Cyn Armistead

I think supressing any and all non-violent forms of expression is..well repressive and prefer if the government does not do that.

Now we have social media companies censoring posts and uploads……..but according to what rules? Very subjective.

They will start pulling down Hitchens’ videos before you know it. I am sure many Catholics are…[Read more]

I’m not concerned with hate speech in public. That’s legal in the U.S. (mostly) and not in Canada/Europe/NZ/Australia. Those countries have made their decisions and have to live with the consequences. Hate speech is widely reported in the U.S. and so are hate crimes. You can interrupt a funeral and tell grievers that he deserved to die “because…[Read more]

I believe that hate speech should be protected right up to the point of direct or implied violence as far as criminal law is concerned. For civil law….take your chances….

There is some interesting info on this site (which seems legit). How or where do you get to see a breakdown of the individual donations that each candidate gets. Similar to this from the NRA.

Is there any merit to thinking that Trump might become his own worst enemy when the campaign really gets going? Will there be such a thing as Trump fatigue,…[Read more]

I also like Hickenlooper, but that name. President Hickenlooper. OK we can do that, I guess. LOL.

Detailed Maps of the Donors Powering the 2020 Democratic Campaigns (as of July 2019, per New York Times)

Focus is mostly on Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Harris, Biden, and O’Rourke, with mentions of 15 others.

I’ve neglected to follow the debates, but am hoping/wishing that Dems can favor a moderate candidate that can more likely beat Trump.…[Read more]

Here is some graphed data on internet research by people interested in the democratic candidates during, and before the debate. (Vox story link).

Unseen wrote:
handicap the election

Not sure what to take seriously (if anything) here, but I’ll say anyway that if big money corrupts campaigns, more of it will just invite even more corruption and undesirable opportunists.

I’m betting on candidates voluntarily greatly limiting big money donations, founding or finding an internet-wide platform…[Read more]

Here’s a campaign funding idea. Campaign donations are allowed up to some ungodly high limit. But the government’s Handicapper General (a character borrowed from a Kurt Vonnegut novel) would handicap the election by making up the difference for the candidate receiving less money. If one candidate receives $22 million in donations but the other…[Read more]

#PB_Like #25316

[…] a look back at the 2016 presidential candidate media coverage

Graph of Trump vs Clinton media coverage before 2016 election

(Data covers up to Dec 1 2016. I might add more to this topic later wrt 2020 election media coverage.)

source

BIKINI PHOTOS!? DUMP THE TRUMP!!
Just kidding, no link there. But while you’re here, if you haven’t seen it in the general Small Talk forum, @Unseen started an interesting discussion about Tulsi Gabbard running in 2020.

Canada has had limited donations laws for a decade now. A centre-left government introduced very limited donations from both businesses (a few thousand dollars at most) and invidivudals (a few hundred). In return after each election the parties were given around $1 per vote for financing. The next government (centre-right) partially repealed this…[Read more]

I read this yesterday about them saying “No” to PAC money.

We are slowly entering an age where accepting PAC money is unacceptable for Democrat Party candidates.