Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:He won because Hilary didn't campaign (Score 1) 1470

If your theory was correct, then those voters would have prevented Democratic losses in 2002. There would also be far, far, far, far more split tickets where a state goes for president from one party and congresspeople from the other.

Instead, Democrats got clobbered in 2002 and the few split ticket situations have razor-thin margins instead of overwhelming numbers.

Comment Re:He won because Hilary didn't campaign (Score 1) 1470

Nope. Democrats do not vote like Republicans.

Republicans turned out for the midterms during Obama's tenure because they wanted to stop Obama. Because on average, Republican voters are motivated by stopping things. After all, stopping change is at the core of being "conservative". You are trying to conserve "the old ways".

Democrats did not turn out similarly during W's tenure. Because on average, Democrats are looking for certain changes to the status quo and the DNC offered "Republican lite" in 2002 (and 2004). In 2006 the DNC started talking a bit maybe possibly changing things, and got higher turnout. Obama's "Hope and Change" in 2008 got big turnout.

The DNC theme for the 2018 midterms will be "Trump bad!!!! Vote us! We stop Trump!!!" (And yes, the grammar there is intentional). Turnout among Democratic voters will be bad. That theme is an appeal to people who are motivated like Republican voters. You'll get the "Always vote for Team D!!" voters, but one only has to look at our last election to see how well that works.

It is only after the 2018 losses that the DNC may finally do enough introspection to repair the party. For now, too many are busy screaming "Russia did it! Popular vote!" to change anything.

Comment Re:already exceeding expectations (Score 1) 1470

People blame her for supporting the Iraq War, which is fair - but she wasn't one of the ones pushing it,

She made an impassioned speech on the floor of the Senate pushing it.

You also ignored that while Secretary of State, she pushed for "military intervention" in Libya and Syria, backed the coups in Honduras and Egypt, and pushed to escalate against Russia in Syria and Ukraine.

After she stepped down as Secretary of State, she blasted the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by Kerry.

As far as I know, Clinton has not opposed a "military intervention" since she entered public life.

More importantly though, she is first and foremost a -rational- actor in terms of international policy.

Iraq turned into a shitshow. Clinton backed the war in Libya. Libya turned into a shitshow. Clinton backed the war in Syria. Syria turned into a shitshow. That is not the behavior of a rational actor unless they are seeking to create more violence.

Comment Re:already exceeding expectations (Score 1) 1470

Thank California for that. Because apart from the landslide in California, she lost handily in the rest of the 49 states.

Clinton won 20 states + DC, including California.

If you want to claim a popular vote victory if California was excluded, you need to wait until a "CalExit" vote wins first.

Comment Re:way too generous (Score 1) 495

I did no such thing. GenX is not a generation. Neither is GenY, or the boomers, or the millennials. These are all marketing bullshit terms. A generation is the time between the birth of a child and the birth of that child's children.

Yet you keep talking about Boomers as if they are a generation.

Gee, it's almost like you're still searching for a way out of your gaffe instead of just saying "Oh yeah, GenX too".

Comment Re:Enter the casual, brazen SJW injection (Score 0) 495

Not necessarily relevant even if true (and I'm not sure that's true for many > 3.) If the tens of millions that came over more recently were significantly poorer than the average American, this would obviously significantly drag down the average socioeconomic status, yes?

I like how you argue it's irrelevant and then argue that it's relevant. It definitely shows the level of clarity involved in your analysis.

What statistics?

There's a giant mountain of them. Considering you can't even bother to google the number of Latinos in the US so that you can compare with your fears about undocumented workers, it's abundantly clear giving you any statistics is an utter waste of time.

Are you asserting that the 11 million undocumented Latinos (nevermind all of the documented Latinos who have been here for only a few generations) had assets, education and income equal or exceeding that of the average American when they entered the country?

Nope. What percentage of Latinos in the US is that 11 million? Because again, it would have to be a very significant percentage in order to drag the entire demographic down so far from whites. After all you are asserting that the difference between whites and Latinos is entirely caused by undocumented workers.

Keep lying and calling it truth.

I'm not the one lying. Technically, you aren't either since it's just a mountain of ignorance you're throwing around.

Comment Re:Enter the casual, brazen SJW injection (Score 1) 495

I remember Crimea and Eastern Ukraine separatism. I remember several movements for Quebec to secede from Canada. I remember movements for Basque and Catalunya to secede. I remember the breakup of countless European states. I remember countless former and extant exclaves, such as Llívia, which obviously would not exist if not for separatism largely based on hundreds of years of the populations speaking different languages.

And yet you can't remember actual US history, and instead substitute the history of other countries.

I also remember that lawmakers in the USA did not attempt to allow there to be multiple official languages in government institutions and schools in the 1800s and before.

That would be incorrect. Because the US never has had an official language, much less multiple. In places where a non-English language is common, the government has always had either documents in the local dominant language, or the people working at those government offices spoke the non-English dominant language. Just as you will find in any place with a significantly-sized "Chinatown" today. But they aren't Latinos, so it's OK.

That can happen depending on population densities and cultural attitudes of the immigrants, but it certainly isn't guaranteed to happen particularly if efforts to officially recognize, support and pander to a second language succeed.

Again, there is actual history here to guide you on what happens, what doesn't happen, and how likely it is to happen. You're ignoring it so that you can comfortably reside in your concern trolling.

Get out some more. Talk to people who don't look like you. You'll find out some things about what actually happens outside your comfort zone.

Comment Re:way too generous (Score 1) 495

I'm referring to chronological generations - 25 year periods

Millennials are the last ~20. GenX is the ~25 before that. Boomers are the ~25 before that.

The last 50 years most certainly covers GenX

The "Boomer" generation is generally considered people born before 1964. 1964 is 52 years ago. Boomers are outside your "last 50 years" threshold.

So yes, you did skip GenX.

that's all just marketspeak concocted by snake oil salesmen in pursuit of unicorns. After all, if they can divide people into artificial groups, they can conquer them more easily.

Even easier when the people supposedly railing against that ignore 25 years worth of people.

Comment Re:whole life (Score 2) 495

reduced burdens on Milllenials for caring for aging parents if the parents are so rich

Millennials are either the children of Boomers (who had horrifically bad savings rates) or GenX (who got a similar, but not as bad a deal as Millennials). Their parents are not going to be able to financially take care of themselves as you imply here.

I don't see boomers keeping in the money away from their kids to the same degree that the top 1% keep the money away from the lower 99%.

The Boomers do not have money to keep away from their kids. They spent it.

This shouldn't be cast as boomers vs millenials, if society were working properly we would all live to see our children prosper more than we did and not just inside some arbitrary historical border, but for everyone

I can not influence economic policy in Uganda. And since I do not live in Uganda, higher quality of life there does not significantly ameliorate a lower quality of life here.

Comment Re:Enter the casual, brazen SJW injection (Score 1, Insightful) 495

I'm far, far from being a kneejerk anti-SJW ranter

Yeah....sure. Let's take a look at your kneejerk post and evaluate that claim.

r, I suspect that many black subcultures, which were indeed originally formed as a direct result of racism, nonetheless will not be found to promote such as academic achievement to the same extent as their white counterparts

Ok, now actually look at the data showing that despite having greater academic achievement, all Millennials are worse off. If you're going to posit that greater academic achievement is somehow the magic bullet for those lazy dark-skinned folks, you're going to run smack into the wall that greater academic achievement has failed in whites.

2. The casual accusation that discrimination against Latinos is entirely or primarily responsible for their lower average socioeconomic status is far more contentious. First off, all of the objections from #1 apply here. Additionally, unlike black people, tens of millions of them have only been here for a generation or two


The vast majority of Latinos have been in the US for many generations. It's only when you imagine all Latinos are the descendants of undocumented workers that you come up with dumb shit like this claim that so many Latinos are "new to this country" that they cause a massive statistical difference.

There are, of course, some far-left people who will deny both of these latter points

Fucking far-left assholes and their insistence on statistics instead of pulled-from-the-ass claims that justify one's attitude towards those dark people.

and so is any insistence on a shared common language as a prerequisite for citizenship (without which the melting pot cannot function and over time the society and nation will inevitably fracture along ethnic lines, as history has repeatedly showed.)

Yeah, remember how the country totally disintegrated when all those Europeans settled in the 1800s and kept speaking their native language? They even had the gall to name towns and cities in their native tongue! You know, all those places that end in -burg. That totally annihilated the melting pot. And there's all those evil Chinatowns around the country where lots of people don't speak Engilsh....oh wait, you were just praising the Chinese via another stereotype, so we'll forget that.

What happened back then is the kids spoke two languages, and the grandkids spoke English. The same thing happens in Latino communities that are primarily immigrants. In the non-immigrant communities, they just speak English.

You're simply feeding the right and alt-right narratives of the biased and lying mainstream media and mainstream academia.

Yeah, providing accurate information is an utterly terrible idea. Much better to just go with what "everybody knows". As long as one is in the group where that "everybody" has advantages.

It's really, really hard to continue pushing back against the alt-right when you keep ensuring that ~30% of what they say is more or less correct

Actually, it isn't correct. And never was correct, even when "everybody knew" it. You just want it to be correct.

Comment Re:But the median college-educated.... (Score 1) 495

Millennials have been SUCKERED into thinking they HAVE to have a college degree

They do if they want to work anywhere other than trades or retail.

For example, back in the Boomer's day, you could do clerical work with just a high school diploma. Now you need a bachelors in anything to get past HR.

Slashdot Top Deals

Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. -- Publius Syrus