mindthemittelschmerz
mindthemittelschmerz
2/8/16
3:32 AM
3

Seriously, people who talk about Goldman like everyone who works there and everything they do MUST be nefarious - like, google 10,000 women. You want to see a Clinton speech to Goldman, here you go:

2/3/16
12:51 PM
Save

I should add that this article is a starting point that links to various other commentary on even the issues with ‘progressive’ speech about Clinton. I’m getting over malaria and not being terribly thorough. Apologies!

2/1/16
12:35 PM
1

Which is all fair. The point I’m making is only that there are reasonable arguments on both sides that come down, as I see it, to a matter of approach and emphasis more so than on the issue of ideology. So for me, there is no point in casting aspersions on a candidate’s supporters so long as they are engaging politely

2/1/16
11:45 AM
1

Well, the first measure (her Senate record) is a relative measure - to your point, but the second is an absolute measure based on criteria outlined by On the Issues. Her funders haven’t really changed much since her Senate days, and she is still considered, based on this absolute measure, to be a hardcore liberal - so

2/1/16
10:55 AM
1

I don’t agree that Clinton is a centrist; I think that’s probably a reflection of the way she campaigns, but she has a track record of liberal politics. I agree that part of the Clinton campaign has worked to paint Sander’s as naive, but it’s not just her campaign that have pointed this out but other academics and

2/1/16
9:43 AM
1

I’m not at all saying it’s more of the same, there are obviously elements of really exciting progressive politics. But they are just that - progressive politics. They might be more progressive than what we’ve seen so far, but they aren’t revolutionary. I completely understand the excitement over what he’s selling, but

2/1/16
6:38 AM
1

I want to see a woman in the White House. I’ve also looked at the policies both campaigns have put forward and felt that Sander’s policies are astonishingly JV for someone with that many years of legislating experience. The lack depth and nuance in much the same way that I feel his campaign lacks depth and nuance.

2/1/16
4:57 AM
1

I’ve seen this come up a lot, and I think its just worth acknowledging the gender element to this relationship. Part of Warren’s decision not to run is linked to some not-so-insignificant skeletons in her closet that would drop if she went for the nomination. She wants to be close to power and the VP spot has proven

2/1/16
4:46 AM
2

I’m excited to vote for Hillary - I think there are others like me. There was an interesting article on FiveThirtyEight recently that suggested a good amount of the ‘Sanders Surge’ was media manipulation - i.e. that it never really happened the way it was made out and that many polls were purposely selected because

2/1/16
4:35 AM
Save

I agree that now it’s been overblown, but late last year it was really an issue. There were several months on this website where anyone who expressed even lukewarm support for Hillary was absolutely torn to pieces by a group of commenters that were both very condescending and prone to personal attacks. I think you are

11/30/15
9:38 PM
Save

This isn’t very well organized, but in fairness, its the middle of the night here. I’m using this as a break between reports on inter communal conflict in Myanmar. My Monday nights are the best.

11/30/15
6:23 PM
Save

I agree that it shouldn’t be framed in terms of ethics - because its clear the opposing sides do not share the same vision of what it means to be ‘moral’. I actually work on the anthropology of ethics and morality as part of my PhD, so I could go into that in a way, way more informative but ultimately probably

11/30/15
10:30 AM
Save

Just adding some clarification here in terms of ‘impairment’ post childbirth (Stats from around the world, noted where possible/I can be bothered):

11/30/15
9:57 AM
Save

I can understand this, particularly as I grew up in a very religiously conservative state. Most of the people I knew were not bad people, regardless of their position on abortion. That, however, does not mean that their position on abortion wasn’t bad for women - which is my central point.

11/29/15
5:54 PM
3

No indeed - it’s not good science. In fact, the desire to prove there is a causal link between watching extreme pornography and misogyny has really limited our understandings. Generally what would happen in these studies is they would go in looking to prove their hypothesis that there is a causal relationship, and

11/29/15
5:35 PM
5

I get what you are saying here, and I think its always useful to remember that the majority of people are not evil - they just maybe inhabit an entirely different moral universe.

11/29/15
3:30 PM
2

I didn’t say that I did. I said that there appears to be a correlation between consumption of child pornography and recidivism, which is not the same as claiming there is a causal relationship between consumption of child pornography and child abuse. I then said that we can probably assume this same correlation exists