DNC emails! from Wikileaks
http://www.salon.com/2016/07/22/dnc_emails_wasserman_schultz_furiously_pressured_msnbc_after_it_criticized_her_unfair_treatment_of_sanders/
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/dnc-staffers-mocked-the-bernie-sanders-campaign-leaked-emails-show/
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/756523316941324288
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/new-leak-top-dnc-official-wanted-to-use-bernie-sanderss-religious-beliefs-against-him/
― helpless before THRILLARY (Dr Morbius), Friday, 22 July 2016 20:19 (eight years ago) link
@thehillLeaked email: DNC chairwoman wanted 'unrealistic' number of Hamilton tickets
― mookieproof, Friday, 22 July 2016 22:08 (eight years ago) link
former ILXer Vic Perry a prominent commenter on The Intercept.
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 22 July 2016 22:18 (eight years ago) link
good old Vic "incoherent thick-headed piece of half-sentient shit" Perry
― http://porno (DJP), Saturday, 23 July 2016 01:13 (eight years ago) link
and that's the more affectionate nickname for him
― nomar, Saturday, 23 July 2016 01:21 (eight years ago) link
Vic PerryJuly 22 2016, 2:50 p.m.turn the page. vote Jill Stein.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Saturday, 23 July 2016 01:21 (eight years ago) link
you smoke the day's last cigarette, remembering what she said
― mookieproof, Saturday, 23 July 2016 01:27 (eight years ago) link
man i normally don't say stuff like this, but that guy was a bad poster.
― we're gonna live in spatula city (Doctor Casino), Saturday, 23 July 2016 02:08 (eight years ago) link
i always got him confused with that other perry
― thrusted pelvis-first back (ulysses), Saturday, 23 July 2016 03:18 (eight years ago) link
joeks
kind of saddens me the way pro-transparency activists keep winding up inadvertently doing the work of authoritarians. i guess i wouldn't feel so bad about it if i saw any evidence they're attempting to reckon with the moral implications of snowden being in russia.
― big rave warrior (rushomancy), Saturday, 23 July 2016 07:19 (eight years ago) link
http://gizmodo.com/wikileaks-just-published-tons-of-personal-data-like-a-b-1784140603?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_twitter&utm_source=gizmodo_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
― Frederik B, Saturday, 23 July 2016 07:44 (eight years ago) link
wow, fuck them. that means a bunch of people are going to be victim to identity theft, fraud, and worse.
frankly while plenty of the stuff in the leak is evidence of the corruption of our democratic system we've all known about for decades (except mores, he's known about it for centuries), the stuff that so far has gotten press doesn't seem all that awful to me. one asshole in the DNC leadership floated using sanders's lack of religious affiliation against him. that's bad, but you know what isn't bad? the fact that neither the clinton campaign nor its surrogates took the advice.
― wizzz! (amateurist), Saturday, 23 July 2016 07:52 (eight years ago) link
attempting to reckon with the moral implications of snowden being in russia.
man, what garbage
― The Hon. J. Piedmont Mumblethunder (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 23 July 2016 13:19 (eight years ago) link
― The Hon. J. Piedmont Mumblethunder (Dr Morbius)
please, go on.
― big rave warrior (rushomancy), Saturday, 23 July 2016 13:32 (eight years ago) link
Edward Snowden has criticised Russia for its crackdown on internet freedom and lax attitude to gay rights, despite having been granted asylum by the country.
The National Security Agency whistleblower described Moscow’s tightening grip over online activities and treatment of gay people as “fundamentally wrong”.
The former US intelligence contractor was given a three-year residence permit in August 2014, but insisted that it was never his choice to go there. He said he would prefer to live in the US, although he cannot return without facing arrest for leaking to the Guardian classified documents revealing the vast scale of the country’s surveillance programmes.
The 32-year-old was accepting the Norwegian Academy of Literature and Freedom of Expression’s Bjornson prize – which he was awarded for his work on the right to privacy – by videophone from Russia when he described the country’s restrictions on the web as a “mistake in policy”. He said: “It’s wrong in Russia, and it would be wrong anywhere.
“I’ve been quite critical of [it] in the past and I’ll continue to be in the future, because this drive that we see in the Russian government to control more and more the internet, to control more and more what people are seeing, even parts of personal lives, deciding what is the appropriate or inappropriate way for people to express their love for one another ... [is] fundamentally wrong.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/05/snowden-criticises-russia-internet-homosexuality
― The Hon. J. Piedmont Mumblethunder (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 23 July 2016 13:39 (eight years ago) link
so he speaks at the convention and refuses to endorse the candidate. i'm so fucking proud of him. what a hero!
― big rave warrior (rushomancy), Saturday, 23 July 2016 13:45 (eight years ago) link
I would be more concerned by the idea of releasing stuff when it has the maximum impact, which is just another form of political control of information.
― two crickets sassing each other (dowd), Saturday, 23 July 2016 13:50 (eight years ago) link
my experience is that people who are the proudest about not "taking sides" tend to wind up on the wrong one. in russia, snowden can say whatever he likes without fear, unlike russian journalists, because he's a propaganda asset to the regime.
― big rave warrior (rushomancy), Saturday, 23 July 2016 13:59 (eight years ago) link
really couldn't have cared less if snowden had found asylum in the dprk
― le Histoire du Edgy Miley (difficult listening hour), Saturday, 23 July 2016 15:48 (eight years ago) link
didn't the us basically freeze his flights/visa to get him trapped in Russia? That would make sense, as it looks pretty bad for him. if i'm remembering right i think he was on his way to ecuador
― global tetrahedron, Saturday, 23 July 2016 16:25 (eight years ago) link
snowden can be forgiven, it's not like he had any good choices.
― wizzz! (amateurist), Saturday, 23 July 2016 20:50 (eight years ago) link
and i think he's made the best out of an impossible situation, basically. wouldn't want to be in his shoes.
yeah snowden did not intend to get stuck in russia, it may be a bad look for a pro civil liberties whistleblower to take asylum in a country with such a poor civil liberties record (tbh can't think of many countries w/ good civil liberties records but russia has a fairly bad one among countries that aren't outright dictatorships) but his only real alternative is going home and facing what would probably be life in prison. i don't think snowden (or manning for that matter) should automatically be grouped in w/ wikileaks which has done some deliberately fucked-up things.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Saturday, 23 July 2016 21:00 (eight years ago) link
the moral implications of snowden being in russia.
the main moral implication is that the US government would gladly extradite and imprison Edward Snowden if he lived in any country on earth the USA has an extradition treaty with or the power to coerce. that leaves one known option for snowden other than imprisonment in a federal prison. and what would you say are the moral implications of that?
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Sunday, 24 July 2016 04:00 (eight years ago) link
Question about the two-party nature of American politics: I saw a member of the Green Party defend herself against the claim that they only care about presidential elections, and she said that the amount of signatures needed to get on the ballot in local politics is so high that it's impossible without the publicity of a presidential candidate. Is that true? And can that be changed without a constitutional amendment?
Possible thread idea: Where we all complain about stupid stuff in our political systems.
Taking Sides: Two- vs Multi-party Democracies.
Or something.
― Frederik B, Thursday, 28 July 2016 16:37 (eight years ago) link
the amount of signatures needed to get on the ballot in local politics is so high that it's impossible without the publicity of a presidential candidate
this is a huge falsehood
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 28 July 2016 16:38 (eight years ago) link
Though we all now the best would be a single party system devoted to permanent world revolution, but, y'know.
― Frederik B, Thursday, 28 July 2016 16:38 (eight years ago) link
In San Francisco, Green Party candidate Matt Gonzales came very close to beating Dem candidate Gavin Newsom in 2003 (a non-presidential election year), for ex.
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 28 July 2016 16:40 (eight years ago) link
And can that be changed without a constitutional amendment?
also FYI the Constitution details the powers and limits of the federal government, it does not have anything to say about municipal or state elections.
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 28 July 2016 16:41 (eight years ago) link
that being said, a two-party structure is deeply embedded in the Constitution, the result of the way majority/minority rights and powers are delineated
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 28 July 2016 16:51 (eight years ago) link
My city council representative belongs to the Socialist Alternative party, I don't think her electoral success has much relationship to whether they run a candidate for president.
― Sean, let me be clear (silby), Thursday, 28 July 2016 17:12 (eight years ago) link
Ohio requires a mere 5,000 signatures to get on a ballot for state or federal office as an independent or non-major-party candidate. (Ohio has a total population just shy of 12 million.)
In my county, with a population of 1.26 million, independent candidates for county office are required to get a number of signatures dependent on the number of votes cast in the last election for that office. If there were fewer than 5,000 votes, they need 25 signatures or 1% of the votes, whichever is lower. If there were more than 5,000, they need 1% of the votes as signatures.
Jill Stein is a fucking moron and so is everyone voting for her.
― a 47-year-old chainsaw artist from South Carolina (Phil D.), Thursday, 28 July 2016 17:32 (eight years ago) link
― Οὖτις, Thursday, July 28, 2016 11:40 AM (51 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
This doesn't really refute the argument. It's unquestionable that the Green Party's ability to do this stems from national visibility due in large part not just to running a candidate in the prior presidential election but running an already somewhat well-known one.
― socka flocka-jones (man alive), Thursday, 28 July 2016 17:33 (eight years ago) link
or whichever Green Party shithead that Frederik heard. But Stein is still a moron.
― a 47-year-old chainsaw artist from South Carolina (Phil D.), Thursday, 28 July 2016 17:33 (eight years ago) link
It's unquestionable that the Green Party's ability to do this stems from national visibility due in large part not just to running a candidate in the prior presidential election
it is absolutely questionable, because Matt Gonzales' popularity and prior service to the City was totally unrelated to the Green Party's candidate in the previous presidential election so gtfo with that shit. He did not have any problem getting elected to the Board of Supervisors and then running for Mayor, and it had nothing to do with the national party apparatus of the Green Party and everything to do with the fact that he didn't want to be part of the Democratic Party machine in SF, of which Newsom was a golden boy.
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 28 July 2016 17:45 (eight years ago) link
that being said, there are third-party candidates in every mayoral election in SF, often unaffiliated with any party
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 28 July 2016 17:47 (eight years ago) link
Totes false at the local level. Indeed many local races are explicitly nonpartisan (e.g. school boards). Candidates may sometimes slyly say something like "endorsed by Gulch County Democrats" but the race is supposed to be nonpartisan. Third-party candidates often run in and win these races, then use those wins as stepping stones to more prominent positions.
My home town has invented town-specific political organizations that take pains to say they are not "parties" - e.g., Citizens for a Better Gulchville vs. Gulchville Improvement Coalition. They only hazily overlap with the national party organizations. When they differ, they differ over weirdly small zoning or water-pressure issues. Maybe everyone but me has a secret decoder ring that tells them CfaBG = Republican or whatever. If so, I never found out.
― mandolinsanity (Ye Mad Puffin), Thursday, 28 July 2016 17:57 (eight years ago) link
i don't think the green party's visibility in the USA--such as it is--is due largely to the folks they run for president (who haven't gotten much attention aside from nader) but for their general high profile globally, esp. in europe. if they have credibility as a left-wing alternative in the USA it's because the greens have actually won a fair number of elections in european countries. (not so much recently, though.)
― wizzz! (amateurist), Thursday, 28 July 2016 19:04 (eight years ago) link
and the green party's success in the states has been largely limited to highly-educated enclaves that might be expected to have a little understanding (or at least knowledge) of what's going on in the rest of the world. i imagine the green "brand" doesn't mean much outside of those enclaves.
― wizzz! (amateurist), Thursday, 28 July 2016 19:05 (eight years ago) link
if they have credibility as a left-wing alternative in the USA it's because the greens have actually won a fair number of elections in european countries. (not so much recently, though.)
Wait, what? Where?
― Frederik B, Thursday, 28 July 2016 19:06 (eight years ago) link
germany, austria, belgium, scandinavia... though they've long since peaked in those places.
― wizzz! (amateurist), Thursday, 28 July 2016 19:08 (eight years ago) link
Ehh, I'm skeptical that Green successes in the US are due to candidates getting secret decoder ring messages from Caroline Lucas and not, say, them being clearly on the right side of the only long-term issue.
― Andrew Farrell, Thursday, 28 July 2016 20:39 (eight years ago) link
sure, but there's a reason why the party to have capitalized at all on that issue is the green brand and not some other one...
― wizzz! (amateurist), Friday, 29 July 2016 02:45 (eight years ago) link
i say "capitalized" with my tongue in and tears rolling down my cheek, of course
― wizzz! (amateurist), Friday, 29 July 2016 02:46 (eight years ago) link
I've tried and check, and I really can't find those victories you're talking about?
― Frederik B, Friday, 29 July 2016 07:18 (eight years ago) link
Except for Alexander van der Bellen. But that's very recent.
― Frederik B, Friday, 29 July 2016 07:28 (eight years ago) link
Because that's their core issue? If you want a party that will prioritise that over all others and not subsume it to popular policies (With the obvious effect on their electability), that's the one for you. Or at least, that's my assumption on the US party based on the UK one - literally the only time I hear about it is Dr Morbius yelling that he'll turn this car around and vote for Jill Stein on the Presidential threads.
― Andrew Farrell, Friday, 29 July 2016 09:25 (eight years ago) link
Lol cmon Morbz doesn't know how to drive
― Οὖτις, Friday, 29 July 2016 14:46 (eight years ago) link
plays decent defense though tbf
― a 47-year-old chainsaw artist from South Carolina (Phil D.), Friday, 29 July 2016 14:47 (eight years ago) link