New York Times: “About 30 million Americans watched Mr. Trump’s climactic acceptance speech on Thursday evening on the major cable news and broadcast channels… That was about 200,000 fewer viewers than the last Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, received when he addressed his party’s convention in 2012.”
I'll bet James got his numbers from either Electoralvote.com or politicalwire.com - That is why they are (as they usually are when you use those sites) wrong.
The 32 million will go likely still go up a bit when they add some other things in... but suffice it to say he won't hit the 40 million that many were expecting.
“The economy added 287,000 jobs in June, a bounce-back from May’s low number and a clear indication that the economy continues to make solid progress. U.S. businesses have now added 14.8 million jobs since private-sector job growth turned positive in early 2010. So far in 2016, job growth has averaged a solid 172,000 jobs a month, well above the pace needed to maintain a low and stable unemployment rate. Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate ticked up in June, while part-time employment for economic reasons as a share of the labor force saw its largest one-month drop since 2010. Most importantly, average hourly earnings for private employees have increased 2.6 percent over the last twelve months, tied for the fastest twelve-month pace since the recovery began. Nevertheless, more work remains to sustain faster wage growth and to ensure that the benefits of the recovery are broadly shared, including investing in infrastructure and job training, implementing high-standards trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and raising the minimum wage.”
Why it seems like it was just yesterday that Donald Trump was telling voters how terrible the economy is, and he promised to make America great again. Well, it turns out that Barack Obama and the American people have already made their country great.
I would point out how wrong HB is on this Economy, but why bother, he is unable to learn.
As for the VP pick, yawn, some safe white guy, so what happen to the diversity choices?
I saw some nice clean black men and woman on old grannies list, but, then again she is from Arkansas, and you know how those people can be toward blacks.
Cane, lackluster bio and no real accomplishments, perfect , matches granny perfectly, does he have a cough?
I don't see where Kaine helps her unless she felt it was essential to lock down Virginia. (And if she feels she needs to lock down Virginia then her campaign is in a lot more trouble than it appears)
On the plus side Kaine is not likely to overshadow her like an Elizabeth Warren will.
The problem is that she picked the Democrat version of Mike Pence when she really needed a Chris Christie.
Trump can and will be his own attack dog so he can get away with a Mike Pence pick but Hillary can't play that role.
In every sense of the word, she's a conventional presidential candidate who needed a running mate in the traditional attack dog role.
As for the numbers I posted at the beginning, I got them from the New York Times. I was quite surprised by them, simply because I felt sure huge numbers of people would tune in just to see what the orange Klown did.
"There is.a legitimate argument for some limitation upon immigration." And Kennedy reassured Americans that his proposal "does not seek to make over the face of America."
Seems that President Trump took his stance from the JFK Handbook.
I just again read through Roger's citations of the Washington Post's and the NYT's editorials against Trump, and they a damning, damning, damning. Not to mention the video provided.
Not too often major newspapers take the unusual step of totally condemning a candidate of either party as soon as he/she is officially nominated.
Roger - because Scott Elliot doesn't choose to use toss up states in his evaluation. I do, because I don't see the point in the state of Ohio (for instance) moving back and forth every time a new poll comes out.
Does anyone really believe that going from 51-49 to 49-51 is worthy of actually changing a projection?
What I am trying to show is how many electoral college votes we can be pretty damned certain will go to each candidate, and then how many electoral college votes are "in play".
Real Clear Politics, on the other hand has 165 states in the "toss up" category... which one might argue is a little too excessive in hedging.
RCP includes states like Wisconsin and Georgia in the toss up category. These are states consistently won by one Party, where that candidate is currently up by a mid single digits. For me, until we get current polling showing Trump and Clinton within a couple of points, I am not ready to call it a toss up state yet.
On the flip side, when four of your last six polls in Ohio (which is always in play) are either tied or a one point lead, and you have to go back to March to find a poll where either candidate has lead by more than 4-5 points. You are throwing out a best guess (rather than a solid statistical projection) by claiming you can get some tangible prediction.
KD , Huff Po Trashes Hillary for weak Pick
said...
Jane just coined Abe Cane, funny shit IMHO.
So Cane is also for Banks and big money wall street, two crooked people on the top of the bought and paid for Socialist Ticket.
"Kaine signed two letters on Monday urging federal regulators to go easy on banks ― one to help big banks dodge risk management rules, and another to help small banks avoid consumer protection standards.
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is believed to be weighing Kaine among a handful of other potential VP choices. Her pick is widely viewed in Washington as a sign of her governing intentions." Huffington Post
So we've recently learned that the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and news media all conspired together to screw Bernie Sanders. We only know this because guccifer 2.0 hacked secret docs and released them. Now we see Hillary getting Bernie to endorse her, only to ignore him and his millions of supporters and pick Kaine as running mate. And they're all mad ad hell about all this. Look for many to either stay home or vote Trump because of this.
CH, seems your frets of forcing someone to bake a cake because of their core beliefs, may be going to the Supreme Court. But I really doubt that will happen to this openly discriminatory practice. Seems to me if this couple walked into their store and ordered a loaf of bread and were denied service is the potential analog to this case. Baking bread or cakes is not a religious vocation.
A Colorado baker wants the Supreme Court to hear his case after a lower court ruled he could not cite his religious beliefs to refuse service to a same-sex couple looking to purchase a wedding cake.
Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips declined to make a cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins in 2012, and both Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission and the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled he discriminated against the couple and ordered him to change his store policy against making cakes for gay weddings.
Last month, the Colorado Supreme Court decided against hearing the case of the Lakewood baker, but the three-year legal battle hasn’t come to an end yet — Phillips’ attorney filed a petition to the Supreme Court Friday, according to the Denver Post.
“No one — not Jack or anyone else — should be forced by the government to further a message that they cannot in good conscience promote,” said attorney Jeremy Tedesco in a statement released by the non-profit legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom. “And that’s what this case is about.”
Opie - I believe in a basic essential freedom of Americans to make certain choices. I especially believe that those people who put in their own investment to start their own businesses should have some say in how they do that business and who they do business with.
On the flip side I believe in the basic essential rights people have to not be discriminated against for gender, color, religion, or sexual orientation.
Balancing these two can be difficult, but both are rights under the constitution, and to some degree I believe that they are common sense rights that we all inherently understand (and should support). The trouble is when our society decides that there is no middle ground, and that it's a matter of two sides battling for absolute control.
For instance. If you own a bakery and a skin head Nazi walks in the door and says he wants you to make a cake in the shape of a swastika, with some anti-semetic statements on it, I believe that the baker has the right to say no. On the flip side, he should be required to allow that same skin head to choose any cake (or other bakery item) off the shelf and the owner should sell it to him like he would any other customer.
If an convention center was asked by the porn screen actors guild to host the 2016 porn awards, I would think that the convention center has the right to say that they do not want to host that sort of event at their location (in spite of it being perfectly legal).
So assuming the Baker should have to sell a generic cake to the Nazi skin head, but shouldn't have to make him a custom cake with a Nazi sign, I would offer that the same should hold true for someone purchasing a same sex wedding cake. If they want to choose any generic cake off the shelf and walk out with it... then that baker should absolutely be required to sell it to them. No questions asked. Not doing so would be discrimination (in my mind). But I do believe that if they ask that baker to custom order a cake that says congratulations Jim and Tom, with two men holding hands on the cake, that that baker has the right to say, no thank you. Please take that particular request elsewhere.
It's a fine line... but I think that there is a place where everyone could be a little more respectful. If there are five bakers, and three of them have no issue making a custom Nazi cake or custom same sex wedding cake, then why would people want to "force" the other two to follow along?
Seems our gay couple only wanted a cake and were refuse by the baker. nNo ceremony, no catering, just a simple cake for a party. Seems the baker needs to close down!!!
If Phillips’ attorneys continue to pursue the case, one option may be requesting the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case.
In 2012, Charlie Craig and David Mullins were turned away by Phillips while trying to buy a custom wedding cake. Mullins and Craig planned to marry in Massachusetts and wanted a cake to celebrate in Colorado.
Phillips told the couple that he would not make them a wedding cake because of his religious beliefs.
For instance. If you own a bakery and a skin head Nazi walks in the door and says he wants you to make a cake in the shape of a swastika,"
On the other hand, your hypothetical is likely to never happen and if it does, let them sort it out in court and lose. Again, you are stretching the limits of logic to present an improbable situation with a zero change of getting to court since no free lawyer would take the case. I once asked a baskin robbins worker to write Fuck you on a cake.....He laughed and happily applied the sentiment. If he had said no, I would have bought the cake anyway. Maybe the baker should put up a sign in his lobby, no shoes, no shirt, no gays. LOL!
And second of all, hating nazism is not a religious tenet, even though you equate it as one. Sorry, on second thought your straw man is just plain stupid.
Opie- If you are a contractor who works through individual contracts with individual customer, I think you inherently have a right to refuse to sign into contracts with people who you want to work with.
Let's say you painted houses for a living, you could choose for any number of reasons not to work with someone. Maybe the job is too big, too small, too far away, or maybe after meeting the person, he was a complete ass and you decided that the business wasn't worth it. You should be able to simply say you don't want the job. Or to look at it the other way... nobody has any "right" to demand that every private contractor out there has to provide any sort of service to you.
Once you demand that because a potential client is gay, black, or Muslim that pretty much all contractors must provide all of their services to them, regardless... then you are providing them with privileges that the rest of the Country doesn't have.
Why does the gay person have more rights than the Skin head. Both are exercising perfectly legal actions? But neither has the right to demand that other comply or approve of their actions.
_____
If you are, on the other hand, a retailer... then you should be required to sell your generic product to whomever it is that wants to purchase it. If your a bar or restaurant, then as long as they follow the require decorum (if there is a dress code for instance) anyone should be allowed.
Opie - How do you feel about Twitter deciding to give a lifetime ban to Milo Yiannopoulos who is a gay conservative?
There are claims that he "incited" others to act negatively (although nothing he has done himself was called out). They say this has been going on for some time, but the final straw were attacks on Leslie Jones (who said his followers were abusing her).
Although twitter isn't really required to say why they banned him. They see it as simply their right.
Certainly almost "all" of the controversy surrounding this guy is because he is gay and conservative. Should his status as a gay person prevent twitter from banning him?
How do you feel about Twitter deciding to give a lifetime ban to Milo Yiannopoulos who is a gay conservative?
About the same if you banned Loretta.
you could choose for any number of reasons not to work with someone. Maybe the job is too big, too small, too far away, or maybe
Or maybe you overslept. Another absurd hypothetical that is about as relevant as a wet fart. Keep rationalizing CH, you may get it correct yet. But throwing crap on the wall to see what sticks like you are doing does not mean you are winning. It is discrimination, no different than the old white only water fountains or restaurants.
As usual, CH once again stretches the truth to make a point. Seems Mile was a long term asshole on twitter and was banned for abusing the medium and not because he was gay or conservative. FU CH.
SAN FRANCISCO — For years, one of the main grievances among Twitter users has been the ability of anonymous trolls to send abusive comments to other people on the service.
But on Tuesday, Twitter barred one of the most egregious and consistent offenders of its terms of service, Milo Yiannopoulos, in an attempt to show that it is cracking down on abuse.
The ban against Mr. Yiannopoulos, a technology editor at the conservative news site Breitbart and known by his Twitter handle, @Nero, follows a campaign of prolonged abuse against Leslie Jones, a comedian and co-star of the recently released “Ghostbusters” movie. The film and its stars have come under fire from various parts of the internet for months, after it was first revealed that the reboot of the 1984 film would feature an all-female cast.
FU CH. You've really flushed any modicum of intellect down the crapper with the MILO quote, who turns out was a major league asshole like your party and was banned not for being gay or conservative, but acting like loretta. Dayum stupid.
Seems CH advocates racism if you are gay, conservative and work for breitbart, who is dead. Be proud CH, you slip is showing again. LOLOL
Leslie Jones, one of the most visible and accessible stars in the all-female remake of the “Ghostbusters” movie, said that she would leave Twitter after becoming the target of online trolls who sent her a stream of pornography, racist speech and hateful memes.
Ms. Jones, who is black, and her white cast mates have endured months of criticism since the announcement of a reboot of the blockbuster franchise (so much has been written about the internet’s outrage and gender-based criticism over the film that we won’t rehash it here). But her frustration appeared to come to a head on Monday.
Commonsense said... So Twitter has a right to ban someone because he's gay but a baker doesn't have a right to refuse service
As predicted, you didn't read my posts above that he was banned for being a troll, like loretta, by posting racist and pornographic images aimed at a comedian. You are dumber than my cat who understands more than you do. Learn to read, idiot. I'l post it again since you are too lazy to find it on your own. LOL
SAN FRANCISCO — For years, one of the main grievances among Twitter users has been the ability of anonymous trolls to send abusive comments to other people on the service.
But on Tuesday, Twitter barred one of the most egregious and consistent offenders of its terms of service, Milo Yiannopoulos, in an attempt to show that it is cracking down on abuse
Great Troll CH. Your menstral child fell for you bullcrap and repeated that Milo was banned because he was gay and conservative. Talk about low information audiences......LOL Good job, your genius acts first and swears to it. LOL
Of course Twitter is under no obligation to maintain a forum for Yiannopoulos or anyone else..... Twitter is a private company; it can kick off anyone for any reason it wants.
......
But Twitter’s maddening inconsistency in enforcing its policies makes the issue more complicated. For years, Twitter has ignored appalling behavior on the service, shrugging off reports of racial slurs, sexist insults and even threats. For example, extremist groups such as the Somali terrorist organization al-Shabaab have used the service to publicly discuss targets for violence, and yet their accounts often remain open for long periods, even after they’ve been flagged by other users. Meanwhile, Twitter has suspended low-profile accounts for relatively petty violations or, sometimes, for no stated reason at all. (Twitter does not always provide justifications for its suspensions.) If there are objective criteria for what constitutes harassment on Twitter, or for what actions warrant suspension, they’re not apparent.
It wasn’t pure paranoia, then, that made Yiannopoulosand his supporters suspect liberal bias—a possibility most left-wing commentators shrugged off. They were only too glad to see him go, and were characteristically uninterested in defending an ideological opponent’s right to speak
Oh, and if you do not believe that contractors turn down work because someone is an ass wipe... it happens all the time. My fiance is an account manager for a fabrication company, and she picks and chooses who she wants to work with and is happy to discontinue working with people she doesn't like to work with.
Fortunately for her, she is in a position to pick and choose from a wide variety of people who "want" to work with her.
My understanding is that this guy was only the first to have his privileges revoked under Twitter's revised policy. If he's still the only one a month from now, then ask whether Twitter is somehow showing bias.
It's very difficult to establish standards and then apply them in a way that all agree is fair, whether you're a huge commercial enterprise like Twitter or a small blog like this one. Give Twitter a chance to prove by its actions whether it's being fair, or even consistent.
57 comments:
OH NO!
Republican Convention Ratings Fall Short
New York Times: “About 30 million Americans watched Mr. Trump’s climactic acceptance speech on Thursday evening on the major cable news and broadcast channels… That was about 200,000 fewer viewers than the last Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, received when he addressed his party’s convention in 2012.”
Jane, is there a time in your life that you look in the mirror and see the complete unvarnished dumbass that we all see?
"TV Ratings: Donald Trump's RNC Speech Tops Romney With 32 Million Viewers"
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/tv-ratings-donald-trumps-rnc-913569
Boy - I bet James wishes Hillary was still at 80%
FiveThirtyEight
Chance of winning
Hillary Clinton
59.7%
Donald Trump
40.2
I'll bet James got his numbers from either Electoralvote.com or politicalwire.com - That is why they are (as they usually are when you use those sites) wrong.
The 32 million will go likely still go up a bit when they add some other things in... but suffice it to say he won't hit the 40 million that many were expecting.
No unveiling of Hillary's veep this afternoon as was teased. Maybe Saturday?
CH and I posted at about the same time. His original post is the time it was posted. But mine was first. LOLOL
Weird timing. Was there a pitching change being made in the Nationals' game or something?
“The economy added 287,000 jobs in June, a bounce-back from May’s low number and a clear indication that the economy continues to make solid progress. U.S. businesses have now added 14.8 million jobs since private-sector job growth turned positive in early 2010. So far in 2016, job growth has averaged a solid 172,000 jobs a month, well above the pace needed to maintain a low and stable unemployment rate. Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate ticked up in June, while part-time employment for economic reasons as a share of the labor force saw its largest one-month drop since 2010. Most importantly, average hourly earnings for private employees have increased 2.6 percent over the last twelve months, tied for the fastest twelve-month pace since the recovery began. Nevertheless, more work remains to sustain faster wage growth and to ensure that the benefits of the recovery are broadly shared, including investing in infrastructure and job training, implementing high-standards trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and raising the minimum wage.”
Why it seems like it was just yesterday that Donald Trump was telling voters how terrible the economy is, and he promised to make America great again. Well, it turns out that Barack Obama and the American people have already made their country great.
I would point out how wrong HB is on this Economy, but why bother, he is unable to learn.
As for the VP pick, yawn, some safe white guy, so what happen to the diversity choices?
I saw some nice clean black men and woman on old grannies list, but, then again she is from Arkansas, and you know how those people can be toward blacks.
Cane, lackluster bio and no real accomplishments, perfect , matches granny perfectly, does he have a cough?
7/22/16, 7:12 PM
Central Daylight Time
Links
One minute, because I got the text.
I don't see where Kaine helps her unless she felt it was essential to lock down Virginia. (And if she feels she needs to lock down Virginia then her campaign is in a lot more trouble than it appears)
On the plus side Kaine is not likely to overshadow her like an Elizabeth Warren will.
The problem is that she picked the Democrat version of Mike Pence when she really needed a Chris Christie.
Trump can and will be his own attack dog so he can get away with a Mike Pence pick but Hillary can't play that role.
In every sense of the word, she's a conventional presidential candidate who needed a running mate in the traditional attack dog role.
Not seeing blowback against Kaine from the left. Looks like a solid pick, just like Pence was.
There's a Wapo story about progressive blowback it you get behind the pay wall.
For once I agree with 538. He doesn't help. He doesn't hurt.
As for the numbers I posted at the beginning, I got them from the New York Times. I was quite surprised by them, simply because I felt sure huge numbers of people would tune in just to see what the orange Klown did.
I happened on a long PBS interview with Kaine, one that took place before it was known for sure that he would be the Veep pick.
What a really, really decent man. His sincerity and candor and honesty and openness and integrity were obvious.
He's Catholic and pro-life, but recognizes that politicians are committed to upholding the laws of the land.
He's also anti capital punishment, but ditto.
You can't be "pro-life" and have a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood.
Kaine is pro-abortion.
5:20 Interesting to see Ch rejoicing at 60 versus 40% odds for Trump.
Watch how that slides as the Clinton-Kaine train gets underway.
Lincoln was anti slavery but willing to recognize its legality in the South.
Subtlety and nuance of any kind escapes Commensa.
Ch, why does your side bar give
H.Clinton 265 electoral votes
vs D.Trump 180 electoral votes
while your favorite prognosticator at electionprojectio.com gives
H.Clinton 357 electoral votes
vs D.Trump 191 electoral votes
Can you explain that discrepancy for us please,
pretty please, Mr. Ch?
And yet Lincoln wrote and signed the Emancipation Proclamation.
Nuance.
Kaine doesn't have to navigate between what was desired and what was possible like Lincoln did.
Either you are pro or you are anti-abortion and if you are anti-abortion you would never get a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood.
The GOP has FOR YEARS been navigating between what is desired by their most extremist base and what is politically possible.
They pretend to be anti abortion to get votes, but when in power they cave to political reality.
*5:55AM Error. That was a C-span interview.
It's taking a LONG time for electoral-vote.com to get up this morning.
When it does come, I bet it'll be a doozy.
Jane Hillary and Obama are strongly unshakably for the TPP as I believe you are, Cane is not, he is against it.
Oh and Jane, you are again wrong on how many people tuned in to watch President Trump.
You always are wrong and jumping the shark.
LA TIMES, A very, very left wing nut case rag reports the Number at 35 Million viewers.
James -
H.Clinton 265 electoral votes
D.Trump 180 electoral votes
Toss ups - 93 electoral votes
"There is.a legitimate argument for some limitation upon immigration." And Kennedy reassured Americans that his proposal "does not seek to make over the face of America."
Seems that President Trump took his stance from the JFK Handbook.
Ch, why do find so many more toss ups than your buddy at electionprojection finds?
I just again read through Roger's citations of the Washington Post's and the NYT's editorials against Trump, and they a damning, damning, damning. Not to mention the video provided.
Not too often major newspapers take the unusual step of totally condemning a candidate of either party as soon as he/she is officially nominated.
So nice these people will be at the DNC
of Black Lives Matter has declined an invitation to participate in a barbecue with the local police department, with one protester explaining, "I eat pigs, I don't eat with them."
What if Jaime and Mike Pence held a debate and no one watched or cared. Would they still have debated?
Talk about a snooze fest.
Stupid autospell. Tim Kaine.
Roger - because Scott Elliot doesn't choose to use toss up states in his evaluation. I do, because I don't see the point in the state of Ohio (for instance) moving back and forth every time a new poll comes out.
Does anyone really believe that going from 51-49 to 49-51 is worthy of actually changing a projection?
What I am trying to show is how many electoral college votes we can be pretty damned certain will go to each candidate, and then how many electoral college votes are "in play".
Real Clear Politics, on the other hand has 165 states in the "toss up" category... which one might argue is a little too excessive in hedging.
RCP includes states like Wisconsin and Georgia in the toss up category. These are states consistently won by one Party, where that candidate is currently up by a mid single digits. For me, until we get current polling showing Trump and Clinton within a couple of points, I am not ready to call it a toss up state yet.
On the flip side, when four of your last six polls in Ohio (which is always in play) are either tied or a one point lead, and you have to go back to March to find a poll where either candidate has lead by more than 4-5 points. You are throwing out a best guess (rather than a solid statistical projection) by claiming you can get some tangible prediction.
Jane just coined Abe Cane, funny shit IMHO.
So Cane is also for Banks and big money wall street, two crooked people on the top of the bought and paid for Socialist Ticket.
"Kaine signed two letters on Monday urging federal regulators to go easy on banks ― one to help big banks dodge risk management rules, and another to help small banks avoid consumer protection standards.
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is believed to be weighing Kaine among a handful of other potential VP choices. Her pick is widely viewed in Washington as a sign of her governing intentions."
Huffington Post
So we've recently learned that the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and news media all conspired together to screw Bernie Sanders. We only know this because guccifer 2.0 hacked secret docs and released them. Now we see Hillary getting Bernie to endorse her, only to ignore him and his millions of supporters and pick Kaine as running mate. And they're all mad ad hell about all this. Look for many to either stay home or vote Trump because of this.
CH, seems your frets of forcing someone to bake a cake because of their core beliefs, may be going to the Supreme Court. But I really doubt that will happen to this openly discriminatory practice. Seems to me if this couple walked into their store and ordered a loaf of bread and were denied service is the potential analog to this case. Baking bread or cakes is not a religious vocation.
A Colorado baker wants the Supreme Court to hear his case after a lower court ruled he could not cite his religious beliefs to refuse service to a same-sex couple looking to purchase a wedding cake.
Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips declined to make a cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins in 2012, and both Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission and the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled he discriminated against the couple and ordered him to change his store policy against making cakes for gay weddings.
Last month, the Colorado Supreme Court decided against hearing the case of the Lakewood baker, but the three-year legal battle hasn’t come to an end yet — Phillips’ attorney filed a petition to the Supreme Court Friday, according to the Denver Post.
“No one — not Jack or anyone else — should be forced by the government to further a message that they cannot in good conscience promote,” said attorney Jeremy Tedesco in a statement released by the non-profit legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom. “And that’s what this case is about.”
This will be fun to watch.
Opie - I believe in a basic essential freedom of Americans to make certain choices. I especially believe that those people who put in their own investment to start their own businesses should have some say in how they do that business and who they do business with.
On the flip side I believe in the basic essential rights people have to not be discriminated against for gender, color, religion, or sexual orientation.
Balancing these two can be difficult, but both are rights under the constitution, and to some degree I believe that they are common sense rights that we all inherently understand (and should support). The trouble is when our society decides that there is no middle ground, and that it's a matter of two sides battling for absolute control.
For instance. If you own a bakery and a skin head Nazi walks in the door and says he wants you to make a cake in the shape of a swastika, with some anti-semetic statements on it, I believe that the baker has the right to say no. On the flip side, he should be required to allow that same skin head to choose any cake (or other bakery item) off the shelf and the owner should sell it to him like he would any other customer.
If an convention center was asked by the porn screen actors guild to host the 2016 porn awards, I would think that the convention center has the right to say that they do not want to host that sort of event at their location (in spite of it being perfectly legal).
So assuming the Baker should have to sell a generic cake to the Nazi skin head, but shouldn't have to make him a custom cake with a Nazi sign, I would offer that the same should hold true for someone purchasing a same sex wedding cake. If they want to choose any generic cake off the shelf and walk out with it... then that baker should absolutely be required to sell it to them. No questions asked. Not doing so would be discrimination (in my mind). But I do believe that if they ask that baker to custom order a cake that says congratulations Jim and Tom, with two men holding hands on the cake, that that baker has the right to say, no thank you. Please take that particular request elsewhere.
It's a fine line... but I think that there is a place where everyone could be a little more respectful. If there are five bakers, and three of them have no issue making a custom Nazi cake or custom same sex wedding cake, then why would people want to "force" the other two to follow along?
Seems our gay couple only wanted a cake and were refuse by the baker. nNo ceremony, no catering, just a simple cake for a party. Seems the baker needs to close down!!!
If Phillips’ attorneys continue to pursue the case, one option may be requesting the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case.
In 2012, Charlie Craig and David Mullins were turned away by Phillips while trying to buy a custom wedding cake. Mullins and Craig planned to marry in Massachusetts and wanted a cake to celebrate in Colorado.
Phillips told the couple that he would not make them a wedding cake because of his religious beliefs.
For instance. If you own a bakery and a skin head Nazi walks in the door and says he wants you to make a cake in the shape of a swastika,"
On the other hand, your hypothetical is likely to never happen and if it does, let them sort it out in court and lose. Again, you are stretching the limits of logic to present an improbable situation with a zero change of getting to court since no free lawyer would take the case. I once asked a baskin robbins worker to write Fuck you on a cake.....He laughed and happily applied the sentiment. If he had said no, I would have bought the cake anyway. Maybe the baker should put up a sign in his lobby, no shoes, no shirt, no gays. LOL!
And second of all, hating nazism is not a religious tenet, even though you equate it as one. Sorry, on second thought your straw man is just plain stupid.
Opie- If you are a contractor who works through individual contracts with individual customer, I think you inherently have a right to refuse to sign into contracts with people who you want to work with.
Let's say you painted houses for a living, you could choose for any number of reasons not to work with someone. Maybe the job is too big, too small, too far away, or maybe after meeting the person, he was a complete ass and you decided that the business wasn't worth it. You should be able to simply say you don't want the job. Or to look at it the other way... nobody has any "right" to demand that every private contractor out there has to provide any sort of service to you.
Once you demand that because a potential client is gay, black, or Muslim that pretty much all contractors must provide all of their services to them, regardless... then you are providing them with privileges that the rest of the Country doesn't have.
Why does the gay person have more rights than the Skin head. Both are exercising perfectly legal actions? But neither has the right to demand that other comply or approve of their actions.
_____
If you are, on the other hand, a retailer... then you should be required to sell your generic product to whomever it is that wants to purchase it. If your a bar or restaurant, then as long as they follow the require decorum (if there is a dress code for instance) anyone should be allowed.
Opie - How do you feel about Twitter deciding to give a lifetime ban to Milo Yiannopoulos who is a gay conservative?
There are claims that he "incited" others to act negatively (although nothing he has done himself was called out). They say this has been going on for some time, but the final straw were attacks on Leslie Jones (who said his followers were abusing her).
Although twitter isn't really required to say why they banned him. They see it as simply their right.
Certainly almost "all" of the controversy surrounding this guy is because he is gay and conservative. Should his status as a gay person prevent twitter from banning him?
How do you feel about Twitter deciding to give a lifetime ban to Milo Yiannopoulos who is a gay conservative?
About the same if you banned Loretta.
you could choose for any number of reasons not to work with someone. Maybe the job is too big, too small, too far away, or maybe
Or maybe you overslept. Another absurd hypothetical that is about as relevant as a wet fart. Keep rationalizing CH, you may get it correct yet. But throwing crap on the wall to see what sticks like you are doing does not mean you are winning. It is discrimination, no different than the old white only water fountains or restaurants.
As usual, CH once again stretches the truth to make a point. Seems Mile was a long term asshole on twitter and was banned for abusing the medium and not because he was gay or conservative. FU CH.
SAN FRANCISCO — For years, one of the main grievances among Twitter users has been the ability of anonymous trolls to send abusive comments to other people on the service.
But on Tuesday, Twitter barred one of the most egregious and consistent offenders of its terms of service, Milo Yiannopoulos, in an attempt to show that it is cracking down on abuse.
The ban against Mr. Yiannopoulos, a technology editor at the conservative news site Breitbart and known by his Twitter handle, @Nero, follows a campaign of prolonged abuse against Leslie Jones, a comedian and co-star of the recently released “Ghostbusters” movie. The film and its stars have come under fire from various parts of the internet for months, after it was first revealed that the reboot of the 1984 film would feature an all-female cast.
FU CH. You've really flushed any modicum of intellect down the crapper with the MILO quote, who turns out was a major league asshole like your party and was banned not for being gay or conservative, but acting like loretta. Dayum stupid.
Seems CH advocates racism if you are gay, conservative and work for breitbart, who is dead. Be proud CH, you slip is showing again. LOLOL
Leslie Jones, one of the most visible and accessible stars in the all-female remake of the “Ghostbusters” movie, said that she would leave Twitter after becoming the target of online trolls who sent her a stream of pornography, racist speech and hateful memes.
Ms. Jones, who is black, and her white cast mates have endured months of criticism since the announcement of a reboot of the blockbuster franchise (so much has been written about the internet’s outrage and gender-based criticism over the film that we won’t rehash it here). But her frustration appeared to come to a head on Monday.
So Twitter has a right to ban someone because he's gay but a baker doesn't have a right to refuse service.
You're never not fun Opie.
Commonsense said...
So Twitter has a right to ban someone because he's gay but a baker doesn't have a right to refuse service
As predicted, you didn't read my posts above that he was banned for being a troll, like loretta, by posting racist and pornographic images aimed at a comedian. You are dumber than my cat who understands more than you do. Learn to read, idiot. I'l post it again since you are too lazy to find it on your own. LOL
SAN FRANCISCO — For years, one of the main grievances among Twitter users has been the ability of anonymous trolls to send abusive comments to other people on the service.
But on Tuesday, Twitter barred one of the most egregious and consistent offenders of its terms of service, Milo Yiannopoulos, in an attempt to show that it is cracking down on abuse
Great Troll CH. Your menstral child fell for you bullcrap and repeated that Milo was banned because he was gay and conservative. Talk about low information audiences......LOL Good job, your genius acts first and swears to it. LOL
Opie - Here is what the Los Angles Times wrote:
Of course Twitter is under no obligation to maintain a forum for Yiannopoulos or anyone else..... Twitter is a private company; it can kick off anyone for any reason it wants.
......
But Twitter’s maddening inconsistency in enforcing its policies makes the issue more complicated. For years, Twitter has ignored appalling behavior on the service, shrugging off reports of racial slurs, sexist insults and even threats. For example, extremist groups such as the Somali terrorist organization al-Shabaab have used the service to publicly discuss targets for violence, and yet their accounts often remain open for long periods, even after they’ve been flagged by other users. Meanwhile, Twitter has suspended low-profile accounts for relatively petty violations or, sometimes, for no stated reason at all. (Twitter does not always provide justifications for its suspensions.) If there are objective criteria for what constitutes harassment on Twitter, or for what actions warrant suspension, they’re not apparent.
It wasn’t pure paranoia, then, that made Yiannopoulosand his supporters suspect liberal bias—a possibility most left-wing commentators shrugged off. They were only too glad to see him go, and were characteristically uninterested in defending an ideological opponent’s right to speak
But the point remains... it's a private business and they have the right to discontinue service with anyone they want.
Apparently a point you either strongly agree with or strongly disagree with... depending on who a private company decides to not do business with.
Oh, and if you do not believe that contractors turn down work because someone is an ass wipe... it happens all the time. My fiance is an account manager for a fabrication company, and she picks and chooses who she wants to work with and is happy to discontinue working with people she doesn't like to work with.
Fortunately for her, she is in a position to pick and choose from a wide variety of people who "want" to work with her.
My understanding is that this guy was only the first to have his privileges revoked under Twitter's revised policy. If he's still the only one a month from now, then ask whether Twitter is somehow showing bias.
It's very difficult to establish standards and then apply them in a way that all agree is fair, whether you're a huge commercial enterprise like Twitter or a small blog like this one. Give Twitter a chance to prove by its actions whether it's being fair, or even consistent.
Post a Comment