Red Mosquito

Looks like both mass incarceration and media-fueled fear work:

Bi_3 wrote:Looks like both mass incarceration and media-fueled fear work:

Party messaging...




...leads to party effect.

While I totally agree “party messaging” (Fox) is at work here, I wonder if there isn’t also a bit of reality as well. The rural/urban divide on economic growth plus opioid addiction issues could create those results as well

The (young) whites are at it again.






But republicans still go nuts over a stupid burning flag.



Specific examples probably expose Republicans as being anti-speech-they-don't-like as well, but the fact that young "liberals" are increasingly, broadly anti-speech doesn't bode well.

BurtReynolds wrote:

It was depressing to see Coke on the top for so long. Being replaced with Apple is better, but only marginally so.

BurtReynolds wrote:Specific examples probably expose Republicans as being anti-speech-they-don't-like as well, but the fact that young "liberals" are increasingly, broadly anti-speech doesn't bode well.

It would be mindblowing to someone in the 1970s to be transported to today to see how this has changed.

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Specific examples probably expose Republicans as being anti-speech-they-don't-like as well, but the fact that young "liberals" are increasingly, broadly anti-speech doesn't bode well.

It would be mindblowing to someone in the 1970s to be transported to today to see how this has changed.

Would it, though? This attitude has cycled through both parties before, often far more intensely and passionately than now, and yet has never really altered the broader legal status of speech in our country

McParadigm wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Specific examples probably expose Republicans as being anti-speech-they-don't-like as well, but the fact that young "liberals" are increasingly, broadly anti-speech doesn't bode well.

It would be mindblowing to someone in the 1970s to be transported to today to see how this has changed.

Would it, though? This attitude has cycled through both parties before, often far more intensely and passionately than now, and yet has never really altered the broader legal status of speech in our country

I was just trying to limit it to two specific eras, so I think it would. Someone like Scalia voting to declare flag burning as constitutionally protected would have been very tough to predict. And there have been a smattering of old guard ACLU types who've been worrying that their organization is weakening its cause to free speech, even to speech they don't like.

Green Habit wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Specific examples probably expose Republicans as being anti-speech-they-don't-like as well, but the fact that young "liberals" are increasingly, broadly anti-speech doesn't bode well.

It would be mindblowing to someone in the 1970s to be transported to today to see how this has changed.

Would it, though? This attitude has cycled through both parties before, often far more intensely and passionately than now, and yet has never really altered the broader legal status of speech in our country

I was just trying to limit it to two specific eras, so I think it would. Someone like Scalia voting to declare flag burning as constitutionally protected would have been very tough to predict. And there have been a smattering of old guard ACLU types who've been worrying that their organization is weakening its cause to free speech, even to speech they don't like.

I think people just stop supporting free speech when they dislike what’s being said enough. The question in the poll above, coming while conservatives are fretting en mass over feelings that a mob of lefties are trying to make them look evil and where liberals are lit up over every perceived act of racism and intolerance...is contextually unremarkable. So is this poll from last year:

Green Habit wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Specific examples probably expose Republicans as being anti-speech-they-don't-like as well, but the fact that young "liberals" are increasingly, broadly anti-speech doesn't bode well.

It would be mindblowing to someone in the 1970s to be transported to today to see how this has changed.

Would it, though? This attitude has cycled through both parties before, often far more intensely and passionately than now, and yet has never really altered the broader legal status of speech in our country

I was just trying to limit it to two specific eras, so I think it would. Someone like Scalia voting to declare flag burning as constitutionally protected would have been very tough to predict. And there have been a smattering of old guard ACLU types who've been worrying that their organization is weakening its cause to free speech, even to speech they don't like.

I thought they had already come out and said they wont defend speech they deem as 'hate' any more.

Et tu scotch whisky

my whiskey post alarm went off

"It's early 2020. The entire country is gripped with Marco Rubio fever except for Alaska, which is freaking out. You're frantically studying up on etiquette and/or sexting."

The best thing about that map is that Alaska is like a smaller, mirror universe scenario hanging out in a breakout panel. Geographically blue, but no one is rushing to say that means it should be a blue state....because that logic is stupid.

wtf is up with Maine? White wall or something?