@Nerd's banner p

Nerd


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 08 17:26:41 UTC

I had sex with a vacuum, it sucked.


				

User ID: 1024

Nerd


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 08 17:26:41 UTC

					

I had sex with a vacuum, it sucked.


					

User ID: 1024

Texas also went left further than Florida due to ICE backlash. The Hispanics in Texas are very different from the Hispanics in Florida.

This kinda makes me nervious. How cooked are texas republicans in the foreseeable future? Intresting enought, the public actually trust republicans with the immigration issue more than democrats, despite the blunders.

Yes but Republicans kept the senate. They can still block a lot of bullshit. (And a lot of the “democrats” are conservative on certain things, im pretty sure some of them helped get the abortion ban passed)

Texas still has a conservative (well, technical split) legislature, so that’s a small glimmer of hope.

I read somewhere that the part of the reason California is blue is due to an immigration related ballot which caused backlash. That doesn’t spell short term memory to me

Agreed

My intuition says you’re somewhat right. But it wouldn’t explain why we see such a backlash of rightwing populism up till this point. Trump was the first Republican to win the popular vote in a while. Same thing we are seeing with thing like the AFD parties

They’re permanent as far as public opinion and culture goes. Just legal Overturning roe might be a short term gain, but if states restablish the right state by state via ballot. Your back to square one to a degree. I can’t see the public getting more conservative on any real issues.

I mean with abortion we have lost on it on most ballot measures. Minus a few states. I think there is some truth to what he is saying.

I knew Iran was unpopular but I didn’t expect that. Trump fucked up in an insane way…

Holy shit….

I did a quick AI Slop search. It seems like paxton himself was a fairly bad dude. Incredibly currupt. Also, looks like hispanic demographic are catching up to texas. Hinojosa ran compaigns in both english and spanish, and accused her opponent of helping out data centers.

I grew up in Texas before I was in Florida, but 20 points is nuts, is Paxton that bad?

Economy wins elections. Go figure.

it's also ICE goons and corruption and tariffs and being a vulgarian and...

Honestly, its just Gas/Iran. If you see polls about immigration, the public trust republicans more. He was a vulgarian from the get go so that probably wasnt as big of a deal. Tarrifs were certainly not helping things. I dont think many people know about the corruption.

Im not blaming Iran LOL! Im talking about the iran situation. I agree that trumps declaration of the war is the cause.

Alright Im gonna wake up tommorow and expect the democrats to have both the house and the senate. Can democrats actually do anything about Iran or the gas prices? Probably why the republicans lost this time.

Exit polls, This is.... bad.

Iran fucked us damn it.

Republicans won here in my state of florida, but damn so far Texas isnt looking hot.

Why do people engage in culture war though?

I can only speak for myself. But I (mostly) "wage" the culture war because I believe that culture actually matters, and, in fact it matters much more than many people in modern society would like to admit. There are a lot of people who are libertarians (and those to the left of them), who essentially think nothing but GDP and economic growth, and taxes matter, and that cultural/societal norms are largely arbitrary. What these people don't understand is that culture effects economics, (and the inverse is also true: economics affects culture).

A small scale example of this is the job market: the best and easiest way to get hired at a job is via nepotism: aka a friend or family member recommends you to the boss or hiring manager, and your resume gets pulled through, you get interviewed, and then hired. This is effective because the hiring manager has some background information on you, that he doesn't have about random applicants online. But increasingly, people are becoming more isolated, and are having less friendships. We often here a lot about college grads having a hardtime finding a job, but we are also (Im speaking for me, Im gen-z) far less likely to have close friends than previous generations. If we had more connections it would probably help us get in the door faster and easier.

A large scale example is declining birthrates: an arguably cultural change that will and is already having massive implications. As populations age, we need more people to pay for retirement, and also fill jobs in the increasingly large healthcare sector. (Fun fact: healthcare is what is having the largest job growth!). We are running out of people, which is having large economic effect on socially safety net and healthcare systems.

Point is, the general idea that culture "doesnt matter" or is arbitrary is absurd. Lifestyles matter, and Im a firm believer that there is a heiarchy, to quote Charles Murray in his interview with Ronald Bailey via ReasonTV.

Charles Murray: If you say that satisfactions in life, deep satisfactions in life come from one of four domains, something I've been arguing for years—they come from family, community, vocation, and faith. You don't have to tap into all four; there are happy atheists, there are happy single people. But if you don't tap into those domains, you better have a really satisfying vocation, for example, or you better have a really satisfying community life.

Okay, what I'm describing in the new lower class are increasing numbers of people who aren't married, they aren't working, they've fallen away from religion, and they are isolated. They're living in their communities isolated from any interaction with other people. Those people are living lives that have been stripped of a great deal of the stuff of life. All right, I don't consider that argument to be nostalgic. I say that is grounded in a great deal of our understanding, both in terms of classic Aristotelian discussions of what it means to be a human being and also modern empirical psychology and sociology. I'm making the statement: this is a human tragedy.

Ronald Bailey: And yet I get the impression that if you gave them the offer, "You could go back to 1960," they would also be like you, not want to go. They'd go kicking and screaming.

Charles Murray: Yeah, yeah. The reason that they aren't going to go back to 1960—part of them are exactly the same reasons I'm not going to, okay? All right, in terms of the creature comforts and the rest of it. The other part of it is that the most impoverished part of all is they don't know there is anything better out there. We have kept that information carefully to ourselves.

If people are watching, take away anything, I wish they would take away this: it is non-judgmentalism run amok to say that the person I just described—unmarried, not working, no religion, no community—to say, "Well, these are his choices, and perhaps in his own way he's just as happy as I am, that doesn't apply to you," is a form of cruelty. And public policy cannot address this form of cruelty. We have to address it by a deep introspection into what we most deeply believe about the sources of satisfaction in a human life. And how do we transmit that? We live it openly, and we don't make it easy for people to live miserable lives.

Note: Murray is talking specifically about the lower class, but much of this is affecting all economic classes. It simply happens to impact the lower class the most.

Of course, All I've said, you can probably guess which side of this war I'm biased towards. But I'm more or less convinced that the conservative positions on these issues are better overall than anything I've seen in more liberal and progressive circles.

A woman, on the other hand, is of value the moment she finishes puberty.

I get the sentiment, but I think a more accurate picture is that attractive women have value via puberty, and unattractive women dont and are ignored/invisible.

My Florida Ballot

Early voting starts in my state. Mid-terms have arrived. Here is what I'm voting for, and why:

Governor - Byron Donalds: I largely agree with most positions more than I disagree. I support police, and cracking down on criminality, I oppose most gun control. To keep a long story short, im about 60/40 as far as agreeing with Republicans/Democrats respectively. And will vote R if I must choose. This will be the same for the other smaller representees.

-Edit- Senate - Ashley Moody: Same reasons as Byron

Supreme Court - Carlos G. Muñiz: Keeping him.

CFO - Blaise Ingoglia: I did a little digging, he seems more effective at managing spending for the state. So I'm going with him.

Commissioner of Agriculture - Wilton Simpson: Unfortunately, I dont know the first thing about argiculture. But just looking at the perspective candidates websites. Wilton claims to have done some nice things, like providing for those in need via a Farming Feed initiative, and preventing medicine from getting water systems. Assuming this is true. He has my vote. I also went and checked what stuff he has voted for on Ballotpedia, most of it seems pretty good. He voted for things related to childrens welfare and having standards for education systems. I trust him. His oppononent, Joey, doesnt even have anything he has done on his website.

Attorney General - James Uthmeier: He was under DeSantis, and as an Attorney General he basically will over see the state legal system and such. I trust him to enforce the laws we have on the book and help police crack down on bad behavior.

Amendment 1 : I'm largely for increasing funding for emergencies, Florida tends to have a lot of natural disasters, so I dont see the argument against this just off intuition. So I'll vote yes.

Amendment 2 : Again, I unfortunately don't know much about agriculture, but it basically says that certain equipment wont get taxed. Im going to go with yes for this as well. But if anyone know a lot about agriculture, I'd like an argument as to why. Farming tends to be an expensive endeavor from just doing brief research, so I'm gonna vote to save the farmers a few dollars.

Amendment 3: I don't know how to feel about this. On the one hand, I kinda understand the fundamental argument for Taxes: someone needs to pay for government services. And from what I can tell, this bill will tax people the more expensive their houses become. It essentially reads as a progressive tax but for property. I tend to sympathize with progressive tax systems in general, so I don't have a problem with this. But it does seem unfair to those who bought their house for $100,000, but now pay more tax because that house is worth $300,000 they didn't exactly choose that, on the other hand for many this might have been a desired outcome. There are also those who would plan on just living in the house forever without selling so for those accruing a higher price on the house isn't very relevant. There is also the problem of landlords passing the tax on the current renters. I dunno, I'm still thinking on this, opinions are welcome.

Is Bodily Autonomy only limited to “dont force surgeries on people”? There are a lot of people who would consider things like rape or banning birth control a violation. That’s not even getting into things like lethal injection.

Umm, Ok. But thats not really an argument against them. Your basically saying that you just dont like them. How is there migration any better or worse than any other group? Are they more violent, are they lazy, etc?

Whats your beef with Somali's? You really gonna sack a policy that will benefit the majority of people just so you can shiv people you don't like?