Author Topic: 2020 POTUS Candidates  (Read 235611 times)

ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2000 on: February 04, 2020, 10:38:39 AM »
No single state is an effective representative of the U.S.

Well, Iowa was a mess.  Who's up next?   Hopefully, they will have it together.

Let's all cheer for New Hampshire to perform better as an organization.  This has to be so frustrating for Democratic primary voters, but perhaps the glass can be half full and not half empty?  Perhaps this gives all the candidates a little more room to work?

If one state goes first, it should be Ohio.  Its racial and wealth demographics are almost the exact representative of the US as a whole.  You have three cities with good economies and universities (Cleveland, Cincy, Columbus); medium size cities (Toledo, Akron); and rust belt towns (Youngstown, Steubenville, Sandusky, etc.).  And outside of these areas is extremely rural (my Ohio State friends from out of state always commented how, as soon as you were 25 miles outside Columbus, you might as well be in Kansas).

Living in Columbus was actually cool because pretty much all fast food and restaurant items get tested there. Columbus is so representatively diverse that if it works there, it will probably work nationally.

All this said, campaign ads are horrible here come November.  I can't imagine being first in the primary, so just stay away.

Daisy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2180
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2001 on: February 04, 2020, 10:40:55 AM »
Do the Democrats enjoy giving the Republicans gifts? If I was a hard core Democrat I would be really exasperated. As was mentioned, this is the party that talks about how we want the government to come and save us and this happens...I'm not saying it's fair, but the optics are terrible.
I mean, to be fair, the DNC isn't the government.  They're a private organization running the primaries/caucuses.

As an independent voter, my vote translates to who am I going to hire to run this country, and if the Democrats or DNC or whatever couldn't even run a simple caucus, it gives me great pause to throw my vote their way. Who hired who to run this caucus? The decision makers would probably be in any Democratic administration.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2002 on: February 04, 2020, 11:05:21 AM »
Do the Democrats enjoy giving the Republicans gifts? If I was a hard core Democrat I would be really exasperated. As was mentioned, this is the party that talks about how we want the government to come and save us and this happens...I'm not saying it's fair, but the optics are terrible.
I mean, to be fair, the DNC isn't the government.  They're a private organization running the primaries/caucuses.

As an independent voter, my vote translates to who am I going to hire to run this country, and if the Democrats or DNC or whatever couldn't even run a simple caucus, it gives me great pause to throw my vote their way. Who hired who to run this caucus? The decision makers would probably be in any Democratic administration.

If you're asking an honest question, neither the DNC nor any Democrat with enough influence to get into an administration is responsible for this. State primaries / caucuses are run by the state party organization. This is the Iowa Democratic Party's mess, no one else's.

One might even say this is a good example of why we shouldn't leave elections in the hands of each individual state, and we should have a national administration responsible for running elections. Because the chances of a federal administration being competent are much much higher than those of a random state's government or random state's parties.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1291
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2003 on: February 04, 2020, 11:09:20 AM »
I don't even really see this as a big mess. They have the vote totals and they took everyone's paper ballot as a backup in case this happened. So what if the vote count gets delayed 1 day. That's not the end of the world. And honestly, it happens all the time. It happens every year somewhere in the country. The DNC made the appropriate contingencies an we'll still all know the results in less than 24 hours. People making this out to be an indictment of why not to vote for Dems are ridiculous.

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2004 on: February 04, 2020, 11:10:34 AM »
I am waffling between incompetence and corruption with this Iowa mess.

Either way it doesn't bode well for the party that wants to centralize a lot of power.

When in doubt, choose incompetence.  Although that’s probably worse. Not competent enough to rig a caucus? Politicos in Chicago are doing a double facepalm.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2005 on: February 04, 2020, 11:13:34 AM »
I don't even really see this as a big mess. They have the vote totals and they took everyone's paper ballot as a backup in case this happened. So what if the vote count gets delayed 1 day. That's not the end of the world. And honestly, it happens all the time. It happens every year somewhere in the country. The DNC made the appropriate contingencies an we'll still all know the results in less than 24 hours. People making this out to be an indictment of why not to vote for Dems are ridiculous.

+1

I'd take this any day over "I, the man who is running the election, declare myself the winner of the election because our no-paper-record voting machines say so. But no you can't have any evidence of that, and in fact when the court subpoenas the server hard drives because there was evidence of malfeasance I'll order that they be destroyed before they can be examined" Georgia.

Daisy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2180
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2006 on: February 04, 2020, 11:22:56 AM »
One might even say this is a good example of why we shouldn't leave elections in the hands of each individual state, and we should have a national administration responsible for running elections. Because the chances of a federal administration being competent are much much higher than those of a random state's government or random state's parties.

I don't see your argument why state vs. federal would make a difference. What makes you think the federal government is more competent than state governments? There is nothing to argue that either is more or less competent or corrupt.

Oh well, I will see how this plays out.

PathtoFIRE

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 731
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Dallas
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2007 on: February 04, 2020, 11:36:57 AM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

Daisy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2180
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2008 on: February 04, 2020, 12:12:51 PM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

YttriumNitrate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 886
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2009 on: February 04, 2020, 12:18:03 PM »
If one state goes first, it should be Ohio. Its racial and wealth demographics are almost the exact representative of the US as a whole.  You have three cities with good economies and universities (Cleveland, Cincy, Columbus); medium size cities (Toledo, Akron); and rust belt towns (Youngstown, Steubenville, Sandusky, etc.).  And outside of these areas is extremely rural (my Ohio State friends from out of state always commented how, as soon as you were 25 miles outside Columbus, you might as well be in Kansas).

Apparently, the 18% Hispanic population in this country doesn't matter when comparing racial demographics. ;-) Looking at the numbers, Iowa is closer to the national average than Ohio in the three Income & Poverty categories provided by the census bureau: Median household income, per capita income, and percent persons in poverty.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/OH,IA,US/PST045218

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7466
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2010 on: February 04, 2020, 12:53:06 PM »
If one state goes first, it should be Ohio. Its racial and wealth demographics are almost the exact representative of the US as a whole.  You have three cities with good economies and universities (Cleveland, Cincy, Columbus); medium size cities (Toledo, Akron); and rust belt towns (Youngstown, Steubenville, Sandusky, etc.).  And outside of these areas is extremely rural (my Ohio State friends from out of state always commented how, as soon as you were 25 miles outside Columbus, you might as well be in Kansas).

Apparently, the 18% Hispanic population in this country doesn't matter when comparing racial demographics. ;-) Looking at the numbers, Iowa is closer to the national average than Ohio in the three Income & Poverty categories provided by the census bureau: Median household income, per capita income, and percent persons in poverty.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/OH,IA,US/PST045218
Good point on that.  I've been to Ohio, I live in California...

ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2011 on: February 04, 2020, 02:04:37 PM »
If one state goes first, it should be Ohio. Its racial and wealth demographics are almost the exact representative of the US as a whole.  You have three cities with good economies and universities (Cleveland, Cincy, Columbus); medium size cities (Toledo, Akron); and rust belt towns (Youngstown, Steubenville, Sandusky, etc.).  And outside of these areas is extremely rural (my Ohio State friends from out of state always commented how, as soon as you were 25 miles outside Columbus, you might as well be in Kansas).

Apparently, the 18% Hispanic population in this country doesn't matter when comparing racial demographics. ;-) Looking at the numbers, Iowa is closer to the national average than Ohio in the three Income & Poverty categories provided by the census bureau: Median household income, per capita income, and percent persons in poverty.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/OH,IA,US/PST045218

Ohio's Hispanic population, from what I've read, has increased somewhat dramatically since the last ten years with the resurgence of Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincy.  However, there have been several huge ICE raids at local farms, and with the Trump administration's census questions, I'm not sure you're going to get full participation by the Hispanic community in Ohio (or elsewhere) moving forward.

That said, my point still largely stands about Ohio.  Looking at that link you provided (very cool website), race is mostly close with the exception of Hispanics; age is remarkably close to the national level; education is very close; economic conditions are within hundreds of percentile points; etc.  It would be a fun game to find a state that's more closely representative of the country than Ohio.

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2012 on: February 04, 2020, 02:09:11 PM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

Talk about mixed emotions. Someone with a different view is here. YAY! That same person is wisely is choosing to abstain from political discussion.*Also a Huge YAY! But BOO because I like hearing other views.

Sorry to see you go.

*( I guess I should leave as well.)



« Last Edit: February 04, 2020, 02:19:00 PM by Buffalo Chip »

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2375
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2013 on: February 04, 2020, 02:17:10 PM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

This was not a suggestion that posters here are Russian bots, it was pointing out that posters here are repeating talking points of Russian bots. Which is true.

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2014 on: February 04, 2020, 02:24:25 PM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

This was not a suggestion that posters here are Russian bots, it was pointing out that posters here are repeating talking points of Russian bots. Which is true.

So let me get this right. Those who disagree with you are mimicking the talking points of Russian Bots. So they’re not Bots. But they’re clearly dupes.

Russian Bot or dupe. Not much of a choice. Hmmm.

I want to be a Bot. Does this mean I should change my site handle?


Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 464
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2015 on: February 04, 2020, 02:29:55 PM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

This was not a suggestion that posters here are Russian bots, it was pointing out that posters here are repeating talking points of Russian bots. Which is true.

If by Russian bots, you mean articles on CNN, then you are correct..... The comments I've seen about Iowa so far are pretty tame and in line with general news articles/commentary. It wasn't just, hey, the results were delayed a couple of hours as PTF insinuated. It was the fact that the means they were basing everything on - an untested app failed miserably. And Pete claimed complete victory. And Biden's group questioned the integrity of the caucuses. Basically, as was mentioned, you have the Democrat party, which says government is the answer to most problems amidst a not insignificant fail of an election process working while not handling it the best themselves as individual candidates. I said from the beginning, it's not fair to really blame them for it. I reiterate, however, that it's very bad optics, for people who aren't sold on voting Democrat.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2016 on: February 04, 2020, 02:45:34 PM »
... Democrat party ... voting Democrat.

"Democratic party". "Voting Demoratic" or "voting for a Democrat".

"Democrat party" is a slur. I agree that calling people "Russian bot parrots" is ridiculous and uncalled for though.

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2161
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2017 on: February 04, 2020, 02:57:06 PM »

One might even say this is a good example of why we shouldn't leave elections in the hands of each individual state, and we should have a national administration responsible for running elections. Because the chances of a federal administration being competent are much much higher than those of a random state's government or random state's parties.

Well, a state group can mess up one state, but a federal group can mess up the whole country.

At least with the state control model, if one goes bad, the others still have a chance to get it right.

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2375
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2018 on: February 04, 2020, 03:08:06 PM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

This was not a suggestion that posters here are Russian bots, it was pointing out that posters here are repeating talking points of Russian bots. Which is true.

So let me get this right. Those who disagree with you are mimicking the talking points of Russian Bots. So they’re not Bots. But they’re clearly dupes.

Russian Bot or dupe. Not much of a choice. Hmmm.

I want to be a Bot. Does this mean I should change my site handle?

First, I was simply pointing out that one poster misinterpreted another poster. I stand by that.

Second, pathtoFIRE did not say anyone was mimicking Russian bots, rather that their comments were the same as those of Russian bots. On top of that, they did not suggest that this makes their comments wrong, rather that maybe they should stop and reflect on how those thoughts came into their mind - something all of us should probably be doing more often.

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2019 on: February 04, 2020, 03:57:04 PM »
... Democrat party ... voting Democrat.

"Democratic party". "Voting Demoratic" or "voting for a Democrat".

"Democrat party" is a slur. I agree that calling people "Russian bot parrots" is ridiculous and uncalled for though.

Comrade! Calling someone a Russian bot when they ARE a Russian bot is not a slur.

Don’t expect many responses today from botdom. Brother bots are celebrating Glorious Victory in Operation Iowa Screwup.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2251
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2020 on: February 04, 2020, 04:12:27 PM »
What's striking is how well Buttigieg is doing in more rural counties in Iowa as compared to the more urban areas.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html?region=RaceTitle&action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1291
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2021 on: February 04, 2020, 06:10:14 PM »
Still waiting on the final numbers from Iowa, but we have partial results so far:

CandidateDelegates% of pledged% of all delegates
Sanders1041%0.25%
Buttigieg1041%0.25%
Warren417%0.1%
Biden00%0%
Klobuchar00%0%
Total24 / 3,979100%0.6%

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1275
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2022 on: February 04, 2020, 06:58:51 PM »
What's striking is how well Buttigieg is doing in more rural counties in Iowa as compared to the more urban areas.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html?region=RaceTitle&action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Why is that striking?  His base is overwhelmingly white and old.  Those kinds of people don't live in urban areas, by and large.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 464
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2023 on: February 04, 2020, 06:59:37 PM »
... Democrat party ... voting Democrat.

"Democratic party". "Voting Demoratic" or "voting for a Democrat".

"Democrat party" is a slur. I agree that calling people "Russian bot parrots" is ridiculous and uncalled for though.

Lol....ok... it's awkward either way to say Democrat party because it sounds awkward or Democratic party which seems to be making it into a descriptive adjective instead of a more proper noun. At least Democrat party sounds a little weird. Voting Democrat is directly comparable to saying voting Republican...so....yeah.  Overall, I'm probably not going to change how I say things that aren't clear cut based off of a wiki page.... but thanks for agreeing the Russian bot thing was ridiculous :-).

gentmach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2024 on: February 04, 2020, 07:04:42 PM »
I don't even really see this as a big mess. They have the vote totals and they took everyone's paper ballot as a backup in case this happened. So what if the vote count gets delayed 1 day. That's not the end of the world. And honestly, it happens all the time. It happens every year somewhere in the country. The DNC made the appropriate contingencies an we'll still all know the results in less than 24 hours. People making this out to be an indictment of why not to vote for Dems are ridiculous.

It is 2020. Computers are not a new fangled thing. Neither are apps. Somehow the system glitches just as the country turns its eyes upon Iowa. And then Democrats had to boomer their way through the screw up using paper ballots.

Might as well have shown up with a horse and buggy for all the progress they showcased.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1291
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2025 on: February 04, 2020, 07:12:28 PM »
I don't even really see this as a big mess. They have the vote totals and they took everyone's paper ballot as a backup in case this happened. So what if the vote count gets delayed 1 day. That's not the end of the world. And honestly, it happens all the time. It happens every year somewhere in the country. The DNC made the appropriate contingencies an we'll still all know the results in less than 24 hours. People making this out to be an indictment of why not to vote for Dems are ridiculous.

It is 2020. Computers are not a new fangled thing. Neither are apps. Somehow the system glitches just as the country turns its eyes upon Iowa. And then Democrats had to boomer their way through the screw up using paper ballots.

Might as well have shown up with a horse and buggy for all the progress they showcased.

Yes, this one company's app that was probably developed by 3 people certainly showcases modern US technological capabilities. We'll ignore all the regular technological hiccups that pretty much all US companies, governments, etc. experience on a regular basis and make this about political points cause it's convenient to your personal political biases. (Despite this being a decision on the state party level and doesn't really say anything about the national party) I've worked in tech my whole life, it's nothing odd for the industry.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 464
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2026 on: February 04, 2020, 07:13:56 PM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

This was not a suggestion that posters here are Russian bots, it was pointing out that posters here are repeating talking points of Russian bots. Which is true.

So let me get this right. Those who disagree with you are mimicking the talking points of Russian Bots. So they’re not Bots. But they’re clearly dupes.

Russian Bot or dupe. Not much of a choice. Hmmm.

I want to be a Bot. Does this mean I should change my site handle?

First, I was simply pointing out that one poster misinterpreted another poster. I stand by that.

Second, pathtoFIRE did not say anyone was mimicking Russian bots, rather that their comments were the same as those of Russian bots. On top of that, they did not suggest that this makes their comments wrong, rather that maybe they should stop and reflect on how those thoughts came into their mind - something all of us should probably be doing more often.

And yet much said on this thread is the same stuff being reported or said on the cnn home page. Basic news that is not fox is skewering the Democrats for this. I mean seriously not to Godwins law this or anything but I'm sure Hitler somewhere said eat your vegetables they're good for you.... just because somewhere Russian bots might be saying something doesn't make the points invalid.  I re read the posts and saw nothing extreme. The reference of Russian bots was a cheap shot that seems likely to only stifle dialogue (which it seems to have with daisy,  not an extremist by any account I can see from her posts). It was a poor comment not worth defending.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2251
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2027 on: February 04, 2020, 07:40:37 PM »
What's striking is how well Buttigieg is doing in more rural counties in Iowa as compared to the more urban areas.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html?region=RaceTitle&action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Why is that striking?  His base is overwhelmingly white and old.  Those kinds of people don't live in urban areas, by and large.

Buttigieg also did well in suburban Des Moines

secondcor521

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2763
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Big cattle, no hat.
    • Age of Eon - Overwatch player videos
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2028 on: February 04, 2020, 07:50:57 PM »
We'll ignore all the regular technological hiccups that pretty much all US companies, governments, etc. experience on a regular basis and make this about political points cause it's convenient to your personal political biases. (Despite this being a decision on the state party level and doesn't really say anything about the national party) I've worked in tech my whole life, it's nothing odd for the industry.

Your experience differs from mine.  I worked for 23 years as a developer, tools developer, multiple roles in software/firmware test, and management for two Fortune 500 companies as well as several other smaller companies, including a startup.  I have easily worked on multiple dozens of commercially successful products, some of which most people on this forum have used or are using.

Across that nearly quarter century, across those companies, across all of those products, there was exactly *one* bug that was serious enough to recommend that customers update their product.  We found the bug internally before customers reported it, we proactively notified customers, and although it was a serious bug in terms of it's effect on the product, the user could use the product for it's intended purpose and the primary function of the device worked 100% flawlessly.  Yes, there were products that received minor bug fixes, but they were for corner cases or improvements or issues with negligible consequences, like a misspelled word in a message to the user.

In the Iowa case, they must not have found the bug, they didn't proactively notify anyone, and the serious bug affected the basic, central function of the product.  Not only does this reflect poorly on the developers, it also reflects poorly on whichever QA or test group signed off.  It's really embarrassingly bad.  If it had happened at my companies, there would be an investigation and whoever screwed up would probably be out of a job.

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2375
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2029 on: February 04, 2020, 08:05:52 PM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

This was not a suggestion that posters here are Russian bots, it was pointing out that posters here are repeating talking points of Russian bots. Which is true.

So let me get this right. Those who disagree with you are mimicking the talking points of Russian Bots. So they’re not Bots. But they’re clearly dupes.

Russian Bot or dupe. Not much of a choice. Hmmm.

I want to be a Bot. Does this mean I should change my site handle?

First, I was simply pointing out that one poster misinterpreted another poster. I stand by that.

Second, pathtoFIRE did not say anyone was mimicking Russian bots, rather that their comments were the same as those of Russian bots. On top of that, they did not suggest that this makes their comments wrong, rather that maybe they should stop and reflect on how those thoughts came into their mind - something all of us should probably be doing more often.

And yet much said on this thread is the same stuff being reported or said on the cnn home page. Basic news that is not fox is skewering the Democrats for this. I mean seriously not to Godwins law this or anything but I'm sure Hitler somewhere said eat your vegetables they're good for you.... just because somewhere Russian bots might be saying something doesn't make the points invalid.  I re read the posts and saw nothing extreme.

Agreed. CNN, Fox, and others are playing along as well.

I'm not saying this is false information or even that the points are invalid, I'm saying it's being blown severely out of proportion to the actual implications of it. Clickbait news media, Russian bots, and internet commenters all amplify that message. It happens on a lot of topics, but election related events are especially sensitive. The trust of citizens in fair elections is critical to a functioning Democracy. Elections are exactly where Putin wants to hit the US hardest.

Now I'm not saying it can't be discussed and I'm certainly not accusing anyone of being a Russian bot, but I do think we should downshift the outrage and pause to think deeply about why we're discussing the things we're discussing. Is it because we believe it's the most important and pressing matter with regard to the 2020 election... or is it because the talking heads and internet commenters told us this is what we should care about for this news cycle?



The reference of Russian bots was a cheap shot that seems likely to only stifle dialogue (which it seems to have with daisy,  not an extremist by any account I can see from her posts). It was a poor comment not worth defending.

Yes, it's a shame that the comment caused Daisy to leave the conversation, but can you admit that Daisy misinterpreted what was said?

Quote
When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

response:

Quote
I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me.

And therefore, it was not the comment that caused them to leave, it was the incorrect interpretation of the comment that caused them to leave.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2020, 08:13:10 PM by Davnasty »

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1291
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2030 on: February 04, 2020, 10:14:36 PM »
We'll ignore all the regular technological hiccups that pretty much all US companies, governments, etc. experience on a regular basis and make this about political points cause it's convenient to your personal political biases. (Despite this being a decision on the state party level and doesn't really say anything about the national party) I've worked in tech my whole life, it's nothing odd for the industry.

Your experience differs from mine.  I worked for 23 years as a developer, tools developer, multiple roles in software/firmware test, and management for two Fortune 500 companies as well as several other smaller companies, including a startup.  I have easily worked on multiple dozens of commercially successful products, some of which most people on this forum have used or are using.

Across that nearly quarter century, across those companies, across all of those products, there was exactly *one* bug that was serious enough to recommend that customers update their product.  We found the bug internally before customers reported it, we proactively notified customers, and although it was a serious bug in terms of it's effect on the product, the user could use the product for it's intended purpose and the primary function of the device worked 100% flawlessly.  Yes, there were products that received minor bug fixes, but they were for corner cases or improvements or issues with negligible consequences, like a misspelled word in a message to the user.

In the Iowa case, they must not have found the bug, they didn't proactively notify anyone, and the serious bug affected the basic, central function of the product.  Not only does this reflect poorly on the developers, it also reflects poorly on whichever QA or test group signed off.  It's really embarrassingly bad.  If it had happened at my companies, there would be an investigation and whoever screwed up would probably be out of a job.

I'm guessing these jobs that you held were not in government or non-profit sector. From what it looks like, the company was likely not paid nearly enough to make a quality app (60k is what I heard?) That's enough for what? 1 developer for 4 months? It wasn't a failure of technology, it was a failure of Shadow Inc. management not understanding the number of resources the project would require.

At the end of the day, this app just shouldn't have been made. They should have run the caucus without it. And Nevada isn't planning on using this app either. I wonder though if this will push the DNC to just force all primaries to be straight voting rather than caucuses.

gentmach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2031 on: February 04, 2020, 11:52:18 PM »
We'll ignore all the regular technological hiccups that pretty much all US companies, governments, etc. experience on a regular basis and make this about political points cause it's convenient to your personal political biases. (Despite this being a decision on the state party level and doesn't really say anything about the national party) I've worked in tech my whole life, it's nothing odd for the industry.

Your experience differs from mine.  I worked for 23 years as a developer, tools developer, multiple roles in software/firmware test, and management for two Fortune 500 companies as well as several other smaller companies, including a startup.  I have easily worked on multiple dozens of commercially successful products, some of which most people on this forum have used or are using.

Across that nearly quarter century, across those companies, across all of those products, there was exactly *one* bug that was serious enough to recommend that customers update their product.  We found the bug internally before customers reported it, we proactively notified customers, and although it was a serious bug in terms of it's effect on the product, the user could use the product for it's intended purpose and the primary function of the device worked 100% flawlessly.  Yes, there were products that received minor bug fixes, but they were for corner cases or improvements or issues with negligible consequences, like a misspelled word in a message to the user.

In the Iowa case, they must not have found the bug, they didn't proactively notify anyone, and the serious bug affected the basic, central function of the product.  Not only does this reflect poorly on the developers, it also reflects poorly on whichever QA or test group signed off.  It's really embarrassingly bad.  If it had happened at my companies, there would be an investigation and whoever screwed up would probably be out of a job.

I'm guessing these jobs that you held were not in government or non-profit sector. From what it looks like, the company was likely not paid nearly enough to make a quality app (60k is what I heard?) That's enough for what? 1 developer for 4 months? It wasn't a failure of technology, it was a failure of Shadow Inc. management not understanding the number of resources the project would require.

At the end of the day, this app just shouldn't have been made. They should have run the caucus without it. And Nevada isn't planning on using this app either. I wonder though if this will push the DNC to just force all primaries to be straight voting rather than caucuses.

When Democrats are hyping this election as "last stand of the republic" they should handle it with the gravity appropriate for the situation. Smooth running helps instill confidence.

Instead we get "How do fellow kids" with an app that was underfunded and untested.

ministashy

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 135
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2032 on: February 05, 2020, 01:09:24 AM »
I agree with the folks who think this is a big hullabaloo over nothing.  So the caucus results were delayed by a day.  Big whoop.  The fact that the Iowa Democratic party was at least smart enough/transparent enough to ensure there was a backup plan (i.e. tried-and-true paper ballots) makes them more competent in my eyes, not less. 

There's also the fact that apparently they tried to roll out the app because the Democratic Party wanted to ensure more transparency after the whole 2016 debacle, with Bernie claiming foul play on how delegates were allotted.  So apparently they were trying to put together out a whole new set of more detailed results.  And when you're running something using volunteers, many of them senior citizens, any project manager will tell you any change to established procedures is only going to add to the confusion.

But they got the results out anyway, and within 24 hours.  That's all I care about.  All of this angst about it is just a tempest in a teapot.

Moonwaves

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1222
  • Location: Germany
    • My blog
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2033 on: February 05, 2020, 02:08:01 AM »
Mike Pence (not the politician) retweeted a thread that went into a bit about the app development. His comment was "JFC. Code Academy graduates need *years* of experience to become reliable contributors. This delusion that “anyone can code” does not serve us well." I found the thread he linked to interesting.

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1275
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2034 on: February 05, 2020, 06:25:13 AM »
Do the Democrats enjoy giving the Republicans gifts? If I was a hard core Democrat I would be really exasperated. As was mentioned, this is the party that talks about how we want the government to come and save us and this happens...I'm not saying it's fair, but the optics are terrible.

A non-government entity (DNC) outsourced their election process to a private company (Shadow Inc) and this is a supposed indictment of the inefficiency of government?

Yeah, your math doesn't check out.

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4327
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2035 on: February 05, 2020, 06:43:09 AM »
Mike Pence (not the politician) retweeted a thread that went into a bit about the app development. His comment was "JFC. Code Academy graduates need *years* of experience to become reliable contributors. This delusion that “anyone can code” does not serve us well." I found the thread he linked to interesting.

That was indeed a fascinating thread. Thank you. Key take aways for me were

1) Campaigns refuse to use/contribute to free and open source software because they are afraid it will be used by "the other side" so many tools are build from scratch and then thrown away...WTH? Companies have learned how much more valuable it is to build on top of and contribute open source tools and platforms which have been developed and tested to be robust, secure, and maintainable in a wide range of situations even though it mean their competitors can use the same software. I guess political operatives haven't done so yet. Hopefully if nothing else good comes of the mess in Iowa it will be the realization that there are worst outcomes than a politician from the other side of the aisle benefiting because your campaign caught a bug or a security hole and fixed it for your campaign, their campaign, and all the campaigns of the future on either side.

2) Political parties/campaigns think they can treat programming expertise (whether in house or outsourced like Shadow) like field organizers, who are laid off right after an election and hired back right when they are needed in the next election. Honestly I'm always surprised this works for field organizers (what do they do between campaign seasons?) but I hadn't realized how the experience hiring and firing them must shape how political parties view all other sources of skilled labor.

3) This was really dumb of me, but because I don't usually follow politics that closely my memories of the Obama years lead me to assume that democrats by default had the edge in tech and software. It sounds like that actually hasn't been true in years.

Obama was in his 40s when he was first elected president and built out a huge software/online campaign infrastructure (most if which, it sounds like, was thrown away after 2012 election and not used by Clinton in 2016.) Our last nominee was 70 when she failed to be elected president. I still hold out a little hope for a surprise result in New Hampshire. However, we sure look to be on track to nominate one of four people ranging in age from 71 (Warren), 78 (Biden and Bloomberg), or Sanders (79) on the date they'd be inaugurated.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 464
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2036 on: February 05, 2020, 07:26:46 AM »
Do the Democrats enjoy giving the Republicans gifts? If I was a hard core Democrat I would be really exasperated. As was mentioned, this is the party that talks about how we want the government to come and save us and this happens...I'm not saying it's fair, but the optics are terrible.

A non-government entity (DNC) outsourced their election process to a private company (Shadow Inc) and this is a supposed indictment of the inefficiency of government?

Yeah, your math doesn't check out.

Can you please read my whole statement? You even quoted it, so you must have either misread it or chose to ignore it. I specifically said that I'm not saying it's fair and also that the optics are bad. Meaning it looks bad because the DNC is all about trust the government, which, as GuitarStv often says is really just all of us, right? Well I've been a project manager, and let me tell you even on a project with very little overall impact to the company, I'm the one who is responsible as project manager for ensuring contractors that work for me get the job done. It was their very poor decision to handle things like they did, and the responsibility is theirs. The fact that they as Democrats are saying, trust us as a whole (the government) to handle all of these things and then themselves as an individual entity screw things up - yea, my math checks out just fine. There is a link there. Is it fair that it's an indictment of the party as a whole or the overall concept they're pushing of government is good - probably not. I did, again, say it wasn't fair. It's is certainly bad optics for them, which was all I said to begin with.

ETA: That line was a bit silly and wasn't really what I was meaning after thinking about it. Essentially, if either party had screwed up like this, it would have looked bad. For the Democratic party, who tend to at least verbally claim about how much better the government can do things and how they should take over or regulate more things and then they make mistakes - it looks a little bit worse because they're saying that they (not the same they that made the mistakes but the same party) of people should make up the government to make these decisions. The government is not some shadow, ethereal kind of thing - it's going to be made up of people in the Democratic party, obviously, if the Democratic party gets what they want. I really don't see how it's hard acknowledge that this looks bad.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2020, 08:18:59 AM by Wolfpack Mustachian »

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 464
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2037 on: February 05, 2020, 07:38:29 AM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

This was not a suggestion that posters here are Russian bots, it was pointing out that posters here are repeating talking points of Russian bots. Which is true.

So let me get this right. Those who disagree with you are mimicking the talking points of Russian Bots. So they’re not Bots. But they’re clearly dupes.

Russian Bot or dupe. Not much of a choice. Hmmm.

I want to be a Bot. Does this mean I should change my site handle?

First, I was simply pointing out that one poster misinterpreted another poster. I stand by that.

Second, pathtoFIRE did not say anyone was mimicking Russian bots, rather that their comments were the same as those of Russian bots. On top of that, they did not suggest that this makes their comments wrong, rather that maybe they should stop and reflect on how those thoughts came into their mind - something all of us should probably be doing more often.

And yet much said on this thread is the same stuff being reported or said on the cnn home page. Basic news that is not fox is skewering the Democrats for this. I mean seriously not to Godwins law this or anything but I'm sure Hitler somewhere said eat your vegetables they're good for you.... just because somewhere Russian bots might be saying something doesn't make the points invalid.  I re read the posts and saw nothing extreme.

Agreed. CNN, Fox, and others are playing along as well.

I'm not saying this is false information or even that the points are invalid, I'm saying it's being blown severely out of proportion to the actual implications of it. Clickbait news media, Russian bots, and internet commenters all amplify that message. It happens on a lot of topics, but election related events are especially sensitive. The trust of citizens in fair elections is critical to a functioning Democracy. Elections are exactly where Putin wants to hit the US hardest.

Now I'm not saying it can't be discussed and I'm certainly not accusing anyone of being a Russian bot, but I do think we should downshift the outrage and pause to think deeply about why we're discussing the things we're discussing. Is it because we believe it's the most important and pressing matter with regard to the 2020 election... or is it because the talking heads and internet commenters told us this is what we should care about for this news cycle?

Is it the most important pressing matter? Of course not. Is it more important than plenty of other crap I've seen, absolutely. I've seen comments on Warren's skin care regimen. Well before Russian bots (right?) I saw comments about how video that came up of John Kerry wearing a bunny suit would impact his chances in his election. Elections are full of frivolous crap. This is a little bit bigger than those, especially with people in Biden's campaign questioning the validity of Iowa because of it.

The reference of Russian bots was a cheap shot that seems likely to only stifle dialogue (which it seems to have with daisy,  not an extremist by any account I can see from her posts). It was a poor comment not worth defending.

Yes, it's a shame that the comment caused Daisy to leave the conversation, but can you admit that Daisy misinterpreted what was said?

Quote
When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

response:

Quote
I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me.

And therefore, it was not the comment that caused them to leave, it was the incorrect interpretation of the comment that caused them to leave.

If Daisy truly thought she was being accused of being a Russian bot, then she misread the comment and that was the issue. My impression (totally subjective) was that Daisy probably was using hyperbolic language and not literally meaning she had been accused of it. The point is, when you start bringing up Russian bots, which are probably spreading anything and everything negative - plenty of which might have significant grains of truth to it because they don't care they're trying to just stir crap up - and use that even tangentially, you're muddying the waters of conversation. This is not birther rumors being spread with no foundation. This is an actual issue that even the Democratic candidates have weighed in on. Argue that it's pointless for its own merits, and you won't tend to get results that end up with more of an echo chamber by alienating people like Daisy.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2038 on: February 05, 2020, 07:49:24 AM »
... Democrat party ... voting Democrat.

"Democratic party". "Voting Demoratic" or "voting for a Democrat".

"Democrat party" is a slur. I agree that calling people "Russian bot parrots" is ridiculous and uncalled for though.

Lol....ok... it's awkward either way to say Democrat party because it sounds awkward or Democratic party which seems to be making it into a descriptive adjective instead of a more proper noun. At least Democrat party sounds a little weird. Voting Democrat is directly comparable to saying voting Republican...so....yeah.  Overall, I'm probably not going to change how I say things that aren't clear cut based off of a wiki page.... but thanks for agreeing the Russian bot thing was ridiculous :-).

Okay? I mean, the "Democratic Party" is the official name of the party, in the same way that "Republican Party" is the official name of the other one. As such, it is a proper noun, not a descriptive adjective.

Quote
The Democratic Party sounds too good so I don't want to use that, OK? I call it the Democrat Party. It sounds better rhetorically. - Donald Trump

If you want the people you're talking to to immediately dismiss what you're saying because you're using an intentionally grating slur rather than the correct term, then just keep doing what you're doing I guess.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 464
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2039 on: February 05, 2020, 08:10:10 AM »
... Democrat party ... voting Democrat.

"Democratic party". "Voting Demoratic" or "voting for a Democrat".

"Democrat party" is a slur. I agree that calling people "Russian bot parrots" is ridiculous and uncalled for though.

Lol....ok... it's awkward either way to say Democrat party because it sounds awkward or Democratic party which seems to be making it into a descriptive adjective instead of a more proper noun. At least Democrat party sounds a little weird. Voting Democrat is directly comparable to saying voting Republican...so....yeah.  Overall, I'm probably not going to change how I say things that aren't clear cut based off of a wiki page.... but thanks for agreeing the Russian bot thing was ridiculous :-).

Okay? I mean, the "Democratic Party" is the official name of the party, in the same way that "Republican Party" is the official name of the other one. As such, it is a proper noun, not a descriptive adjective.

Quote
The Democratic Party sounds too good so I don't want to use that, OK? I call it the Democrat Party. It sounds better rhetorically. - Donald Trump

If you want the people you're talking to to immediately dismiss what you're saying because you're using an intentionally grating slur rather than the correct term, then just keep doing what you're doing I guess.

Fair enough. I stand corrected. Thank you.

ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2040 on: February 05, 2020, 09:25:16 AM »
If you want the people you're talking to to immediately dismiss what you're saying because you're using an intentionally grating slur rather than the correct term, then just keep doing what you're doing I guess.

Fair enough. I stand corrected. Thank you.
[/quote]

"An intentionally grating slur."  Good heavens people.  Take yourselves a little less seriously.

secondcor521

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2763
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Big cattle, no hat.
    • Age of Eon - Overwatch player videos
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2041 on: February 05, 2020, 09:42:11 AM »
We'll ignore all the regular technological hiccups that pretty much all US companies, governments, etc. experience on a regular basis and make this about political points cause it's convenient to your personal political biases. (Despite this being a decision on the state party level and doesn't really say anything about the national party) I've worked in tech my whole life, it's nothing odd for the industry.

Your experience differs from mine.  I worked for 23 years as a developer, tools developer, multiple roles in software/firmware test, and management for two Fortune 500 companies as well as several other smaller companies, including a startup.  I have easily worked on multiple dozens of commercially successful products, some of which most people on this forum have used or are using.

Across that nearly quarter century, across those companies, across all of those products, there was exactly *one* bug that was serious enough to recommend that customers update their product.  We found the bug internally before customers reported it, we proactively notified customers, and although it was a serious bug in terms of it's effect on the product, the user could use the product for it's intended purpose and the primary function of the device worked 100% flawlessly.  Yes, there were products that received minor bug fixes, but they were for corner cases or improvements or issues with negligible consequences, like a misspelled word in a message to the user.

In the Iowa case, they must not have found the bug, they didn't proactively notify anyone, and the serious bug affected the basic, central function of the product.  Not only does this reflect poorly on the developers, it also reflects poorly on whichever QA or test group signed off.  It's really embarrassingly bad.  If it had happened at my companies, there would be an investigation and whoever screwed up would probably be out of a job.

I'm guessing these jobs that you held were not in government or non-profit sector. From what it looks like, the company was likely not paid nearly enough to make a quality app (60k is what I heard?) That's enough for what? 1 developer for 4 months? It wasn't a failure of technology, it was a failure of Shadow Inc. management not understanding the number of resources the project would require.

At the end of the day, this app just shouldn't have been made. They should have run the caucus without it. And Nevada isn't planning on using this app either. I wonder though if this will push the DNC to just force all primaries to be straight voting rather than caucuses.

You guess correctly.  It is not clear to me from the portion of your post that I quoted above if you meant to say that development isn't done very well only in government and non-profits, or just done poorly in general.  You did say "US companies" and you also didn't qualify or limit "industry", so I took it to mean more broadly.

Since I did not work for government or non-profits, I can't say whether they do well in this area or not.  Your general response that they don't spend enough or think about it carefully enough sounds right to me.

If that's the case, then, though, I think it was a failure of management and leadership - either to allocate sufficient resources to the project, or to not listen to the engineers on the project (who, if they were experienced, might have been able to predict this result), or to realize that it was not feasible with the resources they had to solve the problem at hand.

...

I agree with the folks who think this is a big hullabaloo over nothing.  So the caucus results were delayed by a day.  Big whoop.  The fact that the Iowa Democratic party was at least smart enough/transparent enough to ensure there was a backup plan (i.e. tried-and-true paper ballots) makes them more competent in my eyes, not less. 

There's also the fact that apparently they tried to roll out the app because the Democratic Party wanted to ensure more transparency after the whole 2016 debacle, with Bernie claiming foul play on how delegates were allotted.  So apparently they were trying to put together out a whole new set of more detailed results.  And when you're running something using volunteers, many of them senior citizens, any project manager will tell you any change to established procedures is only going to add to the confusion.

But they got the results out anyway, and within 24 hours.  That's all I care about.  All of this angst about it is just a tempest in a teapot.

1.  The additional results (first alignment, second alignment, delegate equivalents) were a response to Sanders' concerns about the 2016 results.  The app, as I understand it, was not a response to the concerns; it was an effort to be more advanced and technology-savvy and all that.

2.  Yes, it was good they have backup plans.  That does make them look better, although in my opinion the backup plans don't really make up for the failure of the primary plan.

3.  The caucus results are still not complete as of the time of my post.  According to cnn.com/politics front page, they are at 71% of precincts reporting.

I agree that it will probably blow over soon.

...

I was using Democrat Party without knowing the background.  I wasn't using the term as a slur, and I'll switch to the correct name from now on.  As long as we're on the subject, is it "the Democrat nominee" or "the Democratic nominee"?  I think I've heard both.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3106
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2042 on: February 05, 2020, 09:45:03 AM »
If one state goes first, it should be Ohio. Its racial and wealth demographics are almost the exact representative of the US as a whole.  You have three cities with good economies and universities (Cleveland, Cincy, Columbus); medium size cities (Toledo, Akron); and rust belt towns (Youngstown, Steubenville, Sandusky, etc.).  And outside of these areas is extremely rural (my Ohio State friends from out of state always commented how, as soon as you were 25 miles outside Columbus, you might as well be in Kansas).

Apparently, the 18% Hispanic population in this country doesn't matter when comparing racial demographics. ;-) Looking at the numbers, Iowa is closer to the national average than Ohio in the three Income & Poverty categories provided by the census bureau: Median household income, per capita income, and percent persons in poverty.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/OH,IA,US/PST045218

This is legit, I worked with Hispanic Small business owners in Cincinnati, and they openly acknowledged that the city was very Latinx-thin. Among major US cities, only Pittsburgh had a lower Hispanic share in terms of population in 2009.

Perhaps the combination of Ohio and Florida would get you to a more representative area?

ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2043 on: February 05, 2020, 09:53:01 AM »
Yep, results aren't ready within hours of the holding the caucuses, and sure enough here comes the outrage squad. And it's always a little odd how the outrage squad also likes to hold itself aloof from party. Like the cable news need to turn every development in a story into breaking news to keep eyeballs glued, the outrage squad needs to hype every falter. It's nearly always the Democratic Party that is their target too. Sure, they'll tut a little about unfortunate or regrettable actions of others, but it's full steam ahead when they've got a progressive person or ideal in their sites. When one's comments are indistinguishable from those we see put out by troll farms, it should give one pause.

I assume you are referring to me. You figured me out! I am a Russian bot.

I will no longer post on this thread with accusations like this being thrown at me. I was just trying to give my observation as an independent.

Outta here...

I do not at all think @Daisy misinterpreted what was being said.  Words have implications (e.g., Democrat vs. Democratic).  When a poster accuses someone of parroting troll farms, it is a reasonable interpretation for the recipient to infer, at an absolute minimum, that they are too stupid to vet their news; and at worst, that they are consequently a troll themselves.

In fact, it happened repeatedly when I first posted in the political Off-Topic threads a long time ago.  I basically posted that I thought the Russia story was way overblown (i.e., based on on what Russia spent, and how many posts they made, it was a blip in the radar of social media, and thus we lacked evidence that it substantially affected the election).  I also said that continually referencing RUSSIA to dismiss legitimate concerns is modern day Red Scare/McCarythyism: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/so-let's-speculate-about-the-future-of-a-full-trump-presidency/msg2333178/#msg2333178

I was met with the usual from the folks on this forum -- dissecting my posts into fifteen pieces to effectivelly call me stupid, a bunch of socratic method questions that implied I really haven't thought this out, etc.  On top of that, several basically accused me (and other posters doubting the Russia story) of being trolls themselves:

Quote
Imagine the disruption to this forum if even 50 coordinated trolls showed up.

*** Next Post ***

If JLee? :(

Noticeable difference in Off-Topic since... maybe 2-3 months ago?

THEY ARE ALREADY HERE!

*** Next Post ***

Yep, they are here.

I know the mods had to deal with them on an anti-vax thread or two already.

Of course, Sol had to dial it up to 11, completely misrepresenting everything I was saying to claim "Russia was innocent" (something I never came remotely close to saying):

Quote
Just as an example, there are precisely TWO posters in this thread who are saying "Russia is innocent!  Russia did nothing wrong!"  They are a tiny fraction of the the total users, or the total posts, but their voices absolutely have an impact.  You're bringing people around to the opinion that Russia wants us to have, with your tiny fraction of our total posts, because you're not throwing out random posts but rather targeting a specific discussion about Russian interference, to people who are reading along because they want to learn about it and form an opinion, and you are giving them one that Russia supports but the United States intelligence services do not.  The total number of posts on the forum does not matter, in determining how much impact you can have for your few hours of typing away from Moscow.  You have absolutely swayed this discussion, literally with just two accounts, to exonerate the Russians for their interference in the US election, in less than 48 hours.  You may have already convinced hundreds of US citizens, lurking in this thread, that Russia is innocent.  See how easy it is, when you target your messaging?

Take it over and over, and while not being directly called a Russian operative, the substance of my posts was being dismissed because RUSSIA.  Of course.

So I don't think Daisy's interpretation was wrong at all.  Daisy was effectively being called a dumbass, of not checking her information carefully enough, of not cross-referencing Russia troll farm social media posts, and hey, if the troll farms are parroting this, it must be false, or it must not be a big deal, or even if it is a big deal, RUSSIA wants us to be mad about it, so don't worry about it, it's fine.

What nonsense.  This was the lead story in NYT, WaPo, Politico, The Atlantic, etc.  And Pod Save America did an entire podcast on it that I listened to on my walk this morning.

***

You know what IS funny?  The usual liberal posters in this thread, who act as if they are the most well informed of anyone who's ever lived, are just parroting the Democratic Party talking points.  Look at AOC, Bernie, etc. -- "Hey, the Iowa thing is being overblown, calm down, let's wait for results, it's not a big deal." 

They have done all the Google searches and read all the articles to justify their position, and when you disagree with that -- citing WaPo, NYT, The New Yorker -- out come the links and the pitchforks.

The dismissal of any disagreement is just modern day McCarthyism.  The far left (is that a slur too?) loves it because it helps them ignore what's in front of their face -- Trump is going to win in 2020 because they can't shut the hell up about Russia/impeachment.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2020, 10:02:50 AM by ReadySetMillionaire »

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2044 on: February 05, 2020, 09:56:57 AM »
"An intentionally grating slur."  Good heavens people.  Take yourselves a little less seriously.

Quote
At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2019, Trump stated he liked to say, "the 'Democrat Party,' because it doesn’t sound good. But that's all the more reason I use it, because it doesn't."

It is an intentionally grating slur, and Republicans openly state that that's the reason they use it. It's not my fault that Republican civility has sunk this low. And I say this as an Independent (although perhaps I'm an IINO at this point since I can't imagine voting for a Republican in the foreseeable future).

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2045 on: February 05, 2020, 10:04:40 AM »

And yet much said on this thread is the same stuff being reported or said on the cnn home page. Basic news that is not fox is skewering the Democrats for this. I mean seriously not to Godwins law this or anything but I'm sure Hitler somewhere said eat your vegetables they're good for you.... just because somewhere Russian bots might be saying something doesn't make the points invalid.  I re read the posts and saw nothing extreme. The reference of Russian bots was a cheap shot that seems likely to only stifle dialogue (which it seems to have with daisy,  not an extremist by any account I can see from her posts). It was a poor comment not worth defending.

Stifling dialogue is the objective of political discussion in America circa 2020. It’s not important that you discuss, it’s important that nonbelievers be driven off so you can lament their unwillingness to discuss, and in the process virtue signaling both your saintlike patience and your “tolerance.”

Those of us who are the nonbelievers, the heretics, the Russian Bots, are familiar with the routine. There is nothing more intolerant than the “tolerant.” And it’s not unique to one or the other political faction.

The survey results from Cambridge are out and the political house is burning down. The two political factions are vigorously bitching  and slinging accusations about whose job it was to water the begonias.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2046 on: February 05, 2020, 10:06:00 AM »
I was using Democrat Party without knowing the background.  I wasn't using the term as a slur, and I'll switch to the correct name from now on.  As long as we're on the subject, is it "the Democrat nominee" or "the Democratic nominee"?  I think I've heard both.

I imagine most people don't know. I'm not mad at individual voters for using it, just the Republican party for the incredibly petty antics of their elected leaders.

"The Democratic nominee". An easy way to check is to see what non-Fox News article titles are. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iowa-caucus-will-caucuses-predict-2020-democratic-presidential-nominee-7-of-past-9-elections-it-did/

ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2047 on: February 05, 2020, 10:08:46 AM »
"An intentionally grating slur."  Good heavens people.  Take yourselves a little less seriously.

Quote
At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2019, Trump stated he liked to say, "the 'Democrat Party,' because it doesn’t sound good. But that's all the more reason I use it, because it doesn't."

It is an intentionally grating slur, and Republicans openly state that that's the reason they use it. It's not my fault that Republican civility has sunk this low. And I say this as an Independent (although perhaps I'm an IINO at this point since I can't imagine voting for a Republican in the foreseeable future).

Of my extremely scientific sample size of one -- my mom, who has voted Democrat in every election since 1976 -- "Democrat" Party is not a slur, and she uses them interchangeably.  I asked her when she just stopped at my office for lunch.  This is an extremely scientific poll.

ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2048 on: February 05, 2020, 10:11:12 AM »
Stifling dialogue is the objective of political discussion in America circa 2020. It’s not important that you discuss, it’s important that nonbelievers be driven off so you can lament their unwillingness to discuss, and in the process virtue signaling both your saintlike patience and your “tolerance.”

Those of us who are the nonbelievers, the heretics, the Russian Bots, are familiar with the routine. There is nothing more intolerant than the “tolerant.” And it’s not unique to one or the other political faction.

The survey results from Cambridge are out and the political house is burning down. The two political factions are vigorously bitching  and slinging accusations about whose job it was to water the begonias.

Yep.  You can't have a different opinion about Kavanaugh, Russia, or impeachment.  It's all just sooooo obvious if you just know the facts.  Not those inconvenient facts that are propped up by Russia troll farms.  The REAL facts.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15253
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2049 on: February 05, 2020, 10:41:09 AM »
I basically posted that I thought the Russia story was way overblown (i.e., based on on what Russia spent, and how many posts they made, it was a blip in the radar of social media, and thus we lacked evidence that it substantially affected the election).  I also said that continually referencing RUSSIA to dismiss legitimate concerns is modern day Red Scare/McCarythyism: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/so-let's-speculate-about-the-future-of-a-full-trump-presidency/msg2333178/#msg2333178

I was met with the usual from the folks on this forum -- dissecting my posts into fifteen pieces to effectivelly call me stupid, a bunch of socratic method questions that implied I really haven't thought this out, etc.  On top of that, several basically accused me (and other posters doubting the Russia story) of being trolls themselves:

Quote
Imagine the disruption to this forum if even 50 coordinated trolls showed up.

*** Next Post ***

If JLee? :(

Noticeable difference in Off-Topic since... maybe 2-3 months ago?

THEY ARE ALREADY HERE!

*** Next Post ***

Yep, they are here.

I know the mods had to deal with them on an anti-vax thread or two already.

Of course, Sol had to dial it up to 11, completely misrepresenting everything I was saying to claim "Russia was innocent" (something I never came remotely close to saying):

Quote
Just as an example, there are precisely TWO posters in this thread who are saying "Russia is innocent!  Russia did nothing wrong!"  They are a tiny fraction of the the total users, or the total posts, but their voices absolutely have an impact.  You're bringing people around to the opinion that Russia wants us to have, with your tiny fraction of our total posts, because you're not throwing out random posts but rather targeting a specific discussion about Russian interference, to people who are reading along because they want to learn about it and form an opinion, and you are giving them one that Russia supports but the United States intelligence services do not.  The total number of posts on the forum does not matter, in determining how much impact you can have for your few hours of typing away from Moscow.  You have absolutely swayed this discussion, literally with just two accounts, to exonerate the Russians for their interference in the US election, in less than 48 hours.  You may have already convinced hundreds of US citizens, lurking in this thread, that Russia is innocent.  See how easy it is, when you target your messaging?

Take it over and over, and while not being directly called a Russian operative, the substance of my posts was being dismissed because RUSSIA.  Of course.

So I don't think Daisy's interpretation was wrong at all.  Daisy was effectively being called a dumbass, of not checking her information carefully enough, of not cross-referencing Russia troll farm social media posts, and hey, if the troll farms are parroting this, it must be false, or it must not be a big deal, or even if it is a big deal, RUSSIA wants us to be mad about it, so don't worry about it, it's fine.

What nonsense.  This was the lead story in NYT, WaPo, Politico, The Atlantic, etc.  And Pod Save America did an entire podcast on it that I listened to on my walk this morning.

***

You know what IS funny?  The usual liberal posters in this thread, who act as if they are the most well informed of anyone who's ever lived, are just parroting the Democratic Party talking points.  Look at AOC, Bernie, etc. -- "Hey, the Iowa thing is being overblown, calm down, let's wait for results, it's not a big deal." 

They have done all the Google searches and read all the articles to justify their position, and when you disagree with that -- citing WaPo, NYT, The New Yorker -- out come the links and the pitchforks.

The dismissal of any disagreement is just modern day McCarthyism.  The far left (is that a slur too?) loves it because it helps them ignore what's in front of their face -- Trump is going to win in 2020 because they can't shut the hell up about Russia/impeachment.



The Mueller Report later confirmed that you were incorrect in your assumption that the Russian election interference was overblown.

It clearly stated that Russia both "interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion" and that doing this "violated U.S. criminal law".

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/18/politics/full-mueller-report-pdf/index.html


So . . . it turns out that the concerns you were dismissing had a solid basis in fact and reality, and were not in fact 'modern day McCarthyism'.  Have you changed your opinion since finding out that you were wrong?