-
6 votes
-
US President Donald Trump and first lady Melania have tested positive for coronavirus
85 votes -
Should we use a megathread for US election news as we get closer to Nov 3?
I was thinking about how much the quantity of election news is likely to increase as we get closer to Nov 3. And more specifically the likelihood that this election will not be clear cut, will be...
I was thinking about how much the quantity of election news is likely to increase as we get closer to Nov 3. And more specifically the likelihood that this election will not be clear cut, will be contested, lawsuits filed, etc in the days and weeks after Nov 3.
With that in mind, do we want to proactively put up a weekly (maybe daily for the actual week of) megathread to consolidate some of it?
18 votes -
Michigan Attorney General will no longer enforce governor’s executive orders after court ruling
11 votes -
Weird Al - We're All Doomed
20 votes -
Time to pardon Edward Snowden?
14 votes -
Tracker for coronavirus test results from officials in the US government and presidential campaigns
21 votes -
History of US political parties (part 1)
5 votes -
Is political violence ever justifiable?
5 votes -
Trump/Biden 2020 Presidential Debate #1 Discussion Thread
This will be a noisy thread. Please use the ignore feature if you do not want to see it in your feed. Watch on YouTube Other viewing options Debate starts ~10 minutes from the time of this...
This will be a noisy thread. Please use the ignore feature if you do not want to see it in your feed.
Watch on YouTube
Other viewing optionsDebate starts ~10 minutes from the time of this posting.
Info from The Washington Post:
Location: Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. (This was originally scheduled to be held at the University of Notre Dame. Notre Dame withdrew, saying the fact that it would have to limit student attendance and volunteer opportunities because of the pandemic erased the reason to host a debate at the university.)
Moderator: Chris Wallace, anchor of “Fox News Sunday”
Details: The debate will be 90 minutes long and have no commercial breaks. There will be no opening statements. Wallace will dive right in with the first question to Trump. It will be divided into six 15-minute segments that Wallace has chosen. They are:
- the Trump and Biden records
- the Supreme Court
- the coronavirus pandemic
- the economy
- race and violence in cities
- the integrity of the election
56 votes -
The Turkish century; Part 3: New beginnings
6 votes -
The non-voter
12 votes -
AfD official fired after saying migrants ‘could be shot or gassed’, German media reports
8 votes -
Notes about Nagorno-Karabakh by Martin Sonneborn, EU parlamentarian and satirist
4 votes -
Data leak reveals Donald Trump campaign strategy to deter millions of Black Americans from voting in 2016
38 votes -
Postal Service workers quietly resist DeJoy’s changes with eye on election
16 votes -
US President Donald Trump’s taxes show chronic losses and years of income tax avoidance
61 votes -
What academics can do now to prevent a coup later
5 votes -
Trump campaign is reportedly plotting an election coup to “bypass” a Biden win
28 votes -
"Feels like they are just waiting for us to die" - On /r/unemployment, a community of desperate people has stepped in where the government failed
13 votes -
The United States is not entitled to lead the world
15 votes -
DeJoy tells judge mail-sorting machines can’t be reassembled
11 votes -
Sensory overload and annals of lying
3 votes -
Is the UK moving towards government by decree?
6 votes -
President Trump is continuing his war on Section 230 and the right for the open internet to exist
8 votes -
Trump won’t commit to ‘peaceful’ post-election transfer of power
9 votes -
Can anyone help me narrow down the definition of "gaslighting" to better make sense of it as a concept?
I read the Wikipedia article about "gaslighting" and know it comes from a 1944 film of the same name in which an abusive husband gradually dims the gaslights at home – while denying doing so – to...
I read the Wikipedia article about "gaslighting" and know it comes from a 1944 film of the same name in which an abusive husband gradually dims the gaslights at home – while denying doing so – to drive his wife mad.
Yet whenever I see the term used (which happens a lot, lately) I can't make the connection. It seems people use it for the simple act of lying or denying something, which to me is mostly just... lying, not "gaslighting". Any kind of stupid, misguided act is getting the sinister "gaslighting" stamp as if it some 5d chess move when it simply looks like incompetence. The core principle of it seems to revolve around having a plan to psychologically manipulate someone but I mostly don't see the plan nor the actual goal. If anything untruthful you say about an important topic is "gaslighting", then the term doesn't seem to have a lot of value on its own. Wikipedia actually mentions "unconscious" gaslighting which seems to contradict its purpose of actually wanting to manipulate someone.
So, given its popularity, I'm curious if there might be a (succinct) definition of the term that helps me understand it properly? Do you think it's just a trendy term to throw at politicians doing shit you don't like? Am I missing an important detail?
17 votes -
Viral hate, election interference, and hacked accounts: Inside the tech industry’s decades-long failure to reckon with risk
8 votes -
The supply of disinformation will soon be infinite: Disinformation campaigns used to require a lot of human effort to be effective, but now artificial intelligence could take them to a whole new level
9 votes -
Thomas Frank on the podcast "Useful Idiots"
3 votes -
"What could possibly go wrong?": Chris Anderson, the supervisor of elections in Seminole County, Florida, on the risks of running a presidential election in a pandemic
4 votes -
Donald Trump accused of sexual assault by former model Amy Dorris
17 votes -
Court blocks Trump’s WeChat ban from taking effect today
17 votes -
FiveThirtyEight Senate forecast
30 votes -
The FinCen Files: Thousands of secret suspicious activity reports offer a picture of corruption and complicity - and how the government lets it flourish
11 votes -
Monterey bans gas leaf blowers in residential areas
14 votes -
How the Beirut explosion was a government failure
6 votes -
US Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, champion of gender equality, dies at 87
76 votes -
The FBI, the second Red scare, and the folk singer who cooperated
6 votes -
Politics is an American industry
5 votes -
White House abandoned plan to send 650 million face masks across the US in April
15 votes -
With violent crime on the rise, Minneapolis City Council asks: Where are the police?
5 votes -
On the rudeness of mobs
4 votes -
The country’s most important climate election is happening in Texas
8 votes -
Whistleblower complaint alleges mass hysterectomies at ICE detention center
48 votes -
How to think about the deficit by James Tobin
6 votes -
6,600-word internal memo from a fired Facebook data scientist details how the social network knew leaders of countries around the world were using the site to manipulate voters — and failed to act
21 votes -
Why don't we just ban the buying, selling, and merging of companies?
With the ever-growing stream of acquisitions and mergers, it got me thinking: Why do we permit companies to do this? What would the harm be in banning this practice? If a company is becomes...
With the ever-growing stream of acquisitions and mergers, it got me thinking: Why do we permit companies to do this?
What would the harm be in banning this practice? If a company is becomes insolvent, release all of it's IP to the public domain, dissolve all patents/trademarks, and sell off physical assets to pay debtors (first of which should be former employees IMO, but that's a separate discussion).
Edit: I think my original intention of the post to kick off some interesting discussion has worked. Thank you to all current and future posters!
16 votes -
"We have capitalism for the poor and socialism for the rich" - Mark Blyth
13 votes -
Woodward book: Trump says he knew coronavirus was ‘deadly’ and worse than the flu while intentionally misleading Americans
30 votes