations. Instead, the Trump administration favours buying up all available resources, thereby worsening the crisis to the point where it is out of control.
The man in charge of the CDC (Atlanta) - Robert Redfield - claimed on NPR today that he did his best under the circumstances and that the reason things were so bad in America is that the population suffered from a heavier load of the preexisting conditions that provide fertile soil for the virus.
Redfield’s belief is partly true. America does have a massive overload of people affected by hypertension, obesity hyperlipidaemia and obesity (collectively known as Syndrome X or the metabolic syndrome). But there is the current cultural antipathy towards helping each other that is also a big part.
Countries, where the government and society subscribe to the slime mould model of cooperativity, have done much better.

[Winstonm]

https://www.theatlan...ul-coup/617709/

Quote

Here is the nub of our predicament. Donald Trump attempted democracide, and he had help. The victim survived but suffered grievous wounds. American democracy now faces a long convalescence in an environment of ongoing attacks. Trump has not exhausted his malignant powers, and co-conspirators remain at large.

I do not mean to be taken figuratively. The president of the United States lost an election and really did try with all his might to keep the winner from replacing him. He did his level best to overthrow our system of government, and tens of millions of Americans marched behind him. But a coup d’état in America had seemed so unlikely a thing, and it was so buffoonishly attempted, that the political establishment had trouble taking it seriously. That was a big mistake.

[kenberg]

Winstonm, on 2021-January-16, 08:56, said:

https://www.theatlan...ul-coup/617709/

This is a very good article.

[kenberg]

Trump has announced that he will not be at the inauguration.
Where will he be?
A guess, not entirely joking.
In some country that has no extradition treaty with the US.
The House and Senate can remove him from the presidency. A court could put him in jail

[shyams]

kenberg, on 2021-January-16, 15:16, said:

Trump has announced that he will not be at the inauguration.
Where will he be?
A guess, not entirely joking.
In some country that has no extradition treaty with the US.
The House and Senate can remove him from the presidency. A court could put him in jail

He's not going to leave the country. He still has money to make for the Secret Service protection to which he is entitled.

He will most certainly insist on invoicing the US Govt. even higher tariffs on the lodging & boarding for the Secret Service staff assigned to protect him and his family.

[pilowsky]

shyams, on 2021-January-16, 15:31, said:

He's not going to leave the country. He still has money to make for the Secret Service protection to which he is entitled.

He will most certainly insist on invoicing the US Govt. even higher tariffs on the lodging & boarding for the Secret Service staff assigned to protect him and his family.

Which he loses if they convict him!

[y66]

I suppose exorcising the orange turd from the collective spirit of the wc is asking for too much. Still, I'm looking forward to somebody starting a new thread soon that does not mention the OT in the title.

[pilowsky]

y66, on 2021-January-16, 21:38, said:

I suppose exorcising the orange turd from the collective spirit of the wc is asking for too much. Still, I'm looking forward to somebody starting a new thread soon that does not mention the OT in the title.

Just Biden your time I suppose?

[Winstonm]

Without an echo chamber, The Big Lie is not nearly as effective:

Quote

Online misinformation about the presidential election plunged an astonishing 73% after Twitter and other social media networks either banned or suspended Donald Trump and key supporters, according to new data analysis.

Baseless claims of election fraud dropped from 2.5 million mentions to 688,000 mentions across several social media sites in the week after Trump was banned by Twitter, according to research by the San Francisco-based analytics firm Zignal Labs, The Washington Post reported Saturday.

The use of hashtags linked to the Jan. 6 Capitol attack also plunged, with "Fight for Trump," "Hold The Line," and "March for Trump" all falling 95%, Zignal found.

The findings, covering social media comments from Jan. 9 through Friday, underscores the synergistic effect of falsehoods on social media as misinformation is repeated and amplified if it's not quickly checked, the Post noted.

Looks like a reasonable argument for re-instituting the Fairness Doctrine.

[Winstonm]

This caught my eye in the WaPo:

Quote

Too often, even the most credible journalists who are trying to cover the disastrous effects of the Big Lie explain it by sprinkling phrases into their reporting like "baseless claims" or "without evidence" — and seem to expect them to do all the work.

But that's simply ineffective. "People don't notice this boilerplate language after a while," Rosenstiel said, "or even begin to bristle at it."

Seems like I heard this before - maybe in the WC?

Thinking further about this, not only is it important to identify the lies but to frame the lies in such a way that no one would want to be characterized as someone who would listen to them or allow themselves to be influenced by lies. Calling them propaganda after a while becomes meaningless. I'm thinking a more effective phrase would be this: lies aimed at the weak-minded.

No one wants to think of themselves as weak-minded.

This post has been edited by Winstonm: 2021-January-17, 08:47

[kenberg]

y66, on 2021-January-16, 21:38, said:

I suppose exorcising the orange turd from the collective spirit of the wc is asking for too much. Still, I'm looking forward to somebody starting a new thread soon that does not mention the OT in the title.

I wonder if we ("we" meaning whatever we wish it to mean) can move toward a discussion of what we value. I was having a discussion with one of my daughters las night that can illustrate the point. We were talking about choices and sh mentioned, just as an aside, that my father must have been very proud of me for becoming a professor. Not really. I was self-supporting, that was the key. My father never understood mathematics and certainly never understood how or why anyone would earn a living at it, but if it paid the bills, then that's fine. This was not some peculiarity of my father, I grew up a time and place where this was a fundamental way of thinking. Is it still?

Or child care. The teachers were in charge of me when I was in school, my parents were when I was not in school. This worked well.

All very 1950s. And, btw, I never watched Leave It To Beaver or other such shows. I am trying to speak of reality here.

We hear about how we must accept that the world has changed. Yes, I accept that it has. I don't always like it, but I accept it. Maybe some discussion about just what sort of society we hope for would be timely. No to Trump, fine, I have never thought otherwise. But where is it exactly that we are heading, or hope to be heading?

[Winstonm]

kenberg, on 2021-January-17, 10:08, said:

I wonder if we ("we" meaning whatever we wish it to mean) can move toward a discussion of what we value. I was having a discussion with one of my daughters las night that can illustrate the point. We were talking about choices and sh mentioned, just as an aside, that my father must have been very proud of me for becoming a professor. Not really. I was self-supporting, that was the key. My father never understood mathematics and certainly never understood how or why anyone would earn a living at it, but if it paid the bills, then that's fine. This was not some peculiarity of my father, I grew up a time and place where this was a fundamental way of thinking. Is it still?

Or child care. The teachers were in charge of me when I was in school, my parents were when I was not in school. This worked well.

All very 1950s. And, btw, I never watched Leave It To Beaver or other such shows. I am trying to speak of reality here.

We hear about how we must accept that the world has changed. Yes, I accept that it has. I don't always like it, but I accept it. Maybe some discussion about just what sort of society we hope for would be timely. No to Trump, fine, I have never thought otherwise. But where is it exactly that we are heading, or hope to be heading?

In some instances the havoc that has been generated must be dealt with before it is possible to move forward. I believe that is now where we find ourselves. We can try to do both, and I advocate for that approach. I am firmly against any idea of "look forward, not back" as happened with Obama after the Bush-Cheney era.

Moving forward, the only goal that will make a difference is a move toward economic equality - and I hope we can find a better word that "equality" as the effort is not for poor to take from the rich until both are equal but for poor to be elevated to the point where basic necessities of life - food, shelter, healthcare - are provided as a safety net against calamities, while we work to provide genuine equality of opportunities.

[y66]

kenberg, on 2021-January-17, 10:08, said:

I wonder if we ("we" meaning whatever we wish it to mean) can move toward a discussion of what we value.

I think this is a huge part of finding our way out of the abyss. So is getting more people to agree on basic facts, especially people in positions of responsibility.