2020 US Election (Part 3)

Status
Not open for further replies.
What about it?
Van Jones' remarks really resonated with me and my wife and brought me back to the conversation I had with my kids the morning after Trump's election in 2016... to among other things... reassure my kids that they we would keep them safe. Listening to Van Jones also made me think of you, and I thought you might appreciate his remarks as well. That's all. You obviously don't have any obligation to feel the same about it as me, nor do you have any obligation to live up to my expectations. I was just sharing.
 
@Gorbles to say some of the threats claimed aren't exaggerations is a bit of a stretch... Not saying they aren't real, but... Our media isn't exactly shy about plastering the news cycle every time something awful happens to a minority of one stripe or another. American hate crimes make international news.

Also, anyone waiting for Washington to save them from anything should invest in Plan B, pronto.
 
Stupid - but true - anecdote

I have a friend that is of Indian descent and on election night 2016, he pulled up to a red light only to have the car full of MAGA-hat wearers scream obscenities at him for being brown. That's not supposition on my part; they straight up told him to go back to Mexico and to fudge himself because this was "Trump's America".

On CNN just now they showed a mixed race family headed to a celebration and they said it was important for their half-Indian daughters to see what was possible in America.

I like this version of America a lot more.
 
@Gorbles to say some of the threats claimed aren't exaggerations is a bit of a stretch... Not saying they aren't real, but... Our media isn't exactly shy about plastering the news cycle every time something awful happens to a minority of one stripe or another. American hate crimes make international news.

Also, anyone waiting for Washington to save them from anything should invest in Plan B, pronto.
There are no stretches that I can see. As for the news cycle, plenty more happens that doesn't even make it.

I don't expect you to understand, it's not even something I have lived experience of myself. But specific minorities exist under the threat of actual violence, nevermind daily abuse. Is Biden's win going to magically make it all go away? Of course not. But he doesn't represent a free-fall.
 
There are no stretches that I can see. As for the news cycle, plenty more happens that doesn't even make it.

I don't expect you to understand, it's not even something I have lived experience of myself. But specific minorities exist under the threat of actual violence, nevermind daily abuse. Is Biden's win going to magically make it all go away? Of course not. But he doesn't represent a free-fall.

I try to trust but verify and when I go to verify, the data doesn't always correlate the claim. You are fond of saying that just because someone is mad, doesn't make them wrong. Well, just because someone is scared, doesn't make them right.
 
I try to trust but verify and when I go to verify, the data doesn't always correlate the claim. You are fond of saying that just because someone is mad, doesn't make them wrong. Well, just because someone is scared, doesn't make them right.
That's a bit of a poor correlation. You cannot ask someone to verify, constantly, why they're scared. Scared is a feeling. Are you telling them they shouldn't feel that way?

Someone can be demonstrably correct while being angry, because both "angry" and "correct" can be conveyed by text (or speech). The state of being scared cannot be. Neither can living with that fear. I don't think you're giving it the full respect you perhaps should.
 
That's a bit of a poor correlation. You cannot ask someone to verify, constantly, why they're scared. Scared is a feeling. Are you telling them they shouldn't feel that way?

Someone can be demonstrably correct while being angry, because both "angry" and "correct" can be conveyed by text (or speech). The state of being scared cannot be. Neither can living with that fear. I don't think you're giving it the full respect you perhaps should.

Being angry and being scared are both feelings, so if it's a bad correlation it's bad for other reasons. I think you probably meant to say something else and I didn't follow. Anyway, here's something I wrote to a friend about why I feel the media can barely be trusted, but it's also demonstrative of the point of exaggeration I'm trying to make. Also, it's a fairly benign example to focus on so we don't blow up the thread (kind of sad that I'd call this benign, but you know what I mean - as compared to some other topics of threat).

Remember back when Donald Trump didn't dominate the news cycle and we had that summer where it seemed like every other day, the media was reporting about another kid left in a car that died? I think it was 2012 -- 2014 - something like that. The way the media carried on about it, people were running around like crazy asking what on earth the world was coming to and why this 'epidemic' was occurring.

Of course, if you actually bothered to fact check the media sensationalists, you'd notice that there wasn't any actual 'epidemic.' First, damn near no children die this way per year in the US (an average of 39 per year in a population of 331 million), but secondly, there was no 'surge' or 'epidemic' or insanity going on. In fact, it was just like any other year. In 2014, slightly more children died than average (44) but that wasn't even a high since 1998, and you have to take into account that they were reporting these as they happened, meaning that they weren't seeing some enormous uptick in real time (they'd have no way of knowing that the high would ultimately occur, if it was in fact 2014).

Instead what happened is that one story (As it is local news) engendered a large response, other media outlets noticed that response, and then they decided to search for other stories from wherever they could find to report them to get more clicks. It had absolutely nothing to do with being particularly newsworthy, or a particularly noble thing to report to try and "save the children" and everything to do with selling more papers, and getting more clicks.

Indeed, if you think that they did this out of some sense of altruism or civic duty, consider that since Trump has been elected (and thus, there are far juicier stories to tell), children left in cars have been at or above average, and over the 2014 high in 3 of the 4 years since 2016 when he was in his primaries. 2020 obviously being far lower as fewer parents are forgetting to drop their kids off at daycare on their way to work, given that fewer kids are going to daycare, and fewer parents are going in to work. Anyway, more kids died while Trump was in office, but there were better stories to tell and it wasn't as slow of a news year, so the media barely discussed it.

To me, this really demonstrates what many are saying when they tell you the media is full of it. You simply can't trust that the stories they're peddling are what they are at face value. I would encourage you to just visit CNN AND Fox News every morning and start observing what "stories" each reports, and doesn't report, and also what "angle" they take on them, and you'll quickly find you need to do your own research.

As one aside, it is interesting to me that after all the attention the issue of children dying in cars received in 2012-2014, 2015 did see a (pre-2020) record low (24), so the media can have an influence on behavior, which is good in the case of children being left in cars, but very troubling to think of how they can influence more insidious designs.

https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/motor-vehicle-safety-issues/hotcars/

Essentially, the media had people terrified that they'd leave their kids in a hot car and kill them even though it almost never happens. The threat was completely exaggerated, yet it dominated the news cycle that year, and people all over the place were taking corrective measures, like driving to work without a shoe on (so you'd have to remember to check your car seat) to correct for it. Billboards were erected, "check for baby" bumper stickers went up, windows were smashed (mostly to "save" dogs), etc. Somewhat of a chaotic summer, you might say. Well, at least as far as Pre-Trump goes. But again, an exaggerated threat.

Me running around that summer doing all of these things fearfully and spending a lot of time talking about the situation would not change the fact that it really wasn't as big of a situation as I was making it out to be. Sometimes, it just doesn't add up.
 
I remember that summer, maybe about 20 years ago, where shark attacks were the big news thing, then it turned out that it was actually a lower-than-average year for shark attacks.

Having lived exclusively in the upper midwest and not being a swimmer I correctly calculated my shark risk to approach zero.
 
Stupid - but true - anecdote

I have a friend that is of Indian descent and on election night 2016, he pulled up to a red light only to have the car full of MAGA-hat wearers scream obscenities at him for being brown. That's not supposition on my part; they straight up told him to go back to Mexico and to fudge himself because this was "Trump's America".

On CNN just now they showed a mixed race family headed to a celebration and they said it was important for their half-Indian daughters to see what was possible in America.

I like this version of America a lot more.

Arthurian Legend was wrong. The land and it's head-of-state are not one. There's a LOT more to it than that, and judging eras of national history, or delineating national tenor and attitude, solely by tenures of heads-of-state is short-sighted, at best.
 
Being angry and being scared are both feelings, so if it's a bad correlation it's bad for other reasons. I think you probably meant to say something else and I didn't follow. Anyway, here's something I wrote to a friend about why I feel the media can barely be trusted, but it's also demonstrative of the point of exaggeration I'm trying to make. Also, it's a fairly benign example to focus on so we don't blow up the thread (kind of sad that I'd call this benign, but you know what I mean - as compared to some other topics of threat).



Essentially, the media had people terrified that they'd leave their kids in a hot car and kill them even though it almost never happens. The threat was completely exaggerated, yet it dominated the news cycle that year, and people all over the place were taking corrective measures, like driving to work without a shoe on (so you'd have to remember to check your car seat) to correct for it. Billboards were erected, "check for baby" bumper stickers went up, windows were smashed (mostly to "save" dogs), etc. Somewhat of a chaotic summer, you might say. Well, at least as far as Pre-Trump goes. But again, an exaggerated threat.

Me running around that summer doing all of these things fearfully and spending a lot of time talking about the situation would not change the fact that it really wasn't as big of a situation as I was making it out to be. Sometimes, it just doesn't add up.

I mean this still happens all the time. The media is a blessing and a curse no two ways about it. Social media has exacerbated the situation. CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING!!!!11!!

https://migrationdataportal.org/themes/human-trafficking

While there is and always has been a real problem with human trafficking its not hanging out in every wal mart parking lot waiting to scoop up your kids as you put groceries in your car like social media would have you believe.
 
While there is and always has been a real problem with human trafficking its not hanging out in every wal mart parking lot waiting to scoop up your kids as you put groceries in your car like social media would have you believe.
It is also not a cabal of Demonrats operating out of the basement of a New Jersey pizzeria.
 
No, it's telling you not to be physically affectionate with your children if you happend to be stupid enough to take in a ward of the state because they'll take them all under definitional grooming. Because they're just that fudging smart. Welcome to the machine state. It's a fudging embarrassment. Kill kids for having downs, but only if they're trespassing. Ohwai... they're expensive and we don't think they're happy even if the studies say they live to 60 and, in fact, are. I guess it's optics. Like a bunch of pasty ass supremacists on a vanity project.
 
No, it's telling you not to be physically affectionate with your children if you happend to be stupid enough to take in a ward of the state because they'll take them all under definitional grooming. Because they're just that ******* smart. Welcome to the machine state. It's a ******* embarrassment. Kill kids for having downs, but only if they're trespassing. Ohwai... they're expensive and we don't think they're happy even if the studies say they live to 60 and, in fact, are. I guess it's optics. Like a bunch of pasty ass supremacists on a vanity project.

I have no idea what this means or is trying to say, but . . . ok?
 
What are you complaining about? Then assume I'm responding directly to it rather to some dipshit meme on twitgenitalface.
 
It is also not a cabal of Demonrats operating out of the basement of a New Jersey pizzeria.

No, the vast majority of crimes and criminals are not divided by partisan or ideological lines, but found with perpetrators across the Spectrum.
 
What are you complaining about? Then assume I'm responding directly to it rather to some dip**** meme on twitgenitalface.

I just don't even understand it? Who is discouraging affection towards your kids? or state wards? machine state? kill kids for trespassing? ex[pensive but happy but dead at 60? optics? idk the relevance of white supremac either?

I assume you have like an example in mind and this otherwise is a stream of conscience rant?
 
I don't even know how to explain. Ask me when I'm hungover. Wait at leats... 16(hours, imperial)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom