US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Things you love to see.
I shouldn't but that pac-man, maga hat, confederate flag graphic is just too good. 
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
DeSantis appears to have been cooking the books on FL covid deaths. Could affect his future political ambitions
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
He's a Republican, so it won't.
the Supreme Court just overruled the cdcs eviction moratorium but the good news is that the democratic party controls all three lawmaking bodies in the federal government so they will just pass a law tomorrow reinstating it
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I hope no one from the Prince Philip thread reads this: I hope the fecker dies.
The article says it's because of a change in CDC counting measures, not that DeSantis isn't capable of any depravity imaginable. Did you read that elsewhere?
https://www.sfchronicle.com/tech/article/Prop-22-the-gig-worker-exemption-for-Uber-and-16401915.php
Good to read that the court recognizes the obvious:
Good to read that the court recognizes the obvious:
I am at a loss for words.....
and this line here, this line describes the GOP 's cruelty and disdain for others better than anything I could make up
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
and this line here, this line describes the GOP 's cruelty and disdain for others better than anything I could make up
Incidentally, isn't the Washington Post violating the GDPR here?
The new European data protection law requires us to inform you of the following before you use our website:
We use cookies and other technologies to customize your experience, perform analytics and deliver personalized advertising on our sites, apps and newsletters and across the Internet based on your interests. By clicking “I agree” below, you consent to the use by us and our third-party partners of cookies and data gathered from your use of our platforms. See our Privacy Policy and Third Party Partners to learn more about the use of data and your rights. You also agree to our Terms of Service.
I'm almost certain they're not allowed to make accepting personalized advertising (and other things) as a prerequisite for using the website. Opting out should also be the default, and at the very least as easy as opting in.
Not sure honestly. My understanding of GDPR is pretty basic and centered how it revolves around email address collection/storage and emails themselves.
Everyone in Europe (or rather the EU + a few other countries) has a lot more rights now when it comes to collection of personal data than they did before GDPR. That's why nearly all local US media block us from accessing their sites, for example, because they have no intention of complying with GDPR. The Washington Post seems to be trying to go around that, but I have my doubts as to whether or not it's legal. They can't claim that they're not targeting EU customers, since they have a special premium deal for Europeans.
Here's a great example, incidentally, when I tried to look for a site that sums the GDPR up.
All sites that target EU citizens (and a few more countries) have to have something like this for your first visit (or until you make a decision), and opting out has to be as easy as opting in (technically opting out should be the default, I believe, but many don't do that). Some sites tried (and probably still do in some cases) getting away with making it as tedious as possible to opt out, such as having to individually opt out of every single different type of cookie or advertiser. That's a clear violation though, and might lead to a hefty fine.
Here's another example, from the official GDPR site itself.
https://gdpr.eu/what-is-gdpr/
California is the same. Im not sure myself I bet there's some legal loophole they've worked out ?Everyone in Europe (or rather the EU + a few other countries) has a lot more rights now when it comes to collection of personal data than they did before GDPR. That's why nearly all local US media block us from accessing their sites, for example, because they have no intention of complying with GDPR. The Washington Post seems to be trying to go around that, but I have my doubts as to whether or not it's legal. They can't claim that they're not targeting EU customers, since they have a special premium deal for Europeans.
Here's a great example, incidentally, when I tried to look for a site that sums the GDPR up.
All sites that target EU citizens (and a few more countries) have to have something like this for your first visit (or until you make a decision), and opting out has to be as easy as opting in (technically opting out should be the default, I believe, but many don't do that). Some sites tried (and probably still do in some cases) getting away with making it as tedious as possible to opt out, such as having to individually opt out of every single different type of cookie or advertiser. That's a clear violation though, and might lead to a hefty fine.
Here's another example, from the official GDPR site itself.
https://gdpr.eu/what-is-gdpr/
the contortions I’ve seen marketing groups twist themselves into to justify “legitimate interest” has been hilarious
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think this fits better here than COVID thread. This is just mental
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
we can't expect democrats who control all three lawmaking bodies to do anything about this. what we actually need to do is donate to the dccc, write op-eds, and VOTE in 2022
If only you had voted for Biden then this could have been avoided.
Trump’s SC picks are now starting to proverbially bear fruit
Fixed.
What can Democrats really do about this , pack the court ?
Time is ticking - there is a good chance they are in the minority in both houses by the end of 2022
If they were to do try it I am not sure they actually carry enough votes in the senate to do it and realistically get a number of judges appointed before the mid terms campaigns start fully
They seemingly cant get enough votes to even scrap the fillibuster which i would have thought would be easier than deciding what judicial reform to go for (more judges, term limits etc) then getting enough people in both houses on board and selecting and getting judges appointed.
I cant see it happening
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-04-16/can-democrats-really-pack-the-supreme-court
Democrats won’t do anything that gives them the chance to have a solid majority. They benefit as much as Republican‘s do from having a competitive election cycle and if they held a super majority they’d be expected to make progressive changes and the truth is that the majority of democrat politicians who rely on progressive votes are personally aligned far more closely with the right than they are with the left and their purse strings certainly are.
What they always do, nothing, they are paid to lose. Both parties share the same donors
The top 2 headlines on CNN.com right now (I am never going to Texas):
Can Texans go to other states to get an abortion or is that not allowed?
yes... though the places close to texas almost certainly cant cope with the influx and people will be looking at an average round trip of circa 500 miles (if they can get a booking)
https://19thnews.org/2021/09/as-tex...-access-out-of-state-clinics-brace-for-surge/
also the law is a little vague but
would this include driving somebody there... or paying their train ticket etc - its at best vague but certainly not clear what people could / could not do without risk of prosecution
Pro life
Can non-texans also be sued?
As I say its vague?
Given its America I expect some legal firm working on behalf of a pro life organisation will try though
It's depressingly fascinating watching this unfold.
It's not quite simple to go to another state when you live in Texas. If you are one of the nearly 1.5 million people living in San Antonio, you are 300 miles (driving) from the nearest state boarder (Louisiana) let alone the nearest medical facility that would perform an abortion.
It's amazing how we watch Afghanistan going back into the dark ages and Texas is saying "hold my beer".
It's amazing how we watch Afghanistan going back into the dark ages and Texas is saying "hold my beer".
All the while screaming about impeaching Biden for leaving those poor Afghan women to Sharia Law and reduced rights and the general population to the mercy of gun toting extremists.
Speaking of things that are depressingly fascinating to watch unfold what are other peoples thoughts on how the 2024 race is shaping up...
Every time I see Biden he looks like hes ready to retire now and I cant think he will be capable of running again in 2024. Kamala it appears has gone missing in in-action (certainly for somebody not based in the USA where i couldnt tell you what shes supposed to be doing)
I cant help but think that Kamala 2024 is far from certain - AOC or another from the progressive wing might challenge and I wouldn't be surprised to see (now ex) mayor pete trying to get the role based on not being kamala and not being AOC (which might actually be enough to be fair)
In the other corner I guess its trump - or one of his kids (unless they all end up in prison then its whichever republican says they will pardon him)
I really can only see America becoming more divided over the next few years and given where they are starting from that's really not a good thing
Really hard to see it going any other way than even deeper partisan divides
Stuff like this is why the turtle played hardball on SCOTUS picks. On the other hand, some conservatives have been disappointed in various rulings by Gorsuch, Kavannagh, and ACB.