Post your asides here

[mahagonny]

As Jimmy Carter observed in 2016 they are both unpopular (high negatives). But they are also formidable, both. I would think of it more as Clash of the Titans. Here's a piece that made me hopeful, although I still think Hillary bombed in 2016 by talking about the glass ceiling (boring!). The more Biden flounders and rants the more automatically Hillary is positioned. If she carves out a platform as the true alternative to wokeitarian Joe, she's filling a void (opportunity) that's so huge it just needs someone capable of stepping into the role. I could vote for Hillary over Trump if the Biden presidency and its lack of cheerleading from almost anywhere except someone as finished as Joy Reid (stick a fork in that pitcher, he's done - Joe Garagiola)  results  in Biden becoming the fall guy for the scrapped woke movement. I consider her much smarter and more substantial than Biden, and I don't think I'm the only one. What he just said - it's not a gaffe. It's who he is.

https://nypost.com/2022/01/16/dick-morris-2024-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-rematch-is-likely/

...but it's probably wishful thinking. I worry that we're past the point of no return. Explained:

https://americanmind.org/salvo/woke-capitals-modern-slaves/

ETA: If Winsome Sears ran for president I would volunteer for her campaign. Denzil Washington could help get the message out.

High drama: Winsome Sears (with Candace Owens for Veep) versus Stacey Abrams and AOC. The Victimhood Olympics versus the Black Ronald Reagans. Racism accusations neutralized. No old fogies, and no matter who saves the planet, it's a woman of color.

[kaysixteen]

Do you really like to make dumb-dumb trollish remarks, on what is supposed to be a serious academic forum?

[mahagonny]

[keeping calm after another insult]

Well, that's a little loaded, i.e. supposed to be, or is? I think it gets close to a  liberal echo chamber at times, with several dominating. And not to drop names, but old Writingprof left for that very reason, without drumming it into our skulls. Yet I suspect there are some who have issues with the current radical left voices dominating a handful of parts of life in the USA who might be very interesting to hear from.

It amuses me a little when on a forum some see themselves as threatened by trolling but not by groupthink.

I believe this thread is for things relevant to a thread, but intentionally kept away from it. That's why I used it. 'We're done speculating about the 2024 race" ?  OK, I'll put it here. We are not done doing it in our minds. Don't kid yourself.

I think people are likely to be in a bad mood because President Biden is having his approval-rating* troubles. I notice the forum is quiet lately.

As for celebrating MLK Day, we are now at the odd stage where he's almost an unwoke problematic presence to the radical left. They don't quite know what to do with him.

ETA: What did you think of the links I posted? I'm sincerely interested.

Re: the case for it being a hallowed serious academic forum. I recall that the old forum, from which this one was spawned, featured a popular thread called 'when will there be impeachment of the POTUS.' I did participate in it too. I was a Trump hater before I became more of a Trump not-quite-hater-certainly-not-lover-something-in-between. In retrospect, the presence of something like that doesn't exactly convey dignity.
Love him, hate him, struggle to figure him out...he's been a force. Changed our history. on a certain level I guess I accept him. If you look at the neo-Marxist insanity coming from a mob on the left today though, it should it least occur to you he might not be the darkest cloud in our sky.

*slippage (tanking) that I predicted

[mahagonny]

Re: the case for it being a hallowed serious academic forum. I recall that the old forum, from which this one was spawned, featured a popular thread called 'when will there be impeachment of the POTUS.' I did participate in it too. I was a Trump hater before I became more of a Trump not-quite-hater-certainly-not-lover-something-in-between. In retrospect, the presence of something like that doesn't exactly convey dignity.

Being that it was begun the minute he began serving his term, perhaps before. So, if you can walk the walk, you can talk the talk. Otherwise...let it go.

[marshwiggle]

It amuses me a little when on a forum some see themselves as threatened by trolling but not by groupthink.

I'm not a "poll person" but this sounds like the basis for an interesting question regarding which people see as more unhealthy for a forum. (As I've pointed out in the past, based on my non-systematic observation, the threads that actually get the most views are the "controversial" ones. And since views vastly outweigh postings, it suggests that the silent audience is very much interested in the "controversial" discussions.)

[mahagonny]

Speaking of things that are not onerous, how about the things that a person needs to do to be able to vote?

[arcturus]

Speaking of things that are not onerous, how about the things that a person needs to do to be able to vote?

I am really glad to hear that you are in good health and have a stable job, Mahagonny. Congratulations! You have the time and stamina to stand in long lines without loss of pay or the potential for fainting due to heat/cold/hunger/thirst. You also appear to have excellent recall to remember which form of id you used to register to vote 30 or 40 years ago and you still have your drivers license since you are not too infirm to drive. Again, I am happy to hear that your personal circumstances are the best possible and I hope they continue to be so for many years to come. We need people like you in the electorate to explain how easy it is to do these simple things.

[mahagonny]

My health is more in the category of fair. I do work regularly although my load and income are down some 30-35% from Fall 2021 at present. Poor me!
In order for voting to be plausibly accurate, there is work involved, which we share. People who have the problems you mention are voting already. If you are fainting after waiting in line for two hours, I doubt very much that it's hunger doing it. It's true we get hungry a lot. We also do more about it than many. That's why we Americans are overweight.
The democratic party effort to get the vote out was a terrific success, especially given that no one I have ever met or even read about, even among the liberal media, has expressed their view the Joe Biden could had the potential to be a great president. Now they're crying because their 'end the Jim Crow era' bill flopped. C'est la vie!

[namazu]

The Guardian has no paywall.  Just a very in-your-face plea for contributions that you can click away.

[jimbogumbo]

Don't want to keep going back and forth on the thread about Neil Young. Here he is on his relationship with drugs. I do not consider marijuana a hard drug.

https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/neil-young-the-druggie-myth-that-surrounds-his-career/

[smallcleanrat]

Don't want to keep going back and forth on the thread about Neil Young. Here he is on his relationship with drugs. I do not consider marijuana a hard drug.

https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/neil-young-the-druggie-myth-that-surrounds-his-career/

Don't know much about Neil Young, but a brief internet search tells me he wrote songs which spoke to the damage addiction to hard drugs can do to a person. So, it's not as if he was glamorizing it.

And...Neil Young talks about giving up alcohol and cannabis, but the best explanation is that it's just a money-grabbing publicity stunt, not a sincere anti-drug stance? Jordan Peterson talks about his own past drug problem, yet he doesn't merit any cynical suspicion of a money-grabbing publicity stunt?

Also...if you've used drugs in the past that's means you can't really care about the spread of misinformation about COVID?

I'm sorry, but you treat all rock stars as a monolith, the same way neither you nor I want Rs and Ds to be treated.

I'm assuming by Rs and Ds you were referring to Republicans and Democrats? I think you were being a bit too generous. I never got the impression that this poster had any compunctions about treating Democrats as a monolithic cult of woke worshippers who "piss on America."

Democrats are turning America into Nazi Germany, remember?

[mahagonny]

Can you define 'hard drugs?  Of course you can't. Don't bother answering if you're tired of the back-and-forth.
Taking Neil Young out of the conversation for a moment, it is clear that certain things are badly misunderstood even at this late date.
Marijuana affects different people in dramatically different ways. Chronic, debilitating (and scary) effects of psychological depersonalization and derealization are likely to happen to a small percentage of users, something like 5%. But they happen and these people pay for  for them mightily. And if it's happened to you and you subsequently abstained and recovered but then start using years later, it will probably happen again.
Google if you're interested. In the meantime, it would be generally helpful to avoid misinformation - either believing or repeating.

ETA: https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2018.130202

[mahagonny]

I'm assuming by Rs and Ds you were referring to Republicans and Democrats? I think you were being a bit too generous. I never got the impression that this poster had any compunctions about treating Democrats as a monolithic cult of woke worshippers who "piss on America."

Well, if the shoe fits, wear it. There are such folks in our midst: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/the-lure-of-white-martyrdom/ar-AATk4FQ

BTW, have you ever noticed how news outlets avoid getting dinged for failed fact checks by putting their lies into opinion pieces?

The last sentence of Michael Harriot's article: ' You are free to believe that Black people are worthy of their humanity and liberty, but doing something about it means accepting the violent backlash and the collective scorn of a country whose Constitution calculated the value of a Black life at 60 percent of a white one.'

Please, Mr. Harriott. Have you had a checkup lately?

Of course, there are democrats who are very sane and trying hard to do good things. Mainly they are trying to bring the democratic party back to reality. Mayor Eric Adams and this guy (link follows). They have my respect. They just sound like republicans to me, so I can't figure out why they wouldn't just re-register. But that's their affair.

ETA: Sorry, can't locate the link at this time. It was an opinion piece by a recently elected African-American gentleman, a mayor I believe, stating that the democratic party needs to get back to common sense ideas/stances that matter to most of the voters  and quiet down the social justice furor in order to be own the right track in 2022. I breathed a sigh of relief when I read it. We need a two party system with mostly sane people in each party or there's a dearth of hearty, serious dialogue and debate.

[jimbogumbo]

Can you define 'hard drugs?  Of course you can't. Don't bother answering if you're tired of the back-and-forth.
Taking Neil Young out of the conversation for a moment, it is clear that certain things are badly misunderstood even at this late date.
Marijuana affects different people in dramatically different ways. Chronic, debilitating (and scary) effects of psychological depersonalization and derealization are likely to happen to a small percentage of users, something like 5%. But they happen and these people pay for  for them mightily. And if it's happened to you and you subsequently abstained and recovered but then start using years later, it will probably happen again.
Google if you're interested. In the meantime, it would be generally helpful to avoid misinformation - either believing or repeating.

ETA: https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2018.130202

.
My descriptors are not definitions. Yes, drugs have negative effects on people. yes, drugs are clearly beneficial. The NFL just did a $100 million grant to study marijuana and chronic pain relief. So, no TO ME, marijuana and alcohol are not in the same class as the highly addictive heroin, meth or nicotine. Sorry, pivot to something else.

[mahagonny]

The fact that marijuana is very hard on certain individuals is likely a combination of lesser known and intentionally downplayed by people who should know better. According to the study, for some individuals it cuts both ways, both in and out.
Depersonalization disorder can result from both acute intoxication and withdrawal. Withdrawal symptoms = addictive substance.