Jump to content

2024 Presidential Election Thread - Let's keep the party going.


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

If we get to a point in a few months where Donald Trump has won elections over Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, this country deserves to fall.

This still can't be real life, man.  God damn.

I am not underestimating this country's inherent misogyny. It's going to be a battle.

I am often reminded that the 15th amendment and 19th amendment is separated by 50 years.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

They're looking to swift boat Walz. 

For those that don't know in 2004, Bush's side attacked John Kerry saying that Kerry exaggerated his Vietnam war record. Even though everyone agreed that Kerry served in a war zone in Vietnam while Bush served by flying jets in SE Texas.

The end result was that some believed that Kerry was a draft dodger (spoiler: he enlisted) and Bush was Rambo.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, G650 said:

Dude John Cougar Uh Huh on vinyl. This guy can't get any cooler.

2 hours ago, immamac said:

Do I just need a better gif search in the editor? Stop posting yarns. They don't work for anyone. 

yarn is good and the people are for it

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

No, Tim Walz didn’t give Minnesota a Somali flag

  Hide contents

No, Tim Walz didn’t give Minnesota a Somali flag

Philip BumpAugust 7, 2024 at 10:52 a.m. EDT

Someone holds Minnesota and American flags in front of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz's temporary governor's residence in St. Paul, Minn., on Wednesday. (Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

In 2001, the North American Vexillological Association — an organization of flag enthusiasts — conducted a poll asking its members to rank the official flag of each American state and Canadian province.

The most-liked flags were those from New Mexico and Texas, simple flags with broad expanses of color and singular graphical elements. The least-liked were a coterie of similar flags, big fields of color with the state seal (or some equivalently complicated graphic) plunked down in the middle. Of the 72 flags that were considered, Utah’s flag ranked 58th. Minnesota’s ranked a miserable 67th.

Sign up for the How to Read This Chart newsletter

A bit over two decades later, Utah unveiled a new flag, stripped of the state seal in favor of a large beehive, a state symbol representing its motto, “Industry.” And earlier this year, Minnesota unveiled a new flag of its own.

The new flag has three elements, two fields of color and an eight-pointed star. In a report detailing the new flag (and an accompanying update to the state seal), the commission tasked with the redesign explained the significance of each. The dark blue represents “the night sky and the shape of the state of Minnesota.” The bright blue is a representation of Minnesota’s 11,800-plus lakes. The star is a reflection of the state motto — the North Star State — and a reflection of an eight-pointed star on the floor of the rotunda of the state capitol.

None of these elements should be particularly surprising. Minnesota used to be home to the basketball Lakers and the hockey (North) Stars, both reflections of the importance of these symbols in the state.

What the flag is not is some paean to the nation of Somalia.

As you are no doubt aware, Vice President Kamala Harris on Tuesday tapped Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) to be her running mate as she seeks the presidency. That led to a flurry of social media disparagements of the newly high-profile governor, including one that burbled up when the new flag was announced: The new Minnesota state flag was somehow meant to evoke Somalia’s, a woke tribute to the state’s large Somali population.

The reality — as is often the case with reality — is more banal and less nefarious.

In 2023, a state legislator from a suburb of Minneapolis (one that doesn’t have a significant Somali population) proposed revamping the state’s iconography. Speaking to a local news outlet, state Rep. Mike Freiberg (D) explained that the old flag, adopted in 1957, was not one that the state’s residents could embrace. That was in part because the seal at the center depicted a farmer tilling a field, with a Native American riding off on a horse in the background.

“It was designed very deliberately to depict white farmers displacing Native Americans,” Freiberg explained to CCX Media. “So it’s just not something that’s distinctive. It’s just not something that … at least I’m proud of.”

His bill calling for a new design passed the state legislature and was signed into law by Walz. It created a commission of Minnesotans and experts that would take submissions and decide on a new design.

The new flag is a modification of one submitted by Andrew Prekker, a resident of the small town of Luverne near the South Dakota border. It had a slightly different eight-pointed star and the light blue section was instead stripes of white, green and blue, but the design was otherwise the same.

“Each color was chosen to symbolize a different important aspect of Minnesota and its identity,” Prekker explained to Minnesota Public Radio. “For the stripes, white represents snow/winter, the green stripe represents our beautiful nature and the importance of agriculture and the light blue stripe represents the several significant meanings of water to our state.”

The existing flag, he said, was “a problematic representation of our state. It’s not a unifying symbol for everyone, and I wanted to create a flag that our Indigenous communities and tribal nations could see representation in as well.”

The modified design became the official flag of Minnesota in May. Even before then, though, the comparison to Somalia’s flag had been drawn.

On social media, state legislator Natalie Zeleznikar (R) compared Prekker’s original design to one from a particular region of Somalia. (It’s worth noting that the comparison depended on altering Prekker’s design significantly.) After the revised flag was adopted, the comparison drawn by critics — generally on the political right — was to Somalia’s national flag. It features a five-pointed star on a light-blue background.

In other words, the comparison depends on two elements that are omnipresent in flag designs: stars and the color blue.

After Walz was selected by Harris, the idea that the new flag was derived from Somalia’s gained new traction — as did the idea that somehow Walz was the person making the decision. (Again, the choice was made by the committee created under Freiberg’s legislation.) On X, owner Elon Musk offered his familiar “hmm, something to think about” emoji in response to a claim that the flag was related to Somalia’s.

The post to which he was responding was explicit in the reason for making the false claim: It’s an effort to cast Walz (and before his selection by Harris, the left in general) as anti-American, as beholden to immigrants from a country that is often presented as dangerous. (Somalia was one of the countries included in Donald Trump’s original travel ban.)

In the past, such nonsense would be relegated to the fringe of the political conversation and not elevated by prominent voices. But this is the present, in which false, pejorative claims are a form of currency on the right, particularly when targeting prominent politicians on the left. So the “Somali flag” claim gets new traction.

It’s also a reflection of a broader trend: taking an earnest, thoughtful community process aimed at rectifying a cultural (and vexillological) wrong and presenting it instead as nefarious and toxic. This case is exceptional only in how obviously and immediately divergent from reality that presentation is.

 

point of order: MN'a new flag is a powerpoint designed abomination

Posted
2 minutes ago, Constant said:

IMG_7381.thumb.jpeg.a6f1628438bd87d96d73b56c2fa97fb6.jpeg

This feels accurate. Fox News has melted my grandpa’s brain the last 20 years. 

yup. i have one living grandparent  - first generation born in the US from Czechia - and he has voted democratic his whole life. his seemingly meek and innocent wife sure drums up the "immigrants are coming for ours" rhetoric when we get together. FN has broken her brain and she tries to infect my grandfather. thankfully his mind is gone enough he cannot be swayed at this point and he thinks he's still back in his army days. hopefully he still votes his heart and not his FN-by-proxy brain

Posted
6 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

point of order: MN'a new flag is a powerpoint designed abomination

I like it.  And irrespective of what you think of it on its own merits, it's a fuckton better than the previous flag and better than any of the alternative proposals.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
27 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

This account digs into stolen valor claims and did a pretty good job of explaining it in a non-partisan way. TLDR: he reached the rank of and served as a Command Sergeant Major. However, he was reduced in rank administratively upon retirement because he did not complete the Sergeant Majors course before retiring. Like everything else the right says, it’s disinformation at best and a flat out lie at worst.

 

 

nevermind that being a Sergeant Major is a pretty serious NCO rank. Those fuckers know EVERYTHING about the unit that they're in and are the interface between command and the men. They're like the COB on a ship.

It's wild to me that someone would step to him on that, SM's do not take bullshit from anyone

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
Just now, Captainant said:

nevermind that being a Sergeant Major is a pretty serious NCO rank. Those fuckers know EVERYTHING about the unit that they're in and are the interface between command and the men. They're like the COB on a ship.

It's wild to me that someone would step to him on that, SM's do not take bullshit from anyone

One of the chief critics is a guy named Behrends that allegedly took his place as a SM during the deployment to Iraq, before which Walz resigned to run for Congress.

Apparently, Behrends didn't make CSM either (never got the promotion, much less didn't complete the coursework) and is salty about it.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
34 minutes ago, Red Five said:


Like everything else, good luck with that with Captain  cadet Bone Spurs at the top of the ticket.

fify.

Don't give him any more title than what he earned.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

They're looking to swift boat Walz. 

For those that don't know in 2004, Bush's side attacked John Kerry saying that Kerry exaggerated his Vietnam war record. Even though everyone agreed that Kerry served in a war zone in Vietnam while Bush served by flying jets in SE Texas.

The end result was that some believed that Kerry was a draft dodger (spoiler: he enlisted) and Bush was Rambo.

Maybe I'm not remembering as well, but Kerry was a bit of a pushover on this issue, and was not as strong of a personality as Walz appears to be out of the gate.

Walz just needs to keep dunking on Trump and Vance, pointing out that Lieutenant Bonespurs never served a minute in the military and instead has trashed veterans, that his military service was six times that of Vance (24 years v. 4 years), and that he retired at 41 years of age while Vance got out at 23 serving the bare minimum. 

Shit, even Vance has said that he was "lucky to escape any real fighting," and his time in the military consisted of "working in public affairs, writing about Marines and taking photographs of their work, escorting civilian news reporters and speaking about happenings on base."  Link  I'm sure Walz would be careful not to denigrate those in the military taking on non-combat roles, but he should have no hesitation to compare his service record to Corporal Couchfucker, and stuff him in the corner if he or Trump try that Swift Boat bullshit.



 

Edited by South Austin
  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted
1 hour ago, HornPhD said:

They lost that game

Which is bullshit because it seemed to be implied that Dottie sort of dropped the ball on purpose when Kitt steamrolled her ass at home plate. 
 

I don’t see the DNC offering sisterly love in a similar manner 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I like it.  And irrespective of what you think of it on its own merits, it's a fuckton better than the previous flag and better than any of the alternative proposals.

Personally I loved this one but blame the MN MAGA for making a stink about it

1125.flag2_.jpg

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
20 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

point of order: MN'a new flag is a powerpoint designed abomination

vexillology talk not going away.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

Wait, wait. I'm confused. Is Vance trying to act like he was in actual combat when he was a military journalist? Isn't that stolen valor?

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, NAVY said:

Which is bullshit because it seemed to be implied that Dottie sort of dropped the ball on purpose when Kitt steamrolled her ass at home plate.

I think you read the sequence of events in the movie backwards, although the framing makes it seem like that's the implication. The movie opens with Dottie telling her boy that it's important for his brother to win every once in a while, which seems to foreshadow the end and indicates she dropped it on purpose. But that scene is actually in the "present," and chronologically takes place long after she dropped the ball. In the past, when the movie is set, Dottie *never* lets Kit win, at anything, her entire life. And Kit was actually a pretty impressive person in her own right, and should have had lots of accolades, except that she was constantly overshadowed. And going into that final at bat, she indicates she fully is ready to do it again. But when Kit actually pulls it off, and wins the game, Dottie sees how much it means to Kit, and realizes the importance of putting competition aside when your family. It wasn't until she saw Kit get a moment in the sun that she realizes she was destroying their relationship.

It's actually backwards: Her dropping the ball set in her mind that letting your sibling win every once and a while is a good thing, not the other way around.

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Wait, wait. I'm confused. Is Vance trying to act like he was in actual combat when he was a military journalist? Isn't that stolen valor?

spacer.png

Edited by Pato del Muerto
Caution: yarn link embed. Do not poke with a sharp stick.
  • Haha 6
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 hours ago, immamac said:

I am fine with yarn if it worked for people I figured it was more widespread since there were other complaints. I've contacted them but never heard anything. 

A bunch doesn’t appear on mobile. Not sure if it’s yarn or something else. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Wow they have nothing at all

the fucking gall of them to get the vapors over her fucking necklace, then end the same fucking email begging maamaw and paapaw for $5 for the """"""""""""billionaire"""""""""" pissbaby.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Wait, wait. I'm confused. Is Vance trying to act like he was in actual combat when he was a military journalist? Isn't that stolen valor?

I think he was technically a correspondent.  Probably something like Lieutenant Steven Hauk.

spacer.png

  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, South Austin said:

I think he was technically a correspondent.  Probably something like Lieutenant Steven Hauk.

spacer.png

In his heart, he knows he's funny

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 3
Posted
15 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

I think you read the sequence of events in the movie backwards, although the framing makes it seem like that's the implication. The movie opens with Dottie telling her boy that it's important for his brother to win every once in a while, which seems to foreshadow the end and indicates she dropped it on purpose. But that scene is actually in the "present," and chronologically takes place long after she dropped the ball. In the past, when the movie is set, Dottie *never* lets Kit win, at anything, her entire life. And Kit was actually a pretty impressive person in her own right, and should have had lots of accolades, except that she was constantly overshadowed. And going into that final at bat, she indicates she fully is ready to do it again. But when Kit actually pulls it off, and wins the game, Dottie sees how much it means to Kit, and realizes the importance of putting competition aside when your family. It wasn't until she saw Kit get a moment in the sun that she realizes she was destroying their relationship.

It's actually backwards: Her dropping the ball set in her mind that letting your sibling win every once and a while is a good thing, not the other way around.

I stand corrected

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

 

Get over it. It’s not anti semitic because they didn’t pick a Jew. They didn’t pick Pete, was it anti gay? They didn’t pick Whitmer, anti-women? Didn’t pick Beshear, age discrimination? Didn’t pick Pritzker, anti-rich or anti-fat?

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
16 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

I think you read the sequence of events in the movie backwards, although the framing makes it seem like that's the implication. The movie opens with Dottie telling her boy that it's important for his brother to win every once in a while, which seems to foreshadow the end and indicates she dropped it on purpose. But that scene is actually in the "present," and chronologically takes place long after she dropped the ball. In the past, when the movie is set, Dottie *never* lets Kit win, at anything, her entire life. And Kit was actually a pretty impressive person in her own right, and should have had lots of accolades, except that she was constantly overshadowed. And going into that final at bat, she indicates she fully is ready to do it again. But when Kit actually pulls it off, and wins the game, Dottie sees how much it means to Kit, and realizes the importance of putting competition aside when your family. It wasn't until she saw Kit get a moment in the sun that she realizes she was destroying their relationship.

It's actually backwards: Her dropping the ball set in her mind that letting your sibling win every once and a while is a good thing, not the other way around.

Surly used to be my playground.

  • Like 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, Jersey Man10 said:

emoji1782.pngemoji1782.png
2f4b967ae4c48a5f2469d5410eee5b70.png
507d2d382bea86a71db30a1179686a85.png
ae45eeb426940837911048376f803020.png
f845fef8c2266c7fbadbb2e928038e90.png

I'm just going to observe that, even assuming that the necklace did cost $62,000, her husband was a fucking partner at DLA Piper.

Yeah--I think he can afford to buy his wife some nice bling.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
Just now, Js1 said:

Get over it. It’s not anti semitic because they didn’t pick a Jew. They didn’t pick Pete, was it anti gay? They didn’t pick Whitmer, anti-women? Didn’t pick Beshear, age discrimination?

don't give the issue any air. they are looking for something, anything, to stick and it just isn't.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
Just now, Ghost of LL said:

I'm just going to observe that, even assuming that the necklace did cost $62,000, her husband was a fucking partner at DLA Piper.

Yeah--I think he can afford to buy his wife some nice bling.

I'm guessing it would take all of 10 minutes to find photos of Usha Vance wearing a Cartier neckless or Oscar De La Renta dress.  Or JD sitting on a Louis Vuitton Bombaca Sofa.  Link

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I'm just going to observe that, even assuming that the necklace did cost $62,000, her husband was a fucking partner at DLA Piper.

Yeah--I think he can afford to buy his wife some nice bling.

Also one place that being a 'childless cat lady' makes quite the difference on the personal finance front



×
×
  • Create New...