Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 17, 2017, 02:04:32 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 163
1  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: MA-08: Brianna Wu running against Lynch in 2018 Democratic primary on: January 10, 2017, 09:41:58 am
Funny, I get far more triggered by Lynch's district than her. In fact I'd say he represents one of the worst places in the country that voted for Hillary by far.

I have absolutely no idea what your reasoning is here. None whatsoever.
2  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: If Marine Le Pen loses the 2017 French election, how will it affect Trump? on: January 04, 2017, 08:34:48 pm
I'm not convinced Trump even knows who Marine Le Pen is.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Counties that swung anti-Obama in 2008 and pro-HRC in 2016 on: January 02, 2017, 12:24:11 pm
Given the rate of Atlanta's growth, I wouldn't be surprised if Dawson swung to McCain as a rural county then swung to Clinton (though not by very much, it should be pointed out, Trump increased his vote on romney by 1000, whereas clinton increased on Obama by 200 raw votes) as an exurban Atlanta county. Habersham seems like a dead cat bounce, although I guess that could be just becoming exurban as well, given the sheer size of the atlanta metro area.
4  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinions of Heinz-Christian Strache on: December 31, 2016, 01:06:35 pm
5  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: France vs. Russia on: December 23, 2016, 04:18:34 pm
Russia, because it has the best literature in the world and, even more importantly, the best jokes.
6  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Why are the "WOW" counties in Wisconsin conservative? on: December 17, 2016, 02:57:34 pm
In 2016,

Clinton carried the city of Milwaukee: 188,687:45,422 (81%:19%, of two way vote)
She carried the remainder of the county: 100,134:80,676 (55%:45%)
Trump carried Waukesha County: 79,224:142,543 (36%:64%), Ozaukee (40%:60%), and Washington (29%:71%).

So it is simply a pattern of the city of Milwaukee being extremely leftwing, and the remainder of the county moderating that somewhat (the city had about 56% of the county vote).

Were Milwaukee more centrally located, rather than on the shoreline the metropolitan area would not be as bipolar.


I don't see how this follows at all.
7  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: December 2016 House Election on: December 11, 2016, 08:32:11 pm
1. NeverAgain
2. Southern Gothic
3. Cashew
4. Siren
5. Peebs
6. Goldwater
8  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: What religion are you in your heart and in your head? on: December 11, 2016, 10:12:55 am
Fiscally conservative in my head, socially conservative in my heart
9  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: I'm switching to the GOP. on: December 09, 2016, 04:57:58 pm
lmao
10  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: This is why we can't have a reasonable eugenics debate on: December 09, 2016, 03:36:39 pm
Whenever I hear people arguing for eugenics, I always think of this paragraph from David Bentley Hart:

Quote
Of course, there was always a certain oafish audacity in Fletcher’s degenerate driveling about “morons” and “defectives,” given that there is good cause to suspect, from a purely utilitarian vantage, that academic ethicists — especially those like Fletcher, who are notoriously mediocre thinkers, possessed of small culture, no discernible speculative gifts, no records of substantive philosophical achievement, and execrable prose styles — constitute perhaps the single most useless element in society. If reproduction is not a right but a social function, should any woman be allowed to bring such men into the world? And should those men be permitted, in their turn, to sire offspring? I ask this question entirely in earnest, because I think it helps to identify the one indubitable truth about all social movements towards eugenics: namely, that the values that will determine which lives are worth living, and which not, will always be the province of persons of vicious temperament. If I were asked to decide what qualities to suppress or encourage in the human species, I might first attempt to discover if there is such a thing as a genetic predisposition to moral idiocy and then, if there is, to eliminate it; then there would be no more Joseph Fletchers (or Peter Singers, or Linus Paulings, or James Rachels), and I might think all is well. But, of course, the very idea is a contradiction in terms. Decisions regarding who should or should not live can, by definition, be made only by those who believe such decisions should be made; and therein lies the horror that nothing can ever exorcise from the ideology behind human bioengineering.

11  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: UK Parliamentary by-elections, 2015-2020 on: December 09, 2016, 02:56:58 pm
Yeah, the thing which Labour should be worrying about (and we really really should be worrying) are the polls, and the general state of the leadership, not these by election results, which are pretty much impossible, given the seats that have come up, to generalise.
12  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: You've been elected the 45th President Of The United States? on: December 09, 2016, 12:07:54 pm
Given Trump is going to be the 44th president, I'd obviously spend my entire term repealing everything he did.

Obama's 44th though. You are elected after him mate.

Grover Cleveland isn't Henry VI. He doesn't count as two people.
13  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: You've been elected the 45th President Of The United States? on: December 09, 2016, 11:40:21 am
Given Trump is going to be the 44th president, I'd obviously spend my entire term repealing everything he did.
14  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Italian Constitutional Referendum, 12/04/2016 on: December 04, 2016, 12:52:31 pm
15  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Austrian Elections & Politics 2.0 (Presidential runoff re-vote: 4 Dec. 2016) on: December 04, 2016, 11:59:15 am
I think this result is another argument in favour of the theory that people really don't like voting more than they have to.
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Two Counties Gave HRC her ENTIRE PV Plurality on: December 01, 2016, 08:39:25 am
Get rid of York and Lancaster County, PA, Livingston County, MI and Waukesha County, WI  and Clinton wins the EV. This is why we should have the PV- to protect the rest of America from four counties out of over 3000.
17  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: Pope Francis extends Catholic priests' power to forgive abortion on: November 24, 2016, 08:29:44 am
The most quasi-universalist talk I've heard is from people like Robert Barron who hold the "reasonable hope that everyone will be saved" position, but I'm not aware of many, if any, who go further than that.

That's what I'm referring to (and approximately the position I hold).

Quote
Personally, I think univeralism is a plausible outcome, but one I find rather unlikely as it overrides free will (although you can make a purgatorial universalist argument that doesn't necessarily do so, although it has other problems), and it seems to go against a number of teachings from Jesus himself.

There are elements within Eastern Orthodoxy, especially in Russian-language theology, that tend in the purgatorial-universalist direction, if memory serves.

I recently read a paper by the Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart which putt the case against Hell in very strong terms (available here). I personally found it very convincing, but Hart is one of those people who's worth reading even when you disagree with.
18  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: Senate Confirmation Hearing: Gass3268 for Supreme Court Justice on: November 23, 2016, 11:47:09 am
I think Gass would make a great justice and I urge the senate to confirm him.

Having said that, I would like to, as an eminent elder statesman of this game, like to release the following statement on Truman nominating a highly qualified, broadly respected atlasian for the supreme court while serving in the last days of a term he wasn't even elected for: lmao

This is clearly an attempt on Oakvale's part to ensure that Griffin does not appoint his successor on the court. I can't say I'm surprised, though.

As a matter of principle, I will oppose this nomination should it come to a vote before Friday, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
19  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Why can moderate republicans win in red states but not the other way around? on: November 22, 2016, 02:24:30 pm
i think the thread is spot-on.

ofc dems can win in republican states but it's much harder and needs much more luck/ressources/ name recog/gaffes than the other way around.

just look at the map...which states are out of reach for down-ticket republicans? (hint: not maryland/illinois/mass.....)

There is no reason at all to say that Democrats need more luck/resources or worse opponents to win in Solid Republican states than the converse. A quick look at the races you mention proves the point. Why did Republicans scrape a victory in Illinois? Because they were running against the incredibly unpopular Pat Quinn in a republican landslide year. Why did Charlie Baker win in 2014? Because he was a good candidate running against Martha Coakley, the world's worst candidate, in a republican landslide year. Why did Phil Scott win in Vermont? Because he was a well known moderate figure in the state, running to suceed the unpopular Shumlin. Why did the unknown John Bel Edwards win in Louisiana last year? Because he was a good candidate running against David Vitter. Why did Jim Justice win this year? Because he was a good, very rich candidate. There is no difference at all.

Wyoming and Tennessee had very popular democratic governors just 6 years ago. South Carolina had a very very close gubernatorial race in 2010. Obviously, all things being equal, Republicans are more likely to win in these states than Democrats. The same is obviously true in reverse for Vermont and Massachusetts and Maryland. But for all of these states there are circumstances, when there is the perfect storm of a good candidate, a poor opponent, the national tide and so on where the minority party can win. And these perfect storms seem to happen about as often on both sides.
20  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Why can moderate republicans win in red states but not the other way around? on: November 22, 2016, 08:54:53 am
What a ridiculously silly thread.

Just 2 weeks ago Jim Justice won the governor's race in the state with the second largest vote for Trump. If you look at the state house races for West Virginia and Kentucky Democrats won races in seats where Hillary got 10 or 20%. All three rural Minnesota dems were re elected despite Hillary losing their districts in a landslide (Clinton didn't even win a county in Petersons). Steve Bullock won re election in a state which Trump won by 20 points.

The whole premise is just flat out wrong.

21  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: Are the vast majority of people good at heart? on: November 19, 2016, 09:02:51 am
Quote
"Approximately at midnight, sleep finally took pity on Pontius Pilate.....He walked in the company of his dog, and beside him walked Yeshua. They were arguing about something very complex and important, and neither of them could refute the other. They did not agree with each other in anything and that made their argument especially interesting and endless. It went without saying that today's execution proved to be a sheer misunderstanding: here Yeshua, who had thought up such an incredibly absurd thing as all men are good, was walking beside him, therefore he was alive. And, of course, it would be terrible to even think that one could execute such a man"
22  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Norbert Hofer (FPÖ) to host US-Russia summit in Vienna if elected President on: November 13, 2016, 04:12:22 pm
the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution.

Jesus Christ, Sanchez.
Only legitimate transfers of power should be recognized. The American Revolution was one. The Glorious Revolution was another. The secession of the CSA can even be legally justified (though, of course, not nearly as much as the subsequent reconquest and repatriation by the Union). These were totally different animals compared to the Russian Revolution or the rise of the Nazi Party in Germany, where existing albeit flawed state structures were overthrown either by force or just general intimidation.

Sorry, but you're not applying any sort of coherent standard here.
I think it's a pretty coherent standard. "Legitimate transfer of power" simply means a revolution sanchez happens to agree with.
23  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: UK Parliamentary by-elections, 2015-2020 on: November 06, 2016, 12:32:15 pm
Tories should run Mr Moat for throwback's sake

If that happened Paul Gascoigne would unexpectedly file as an independent candidate at the last moment.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What went down in NC just now? on: November 04, 2016, 03:23:47 pm
Did anyone see the Obama rally descend into chaos? I against a heckler (an elderly veteran backing Trump according to Obama himself from the podium) was beaten? I dunno. Nobody is reporting it for some reason, but it alarmed me when I watched it happen.

Obama reminded me of Ceausescu during his last speech trying to calm the mob before he was forced to flee the building via helicopter. It took him a hot minute to get that place under control.

This is a remarkably stupid comment, even for a white supremacist.
25  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: You should have listened on: November 04, 2016, 02:29:08 pm
We've got some delusion of grandeur here. People have been aware and vocal on the need of game reform long before you became President. Suggesting that your actions, or rather lack of action, was a deciding factor here is... interesting.

Restart had been accomplished under Griffin, who unlike you never abdicated his responsibilities as President. It's naive to think "bah, reset, everything's solved now" way was of any use.

Well yes. That's true, and I've never claimed otherwise. Pretty much every game reform had the support of a majority (hence all of them passing the senate) of atlasians and probably a supermajority of active ones. What did happen, on every single one of them though, was that there were reactionaries who blocked the changes, not always the same, (although, as noted, some like zuwo were the same) but always enough, combined with the terrible system, to block any change.


Well, I've been receiving more positive notes than negative on my overall tenure as GM and a lot of people were getting involved thanks to various developments, so you certainly can't claim Atlasians views it as bland or useless.

OK, forget terrorist stuff for a moment. What about diplomatic problems with other countries? You've ignored it entirely. Whether you like the idea of GM or not, the law provides for the game engine and President can't just ignore it. You're free to push for the abolition of the game engine, but until then it's just immature to be like "oh, this is part of the rules I don't like, let's ignore it."

Last, but not least, I firmly believe that one of the reasons South American experiment had failed is because you have no game engine whatsoever. All you managed was to repeat all of Atlasia's mistakes.

I'm not at all surprised that people claim to view the GM office positively. In fact I've already said that, repeatedly, up thread.  But of course people claim to do so. As I said, it's one of the best sticks for beating your opponent over the head with. No one really decides their votes on it though, it's just a rhetorical device. And as soon as they reach the position of actually engaging with the office in a meaningful way, most people come around to the view that the office is unworkable. Most GMs do, which is why there is such a high turnover. The problem is no one ever believes that something is so because the GM says so. Hence Adam's aliens storyline, or the terrorist attacks, or whatever. In all those cases the public simply don't believe him. Hell, who really believes that atlasia has run surpluses for the last 12 years? The GM, if he is to believed has to say things everyone already knows, and if he doesn't, no one believes him.

And the thing is atlasia is primarily an elections game and only secondarily a government one. If the president wants to ignore the GM he can. Maybe not de jure but certainly de facto. If the public disagree they'll not re elect him or his party. But, funnily enough, that doesn't happen.


Prior to the massive number of deregistrations, consolidation was still viewed with hostility, and many thought a convention would fail to achieve anything. Even among those who signed it, many were still opposed to consolidation, which was of course the primary expected proposal at a convention. Perhaps that is what is causing our different interpretation of events with regards to support on the right. The massive loss of players finally encouraged those who had long opposed consolidation to realize it was only answer at that point.

I would also point out that I purposely delayed signing by a week because I was worried that the minute I signed the petition, it would be attacked as "Yankee's little scheme to preserve the status quo" by the dissolution, which was already being tossed around. Avoiding signing it gave the con-con some distance until those critics began to depart.

Your second paragraph is convenient, maybe it's true. I don't know so I can't deal with it.

And the first one isn't really a matter of disagreement. I obviously wouldn't have made the speech if there hadn't been a spate of deregistrations and inactivity. They were the inevitable outcome of that incarnation of the game running it's course, but if it had happened in the term after me I would have kept on going, obviously. The president obviously doesn't have the power to announce there is a crisis and have everyone believe him. The crisis was very very real. But I certainly think it's the case, and the negative reviews from the usual suspects of my tenure confirm, that if I had tried to polish the turd, if I had unleashed a flurry of executive orders and pmed everyone in the game and dragged together a cabinet, at least in name only, then the game would have held together for a bit long, staggering on. And I think that is a real contradiction. You can't say that on the one hand I didn't lead enough, and on the other that of course the crisis was real and overwhelming and nothing I did changed its course, and the ConCon would have happened anyway. If I had been more active on a conventional level in my last few months I think the ConCon would not have happened. And I think that would be a tragedy for the game.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 163


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines