Sep 17, 2018

Critical Mass

At a certain point, it just has to go ka-boom.

Jay Newton-Small, Time:

If it seems like the structures that enable sexism are exploding, that’s because they scientifically are, according to the theory of critical mass. When women reached 20% in the Senate, they went after the Pentagon to reform the military’s sexual-assault protocol. When they reached 25% of Hollywood producers, they took down Harvey Weinstein and his casting-couch culture. And when they reached a third of the White House press corps, Fox’s Roger Ailes, NPR’s Michael Oreskes and other serial harassers in the media began to get called out. Somewhere in that zone, when women comprise 20% to 30% of an institution, things begin to change.

And from way back in June 2018, Ed Kilgore at The Daily Inetlligencer, NY Magazine:

In 2016, according to exit polls, women under the age of 30 voted for Hillary Clinton by a 63/31 margin. Men under 30 gave her a much more modest 46/42 edge. This 17-point gender gap in votes for Clinton was larger than the overall 13-point gender gap in the electorate as a whole.

A Pew survey in March showed a rapidly increasing gender gap in party identification among millennials (defined as those born between 1981 and 1996) as of the end of 2017, when men were Democrats or Democratic-leaners by a 49/41 margin, but women tended in that direction by an astonishing 70/23 margin.

And now in a new Pew generic congressional ballot question posed to a large sample of registered voters, women under the age of 35 tilt Democratic by a 68/24 margin, while men under the age of 35 prefer Republicans by a 50/47 margin. That’s a 21-point gender gap in the Democratic percentage, and a 26-point gender gap in the Republican percentage. Meanwhile, there’s a smaller gender gap among voters aged 35–49, and barely one at all among voters over 50.

Conventional wisdom is that if your candidate is behind by a differential of more than 5 points with Women Voters (vs Men), your guy loses.
Trump lost women by 13 points, but had an 11-point edge with men. Differential = 2 points = Trump "wins" (even tho' the outcome will always be in doubt because of Russian interference via American Social Media, if not outright precinct rigging, etc).
 Anyway - per Five-ThirtyEight:

This week, we got a poll showing that same 24-point gender gap in the only “national” election of 2018: the national popular vote for the U.S. House. A YouGov survey found that male voters preferred the Republican candidate by 9 percentage points, while female voters preferred the Democratic candidate by 15 points. It was a bit of an outlier, but not egregiously so: A RealClearPolitics-style average1 of generic-ballot polls taken in the past two weeks reveals a gender gap of 16 points, and the two highest-quality polls from that period — Quinnipiac and Marist — each showed a gap even bigger than 24 points. If YouGov, Quinnipiac or Marist is correct, then just like 2016 broke a gender-gap record for presidential races, 2018 will have the widest gender gap in congressional elections since at least 1992.2

Gender Differential = 6 points.

Imagine the Ka-Boom if that 6 point spread turns into 20.



But -
Don't get happy
Get together
Get busy
Get shit done

Today's Tweet



Follow the thread

Sep 16, 2018

Today's Tweet



"Yeah, but why don't I get credit for all the girls I didn't try to rape?" --Brett Kavanaugh

Both Sides My Ass

Balance is definitely the name of the game, but Press Poodles blindly insisting that there's always a middle ground is part of the whole "Tribalism" problem they love to bitch about.


What's Your Logical Fallacy?

Remember, Poodles: When one guy says it's raining, it's not your job to go find another guy who says it isn't, and then just report that they have differing views on the weather - it's your job to go look out the fucking window and tell us what's actually going on.

2 + 2 = 4. It's not 3; it's not 5 - it's not green flapjacks on a fucking doghouse - and we're not going to "compromise" at 12½.

Eric Alterman, The Nation:

As President Trump and his Republican quislings continue to undermine our democracy, the punditocracy obsesses over another apparent threat to the nation: liberal intolerance. When New Yorkereditor David Remnick disinvited former Trump strategist Steve Bannon from his magazine’s annual festival, The Wall Street Journal ran an article bemoaning the “growing list of news organizations that have reversed their decision to engage with conservatives after a public outcry.” On The New York Times’ op-ed page, ex–Journal opinion editor Bret Stephens crossed into Crazytown when he concluded that “what this really means is that Remnick is no longer the editor of The New Yorker. Twitter is.” He added that the magazine was “on the road to [becoming a] left-wing version of Fox & Friends.”

Alterman's point seems to be that the regime of "Liberal Intolerance" seems to be pretty inclusive, and that there are plenty of platforms and opportunities for the wingnuts to barf up their Daddy State bullshit, but that's a bit defensive, and ineffective - cuz, when you're explaining, you're losing

I think the point needs to be that nobody's obliged to tolerate that Daddy State bullshit.




And, of course, he kicker is that there's solid evidence that the real threat to free speech is coming from the "conservatives". 

This comes as no surprise to anyone who knows Daddy State Awareness Rule 1:

Every accusation is a confession

Sep 14, 2018

Around The Web Today


So my dickhead neighbor, Brad, called the police because I was doing a little reefer out on my balcony.

The cops get here and ask me where's the weed? And I tell them I smoked it all.

Then they asked me who my supplier is - and now they're over at Brad's, jackin' all his shit.

Today's Pix

click the pic to embiggen





















Sep 13, 2018

Another Tweet Today



And still, not one fuckin' word about how these storms have gotten so bad.

It's A Wonderment

Quick note to all my lovely Trolls:

You seem to be among a whole big bunch of people who can't quite master certain elements of the English language.
eg:
"your" and "you're"
"lose" and "loose"
"there" "they're" and "their"
et al

These difficulties with Language Arts don't make you inferior as a person, of course, but it does make it harder to see you as particularly knowledgeable in the fields of Economics, GeoPolitics, History, Immigration Law, Climate Science, and the US Constitution when you post lengthy screeds online from an anonymous account.


Today's Tweet



Because all the good art happens on the left.

Sep 12, 2018

All Hail Florence

From ISS this morning:



And the good news is that, so far, no one has confirmed reports that the storm has picked up several sharks.

But let's be careful out there.