Bloody hell, calm down. Rational people can disagree with expansive free-speech absolutism interpretations. There’s a logical case that the US has been too consistently friendly to the margins in a way that has enabled the growth and spread of radicalizing fringe groups. You can disagree that anything should be…

Most voters don’t pay attention. It doesn’t really matter whether an attack is fair, just whether it sticks. I should’ve noted that when I wrote, cause I thought about it after I did.

There are real problems with VAR. I don’t read a ton of soccer coverage here, but I see it often enough. I’m not a hardcore pro or anti-VAR person either. But I’m a DC United fan, and we’ve had a couple of good goals called back on iffy or outright wrong calls (PRO admitted it a few times). I’m sure fans of other…

It’s definitely a far-right hate group within intent to cause trouble, but if the law says they can’t deny a permit because they’re a bunch of abusive shitheads their hands are tied. 

You can’t maintain a bad, bloated, and often harmful system because some people don’t want to look for a new job. Imagine you’re talking about coal miners, saying the exact same thing. Should their industry be propped up, despite the harm it does, because they’re concerned about transitioning to a new field?

She’s been knocked on seeming half-hearted on this, so that’s likely to show up in some ads later. It’s a good way to knock out the “but is she actually supporting Medicare for All” questions that have already been bounced around. 

Looks like the pissant dismissed my response to his empty posturing. That’s a very coward thing to do. 

I get the feeling this was written before a second goal was wiped out by VAR on a dubious-at-best call, which makes it even funnier. 

Please ban the fake Russian “Information Channel 4" too. That fucking troll is up to some creepy harassment shit at the moment. Wouldn’t be shocked if it’s a sock for one of the usual far-right types. Certainly seems to be making an effort to engage other trolls. 

Hey, staff. I know you guys are busy and don’t read the comments a lot, but this is the second burner I’ve seen this violent far-right sack of shit use and I think maybe you should drop a brick on this one.

Please dismiss the far-right troll “Max Contrarian”. He’s here to spew misinformation and apologia for human rights abuses. 

Please dismiss “Max Contrarian” a far-right troll that, the past few days, has really loved trying to pop up in my sub-threads. Don’t give him the space for his bullshit. 

“Slavedom” is not a word. Slavery is a word. Serfdom is a word. I know this is pedantic. But I guess because my moral outrage is already overflowing that particular bit of stupidity is getting the overflow.

Yeah, I don’t for one second believe the person ignorant of the basic contours of analysis is a political scientist by training. This kind of charlatanesque bluster would never have flown in my department. 

Clinton won by 3 million votes. Post-mortems of the Clinton campaigns failures were numerous, some better than others, but what you’re doing is just how charlatan’s behave. You can’t discredit an entire process and system from a single result. 2018 used a data-driven process too, and was a historic victory. For fuck’s…

Hard to say if it’s a net gain for society, but it can be for people. If you’re a would-be analyst/wonk like me the ability to access people from all over the world and their expertise is invaluable. If you want a better picture of the war in Yemen someone on the ground in Aden or Sana’a tweeting local news and events…

They are. Their read of the situation, and one that I can see a lot of logic behind, leads them directly against your reading. It’s not really possible to say completely who is right and who is wrong, but the political strategist game isn’t one of hunches. There’s a lot of data behind most tactics, even if they turn…

It’s meaningful if the issue has widespread ID. I don’t know that that’s explicitly the case, I’m sure someone’s polled a relevant question but most don’t, but the other data does suggest it does. Trump’s proclivities are well known, whether you loathe them or support them. Just the amount of airtime on Fox is…

Yes. The amount of fluctuation in the polling strongly suggests that the electorate hasn’t fully sorted on that issue. Support has kept edging up over time. A concerted push, like impeach hearings, could drive that harder. Trump’s unpopularity means even some of the opposition to impeachment is likely soft. That also…

I’d argue a large part of what makes Google so resilient is the perceptions of the company, even if most of them are naive or wrong. The whole “quirky fun tech company” image gives them a lot of operating space that an oil company or airline doesn’t get.