Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats

GasBandit

Staff member
I’m an urban California liberal who has had a lot of fun with various long guns on the range.

Come and get it.
But what if I hand one to another urban california liberal in the same room as you at random :D Would you want to step behind a concrete wall, just in case?
 
But what if I hand one to another urban california liberal in the same room as you at random :D Would you want to step behind a concrete wall, just in case?
... *sigh*

Probably. I just imagined most of the people I work with being handed a gun and cringed.

It’s totally true.
 
So Rhode Island has one million people, California has forty million people; but they each get only two senators. What is up with that homey?
 

GasBandit

Staff member
So Rhode Island has one million people, California has forty million people; but they each get only two senators. What is up with that homey?
Senators represent the state governments as individual entities. The house of representatives represents the respective populations. California has 53, Rhode Island has 2, which is not even the minimum - there are several states with only 1.
 
So Rhode Island has one million people, California has forty million people; but they each get only two senators. What is up with that homey?
The OG Gerrymandering. In 20 years, itll be like 60% of the senate will represent 30% of the people. Its because the republican states keep getting worse because republicans are cancer, so the smart people leave the states for democrat ones, shrinking the populations, while leaving behind dumber people making the states more republican.

Texas might be saved thanks to the increased population of latino people, but now that racial discrimination at the polls is ok, such an effect will probably be mitigated.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
The OG Gerrymandering. In 20 years, itll be like 60% of the senate will represent 30% of the people. Its because the republican states keep getting worse because republicans are cancer, so the smart people leave the states for democrat ones, shrinking the populations, while leaving behind dumber people making the states more republican.

Texas might be saved thanks to the increased population of latino people, but now that racial discrimination at the polls is ok, such an effect will probably be mitigated.
The latest HoR adjustments based on the 2010 census do not bear out this statement.

https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_House_of_Representatives

Several blue states lost representatives, and several red ones gained (notably Texas, as you said, picked up 4, though I don't think that's exclusively latino - we weathered the 2007 recession pretty well and lots of people moved here for jobs).

But Pennsylvania? -1. Massachusetts? -1. New York? -2. Illinois? -1.

Edit - the pertinent numbers:
1530055763175.png

1530055795823.png
 
Last edited:

Dave

Staff member
It's not the number of representatives, it's the insane gerrymandering that distorts the current populations based on ethnicity and political affiliation. The overall state numbers don't matter as much as their density in specific areas.
 

Dave

Staff member
I'm a dyed in wool lefty and I'm a God damn certified sharpshooter.
Same. I was close to making the Marine Corps shooting team. I would have if I were better with a pistol. I actually love guns. I don't OWN one any longer (I got rid of any I had when I had kids), but I do love to fire. It's one of the things I'm actually pretty good at.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I'm a dyed in wool lefty and I'm a God damn certified sharpshooter.
Same. I was close to making the Marine Corps shooting team. I would have if I were better with a pistol. I actually love guns. I don't OWN one any longer (I got rid of any I had when I had kids), but I do love to fire. It's one of the things I'm actually pretty good at.
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data" :p You guys know I'm right, statistically.
 
Or, it's a win for people who don't want to be forced to be in unions to STILL have to pay into them, for things they don't want.

On one level, the PRESENCE of unions usually indicates something else severely wrong with the system in that they are necessary. If workers aren't protected without them, your laws and/or political system is fucked, and/or your economy is out of whack too (workers are cheap). They're a symptom of other bad shit, unfortunately they also become horrific as well, all too often IMO.

My Mom has some interesting stories about her Nursing union (that she was required to be a part of) and the meetings. She commented on how "mob mentality" and almost hyper-religious fervor they had at meetings.
 
So the unions have to convince the workers that they are worth $$$ per month.

If the workers don't think the services are worth it, they don't need to pay union dues.

If a union can't stay afloat, they need to do more for the workers, or charge less, or change in some way to balance their value.
Post automatically merged:

Re: Kennedy's retirement

If he had waited until after the midterm, it wouldn't have the impact it does now.

The republican base will be particularly energized by this.

I wonder what the better strategy is - delay confirmation, so the midterm vote becomes all about supreme court nomination, or confirm quickly to avoid the possibility that the senate might change enough to hold off confirmation for two more years.

It'll be fun seeing both sides throw each other's arguments in their opponent's faces over the next few months.

CNN has a particularly interesting take on five senators who are between a rock and a hard place:

"The timing couldn't be worse for the five Democratic senators up for re-election in states Trump won by double digits: Sens. Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Jon Tester of Montana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. If those five vote against Trump's nominee, they'll hand Republicans a potent issue to hammer them with. If they vote for the nominee, they risk severe retribution from within the Democratic Party."
 
Last edited:
When McConnell and the Republicans in Congress wrongly cheated the system by obstructing President Obama’s right to choose a Supreme Ourt nominee, McConnell claimed it was because the political makeup of the court had to be preserved (i.e. a conservative justice died, so a conservative one had to be appointed to maintain the status quo).

Now, watch as that hypocritical piece of shit pushes for a conservative to replace the moderate Kennedy.
 

figmentPez

Staff member
Yesterday a man protesting the Red Hen threw chicken poop at the restaurant. He reportedly yelled "Make America Great Again!" as he did so. Stay classy Trumpers.

Photos from outside the restaurant tweeted by the news station yesterday show a group of at least a dozen protesters, with signs bearing an ironic range of phrases such as “Trump is love,” “Red Hen needs to learn love and tolerance,” and “Homos are full of demons.”
Trumpers have also retaliated by doxxing the owner and staff, as well as accusing the owner of being a pedophile.
 
So the unions have to convince the workers that they are worth $$$ per month.

If the workers don't think the services are worth it, they don't need to pay union dues.

If a union can't stay afloat, they need to do more for the workers, or charge less, or change in some way to balance their value.
Do wonder if they will be allowed to not cover non-union members in their negotiations. Cause right now if they negotiate a contract everybody gets the raise.

Re: Kennedy's retirement

If he had waited until after the midterm, it wouldn't have the impact it does now.

The republican base will be particularly energized by this.

I wonder what the better strategy is - delay confirmation, so the midterm vote becomes all about supreme court nomination, or confirm quickly to avoid the possibility that the senate might change enough to hold off confirmation for two more years.

It'll be fun seeing both sides throw each other's arguments in their opponent's faces over the next few months.

CNN has a particularly interesting take on five senators who are between a rock and a hard place:

"The timing couldn't be worse for the five Democratic senators up for re-election in states Trump won by double digits: Sens. Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Jon Tester of Montana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. If those five vote against Trump's nominee, they'll hand Republicans a potent issue to hammer them with. If they vote for the nominee, they risk severe retribution from within the Democratic Party."
I think McConnell is a “grab the cheese” and scurry kind of guy. He probably knows that his time is coming to an end with Trump at the head of the party so I don’t think he can risk letting the vote go until after the midterms. Cause right now I think republicans are as high in people’s esteem as they are going to be for the foreseeable future and they can’t eat out right now.

And I don’t think a vote against a Supreme Court justice would constitute a powerful weapon. Even in states Trump carried. They would undoubtedly lose more votes than they gained if they did vote for the justice Trump nominates.
 
The unions provide other services, for instance you might actually get representation when you were wrongly fired (something the union claims to do but in too many cases doesn’t because they are in bed with the company and would rather lose the employee than argue with the company)

There are other benefits unions ostensibly provide, such as legal aid, career guidance, job assistance, etc.

Unions are going to have to prove their value. I know too many people who were ignored by their unions when they filed grievances that should have been clear cut. The unions no longer act for the individual, but the point wasn’t that the individual could get attention because they were union. Now we are back to individuals receiving no attention, unions Building wat chests and having highly paid leaders and negotiators who get minuscule increases in benefits.

Not all unions, of course, some actually stay faithful to their charter.
 
The unions provide other services, for instance you might actually get representation when you were wrongly fired (something the union claims to do but in too many cases doesn’t because they are in bed with the company and would rather lose the employee than argue with the company)

There are other benefits unions ostensibly provide, such as legal aid, career guidance, job assistance, etc.

Unions are going to have to prove their value. I know too many people who were ignored by their unions when they filed grievances that should have been clear cut. The unions no longer act for the individual, but the point wasn’t that the individual could get attention because they were union. Now we are back to individuals receiving no attention, unions Building wat chests and having highly paid leaders and negotiators who get minuscule increases in benefits.

Not all unions, of course, some actually stay faithful to their charter.
I have been on so many different sides of this debate, in so many different companies and capacities. This is a pretty decent summary. I'm somewhat amazed that the law lasted this long.
 
Fuck Mitch McConnell,
The unions provide other services, for instance you might actually get representation when you were wrongly fired (something the union claims to do but in too many cases doesn’t because they are in bed with the company and would rather lose the employee than argue with the company)

There are other benefits unions ostensibly provide, such as legal aid, career guidance, job assistance, etc.

Unions are going to have to prove their value. I know too many people who were ignored by their unions when they filed grievances that should have been clear cut. The unions no longer act for the individual, but the point wasn’t that the individual could get attention because they were union. Now we are back to individuals receiving no attention, unions Building wat chests and having highly paid leaders and negotiators who get minuscule increases in benefits.

Not all unions, of course, some actually stay faithful to their charter.

See, like a lot of other things, unions only work if their members hold the union accountable for it's actions.

If the other individuals see their union not helping someone, and they don't quit the union, or say something, of course nothing will be done.
 
See, like a lot of other things, unions only work if their members hold the union accountable for it's actions.

If the other individuals see their union not helping someone, and they don't quit the union, or say something, of course nothing will be done.
And now people can vote with their wallets, so the union will have a much better measurement as to how well they are serving their members.
 
Top