toad

Ocasio

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Ford's main innovation was buying cars on credit, he did not directly invent anything. He also paid his own workers enough that they could buy the cars they built, and gave tremendous amounts of money to charities and civic projects.

 

Ransom E. Olds is underappreciated.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Where did Edison get his money to start testing variations of the light bulb?

Ford's main innovation was buying cars on credit, he did not directly invent anything. He also paid his own workers enough that they could buy the cars they built, and gave tremendous amounts of money to charities and civic projects.

 

edison got his funding from morgan

ford didn't invent anything? really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hermetic said:

edison got his funding from morgan

ford didn't invent anything? really?

He picked up a lot with telegraph inventions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
9 minutes ago, hermetic said:

ford didn't invent anything? really?

does modern american anti-semitism count?

I would think so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Satellite Communications?  You mean like Telstar?  Bell Labs (AT&T) paid for the launch.

Belonging to AT&T, the original Telstar was part of a multi-national agreement among AT&T (USA), Bell Telephone Laboratories (USA), NASA (USA), GPO (United Kingdom) and the National PTT (France) to develop experimental satellite communications over the Atlantic Ocean. Bell Labs held a contract with NASA, paying the agency for each launch, independent of success.

Six ground stations were built to communicate with Telstar. One each in the US, France, the UK, Canada, Germany and Italy. The American ground station—built by Bell Labs—was Andover Earth Station, in Andover, Maine. The main British ground station was at Goonhilly Downs in southwestern England. The BBC, as international coordinator, used this location. The standards 525/405 conversion equipment (filling a large room) was researched and developed by the BBC and located in the BBC Television Centre, London. The French ground station was at Pleumeur-Bodou (48°47′10″N 3°31′26″W) in north-western France. The Canadian ground station was at Charleston, Nova Scotia. The German ground station was at Raisting in Bavaria. The Italian ground station was at Fucino in Abruzzo

Well, leaving out NASA and Societe Astronautiqe, which are pure government-funded organizations, the technologies going into Telstar came from RAND (doing research for the US Army) and tested by the Army Signal Corp and Air Force.

BTW Bell Labs was a prime contractor a for lot of not-quite-pure research funded by various gov't agencies.

Anyway, I'm glad you mentioned Telstar because it certainly shows the usefulness of advances in science; but it certainly doesn't make the case the the gov't should not fund research because as near as I can make out, ignoring background stuff like transistors and rockets (who paid Goddard's bills?), the Telstar story is about half and half..... that was when they were in the stage of directed research, when they knew what they wanted to build and needed the solutions to technical problems.

Readable story https://www.inventionandtech.com/content/telstar-1?

-DSK

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Well, leaving out NASA and Societe Astronautiqe, which are pure government-funded organizations, the technologies going into Telstar came from RAND (doing research for the US Army) and tested by the Army Signal Corp and Air Force.

BTW Bell Labs was a prime contractor a for lot of not-quite-pure research funded by various gov't agencies.

Anyway, I'm glad you mentioned Telstar because it certainly shows the usefulness of advances in science; but it certainly doesn't make the case the the gov't should not fund research because as near as I can make out, ignoring background stuff like transistors and rockets (who paid Goddard's bills?), the Telstar story is about half and half..... that was when they were in the stage of directed research, when they knew what they wanted to build and needed the solutions to technical problems.

Readable story https://www.inventionandtech.com/content/telstar-1?

-DSK

 

Did you read your cite?

These events were made possible by Telstar , the first communications satellite to be privately built and the first that could usefully transmit live voice and television signals. It demonstrated the viability of many satellite design features that are still in use today, from solar panels to the choice of wavelengths for transmission. More important, its success demonstrated once again the importance of letting research geeks play with large amounts of dollars—and the value of opening outer space to private enterprise. Unfortunately, this last lesson was lost on the nation’s policymakers.

Then, there was that Transistor thingy and a few others http://blog.tmcnet.com/next-generation-communications/2011/08/the-top-bell-labs-innovations---part-i-the-game-changers.html.

Did the government buy in as early adopters?  Sure but they didn't invent.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Saorsa said:

Did you read your cite?

These events were made possible by Telstar , the first communications satellite to be privately built and the first that could usefully transmit live voice and television signals. It demonstrated the viability of many satellite design features that are still in use today, from solar panels to the choice of wavelengths for transmission. More important, its success demonstrated once again the importance of letting research geeks play with large amounts of dollars—and the value of opening outer space to private enterprise. Unfortunately, this last lesson was lost on the nation’s policymakers.

Then, there was that Transistor thingy and a few others http://blog.tmcnet.com/next-generation-communications/2011/08/the-top-bell-labs-innovations---part-i-the-game-changers.html.

Did the government buy in as early adopters?  Sure but they didn't invent.

 

 

Excuse me, but you must be a very selective reader. References to government backed research was all thru the whole article, some of which I already mentioned. For example, who paid Goddard's bills?

It's also possible that you're a bit unclear on the difference between pure research and directed research.

I am a huge fan of increasing levels of technology, and bought quite a bit of Lucent stock BITD. Pure research is a different game. And it all starts with a high level of education, such as public schools.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Excuse me, but you must be a very selective reader. References to government backed research was all thru the whole article, some of which I already mentioned. For example, who paid Goddard's bills?

It's also possible that you're a bit unclear on the difference between pure research and directed research.

I am a huge fan of increasing levels of technology, and bought quite a bit of Lucent stock BITD. Pure research is a different game. And it all starts with a high level of education, such as public schools.

-DSK

Your whole case is that government has discovered shit, therefore it must be the best most efficient way to discover shit.  You left out the part about actually proving it is the best, most efficient way to discover shit.

See how that works?  Yeah, government has spent a fuckton of money.  If it didn't discover anything, it would be absurd.  That it discovered some things in ho way means that it is the best way to discover things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jzk said:

Your whole case is that government has discovered shit, therefore it must be the best most efficient way to discover shit.  You left out the part about actually proving it is the best, most efficient way to discover shit.

See how that works?  Yeah, government has spent a fuckton of money.  If it didn't discover anything, it would be absurd.  That it discovered some things in ho way means that it is the best way to discover things.

So, tell us all the wonderful inventions from places where the gov't does not support research, or education

Also, tell us more about how you are a mind reader and can tell exactly what my views & opinions are. You seem to end up calling everybody who disagrees with you a socialist. Does arguing like this pay many dividends, back where you're from?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

What kind of stupid bullshit argument is that?  Typical for PA.

The government forces me to contribute to the SS system, and in return I might get some SS payments.  I think there is a better way.  I can't advocate that way unless give up the SS payments that I earned by making my forced payments?  Is that a position you really want to take?

SS Taxes are Taxes, and they go into the general fund. 

Not my fault you bought the bullshit that this is some sort of forced savings plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Cool, so you're willing to forego your SS check then, right?  After all, SS is just Individual Welfare for old people.

@Saorsa  Why don't you just send the SS Checks back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SailBlueH2O said:

SS would be on solid footing if it was left alone when it was call the SS Trust Fund , before the politicians voted to move the protected pile of money into the general fund where to could then be used for pet projects ....I’d have rather not paid into it and used those funds as I saw fit

I bet you want a pet unicorn too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

SS would be on solid footing if it was left alone when it was call the SS Trust Fund , before the politicians voted to move the protected pile of money into the general fund where to could then be used for pet projects ....I’d have rather not paid into it and used those funds as I saw fit

so donate the money you receive or send the checks back.

make sure you don't take medicare either. its' socialized medicine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

so donate the money you receive or send the checks back.

make sure you don't take medicare either. its' socialized medicine.

Just refund the money I paid in, and you have a deal.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jzk said:
27 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

so donate the money you receive or send the checks back.

...   ....

Just refund the money I paid in, and you have a deal.

 

6 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

If only it were that easy.

 

Great investment advice.

I can see why you righties really slay it in the finance world.

-DSK

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

Your whole case is that government has discovered shit, therefore it must be the best most efficient way to discover shit.  You left out the part about actually proving it is the best, most efficient way to discover shit.

See how that works?  Yeah, government has spent a fuckton of money.  If it didn't discover anything, it would be absurd.  That it discovered some things in ho way means that it is the best way to discover things.

No, the people in the government (universities, parts of which are special departments set up for this sort of thing) do the basic research which the free market (remember free market failures) would never do because the risk/reward profile would fall out of the acceptable range, especially for capital with low time horizons.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Laker said:

No, the people in the government (universities, parts of which are special departments set up for this sort of thing) do the basic research which the free market (remember free market failures) would never do because the risk/reward profile would fall out of the acceptable range, especially for capital with low time horizons.

Arno Penzius was working in Bell Labs trying to minimize signal noise in microwave transmissions.  Once he discovered he could not eliminate some parts of it he won a Nobel prize for the joint discovery of celestial background radiation which made a lot of todays radio astronomy possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Arno Penzius was working in Bell Labs trying to minimize signal noise in microwave transmissions.  Once he discovered he could not eliminate some parts of it he won a Nobel prize for the joint discovery of celestial background radiation which made a lot of todays radio astronomy possible.

Actually, he was trying to minimise the signal noise in the Holmdel Horn Antenna, a device which was funded by the government (via NASA). Their accidental discovery of background cosmic radiation was therefore the direct result of government funding of scientific & engineering endeavours. You, once again, prove the point against free market R&D and for government-funded R&D. Appreciate the input. :lol: 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

Actually, he was trying to minimise the signal noise in the Holmdel Horn Antenna, a device which was funded by the government (via NASA). Their accidental discovery of background cosmic radiation was therefore the direct result of government funding of scientific & engineering endeavours. You, once again, prove the point against free market R&D and for government-funded R&D. Appreciate the input. :lol: 

There are certain companies, bio-tech for example, that do conduct primary research, primarily because the high risk/high reward profile of hitting a block-buster drug is so enormous - 100s of millions in/10s of billions out - and largely because of the "unique" US health insurance system and drug-pricing mechanisms.  Most of these, however, are done in conjunction with a University-supported adjunct with public grant monies and/or public hospitals supporting the clinical trials.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2018 at 12:03 PM, jzk said:

What a lame post.  Just rude insults and nothing more.  Typical PA.  

My way is the way of prosperity for the common man.  Your way is the way of misery.   

In my original hometown, over one hundred years ago, the city gave land to Heinz to build a pickle factory.  The farmers promised to plant the acreage necessary for production.  The factory is still there and has employed many people over the last century plus.  The point is, this was not pure capitalism.  Nor did Adam Smith believe that pure capitalism is possible or desirable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Left Shift said:

There are certain companies, bio-tech for example, that do conduct primary research, primarily because the high risk/high reward profile of hitting a block-buster drug is so enormous - 100s of millions in/10s of billions out - and largely because of the "unique" US health insurance system and drug-pricing mechanisms.  Most of these, however, are done in conjunction with a University-supported adjunct with public grant monies and/or public hospitals supporting the clinical trials.  

And they rely on a government enforced monopoly on the use of any knowledge they get from those trials. Patents are not mechanisms of the "free market".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

And they rely on a government enforced monopoly on the use of any knowledge they get from those trials. Patents are not mechanisms of the "free market".

It's a simple Republican creed:  Regulation is bad only when you don't benefit from it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

And they rely on a government enforced monopoly on the use of any knowledge they get from those trials. Patents are not mechanisms of the "free market".

The free market requires government to protect property rights including intellectual property rights.  No one here is advocating a society without a government.  That you need it for some basic things doesn't mean you need it running all aspects of your life.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alexandria-Ocasio-Cortez-Trump-jr-Tweet.

Now she is threatening citizens that criticize her with the power of government.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jzk said:

The free market requires government to protect property rights including intellectual property rights.  No one here is advocating a society without a government.  That you need it for some basic things doesn't mean you need it running all aspects of your life.  

Bent like to pretend that that's what folks are saying.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Left Shift said:

There are certain companies, bio-tech for example, that do conduct primary research, primarily because the high risk/high reward profile of hitting a block-buster drug is so enormous - 100s of millions in/10s of billions out - and largely because of the "unique" US health insurance system and drug-pricing mechanisms.  Most of these, however, are done in conjunction with a University-supported adjunct with public grant monies and/or public hospitals supporting the clinical trials.  

I'm late to this, and perhaps splitting hairs, but my direct experience was universitys did the primary research (almost entirely based on government funding). startups and corps did the applied research necessary to commercialize. post-2000 no commercial entity has the timeframe or pockets for "basic" research. Orgs like lucent were gutted after the 2001 crash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, toad said:

Haha! read the tweets, its the rantings of a bunch of angry screen warrior right wing snowflakes. She really triggers them bad :)

Apparently the Repugnican newsletters are targeting her specifically. They are scared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, toad said:

Haha! read the tweets, its the rantings of a bunch of angry screen warrior right wing snowflakes. She really triggers them bad :)

Women threaten their hold on power. Just by virtue of being. 

Adding to that, she’s “ethnic”. 

Scares the shit out of them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There really is a boat shoe wearing Harvard educated groomed and manicured upper class elite in the states, it doesnt matter who the president is, they all work for them. The idea that power might actually go back to the people is frightening, better start another war...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Women threaten their hold on power. Just by virtue of being. 

Adding to that, she’s “ethnic”. 

Scares the shit out of them. 

Yup. Repressive regimes and repressives hate feminism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, toad said:

There really is a boat shoe Topsider wearing Harvard educated groomed and manicured upper class elite in the states, it doesnt matter who the president is, they all work for them. The idea that power might actually go back to the people is frightening, better start another war...

Fixed that for you.  Hold the socks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Women threaten their hold on power. Just by virtue of being. 

Adding to that, she’s “ethnic”. 

Scares the shit out of them. 

And she's going to outlive them by 40 years.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

It is not her political views, it is that she is a bimbo...

How come you haven't been down on Melania?

Edit: that sounds a little odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like ol' SbH2o has a bad case of the cabin fever, a little early in the season.....

 Maybe he ought to go to some shit hole country where he can get laid for the price of a chicken dinner....

 Or maybe he could just go to Tijuana, and hook up with a migrant, tell her that he'll sponsor her, then slink off in the morning while she's washing herself with a water bottle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

After some consideration, she's just another loudmouthed New York asshole.

 

I guess she's qualified to be President................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope.  Got to be 35 YO.  On the other hand, intellectually and emotionally she'll never be qualified.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dacapo said:

I guess she's qualified to be President................

Doesn't Chelsea have to get elected first?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

After some consideration, she's just another loudmouthed New York asshole.

 

whos' smarter, more accomplished, and more interesting than you. and because she has the wrong letter after her name you get to binge watch hate TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

whos' smarter, more accomplished, and more interesting than you. and because she has the wrong letter after her name you get to binge watch hate TV.

Really? Anyone with a D would get elected in that district.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2018 at 9:10 AM, Saorsa said:

 Bent like to pretend that that's what folks are saying.

Imagine i said that you're trying to do away with government. Just imagine!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Imagine i said that you're trying to do away with government. Just imagine!

instead of debating the actual topic, now Bent wants to change the debate into what he said.  Classic Bent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Don't even suggest that in jest.

After the next election/administration, she'll be 36.....Perfect age for a Veep, then ascension to POTUS next round.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

After the next election/administration, she'll be 36.....Perfect age for a Veep, then ascension to POTUS next round.....

You think she could beat Ivanka?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

You think she could beat Ivanka?

 

Will Ivanka have been paroled by that time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Saorsa said:

You think she could beat Ivanka?

 

TKO in the first round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Not guilty said:

Considering she has not been convicted of any thing outside of your head, it is not a consideration. 

That doesn’t seem to matter to the “Lock her up!” crowd 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its just amazing how these maga's get triggered by women, I bet their favourite porn is femdom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

 on which planet?

The one you actually live on, while you're happy to think that your home is Uranus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Not guilty said:

I love how they shot themselves in the foot with this, get out a big time D that could get stuff done, and put in this low IQ turd. All the Rs I know are cheering this move on.

She really does get under your skin out of proportion to her actual influence.  I find this strange.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Laker said:

She really does get under your skin out of proportion to her actual influence.  I find this strange.

Successful young female Social Democrat. Five hate words in a row.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Successful young female Social Democrat. Five hate words in a row.

Scary..... Init? (BTW I love your new avatar!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Not guilty said:

Quoted because you are so fucking stupid you don't know that the incumbent was...

Democratic Caucus Chair Joe Crowley

YCMTSU

The caucus chair is a really important Washington position.  It don't mean shit to the local voters..

It's also easy to see what an incumbent has actually done for the constituency while an outsider can make a lot of promises that they may not be able to keep.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, VOA said:

Blatant whataboutism again

Whatabout the bar maids?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

The caucus chair is a really important Washington position.  It don't mean shit to the local voters. Blah blah blah.

Actually, Caucus Chair is third in the House leadership bracket behind Leader (Pelosi) and Whip (Hoyer). Seniority and leadership does mean shit to local voters. It's why incumbency is so strong and primary challenges so rarely win.

But there had been demographic changes in that district (NY-14) since Crowley entered Congress in 1999. Ocasio Cortez was a strong candidate to win that race by 15 points and Crowley understood this and was gracious in defeat.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Actually, Caucus Chair is third in the House leadership bracket behind Leader (Pelosi) and Whip (Hoyer). Seniority and leadership does mean shit to local voters. It's why incumbency is so strong and primary challenges so rarely win.

But there had been demographic changes in that district (NY-14) since Crowley entered Congress in 1999. Ocasio Cortez was a strong candidate to win that race by 15 points and Crowley understood this and was gracious in defeat.

 

That's what I said.  But the incumbent has to sell those advantages.

It was the demographic change (along with gerrymandering NYC districts) that held the door open for the feminist.

The district was a Brooklyn-based seat until 1982 when it became the Staten Island district. In 1992 it became the East Side of Manhattan district, which for most of its existence had been the 17th district. In 2012, the district shifted to the former territory of the 7th district in Queens and the Bronx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Districts move around after every census in every state (well, except for Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming) but neither Crowley nor even his predecessor Manton ever represented Staten Island which is on the other side of Manhattan in NY-11. You have to go all the way back to 1992 before NY-14 included Staten Island. Ocasio Cortez was like 3 then.

Still, you'll be happy to know that NY-11 flipped. Yeah, it was the gerrymandering.

Adding that Crowley had represented NY-7 until 2013. NY-7 doesn't include Staten Island either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Laker said:

She really does get under your skin out of proportion to her actual influence.  I find this strange.

it's the virtuous right-wing media cycle. there's a ton of angry people like him who get fed media about how horrible AOC is - on Fox, on some rightwing hate site, via a meme (who's seeding the memes, eh?). They then propagate all of this shit to all of the other angry rightwing fucks. Because the angry rightwingers are loving this stuff in social media, Fox and the rightwing hate sites devote more coverage to her. It's really cheap, easy, shit to "report" on for all concerned. It gives the angry right wingers the dose of brain chemicals they need. All good for that media sphere.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Not guilty said:

The delusional left, never a dull moment in their head.

I find your comment quite disjointed.  What do you mean?  That the left is not a child of the reformation as is the right?  That they don't think things through because they do not come to the same conclusions as the right and therefore have no validity?  This comment about "dull moment".  Is that to say that the right has "dull moments" and that is good?  This is as bad as saying that the right are better economists than the left.  The rate of increase in sovereign debt never seems to go down in Republican governments, for instance.  Clear communication is important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Olsonist said:

Districts move around after every census in every state (well, except for Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming) but neither Crowley nor even his predecessor Manton ever represented Staten Island which is on the other side of Manhattan in NY-11. You have to go all the way back to 1992 before NY-14 included Staten Island. Ocasio Cortez was like 3 then.

Still, you'll be happy to know that NY-11 flipped. Yeah, it was the gerrymandering.

Adding that Crowley had represented NY-7 until 2013. NY-7 doesn't include Staten Island either.

Oh, I didn't say it was the first time it was gerrymandered.  But, there is clearly an effort to keep a few seats safe in NYC.  That can include racial profiling but, nobody wants to own up to that when the Ds are drawing the lines.

NY State Congressional District Map

new_york_state_congressional_districts_2

NY City Congressional District Detail.  7, 10 and 14 seem particularly squiggly (if you can't deal with Gerrymander).

Final-New-York-Special-Master-Map-NYC.jp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

And if memory serves she only had like 14,000 votes all toll.

It doesn't serve you well very often. Almost 16,000.

Yup, nothing to do with gender. Which is of course why this page has a senile dumbass calling her a "bimbo" and this thread is dripping with misogyny.

Fuck your dumbass says in one line she wasn't even on the radar, and then you can't even give her credit for getting out the vote.

Anyways - I'm sure you'll post something stupid soon. It's the only reason to read your addled mental flatulence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

It doesn't serve you well very often. Almost 16,000.

Yup, nothing to do with gender. Which is of course why this page has a senile dumbass calling her a "bimbo" and this thread is dripping with misogyny.

Fuck your dumbass says in one line she wasn't even on the radar, and then you can't even give her credit for getting out the vote.

Anyways - I'm sure you'll post something stupid soon. It's the only reason to read your addled mental flatulence.

Nearly 17,000 votes in the Primary (=56.7%) cxompared to Crowley getting nearly 13,000 votes (=43.3%).

In the General, she took more than 100,000 votes (=77.9%) and Crowley dropped to 8,505 votes (=6.6%).

Linky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

give the woman a chance

someone likes her, otherwise cuomo and deblasio would be skewering her for opposing the amazon deal

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

Cite please. Seriously, where did you get that information? 

I live in the next district or so over. She wasn't even on the radar for the primaries. It was a given that Crowley would plow right through and get re-elected in the general election. Shit man, O-C didn't even think she won, let alone think she could win.

This primary race was more about voter apathy/complacency than some stunning victory by a promising upstart. And if memory serves she only had like 14,000 votes all toll. This is not some mandate or social democrat revolution. It is more a matter that Crowley fuk'd up and didn't get out the vote in a primary he thought was a given.

And for you jerks who thinks this has something to do with gender, you really are dragging your knuckles.

The 15 points. https://ballotpedia.org/New_York's_14th_Congressional_District_election,_2018

The gracious in defeat. Post 760.

As for the demographics.

image.png.0b91d3aa6b716b7f8a8bdc63c13b46de.png

Lastly, if you read the contemporaneous news reports from the NY Times, it doesn't say she came out of nowhere on the evening of June 26 and upset Crowley. It say she mounted an unexpectedly strong campaign and beat him.

image.png.a0ac915f9a02b79bdfc384628eafe5ef.png

Anything else, knuckledragger?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Oh, I didn't say it was the first time it was gerrymandered.  But, there is clearly an effort to keep a few seats safe in NYC.  That can include racial profiling but, nobody wants to own up to that when the Ds are drawing the lines.

NY State Congressional District Map

new_york_state_congressional_districts_2

NY City Congressional District Detail.  7, 10 and 14 seem particularly squiggly (if you can't deal with Gerrymander).

Final-New-York-Special-Master-Map-NYC.jp

Oh look. A couple of maps. There must be gerrymandering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Oh look. A couple of maps. There must be gerrymandering.

The 7th looks a bit contorted.  But, the other districts look pretty straightforward.

Nothing like the Maryland 3rd.

maryland 3rd.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

The 7th looks a bit contorted.  But, the other districts look pretty straightforward.

Nothing like the Maryland 3rd.

maryland 3rd.jpg

It's kind of hard to beat that one.  I'm surprised the Republicans got away with it.

But take a look at NYC 10th and 14th.

Final-New-York-Special-Master-Map-NYC.jp

 

That little purple splotch between 7 and 9 is part of 10 and the 14th is split in half by a river joined by one bridge with parts of 3 and 15 nearly splitting it except perhaps for a few folks living on boats.

data=nHcrZ_z78YGd5JN7rXCFb_6guWeccAru5lI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New York as a state shows up high on the gerrymandering list. But the Minister will be surprised to know that it's gerrymandered to Republicans advantage. There seems to be a lot of red in this chart, 25 to 8. Why is that?

image.png.a2514cbc1ff85843aeae43bc6626a8ab.png

https://www.azavea.com/blog/2017/07/19/gerrymandered-states-ranked-efficiency-gap-seat-advantage/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

New York as a state shows up high on the gerrymandering list. But the Minister will be surprised to know that it's gerrymandered to Republicans advantage. There seems to be a lot of red in this chart, 25 to 8. Why is that?

image.png.a2514cbc1ff85843aeae43bc6626a8ab.png

https://www.azavea.com/blog/2017/07/19/gerrymandered-states-ranked-efficiency-gap-seat-advantage/

It's quite possible that there are more republican districts in NY state but most of it seems to be divided up almost geometrically compared to the NYC area.

New%20District-Map.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Oh, I didn't say it was the first time it was gerrymandered.  But, there is clearly an effort to keep a few seats safe in NYC.  That can include racial profiling but, nobody wants to own up to that when the Ds are drawing the lines.

NY State Congressional District Map

new_york_state_congressional_districts_2

NY City Congressional District Detail.  7, 10 and 14 seem particularly squiggly (if you can't deal with Gerrymander).

Final-New-York-Special-Master-Map-NYC.jp

Quite some odd mapping choices.  Pretty much sliced up to chop up the black vote and leave Charles Rangel all alone with Harlem and the poorest part of the Bronx  (13).

7:  A chunk of Bed/Stuy in Brooklyn, a slice of Italian Queens, the Lower East side and Park slope???

8:  The Russian mob part of Brooklyn and a chunk of Bed/Stuy?

10: The West side of Manhattan and Central Brooklyn in one district???

12:  The Upper East Side of Manhattan and bits of Brooklyn and Queens?

14:  Half Bronx and half Queens?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like NY does pretty good on their state legislative districts too.  Here is Monroe County which included Rochester.

Leg-MapCity.jpg

9, 26, and 27 seem a bit convoluted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Saorsa said:
2 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

maryland 3rd.jpg

It's kind of hard to beat that one.  I'm surprised the Republicans got away with it.

Please don't take the credit from the Democrats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Is that gerrymandering to Republicans advantage as well but you're going to blame Democrats?

it's not NY assembly districts or senate districts. it's a map of the districts, each of 25,000, that elect the legislators to run Monroe County, NY. Soreass is confused. 

edit: amusingly, if it's the most recent map, it was drawn by Republicans. And #26 is weird so they could screw over someone by moving the district one street over so the candidate they didn't want to face, would no longer lived in that district.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

Is that gerrymandering to Republicans advantage as well but you're going to blame Democrats?

Your figures pretend that there are only two parties.  Perhaps you should look into the number running in various counties.

I look at your provided metric 'efficiency seat gap' and the constraints placed on it and figure it's one of those statistics in search of meaning.  In fact, it really, really sucks.

Someone found two numbers, performed an arithmetic operation on them and decided it must have meaning.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Someone found two numbers, performed an arithmetic operation on them and decided it must have meaning.

NY City Congressional District Detail.  7, 10 and 14 seem particularly squiggly (if you can't deal with Gerrymander).

Someone squinted at a map not even normalized for population density and decided it must have meaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2018 at 3:58 PM, hermetic said:

I wonder how the voting went on rikers and hart island

I’m sure all the “residents” of Hart Island voted Democrat :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hermetic said:

I know it's cold out there sean, but don't shiver while hitting submit

Damn post didn’t appear to be posting, so I hit “submit reply” a few times. These forums don’t play well on my iPhone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez doesn't look any more tan than I do in October..... But the screeching numb nutz on the...... Racist/right side of the world cartoon her as brown... Like more brown than Obama..... And her burning eyes! OMG! How awful is that to have large white eyes that aren't all blood shot from late nights in the back room with bourbon, and cigars, and whores?

She's a good clean woman, who want's to do her job.

 Let's give her a chance.

 We gave a scuzzy fuckball named Trump a chance. Let's take another tack.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Not guilty said:

The delusional left, never a dull moment in their head.

The left is not monolithic like the right.  But generally, we are concerned about a living wage, the environment, affordable healthcare  and the military-industrial complex.  Plus we'd like to maintain the institutions that sustain this democratic republic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OC had never run for office before let alone won. Hard to know how to act. Something tells me she was more composed in November. Where we disagree is that you think he lost and I think she won. She did win by a lot and not a little. So she must have done something right. OTOH, he got pushed into NY-14 and wasn't a good fit for the district. I haven't read anywhere that Crowley was exactly complacent. He wasn't a bad candidate just a bad fit. He had previously been in NY-7 with these boundaries:

image.png.4465693ef38331cfaf58e5d2a3423438.png

Nothing against Crowley but I'm happy to see new blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasher said:

The left is not monolithic like the right.  But generally, we are concerned about a living wage, the environment, affordable healthcare  and the military-industrial complex.  Plus we'd like to maintain the institutions that sustain this democratic republic.

The right is only monolithic in the mind of the left.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Not guilty said:

Normal racist left, only seeing color. SMH it must suck to live so hate filled.

 

yj29cdruph321.jpg

Who sold the naming rights?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites