The Swamp

A_B wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:27 amFrom the article: "Skeptical members of Manchin's party have questioned the reasons for his opposition, especially after after a recent poll found that a majority of West Virginia voters support changing the filibuster rules and that 79% of the state's voters — including a large majority of Republicans — support the For the People Act."

In the second paragraph. You whiffed on this one, Steve in your rush to paint with a broad brush.

I've read that poll. It was put together by Represent Us, a left/liberal advocacy group who clearly favors the legislation and wanted to get a result that inflated its popularity among Manchin's voters.

The poll starts by listing the most generally popular parts of the bill and asks whether people favor those provisions. They all get 75 percent favorability, except for one - only 51 percent favor requiring states to use paper ballots. Then it presents three supposed "goals" of the legislation, again all worded very favorably (like "make sure elections are fair and honest" and "crack down on corruption" and "reduce the influence of big money and lobbyists").

Then it asks "from what you have heard about the For the People Act so far" (i.e., how we just described it), do you think your senators should vote yes.

This is known as "priming" and is known to have a big effect on poll results. https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/ ... t-on-bias/

According to that poll, the person whom WV voters trust the most to provide them with information about the FTPA is Donald Trump. The group placing second highest in that poll is "veterans and members of the military in West Virginia." And only 55 percent even know what the filibuster is.

West Virginia voters are very, very conservative. (Only 17 percent identified as liberal or somewhat liberal, versus 49 percent conservative or somewhat conservative.) They want the Republican party to have power.

Edit: Here is that poll:

Yet another "I know what this poll really means and, surprise, it supports my stance". Crazy how this keeps happening.

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:17 pm Yet another "I know what this poll really means and, surprise, it supports my stance". Crazy how this keeps happening.

Dude, c'mon. Do you really think 70 percent of West Virginia voters favor sweeping changes to national voting laws that strongly favor Democrats (and black and brown people) and rein in good clean white Christian Republicans?

Also you meant 79%, not 70%. ; )

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:34 pm Margin of error: As much as Steve needs to not have to alter his narrative

I think you have that backward. I'm not the one refusing to look at arguments critically and carefully just because I like what they say.

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:35 pm Also you meant 79%, not 70%. ; )

That's the funny thing, I don't see 79% anywhere in that poll.

The first time the question is asked, after really being presented in a biased pro-FTPA way, there's 71 percent support. (This is Question 5.)

Then the poll presents some pro- and con- arguments, still in a biased pro-FTPA way, and the support drops to 57 percent. (Question 12.) But the release summarizing that poll doesn't even mention the 57 percent, even though that is the question presented after the respondents "have heard more about the For the People Act." And I don't recall Rachel Maddow talking or tweeting about the 57, only the 71 (which has somehow grown to 79).

I guess whether its 57% or 71% or 79% doesn't matter since we both know all of those numbers fall under 50%.

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 1:03 pm I guess whether its 57% or 71% or 79% doesn't matter since we both know all of those numbers fall under 50%.

Well, no.

The numbers on that poll are irrelevant because the poll is so biased and has so many red flags as to be worthless.

So we are left to look at other things. For example, we know WV is a very conservative pro-Republican white state that heavily supports Trump and the Republican Party. We know that the state has become more Republican over recent years as racial issues have become more salient. (McCain got 56%, Romney 62%, and Trump 69% both times.)

Is it possible that West Virginia voters, when presented with a full understanding of the For the People Act and its implications, would favor the Act?

Sure, it's possible.

But now, back to the question I asked and you didn't answer before: Do you believe that a strong majority of WV voters favor the For the People Act?

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:24 pm

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:17 pm Yet another "I know what this poll really means and, surprise, it supports my stance". Crazy how this keeps happening.

Dude, c'mon. Do you really think 70 percent of West Virginia voters favor sweeping changes to national voting laws that strongly favor Democrats (and black and brown people) and rein in good clean white Christian Republicans?

This description of the law sounds like a GOP talking point about why these restrictive voting acts are necessary.

I don't know, man. 85% of these dumb mouthbreathing Trump lovers want ban politicians from enriching themselves with policy and 84% are against gerrymandering. It would seem to track.

Giff wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:34 pmThis description of the law sounds like a GOP talking point about why these restrictive voting acts are necessary.

That's exactly my point.

Johnnie wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 8:49 pm

God AOC is so fucking good at this.

She likely has a team of people who vet & research all angles in order to respond in a timely fashion.

Fwiw, I'm guessing Joe Rogan does as well.

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 2:53 pm She likely has a team of people who vet & research all angles in order to respond in a timely fashion.

Fwiw, I'm guessing Joe Rogan does as well.

In this day and age every congressional member should have a team of people to handle social strategy.

A_B wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 2:54 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 2:53 pm She likely has a team of people who vet & research all angles in order to respond in a timely fashion.

Fwiw, I'm guessing Joe Rogan does as well.

In this day and age every congressional member should have a team of people to handle social strategy.

Oh no doubt. Some congresspeople figure it out better than others. Synergy is key.

They don't care and they deserve to lose:

I can’t root for it because of the obvious short term damage and potential long term damage, but I’d like to see a simulation where Obamacare is repealed and whether that makes M4A more likely in the next decade or two.

I half want to run for Congress after I'm done with the military just so I could work with Ruben Gallego.

The other half is to be a cunt to Republicans on Twitter.

If he wanted to be subjected to useless crowd noise he would have stayed at that Colts game

ETTD

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 4:16 pmETTD

Sadly, not literally.

wlu_lax6 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:43 pm

wlu_lax6 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 11, 2021 10:53 am Someone I know very well is getting nominated by the White House for Senate confirmed position today. I have been refreshing the whitehouse.gov press releases constantly to see when it is public...and thinking of what opportunities I have to vandalize this person's wikipedia page (which does not exist yet).

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo ... -services/

Confirmation hearing on Thursday. It is a shame it took so long to get scheduled. I mean she is out of a job in August when Trump is reinstated.

Long story short:

Ethan (from H3) was continuing to wear a mask because of CDC suggestion. Crowder talked shit about it and challenged Ethan to a debate. Ethan isn't a debater and invited Sam Seder to debate instead (there's history with Crowder backing out from a debate with Seder from Politicon). Crowder backed out because his booker -- his father -- used Crowder's pregnant wife as an excuse, but was cool to reschedule the debate when Sam Seder went live the following Monday. Seder pretaped his show and was able to stream-bomb Ethan and Crowder's debate. What you see is his pants shitting reaction.

Liberal YouTube and Twitter is laughing at Crowder because he's a bitch.

I don't understand any of that but figure it would be okay if they all get hit by a meteor?

tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 8:47 am I don't understand any of that but figure it would be okay if they all get hit by a meteor?

I don't know who Ethan is or what h3 is, but if he is a politic pundit, he is kind of a bitch for bringing on someone to debate for him. Steven Crowder is a failed comedian turned right wing political troll, and he is always a bitch, acting like a tough guy, punching down and trying to do Daily Show style man on the street interviews with Liberals and make them look bad, but he is just aggressive and bullying, not funny or letting the morons create the humor, which is what makes Daily Show pieces funny. Sam Seder cohosted a show on Air America with Jeannine Garafolo that I used to listen to. I think he has a youtube show now.

Life's too short for any of this.

Ethan isn't in the realm of being a political pundit and exactly why Crowder wants to debate him.

Johnnie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 8:36 am Long story short:

Ethan (from H3) was continuing to wear a mask because of CDC suggestion. Crowder talked shit about it and challenged Ethan to a debate. Ethan isn't a debater and invited Sam Seder to debate instead (there's history with Crowder backing out from a debate with Seder from Politicon). Crowder backed out because his booker -- his father -- used Crowder's pregnant wife as an excuse, but was cool to reschedule the debate when Sam Seder went live the following Monday. Seder pretaped his show and was able to stream-bomb Ethan and Crowder's debate. What you see is his pants shitting reaction.

Liberal YouTube and Twitter is laughing at Crowder because he's a bitch.

You could just post the Youtube link for literal Youtube shows, you know?

Guys, Steven Crowder is a horrible, horrible, horrible human being. As Nazi as they come, so be careful with the moral equivalencies, here.

I absolutely could, but I doubt the board wants to watch the 48 minute clip from H3 directly or Hasan Piker interviewing Ethan or Vaush with his take that's an hour and twenty plus minutes or the various other links I could add.

So I figured I would find the 2 minute clip and give a quick backstory. Because, as you see, it's met with a giant 'meh' as it is.

I watched Hasan's reaction to it today. It's great.

Crowder asked Seder to take off his glasses to see the "Velveteen Rabbit buttons."

I had no idea what that meant, but it's next level antisemitism because Jewish people have "dark beady eyes" and the punk co-host mentioned something about "to see if you have a soul."

Like, my God. The anti Jewish undertones are the mainline of conservative thought while they always act like their Judeo-Christian bubble is under attack.

I don’t understand at least the last eight posts. No idea who these people are. So it’s on topic!

Yeah, call me when there's less talk about CROWDER and more talk about CHOWDER, amiright?

A_B wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 6:40 pm I don’t understand at least the last eight posts. No idea who these people are. So it’s on topic!

Here's a good history and recap of the whole thing if you're mildly interested...