Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 198: The Manchinian Candidate

(+) Yeah! (+)

The past three weeks have really been horrible for womens rights. I cant imagine any woman wanting to come forward about being assaulted if our country rewards a rapist while sending death threats to his accuser.
---

Listen I'm not following the Politics Topic drama that may have caused me to need to request this multiple times per day but could all you rookie topic making pups at least learn to use the bloody tag.
---

Sorry. Fixed.
---

Tag
---

This is why I'll never make the topic. I'd intentionally use no flair and tell everyone to just deal. >_>

(also btw this topic is probably not going to supplant the other one)
---

xp1337 posted...

This is why I'll never make the topic. I'd intentionally use no flair and tell everyone to just deal. >_>

(also btw this topic is probably not going to supplant the other one)

What?
---

I'd deal by putting you on my ignore list. People intentionally subverting the point of the flairs can fuck off.
---

can sephy stay in the other topic while normal people talk about the kavanaugh stuff here kthx
---

xp1337 posted...

(also btw this topic is probably not going to supplant the other one)

What other topic?
---

Lopen posted...

I'd deal by putting you on my ignore list. People intentionally subverting the point of the flairs can fuck off.

Man, what's even the purpose of the politics flair other than letting people just block it so they ignore it? That's silly. And obviously anyone who still would want to do that would ignore me, I'm aware of that, it'd be the only recourse available.

Ashethan posted...

xp1337 posted...

(also btw this topic is probably not going to supplant the other one)

What other topic?

perhaps i spoke too soon in assuming this topic was doomed

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/77069804
---

looks like people have seph on ignore here. he made another topic

substantive: watching the hearing and good god i am so tired of hearing the term "paid protestors." what an absolute load of bullshit that never has and never will exist
---

xp1337 posted...

Man, what's even the purpose of the politics flair other than letting people just block it so they ignore it?

That is the point. I don't want to waste my time discussing politics with board 8 and I don't want to accidentally click topics and see a dumb post I want to respond to. Why would you want people to read the topics that have no interest in reading them.
---

Also, can I just say how annoying it is to hear from pundits *insert red state Democrat here* needs to vote for *insert Republican policy* or else itll hurt them in the next election. Like, I GET that its an uphill battle for Democrats in red states, but that whole argument implies that A. Republican voters will vote someone with a D next to their name over an R, and B. Democratic voters dont matter at all. Seriously, its dehumanizing the way that entire argument is framed. Only Republican votes matter, never mind how a red state Dem voting Republican might depress the Dem voters in their base, nope, only Republicans matter.

Dems make up more than half the population of this country, yet weve become more and more of second class citizens in the eyes of the GOP.
---

We have the literal President of the United States using terms like "Paid protesters" and "Crisis actors" and blaming George Soros for anybody who doesn't agree with him. And he's not at a roast.

I honestly don't think anyone could have written a parody of Trump as President in 2016 that would have come close to as bad as things were going to get.

It's truly frightening what the Republican party has become.
---

Lopen posted...

xp1337 posted...

Man, what's even the purpose of the politics flair other than letting people just block it so they ignore it?

That is the point. I don't want to waste my time discussing politics with board 8 and I don't want to accidentally click topics and see a dumb post I want to respond to. Why would you want people to read the topics that have no interest in reading them.

There are a grand total of 6 topics tagged politics on the board. It'd be 5 if not for the fact that Seph made a Containment topic which led to this one because some people have him ignored.

There are currently 4 Mafia topics up now, none tagged Forum Game. Where's the outrage there? It's not hard to not click on a topic.

Don't see the ability to stick one's head in the sand because "oh no politics" as some good to be upheld. It's already almost entirely consolidated into the Containment Topic instead of separate topics covering each story as it breaks. If people can't just manually ignore a Containment Topic that's on them as far as I'm concerned.

The politics flair itself is a backwards decision IMO.

But this is all hypothetical. I opened by saying my thoughts on this are why I don't make the topics. I'm just rolling my eyes that that's what gets jumped on.
---

Mafia isnt going to draw in people who arent already interested in mafia. Politics, by virtue of affecting everyone, might draw in people who dont agree with the tone of the topic itself. Its easy to say just ignore it, but unless you physically force yourself to do so, that can prove difficult.

Its the same reason I had to ignore a bunch of people finally. I cant help myself but to argue against immoral, sociopathic behavior, even if its a deliberate effort to troll. So I have to just eliminate the arguments entirely.
---

Would you like to see a truly remarkable chart?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/mehta-velencia-pollapalooza-1005-2.png?w=575
---

I feel like the solution in that case would be to ignore users not an entire field of discussion. If you have issues with certain users and putting them on the ignore list is the best way for you to deal with it then by all means do so. I'm not saying you shouldn't.

I'm taking issue with just trying to wall off and ignore the entire field of politics. If you really don't want to talk about it then I feel like you should just be able to manually... not do so.

Obviously you could achieve the same practical affect by putting anyone who makes a political topic on the ignore list but that seems kind of extreme, IMO.
---

Not_an_Owl posted...

Would you like to see a truly remarkable chart?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/mehta-velencia-pollapalooza-1005-2.png?w=575

To be fair here, the red trendline after Sept. 16 suggests a behavior that I don't think is necessarily there if you only focus on the red data points. (It might be, but I'm not convinced by just this data alone)
---

xp1337 posted...

If you really don't want to talk about it then I feel like you should just be able to manually... not do so.

you can do it manually but using the flair is probably easier.

same goes for users. yes, you can manually ignore all the posts by a user, but putting them on ignore is a lot easier.
---

Not_an_Owl posted...

Would you like to see a truly remarkable chart?

That's basically what I'd expect. If anything I'm a little surprised that Republicans didn't rise more.

On a similar subject, I think Kavanaugh getting confirmed ultimately results in the bump in Republican enthusiasm evaporating again. It went up during the whole hearing but I think if confirmed, complacency and satisfaction will set in and things will revert back to how they were trending beforehand.

I think it's more of a wildcard if he gets rejected. Think you have about even odds that the enthusiasm stays because they get mad that the nomination failed or that the base gets demoralized.
---

For example if you cut the data off at Sept. 27 instead it actually looks like the red data is trending downward.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

xp1337 posted...

If you really don't want to talk about it then I feel like you should just be able to manually... not do so.

you can do it manually but using the flair is probably easier.

same goes for users. yes, you can manually ignore all the posts by a user, but putting them on ignore is a lot easier.

Yes, it is easier. My argument is that I don't think that walling off politics and making it easy to ignore is a good thing and it shouldn't be facilitated. It's a minor inconvenience if that's what you want to do but I'm okay with that. Again, it's not like every time a story breaks a new and separate topic is made dedicated to it. You're ignoring 1-3 topics on the entire board at any time.
---

Ignoring specific users is a double-edged sword. For me, there is nothing of value list by ignoring certain people, because as far as Im concerned, they only notably post in the politics topics to troll. But for this topic, Lopen would have to ignore me specifically, and we share other specific interests that would make ignoring less than ideal. Same reason I didnt immediately ignore MWC when he came back.
---

Yeah Mafia you never accidentally click a topic, see some bad post and get tempted to respond.

It's not about head in the sand I just have no desire to discuss politics on this board any longer because I feel too many users in these topics don't make any attempt to have good faith discussions to the point where it makes it impossible to have them cause of the noise those users generate.

And if I want to I can just click the flair and presto I see the topics again.

You can say ignore users but I feel these topics truly bring out the worst in a lot of people and I would have like 15 users (probably not the ones you expect, either) I find otherwise harmless or even like ignored for no other reason. It's also not really a good solution since it only works if literally every person posting in these topics has them ignored as well. Much easier to just ignore the topics. I follow politics just fine without seeing these topics.
---

Lopen posted...

Yeah Mafia you never accidentally click a topic, see some bad post and get tempted to respond.

are you sure

sometimes i think town is making terrible mistakes

Look, I don't really get what the big deal over this is. I specifically avoid making the topics because I know my view on this would annoy people and I'd rather not deal with the hassle (also i'm not witty enough for the topic titles). I only pointed it out because every time a politics topic forgets the flair there's a hostile post made about it. Joking about it is fine, I've done that on occasion, but damn if it doesn't feel like there's some real heat behind the posts sometimes.
---

Flake confirms he's still a Yes tomorrow (the most obvious vote of the 4 "undecided")
Murkowski confirms she's still a No tomorrow

All on Collins now, with Manchin probably going where she goes (a Yes iff his vote doesn't actually matter)
---

It could be confirmation bias, but I'm convinced that Collins is a yes and that the speech is to try and justify her vote when pretty much everyone in Maine is telling her not to.

it won't work

I've felt she was going to leave the Senate in 2020 before this, but if she votes to confirm she doesn't win re-election in the event she seeks it IMO. Or Governor if that was her plan.
---

ultimately it's not a big deal but i get mildly annoyed when people forget the flair as well tbqh. i feel like it's happened a gazillion times at this point and i'm like "is it really that hard to pay attention when making the topic"? it's like anagram making a topic about a news story without checking if there's already a topic about it.

remember that the flair isn't just for people who want to ignore politics topics. it comes in handy for people who want to FIND politics topics, too.
---

CelesMyUserName posted...

Flake confirms he's still a Yes tomorrow (the most obvious vote of the 4 "undecided")
Murkowski confirms she's still a No tomorrow

All on Collins now, with Manchin probably going where she goes (a Yes iff his vote doesn't actually matter)

I just have the weirdest feeling Manchin is a yes regardless
---

I've never actually consciously noticed a flair on any topic ever.

Though my go to is my post list, not the topic list.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

CelesMyUserName posted...

Flake confirms he's still a Yes tomorrow (the most obvious vote of the 4 "undecided")
Murkowski confirms she's still a No tomorrow

All on Collins now, with Manchin probably going where she goes (a Yes iff his vote doesn't actually matter)

I just have the weirdest feeling Manchin is a yes regardless

That would at least kill Corriks argument that he only confirmed Gorsuch because he would have been confirmed anyway
---

Manchin is a fascinating politician to me. He genuinely votes with his constituents in mind, which explains his popularity in what is one of the top 3-5 reddest states (and a state that is mostly white FWIW). Seems like he from a different generation where regional concerns trump the party line.
---

Oh once again people outside the clique weren't allowed to make a politics topic.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Manchin is a fascinating politician to me. He genuinely votes with his constituents in mind, which explains his popularity in what is one of the top 3-5 reddest states (and a state that is mostly white FWIW). Seems like he from a different generation where regional concerns trump the party line.

No he doesn't.
---

Corrik posted...

Oh once again people outside the clique weren't allowed to make a politics topic.

people outside the clique can make the topic, it's just impractical when a user half the regulars have on ignore makes it. i would be fine with team rocket elite making the topic, for instance.
---

Ashethan posted...

We have the literal President of the United States using terms like "Paid protesters" and "Crisis actors" and blaming George Soros for anybody who doesn't agree with him. And he's not at a roast.

I honestly don't think anyone could have written a parody of Trump as President in 2016 that would have come close to as bad as things were going to get.

It's truly frightening what the Republican party has become.

Even better is that even people who hate Trump can write it off as Trump just being clueless. It feels like a certain person who was Trump's biggest competition for the presidential election is just hated in a more visceral way, to the point where even those who think Trump is being incompetent still go and say "at least he's not Hillary". Yes, I still don't fully understand why she is SO hated, although I think I kind of have a grasp on it. But it would take a decent while to explain.

Also I honestly find it kind of hard to truly hate Trump himself. I mean, all he did was just take advantage of the current social (not even so much political) climate. He was just the right (wrong?) man in the right place. And if Hillary had won the election part of me really feels like there would be even bigger riots on the streets, perhaps to the point of the police being repeatedly used to fix situations and Republicans making Fuhrer Clinton jokes. I still would have preferred that to what we have now but yeesh.

All I'm saying is that Trump didn't magically make things worse. However, I *tried* to convince myself that it wasn't a wave of bigotry that got him elected, and while I still think a lot of people who voted for him did so for less nefarious and more pragmatic reasons, I think that bigotry is manifesting itself in a new form: that of outrage at political correctness gone mad.

Previously I used to get really mad at Trump's behavior with other countries, but then something on the "political correctness gone mad" spectrum would then anger me more and cause me to forget about it. Now it's shifting towards the opposite. I can't believe I used to get so in arms about Anita Sarkeesian, someone who really isn't much worse than a typical moral guardian. Even I'm hardly above this kind of bigotry. How tragic.
---

xp1337 posted...

sometimes i think town is making terrible mistakes

Well if politics topics had rules where I couldn't post I'd find it much easier to not post.

Maybe if you wanna add 1. Lopen can't post to the first post rules dump of the hypothetical politics topic you make down the line I won't ignore you.
---

Corrik posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Manchin is a fascinating politician to me. He genuinely votes with his constituents in mind, which explains his popularity in what is one of the top 3-5 reddest states (and a state that is mostly white FWIW). Seems like he from a different generation where regional concerns trump the party line.

No he doesn't.

Sure he does. That's reflected in his economic votes (against tax cuts since most of West Virginians are quite poor, for coal mining and other blue collar initiatives), his views on gun rights, a very moderate social voting record, etc. I really think there's a good chance he follows the WV polling data that shows an overwhelming support for Kavanaugh.
---

Ashethan posted...

We have the literal President of the United States using terms like "Paid protesters" and "Crisis actors" and blaming George Soros for anybody who doesn't agree with him. And he's not at a roast.

The woman who confronted Flake in the elevator literally works for (ie, gets paid by) a Soros-run PAC.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Corrik posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Manchin is a fascinating politician to me. He genuinely votes with his constituents in mind, which explains his popularity in what is one of the top 3-5 reddest states (and a state that is mostly white FWIW). Seems like he from a different generation where regional concerns trump the party line.

No he doesn't.

Sure he does. That's reflected in his economic votes (against tax cuts since most of West Virginians are quite poor, for coal mining and other blue collar initiatives), his views on gun rights, a very moderate social voting record, etc. I really think there's a good chance he follows the WV polling data that shows an overwhelming support for Kavanaugh.

No he doesn't. Been pointed out time and time again he only votes for Republican issues when his vote does not matter (they don't have enough regardless or they have enough regardless with his vote). He is never going to be the deciding vote on an issue whether it is what his voters want or not (aka Obamacare). He votes with democrats and self-preservation in mind.
---

Lopen posted...

Yeah Mafia you never accidentally click a topic, see some bad post and get tempted to respond.

Have you ever considered just not responding to bad posts?

Like the more you talk about this the more it seems like the real problem here is your own lack of self-control.
---

Also Manchin has gone on record stating that he would look at Kav's life "from 22 to 53" when making a decision. He won't have the sexual assault talking point to assuage some voter outrage if he votes no.
---

can we stop shitting up a bunch of wasted posts on what are bad posts

because those are literally the only awful posts that are visible to sane people
---

I just sort of get the feeling there isn't a damn thing worth reading on this page. Accurate?
---

Corrik posted...

Oh once again people outside the clique weren't allowed to make a politics topic.

There is no clique

I despise all of you
---

Not_an_Owl posted...

Like the more you talk about this the more it seems like the real problem here is your own lack of self-control.

I'm not saying I literally respond to troll posts.

I'm saying someone makes a point I disagree with and I attempt to engage them in conversation, which then fails with a pretty significant portion of people who post in this topic as they don't really have any desire to discuss things.

If you're saying I should have some restraint in attempting to seek out discussion then what am I even reading the topic for? As a Twitter feed? Pass.
---

Other topic was way more civil and productive hmm
---

kevwaffles posted...

I just sort of get the feeling there isn't a damn thing worth reading on this page. Accurate?

pretty much

tl;dr: we're all waiting to see what collins will say in a few hours. it'll be "after much thought, yes"
---

StartTheMachine posted...

substantive: watching the hearing and good god i am so tired of hearing the term "paid protestors." what an absolute load of bullshit that never has and never will exist

I mean, it probably does exist
---