#tell your representatives you want Ranked Choice Voting now! | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

eightwholebreads · 3 months

Text

I thought I'd run the whole UK numbers before I go to sleep since that's easy to do and then farage shows up and brings up electoral reform so I guess I'm talking about him now since he brought up electoral reform too...

So the Gallagher index for this election is 22.7. This is abysmal. A Gallagher index measures how proportional an election is by doing some maths on the vote proportions and seat proportions (look it up if you want to see the equation). The closer to 0 the value, the more proportional the system. The larger the number the less proportional. It's generally agreed that a value of 5 or less is good for a proportional system.

I use another equation per seat to throw put a number between 1 and -1 which tells you how over/under represented a party is proportionally. A value close to 0 is best and in a proportional system you'd expect to see all the parties hovering just above or below 0. (I came up with this equation during the 2017 election and it turns out its actually a variation on the Saint-Laguë index equation but with the square taken out to keep the sign of the number and keep it between 1 and -1).

The point is that usually you get from taking the entire UK and seeing who's been over or under represented is that the wining party gets a moderate bump, the biggest loser gets a moderate hit, the national parties are significantly over-represented (this is because english votes are devalued due to english constituencies, on average, having more voters in them), and the small parties take a massive hit (lib dems in 2017: -0.75, greens in 2017: -0.91).

What's happened this election is Labour have a massive bump (0.77), all parties except for the northern ireland parties have taken a hit (this is because the constituencies in northern ireland have fewer voters, on average, than everywhere else in the country. Looking on a whole-UK level, the northern ireland winning parties will always have a value > 0). The biggest losers (except the independents... which you shouldn't really group for this kind of thing) are the SNP (-0.5) and, of course, reform (-0.96).

(bonus fact: the lib dems seem to manage to take the most proportional amount of seats in scotland quite often)

So yeah... looking at the numbers it seems to me that things need to change. And farage agrees (not someone I tend to agrees with. On anything.). So now I've got pause for thought. Farage is clearly plotting something he explicitly said he'd work with anyone on reform to the electoral system in his little speech the BBC decided to broadcast (where's the green's free space to say whatever?). Long-term we need electoral reform. We can't have many more elections like this. I full believe we're seeing the electoral system breaking down infront of our eyes. But what will take it's place?

I think the left will benefit most from most forms of electoral reform. Greens will get the representation they deserve and, with changes in voter behaviour, even improve their number of voters. There are more people voting left and centre-left than right so with any system that lets you rank or score your favourites would be beneficial. You can imagine that there's many people who have a first choice that's more left than how they actually vote due to the spoiler effect and tactical voting.

One form that I can see farage pushing for to capitalise on his massive under-representation in parliament is any system that only lets you vote for one party. This would be a system that just has top-up seats. If the seats were assigned by national vote proportion, then reform would have 93 seats. Labour on 219, conservatives on 154. You can see how this would force one of the large parties into going into coalition with reform. You can see this would be a problem.

Conclusion? Well at least electoral reform is entering the general political discourse... I'm all for electoral reform but now we know the reform party has their eyes on it (and that, for some reason, the general political discourse won't listen to (off the top of my head): the greens, the lib dems, and the labour party membership (not the leadership tho...), but stop and listen to reform), we should be really careful about what form it takes

#uk politics #sorry if this is a bit incoherent I am very very tired

9 notes · View notes

incarnateirony · 1 year

Text

So, about #WhatArentYouWatching

The post immediately before this covers the breakdown of the ... hm. Conflict of opinions within the guild, and my pinned post and its link discusses the reasons behind why the WGA will never actually make that move (legal repurcussions)--AS A UNIT, vs other post about, well, authors fearing loss of rank, and fandom confusing "individually support a specific show on preference/choice" and authors being able to independently choose whether they tell people to keep watching or not, etc -- seriously just check out recent posts for the full scale of that.

But to move forward, here's WHY it was designed. The proposal was dropped on July 14th. Now let's look at some interesting charts,

6 month vs 1 month, WBD

6 month vs 1 month, Disney

6 month vs 1 month, Netflix

Netflix is quite funny, actually, as it's an outlier and I'll cover why, but met the same end.

Disney, for example, lost 5.5% of value from its Jul 13 close Jul 14-17. WBD similar dip, exact same days. Netflix tried to head it off with dropping their Q2s reporting the password shakedown account gain and less insider investors bought in to bring it up 40 while on the 14th you can see the same dip try to hit; casual investors bought in and others, or even they themselves, bailed out. So they lost more than they gained even still and ended up in the same pit, while any attempted bouncebacks like the others will be a bit delayed for the same... timeline/trust/nervousness reasons.

Investors are nervous. And will only get more nervous as this drags on. That's the first dip.

This is just the impact of "Just One Guy", which you know I laugh about. The WGA is also "not announcing it YET" and makes sure to include that YET in actual releases. The studios are waiting to legally pounce if they do, but they won't. The YET, and the fear of it in the climate, is enough to scare away most investors and leave Bob Iger and David Zaslav slamming their phones telling their topline investors to not bail and It'll All Be Fine(TM).

Per my other post, some authors fear loss of treads or property value, and the WGA can't really enforce this. However, to put this in terms: the man who released it is running for leadership. Generally, when you run for leadership in a democratic system, you aim to do What Seems The Most Popular To The Voting Demographic. A man running for leadership does not use his political positioning and even folder directory to post something Only A Few People Want. That is hw voting works. I hope I do not need to explain this any further.

Of the 11,500+ people represented by the WGA, even if you find a dozen people going, "The Guild Has Not Said; It Is A Personal Decision" to slap it down, there's a fuckton that are choosing to stay quiet right now. And frankly, the Guild will Never Say It; not because the majority doesn't want it, but because they legally can't without screwing themselves. So for every tweet you manage to dig up, just subtract it from the 11,500 others silent and figure out what's going on here.

Frankly, it is starting to piss me off at some authors. Because this is writers using word manipulation as a skill to repeat statements that are technically correct but highly misguiding for their own personal gain above the masses willing to take small hits and frankly is its own form of scabbing imo. You'll let the others be quiet but hop in to protect your own data (one literally used the word Data and ran when I was like, we both know not everyone agrees on it) to come out above the rest. But the few repeated old: "The guild has not" puts off airs to the unkeen eye of "the guild does not want you to", and "personal decision" both equalizes the moral weight and appears to put the onus on fans with little education in it rather than the decision to parlay with this dialogue to say, no, keep watching, or to risk saying, no, turn me off, as a personal decision.

So yeah. While it's mostly nobodies afraid of their one big break they got falling in, there's at least one big old fave of mine that favored his personal attachments to a project and is forever stricken from my list, cest la vie. Go be politicians, assholes. Unsurprising that the guy protecting his New Show About To Air Episode 10 And Otherwise Has Only Written For Political Shit And Political Shows And Events popped out to spray this at me and run when I held to the wording and spoke from knowing. Motherfucker dipped the moment he realized I wasn't some rando fan he could lead on with that bullshit. Fuck.

So anyway. Turn off fucking streaming in September. And tell your friends. And point them at my posts for all the bad arguments against it being killed dead, and highlights of blatant reframings of quotes like a bunch of asshole politicians.

If you wanna support your faves watch that shit on TV where possible, buy new DVDs even of old seasons, they make literally 100,000x more on average from that anyway. (One ep new OitNB linear broadcast: $22,000 residuals; all seasons netflix, 0.23 cents residuals)

Imagine how big that 5.5% cut would be if a dozen self vested assholes weren't convincing fans that telling everyone NOT to boycott was the righteous thing by use of suggestive political language obscuring the truth, even when the reasoning behind it is weak and boils down to intentionally trying to outcompete guildmembers in the resulting crunched market. Imagine how nervous those investors would be if this shit was as viral as it should be, "Just One Guy" or not.

Yall right. It's a personal decision.

Now you have the information to make it.

And the louder you, and all your friends get, the more scared those investors will become. You want it to end? Turn off your fucking streaming in September. Also cancel any services that don't have a show immediately coming out from the backpipe that you intend to individually support. Netflix is about to bleed all the followers it gained with an empty library anyway. Help that shit out. Save money. Everyone wins.

See, I can tell you this. Because I'm not WGA. And I've done this dance before. Come at me 30301.

That's why Fuckin September. The same reason Netflix had its Q2s available to drop public as an investor distraction to get chuds that didn't know better to stall the gap. But this time, inside investors can see a very, very different picture and run early. And Q4 can be spent with corps rotting for their choices. And your fave shows can get a huge bounceback when Q4 hits and you all watch again. [jazz fucking hands]

eyyyyyy zaslav, its me, ya boiiiii with the blowtorch [revs it up to test the gas] I said I'd be good if you stayed business sound but man this is some dumb business, and that whole "let them starve" quote of yours "anonymously" or whatever the damn phrasing was, naw. Naw if I have to print and pass flyers all over my metro area to get this out, I will.

I think that's what I'll do. Every time some chucklefuck whether fan or self-vested person with something to gain beyond supporting the guild efforts pops up trying to vague down this shit with sound bytes, I'll have another friend in another metro area distribute a stack of fuckin flyers. Pin it up in walmart. I don't care, I did this before twitter was a thing. And it worked then. And it'll work now.

Go ahead. Check the 5 year stretches of the above and other studios and their networks. This time of year, they should be coming up, not dipping or flatlining, with investors jumping in for fall season. Nope. Not there.

#what aren't you watching #wga strike #stockmarket #stocktrading #investors #brands #seriously if any of yall are invested #fucking run #it will not get better #not this fuckin quarter #and with several of these studios/streamers waiting to eat each other #for most of you it'll never bounce back #good luck

9 notes · View notes

ctraceywrites · 8 months

Text

Voting matters.

Yes, voting in the United States is hard and isn't enough, but it is the bare minimum everyone should try to do.

Yes, you're sometimes going to have to pick between two bad choices, but there are ways to influence those choices and moving the needle in the right direction, even just a little bit, will help a lot of people.

Not voting does not help your cause.

Yes, you should protest and petition and volunteer and connect with your community and do everything else you can, but none of that replaces voting. None of that makes voting irrelevant.

Vote in the primary elections to help get the candidate you want on the ballot. Don't like who the Dem's pick every year? Did you vote in the primary? No? Then why didn't you support a different candidate?

Don't like the two party system? Then help make a third party candidate viable.

If half the people who said they weren't going to vote for Biden reached out to another potential candidate and told them to expect your vote if they ran third party, then we might get a good third party candidate.

You don't get anything by doing nothing.

Reach out to your representatives now. Tell them you want accessible voting. Tell them you want ranked voting.

Reach out to potential candidates you would like to see as president and tell them they would get your vote if they ran.

If you don't vote, you're not going to be heard. It's a flawed system, but it's the only system where we get the most direct influence on who runs this country.

Keep fighting to change the system, but until the system changes there is still going to be elections and only the ones who vote are going to have any influence there.

#voting #politics stuff #politics #election #president #presidential election

1 note · View note

allmyleftistsliveintexas · 4 years

Text

Gerrymandering in Austin, Texas and What We Can Do to Fix It

Below is a deep dive into Austin’s gerrymandering problem. It includes defining gerrymandering, a look into how Austin’s congressional districts are drawn, some actions we can take to make this drawing more fair, and more.

Note: while gerrymandering can occur in any electoral district, this post focuses on US congressional districts in Austin, Texas.

The Redistricting Process

To best understand gerrymandering, it's important to understand the redistricting process.

Every part of the country is divided into different congressional districts. Each district is represented by one congressperson. Redistricting is the process of drawing these districts so that each congressperson represents a relatively equal amount of people.

In every year ending with a zero, the US Census Bureau aims to count every person in the country or every American citizen, depending on the party in power. (Trump did not want to count undocumented folks. Biden will.)

This data is then used in reapportion, where it is decided how many congressional seats/districts each state receives based on population. Typically, the reapportion report is delivered by the US Census Bureau on the last day of the year. This year it is expected by April 30th. This year, Texas is expected to gain three seats. California is expected to lose one.

Next, the US Census Bureau releases redistricting data to the states. Typically this happens for April of the next year, but this year it will happen before September 30th. States then utilize different methods to redraw district lines.

Who redraws the lines depends on the state. While 21 states currently utilize some sort of nonpartisan redistricting committee, in Texas, the state legislature is in charge of redrawing the lines. The current Texas redistricting committee includes 10 republicans and 7 democrats.

"Redistricting is like an election in reverse. It's a great event. Usually the voters get to pick the politicians. In redistricting, the politicians get to pick the voters." - Thomas Hofeller, Redistricting Chair of the Republican National Committee

What is gerrymandering?

"The practice of dividing or arranging a territorial unit into election districts in a way that gives one political party an unfair advantage in elections" - Merriam-Webster Definition

Gerrymandering refers to when electoral districts are drawn to favor one group of people over another. This often means that districts are drawn counterintuitively and in strange shapes so that like-minded voters are separated into one district instead of spread out over multiple districts. Because these voters end up in the same district, they are only able to win that one district instead of the multiple districts they could win if the districts were drawn fairly.

The word "gerrymandering" is named after Elbridge Gerry. (pronounced Gary.) While he was governor of Massachusetts in 1812, he helped create a partisan district of Boston that resembled a salamander. This led to the district electing three Democratic Republicans into historically Federalist seats that same year. While this wasn't the first time the US experienced gerrymandering, this was the first time a name stuck to the practice.

salamander district, via vox/boston centinel 1812

Today, gerrymandered districts play a massive role in keeping political parties in power. While both democrats and republicans are guilty of gerrymandering, the majority of gerrymandered districts are drawn by republicans. In 2010, Republicans launched "REDMAP" which utilized software to strategically redistrict in favor of republicans. This led them to retain control of the US house by 33 seats, even though democrats had a one million voter majority. Additionally, AP found almost four times as many republican skewed states than democrat in 2016. An AP analysis indicated that Republicans won 16 more congressional seats in 2018 because of gerrymandering than they would have with fairly drawn districts.

"When the representatives are drawing their constituencies in a way that allows them to choose their constituents, you've reversed the dynamic quite fundamentally." - John Akred

Gerrymandering Strategies

There are many tactics used in gerrymandering districts, but the two main ones are cracking and packing. Note: there are even *more* methods of gerrymandering than those included on this list.

Cracking - Cracking is when voters of the opposing party are "cracked" or split into many different districts so their voting power is diluted across many districts.

Packing - Packing is when all voters of the opposing party are "packed" into one district to reduce their voting power in other districts.

Kidnapping - Kidnapping is when an incumbent's home address is moved to a different district making reelection more difficult.

Incumbent Protection - Incumbent Protection is when redistricters use any of the above strategies or others to create districts that favor the incumbent over the opponent.

Additionally, there are two main kinds of gerrymandering: racial and partisan.

Racial - Racial gerrymandering seeks to disempower voters of a race or races of people. Racial gerrymandering is illegal but still frequent throughout the country.

Partisan - Partisan gerrymandering seeks to disempower voters of one political party. In many cases, partisan gerrymandering is racial gerrymandering.

What does it look like?

While gerrymandering can occur in any electoral districts, this post is focused on US congressional districts in Austin, Texas.

Here’s what the six congressional districts in Austin look like:

via The Austin Chronicle

A Closer Look at Austin’s Districts

Despite Austin being a heavily blue-voting city, five of the six congressional districts are represented by Republicans. This is one reason why Austin has been identified as one of the worst cases of gerrymandering in the country.

Austin is mostly gerrymandered using the "cracking" method. Austin's blue voters have been spread out among multiple districts, all of which include large swaths of country towns. For example, district 25 travels from Austin all the way to Fort Worth, district 17 travels beyond Waco, and district 10 touches Houston. By including hundreds of small Texas towns into Austin's congressional districts, the firmly red voters in the country outweigh the blue city voters. This design is intentional, and is slated to get much worse this year unless we receive federal protection.

district 10 (michael mccaul-r)

57% caucasian

26% hispanic

10% black

5% asian

.6% indigenous

district 17 (pete sessions-r)

57% caucasian

26% hispanic

13% black

5% asian

.5% indigenous

district 21 (chip roy-r)

62% caucasian

30% hispanic

4% black

4% asian

.5% indigenous

district 25 (roger williams-r)

70% caucasian

19% hispanic

8% black

3% asian

.5% indigenous

district 31 (john carter-r)

59% caucasian

24% hispanic

11% black

5% asian

.4% indigenous

district 35 (lloyd dogget-d)

26% caucasian

61% hispanic

10% black

2% asian

.5% indigenous

Additionally, district 35 is packed. Hispanic voters are grouped together from East Austin to San Antonio so that their voting power is isolated to only one district instead of many districts.

You can view an interactive district drawing map here.

Why this is Bad

Gerrymandering is a racist tool that politicians use to strip minority voters of their political power. If we do not stop gerrymandering in it's tracks right now, districts will be redrawn to be even more oppressive than they are now.

Though racial gerrymandering is illegal, Texas districts still get away with it. In 2018, a seven year legal battle regarding Texas's racially gerrymandered districts (like district 35) ended because the Supreme Court rejected nearly all claims.

Districts in Texas are drawn strategically so Republicans retain power. We need a fair districting map to ever have a realistic chance of unseating republicans.

A Possible Solution

Independent Commissions - 21 states are currently using some sort of nonpartisan commission to redraw their maps. Utilizing independent commissions means districts are drawn sensibly and without favoritism for one group or another.

HR1 is an act that recently passed congress seeking to implement independent redistricting commissions for every state. Should it pass the senate, we would no longer have to trust Republican legislators to draw our district maps.

There are other possible solutions including proportional representation, using artificial intelligence, and ranked choice voting. However, independent commissions seem to be the most realistic future for Texan gerrymandering prevention at this time.

What We Can Do

1. Register ASAP to speak at the Texas Senate's public hearing on Thursday, March 11th at 9am!

The Texas Senate is having a public hearing about Austin's congressional districts on Thursday, March 11th at 9am on Zoom. This is an opportunity for the public to "share details about their local communities and information that they believe is relevant to the upcoming redistricting process." Sign up and tell Texan representatives why your community should be kept together in the redistricting process. Request and independent commission be used if possible. The Texas government canNOT be trusted to draw districts fairly.

Testimony Guide at fairmapstexas.org/testimony-guides

Leave a written comment at senate.texas.gov/redistrictingcomment

2. Call your senators and tell them to vote YES on HR1, the For the People Act!

The For the People Act would incorporate 800 pages of voting rights legislation. Among other things, it would guarantee mail in voting and at least 15 days of early voting for federal elections, would require states to automatically register citizens to vote, would restore voting rights to felons who have completed their sentences, and would require all states to use an independent citizen commission to draw congressional districts.

HR1 passed the US House on March 3rd. To pass the senate, all 48 democrats and the two independents would need to be joined by 10 republicans to overcome a filibuster.

Will Ted Cruz & John Cornyn vote yes on this bill? Very unlikely.

Should we let them know how we feel by blowing up their inboxes anyways? Yes.

Ted Cruz: (512) 916-5834 - email him here.

John Cornyn: (202) 224-2934 - email him here.

"Historically, gerrymandering has been used both as a racist weapon to undermine the political power of minority communities and a political weapon to ensure partisan advantage... Gerrymandering fundamentally undermines a fair and representative democracy."

****act now. sign up to testify. call your senators. ensure a fair redistricting process.****

Additional Reading:

https://www.keranews.org/2019-04-14/texas-matters-gerrymandering-in-texas

https://www.prisonersofthecensus.org/

https://www.caller.com/story/news/local/2019/11/01/why-redistricting-important-and-why-should-you-participate-texas-democrats-republicans/4103303002/

Sources:

The Redistricting Process Sources:

https://indivisible.org/resource/fighting-gerrymandering-states

https://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_Texas_after_the_2020_census

https://www.npr.org/2020/11/30/940116088/supreme-court-weighs-trump-plan-to-cut-undocumented-immigrants-from-census

https://www.npr.org/sections/inauguration-day-live-updates/2021/01/20/958376223/biden-to-end-trump-census-policy-ensuring-all-persons-living-in-u-s-are-counted

https://www.ltgov.state.tx.us/2019/06/28/lt-gov-patrick-announces-2021-redistricting-committee/

https://www.c-span.org/video/?165594-3/2000-redistricting-review

What is Gerrymandering? Sources:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gerrymandering

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/03/01/this-is-the-best-explanation-of-gerrymandering-you-will-ever-see/

https://www.vox.com/2014/8/5/17991968/gerrymandering-name-elbridge-gerry

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/REDMAP

https://www.businessinsider.com/partisan-gerrymandering-has-benefited-republicans-more-than-democrats-2017-6

https://apnews.com/article/9fd72a4c1c5742aead977ee27815d776

https://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2017-07-28/big-data-and-the-gerrymandering-of-america

Gerrymandering Strategies Sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#:~:text=Two%20principal%20tactics%20are%20used,voting%20power%20in%20other%20districts).

https://www.policymap.com/2017/08/a-deeper-look-at-gerrymandering/

https://www.vox.com/videos/2017/7/24/16012440/racial-partisan-gerrymandering-redistricting-supreme-court-video

What Does it Look Like? Source:

https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2018-02-09/u-s-congress/

A Closer Look at Austin’s Districts Sources:

https://thefulcrum.us/worst-gerrymandering-districts-example/7-austin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_10th_congressional_district

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_17th_congressional_district

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_21st_congressional_district

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_25th_congressional_district

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_31st_congressional_district

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_35th_congressional_district

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/texas/

Why this is Bad Sources:

https://indivisible.org/resource/fighting-gerrymandering-states

https://newrepublic.com/article/149357/texas-republicans-got-away-racially-discriminatory-electoral-map

https://www.caller.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/02/27/texas-republicans-democrats-gerrymandering-legislative-districts-voter-suppression/4545917002/

A Possible Solution Sources:

https://apnews.com/article/4d2e2aea7e224549af61699e51c955dd

https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1072&context=vlr

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/05/hr1-bill-what-is-it/

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/11/16453512/gerrymandering-proportional-representation

https://techcrunch.com/2020/09/04/ai-drawn-voting-districts-could-help-stamp-out-gerrymandering/

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/473788-replacing-winner-takes-all-system-would-end-gerrymandering

What We Can Do Sources:

https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJItde6gpjMvH9Mn_8FA26GFQaVkPVxEzQNL

fairmapstexas.org/testimony-guides

senate.texas.gov/redistrictingcomment

https://www.vox.com/2021/3/3/22309123/house-democrats-pass-voting-rights-bill-hr1

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/five-ways-hr-1-would-transform-redistricting

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-house/u-s-house-passes-sweeping-election-bill-senate-prospects-unclear-idUSKCN2AV2JM

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=form&id=16

https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/node/5853

#austin #austintexas #texas #politics #texaspolitics #leftist #leftists #leftistpolitics #gerrymandering #hr1 #forthepeople #forthepeopleact

4 notes · View notes

dweemeister · 4 years

Text

2020 Movie Odyssey Award for Best Original Song (final round)

(Yet again, tumblr has not fixed bullet indentations. So this post doesn’t look as clean on your dashboards.)

TAGGING (among others): @addaellis, @cokwong, @emilylime5, @halfwaythruthedark, @idontknowmuchaboutmovies, @introspectivemeltdown, @maximiliani, @memetoilet, @monkeysmadeofcheese, @myluckyerror, @plus-low-overthrow, @shootingstarvenator, @themusicmoviesportsguy, @theybecomestories, @umgeschrieben, @underblackwings, @voicetalentbrendan, @thewolfofelectricavenue, and @yellanimal.

I would also like to tag some followers/previous participants as well who I also would welcome to participate in this final round: @birdsongvelvet, @bitch-genius, @dog-of-ulthar, @loveless422, @lvl9gay, @mehetibel, @phendranaedge, @poncho-honcho, @sayaf, @shadesofhappy, @thethirdman8, @uncoolforelimb, and @wehadfacesthen. Regardless of whether you were tagged or not, all of my followers can participate if they wish.

Happy Holidays to all! After a fascinating preliminary round, now begins the final round to 2020's Movie Odyssey Award for Best Original Song (MOABOS). This is the eighth time it has been contested and the seventh year it has been open to involvement from family, friends, and tumblr followers. I begin every new year not knowing whether I will be able to share with all of you these songs and the movies they come from around November/December. So on the day that MOABOS becomes viable (usually around mid-year), it's a long stretch of anticipation to this point.

For those who have never participated in this before, my classic movie blog traditionally ends the year by honoring some of the best achievements from movies that I saw for the first time this calendar year (the "Movie Odyssey"; rewatches do not count) with an Oscar-like ceremony. I choose all the nominees and winners from each category, save one: Best Original Song. It is the only category I can think of that does not require you to watch several movies in their entirety. I know some of you wonder why I bother with this quixotic social experiment. But I have always considered it a sort of cinematic-musical thank-you for your moral support in various ways - in the hopes of introducing to all of you films and music you may not have otherwise encountered or sought. A small slice of the 2020 Movie Odyssey, so to speak.

This final will be contested by sixteen songs. As I've mentioned before, for the first time ever, there are no MOABOS entries originating from this year that made the competition - a MOABOS first. I have seen one 2020 film since the prelim (Wolfwalkers... at a drive-in mind you), but this entire final is one of yesteryear. Even without any 1930s songs, this year's final is probably the oldest on average. There are some very recognizable songs that made it straight to the final, bypassing the preliminary; those songs are contained within. Among them, a city anthem and a song that should be a city's anthem. Elsewhere, this is the first final to ever feature two classic Bollywood songs - but no classic Bollywood song has ever cracked the top ten. Elvis has three songs in this final, a MOABOS joint record along with Prince and the Bee Gees (both in 2016). But also appearing in multiple entries are Frank Sinatra and Liza Minnelli, Louis Armstrong and Billie Holiday. With five non-English-language songs in the final, this year’s final ties 2017 with the largest contingent of finalists not in the English language.

INSTRUCTIONS Please rank (#1-16) your choices in order. The top ten songs will receive nominations. The tabulation method used in the preliminary round is being used for the final only as the second tiebreaker (the tabulation method that will be used principally for the final - aka "single transferable vote" - is described in the “read more” at the bottom). There is no minimum or maximum amount of songs you can rank, but because of the nature of single transferable vote, it is highly recommended to rank as many songs as possible, rather than only one or two. Those who rank fewer songs run a greater risk of their ballots being discarded in the later rounds of tabulation. Again, this is all described in the “read more”.

Please consider to the best of your ability: how musically interesting the song is (incl. and not limited to musical phrasing and orchestration); its lyrics; context within the film (contextual blurbs provided for every entry for those who haven't seen the films); choreography/dance direction (if applicable); and the song's cultural impact/life outside the film (if applicable, and, in my opinion, least important factor). Imperfections in audio and video quality may not be used against any song. I encourage you to send in comments and reactions with your rankings - it makes the process more enjoyable for you and myself!

The deadline for submission is Thursday, December 31 at 8 PM Pacific Time. That is 6 PM Hawaii/Aleutian Time / 10 PM Central / 11 PM Eastern. That deadline is also Friday, January 1 at 2 AM GMT / 3 AM CET / 4 AM EET. This deadline has been pushed back two consecutive times due to a sizable non-response rate - but I very much do not want to do so again.

I have compiled most of this final round's songs into this YouTube playlist. Please note that neither of Kaagaz Ke Phool’s two songs are contained in the playlist. You will need to access them using their respective links.

Enjoy the music! Feel free to listen as many times as you need, and I hope you discover music and movies you may have never otherwise heard of that you find fascinating. The following is formatted... ("Song title", composer and lyricist, film title):

2020 MOVIE ODYSSEY AWARD FOR BEST ORIGINAL SONG – FINAL ROUND

“Angela”, music and lyrics by José Feliciano and Janna Merlyn Feliciano, Aaron Loves Angela (1975)

Performed by José Feliciano

(English-language version) / (Spanish single version)

Played over the opening credits to this teenage drama that is partly a blaxploitation film, partly an interracial coming-of-age romance. The movie wasn't a hit, but the Spanish-language version of this song was received well in Latin America.

“Blue Shadows on the Trail”, music and lyrics by Eliot Daniel and Johnny Lange, Melody Time (1948)

Performed by Roy Rogers and the Sons of the Pioneers

This is the introductory song to the final segment of Melody Time. That segment is dedicated to the legend of Pecos Bill, and this atmospheric song leads into the telling of that story.

“Can’t Help Falling in Love”, music and lyrics by Hugo Peretti, Luigi Creatore, and George David Weiss, Blue Hawaii (1961)

Performed by Elvis Presley

(film version) / (single version)

Chadwick "Chad" Gates (Elvis) has just returned to his home state of Hawai'i after a stint in the Army. Not wanting to work on his father's pineapple plantation (seriously), he rekindles his relationship with his girlfriend, Maile (Joan Blackman). This song is sung as an accompaniment to a music box he gives to Maile's grandmother (Flora Kaai Hayes, a former Hawaiian Territorial Representative to the U.S. House). This song is among Elvis' best-known and most widely-covered.

“Dekhi Zamaane Ki Yaari / Bichhde Sabhi Baari Baari”, music by S.D. Burman, lyrics by Kaifi Azmi, Kaagaz Ke Phool (1959, India)

Performed by Mohammad Rafi (dubbing Guru Dutt)

Lyrics in Hindi - roughly, "I Have Seen How Deeply Friendship Lies / I Have Seen People Abandon Me One by One"

Part 1 (3:44-8:27) / Part 2 (2:16:29-2:20:42)

Make sure to turn on the video’s English captions

In this romantic tragedy, Suresh Sinha (Dutt) is a washed-up director looking back on his life. In the first part, the song leads into the rest of the film - which is almost entirely a flashback. In brief, Suresh is unhappily married to a woman whose in-laws look down on him because, to them, working in films is contemptible to their social class. Suresh meets a woman, Shanti (Waheeda Rehman), on accident and she is soon cast as the lead for his next film. They fall in love, but it is never consummated for various reasons. Eventually, his career crashes after a box office bomb and her career is ascendant. Leading into the second part of the song, Suresh is penniless and working as an extra at the movie studio. Shanti recognizes him, wants to help, but he refuses to revive his career on the back of her success. Kaagaz Ke Phool has elements of autobiography, and Suresh's fate has parallels with what happened to Dutt after this film was released.

“(Do You Know What It Means to Miss) New Orleans”, music by Louis Alter, lyrics by Edgar De Lange, New Orleans (1947)

Initially performed by Billie Holiday and Louis Armstrong and his band; reprised by various

(initial film performance) / (Louis Armstrong single version)

Endie (Holiday in her only appearance in a feature film) is a maid to the affluent Smith family, whose matriarch looks down on jazz as a disreputable genre of music. In secret, Endie frequents a gambling and jazz establishment in the historic Storyville district of New Orleans and performs here with Louis Armstrong (playing himself) and others when she gets the chance. The matriarch's daughter (Dorothy Patrick), an classical operatic soprano, is transfixed by this new music she has never heard before.

“ Exsultate Justi”, music and lyrics by John Williams, Empire of the Sun (1987)

Performed by orchestra and chorus under the direction of Williams

Lyrics in Latin

In this historical epic, affluent British school boy Jamie Graham (a young Christian Bale) is living with his parents in Shanghai when the Japanese invade. Jamie is separated from his parents and placed in an internment camp. Soon before the end of WWII, the prisoners are moved elsewhere, but Jamie hides and stays put. This song plays as Jamie bikes around the empty camp and continues to play as he encounters liberating U.S. troops. Jamie is dirty and malnourished when found; one can argue that this song is used ironically. It plays once more over the end credits. "Exsultate Justi" is a variation on a theme John Williams develops over the course of the film and harkens back to Jamie's past, attending Anglican services with parents.

“Farewell to Storyville", music by Louis Alter, lyrics by Edgar De Lange, New Orleans (1947)

Performed by Louis Armstrong and his band, Billie Holiday, and company

In New Orleans, the Storyville district was a den of drinking, gambling, jazz, and prostitution. The district was the home to a heavily black populace. The U.S. military, about to establish a Naval base nearby, forces the city to close the district for good. This song is a swinging dirge to a center of jazz - a musical genre looked down upon by many of the city's upper-class whites due to its ties (real and imagined) to crime.

“Happy Endings", music by John Kander, lyrics by Fred Ebb, New York, New York (1977)

Performed by Liza Minnelli and company (that's Jack Haley - who played the Tin Man and was, at the time, Minnelli's father-in-law - roughly seven minutes in)

(use in film) / (soundtrack version)

It is highly recommended one sees how this song is used in the film. Bear with me: this song is part of a movie within a movie. Within that movie within a movie, there is another movie. "Happy Endings" is the title end song to a film called Happy Endings within New York, New York. Singer Francine Evans (Liza Minnelli) has made it big as a recording artist and caps off her hit film, Happy Endings, with this song. We see Francine's ex, played by Robert De Niro, in the audience as the film ends. "Happy Endings" is a homage/deconstruction to midcentury Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) musicals. It serves the film as "The Broadway Melody" does to Singin' in the Rain (1952) or the 17-minute ballet does to conclude An American in Paris (1951).

“Here They Come (From All Over the World)", music and lyrics by P.F. Sloan and Steve Barri, The T.A.M.I. Show (1964)

Performed by Jan and Dean

The link above provides the entire film. You only need to watch from 0:00-4:11. If you like music from this era or want to hear more, this film is highly, highly recommended.

This is the opening credits song to a concert film recorded over two days in Santa Monica, California on October 28 and 29, 1964. The Teenage Awards Music International (T.A.M.I. - yes, I know it's an awkward name) Show included many of the most popular musical stars of that time - almost all of them name-dropped in this song. Jan and Dean, a surf music duo, served as hosts (and performed during) the show. You folks are lucky that this is the only original song from this film!

“Is There Still Anything That Love Can Do?", music and lyrics by Yôjirô Noda, Weathering with You (2019, Japan)

Performed by RADWIMPS

Lyrics in Japanese (translation)

Weathering with You is a romantic fantasy anime about a high school boy who runs away from his rural home to Tokyo, where he meets a girl who can manipulate the weather. It has been inexplicably raining for weeks without interruption in Tokyo, so they form a business to help clear the inclement weather for special events. The melody of this song is heard throughout the film's score. It does not appear with lyrics until late in the film. The song is played under the boy's seemingly impossible attempt to save her from an unwilling human sacrifice.

There is so much plot in this damn film (it's all Makoto Shinkai's fault) - I can't explain the context of the song or this movie in a reasonable amount of space.

“Moonlight Swim”, music by Ben Weisman, lyrics by Sylvia Dee, Blue Hawaii (1961)

Performed by Elvis Presley

In a musical packed end-to-end with songs, Chadwick "Chad" Gates (Elvis) has taken a job with a tour guide agency. On his first day, he drives his first clients - a school teacher (who not so secretly is attracted to Chad) and four teenagers (one of whom becomes smitten) - to their destination.

“Personality”, music by Jimmy Van Heusen, lyrics by Johnny Burke, Road to Utopia (1946)

Performed by Dorothy Lamour

(in-film performance) / (live radio performance)

In the fourth film of the Road to... comedy series, Bob Hope and Bing Crosby's characters have just overpowered two Alaskan thugs with a history of murderous violence. As they enter a saloon dressed up as those two thugs, all of the patrons - in a town that only knows the thugs by reputation - shut up in terror. They are treated to a performance by Sal (Lamour), who is trying to find a map of a gold mine that the real outlaws supposedly have. A visual narrator (Robert Benchley) interrupts the scene before the song briefly.

“Please Don’t Stop Loving Me”, music and lyrics by Joy Byers, Frankie and Johnny (1966)

Performed by Elvis Presley

(in-film performance) / (single version)

Johnny (Elvis) and girlfriend Frankie (Donna Douglas) work on a Mississippi River riverboat as performers. Johnny is addicted to gambling and believes that another woman is spurring on his recent run of good luck. During a fit of jealousy-as-acting, Frankie accidentally shoots Johnny during a bit of musical theater (someone switched out the blanks for real bullets). This song occurs after Johnny has recovered from the accident.

“Theme from New York, New York”, music by John Kander, lyrics by Fred Ebb, New York, New York (1977)

Performed by Liza Minnelli

(in-film performance) / (Frank Sinatra single)

For most of the film, saxophone player Jimmy Doyle (Robert De Niro) is trying to compose a song but cannot figure out the lyrics (this plays out as a subplot). His eventual girlfriend/later ex, Francine Evans (Minnelli) provides said lyrics. Some time well after they have broken up, he finds her singing this song - which he previously brought to the top of the jazz charts - in the nightclub where they first met. This film flopped (musical movies were out of fashion by the mid-'70s, and a musical didn't seem "on brand" for director Martin Scorsese). But the Frank Sinatra single popularized this song, and it has been used in many venues of popular culture.

“Waqt Ne Kiya Kya Haseen Sitam”, music and lyrics by S.D. Burman, Kaagaz Ke Phool (1959, India)

Performed by Geeta Dutt (dubbing Waheeda Rehman)

Lyrics in Hindi - roughly, "Time Has Inflicted Such Sweet Cruelty On Us"

Song begins at 1:03:31 and ends at 1:07:51

Make sure to turn on the video’s English captions

In this romantic tragedy told in flashback, Suresh Sinha (Guru Dutt) is a director looking back on his life. Suresh is unhappily married to a woman whose in-laws look down on him because, to them, working in films is contemptible to their social class. Suresh meets a woman, Shanti (Waheeda Rehman), on accident and she is soon cast as the lead for his next film. They fall in love, but it is never consummated for various reasons. This song is the most explicit statement of that love in this film. How much of the scene's set-up is observable by the characters is up to the viewer's interpretation.

“You Make Me Feel So Young”, music by Josef Myrow, lyrics by Mack Gordon, Three Little Girls in Blue (1946)

Performed by Del Porter (dubbing Charles Smith) and Carol Stewart (dubbing Vera-Ellen)

(use in film) / (Frank Sinatra cover)

In this rarely-seen musical (*insert plea to Disney to restore the massive 20th Century Fox catalogue they now own and are almost certainly neglecting*), three chicken farmer sisters decide to travel to Atlantic City in hopes of marrying a rich husband when they learn their aunt's inheritance is not nearly as much as they want. There, youngest sister Myra (Vera-Ellen) - despite the sisters' original intentions of marrying men of wealth - becomes involved with a waiter named Mike (Charles Smith). They go on a date, and they sing this song. A somewhat overly-literal fantastical dancing sequence ensues, complete with Vera-Ellen's dancing skills. This song was popularized by Frank Sinatra years later and has long enjoyed status as a big band/jazz standard.

Contact me however you wish if you have questions or comments regarding MOABOS' processes or something specific about a song or a few. Please let me know as soon as possible if you are having difficulty accessing one of the songs (especially if it is region-locked) or if there is an error in the playlist.

Once more, I thank you all for your support for the Movie Odyssey, the blog, and for me personally - no matter how long I’ve known you or in what capacity. There are no hard feelings if you cannot get to this, although I will be checking in as the deadlines get close. Please wear a mask. Practice social distancing. We'll see each other again on the other side of this pandemic.

TABULATION The winner is determined by a process distinct from the preliminary round. For the final, the winner is chosen by the process known as single transferable vote (the Academy Awards uses this method to choose a Best Picture winner, visually represented here - you should really watch this video if the below doesn’t make sense… which it probably won’t):

All #1 picks from all voters are tabulated. A song needs more than half of all aggregate votes to win (50% of all votes plus one… i.e. if there are thirty respondents, sixteen #1 votes are needed to win on the first count).

If there is no winner after the first count (as is most likely), the song(s) with the fewest #1 votes or points is/are eliminated. Placement will be determined by the tiebreakers described below. Then, we look at the ballots of those who voted for the most recently-eliminated song(s). Their votes then go to the highest-remaining and non-eliminated song on their ballot.

The process described in step #2 repeats until one song has secured 50% plus one of all votes. We keep eliminating nominees and transfer votes to the highest-ranked, non-eliminated song on each ballot. NOTE: It is possible after several rounds of counting that respondents who did not entirely fill in their ballots will have wasted their votes at the end of the process. For example, if a person voted the second-to-last place song as their #1, ranked no other songs, and the count has exceeded two rounds, their ballot is discarded (lowering the vote threshold needed to win), and they have no say in which song ultimately is the winner.

A song wins when it reaches more than fifty percent of all #1 and re-distributed votes.

Tiebreakers: 1) first song to receive 50% plus one of all #1 and transferred votes; 2) total points earned (this was the first tiebreaker in the preliminary round); 3) total #1 votes; 4) average placement on my ballot and my sister’s ballot; 5) tie declared

Previous years’ results for reference: 2013 final 2014 final (input from family and friends began this year) 2015 final 2016 prelim / final 2017 prelim / final 2018 prelim / final 2019 prelim / final

#2020 Movie Odyssey Awards

5 notes · View notes

keywestlou · 4 years

Text

MORNING STEW #48

I have not done a Morning stew since early December. My aching body has caused me to miss a day or two. This blog is catch up time. I am going to spell out items in the order they appear in my notes.

Enjoy.

The IRS will begin forwarding the $1,400 stimulus checks this weekend. Some already have arrived. Direct deposit will be first to receive.

Question: If culture wars are over, why is Dr. Seuss all over FOX News.

Most Republican Congressional persons are complaining the stimulus is too big. They forget the crisis is big too!

I have had one vaccine shot. My second the 27th. Vaccine distribution has been a problem in Florida. In addition to availability overall.

Spoke with a person yesterday who said he was in a chain drug store locally to pick up a few things. An employee asked him if he would like a vaccine shot saying that the vaccine would “spoil” if not used. The man got his shot. In fact, he has already had both.

Interestingly, he is not close yet to qualifying off an eligibility list. Including age limits.

I was unaware the vaccine could spoil. Did a little home work. They can.

Pfizer advises its vaccine has a life of 120 hours (5 days). If vaccine is older, Pfizer recommends the manufacturer be called for guidance.

The CDC maintains a COVID-19 Expiration Date Tracking Pool to follow the age of the vaccine at different levels.

What continues to bother me is that we have insufficient vaccine supply in various parts of Florida. Never the less, vaccine is apparently getting old/stale and may have to be disposed of without use. A disgrace.

The entire vaccine situation is in disarray. Not just in Florida. All over the U.S.

Harry Truman loved Key West and Key west loves Harry Truman.

Truman arrived in Key West on 3/12/1950 for a one month vacation.

Biden has ordered the deployment of 4,000 active duty military to help reach vaccine targets. Biden is handling the problem well. It is a war!

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops reveals a “near obsession” with abortion in its opposition to the Johnson and Johnson vaccine.

Spring Breakers are arriving. Key West beaches filling up. Many more expected.

The largest influx of college students is expected to hit Miami and Fort Lauderdale. Many believe a significant number will be unhappy with those two cities and move down to Key West.

Miami and Fort Lauderdale still have restrictions in place. The kids will not be happy.

For example, Miami has a midnight to 6 am curfew. Alcohol is prohibited on beaches.

Key West has been touted as an “open town.” Hordes will arrive.

Key West police are ready. Even horseback police officers will be involved.

St. Patrick’s Day is around the corner. The problem will be the same.

The virus will be around longer than it should because many deviate from the restrictions. Merchants as well as college guests and other visitors.

It is proper to disrespect someone who does not perform properly. Even those who lack the capacity to do good.

I speak of Florida’s Governor DeSantis. A horses ass no mater how you view him. You can’t make good out of bad.

This past week DeSantis issued an order for fines persons and businesses have paid or might have to pay for charges already made be withdrawn. Included are mask violations.

Query: How are safety rules to be enforced during Spring Break?

The “ass” is considered Pesidential timber for 2024. Amazing!

Note this is the same individual who “arranged” for vaccine to be provided to two affluent communities in Florida because they represented some of his heavy financial supporters.

Trump has said many times that DeSantis is the best governor in the U.S. Understandable. Trump was DeSantis’ Pied Piper. He did everything Trump wanted. Bad guys. Sinful under the skin.

While everyone has suspected Trump’s financial problems n New York City would bring him down, it now appears Georgia may do it first. He is being examined down to his underwear for issues involving ballot counting durnig the Presidential election.

If such occurs, and I suspect it will, Donald’s own recorded words will do him in.

A new restaurant in Key West. The Southernmost Fish Company Restaurant. Recently opened where Michael’s did business for many years. I wish Southernmost good luck! Can’t wait for my quarantine time to be over so I can try it.

Syracuse, my Syracuse! What a lousy basketball season!

One week ago, Syracuse was off the bubble. Then Syracuse beat North Carolina State 89-68. Back on the bubble!

Two days later, Syracuse played Virginia. A better team. The game was tied. Virginia dropped in a 3 pointer at the buzzer.

Syracuse now off the bubble? Maybe not. Virginia a much better team and yet Syracuse almost defeated them. The word now is that Syracuse is an if.”

If Syracuse makes it, it is anticipated it will be as #68, the last team invited to play in the big tournament.

We will know tomorrow when the tournament choices and rankings are announced.

Merrick Garland was confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee this past week for the post of Attorney General. The Senate will confirm him, if it has not already done so.

Garland has been touted as “best” for the job for two reasons.

First, he headed the Oklahoma investigation 25 years ago. Second, he has been a respected federal judge for more than 20 years.

Both experiences qualifying on their face. However, I question such.

Twenty five years is a long time ago. No one can tell whether he is as good investigatory wise today as he was then. A good judge does not necessarily make a good prosecutor. Especially after 20 years as a judge. The mind changes. In some instances, the drive also.

I hope Garland does well and I wish him well. However, he causes me concern.

What does Joe Manchin really want? I think he wants his ass kissed. He wants to be considered a big guy in Washington circles. He fortuitously has been placed in that position.

It bothers me.

Biden has a tremendous opportunity to accomplish much. The stimulus bill evidence of the ability he has. To move on, Biden needs Manchin’s support. More succinctly, his Senate vote.

He is the fly in the ointment.

The vaccine. Demand exceeds supply in many parts of the country. Florida, especially.

DeSantis this past week dropped the eligibility age from 65 to 60. He could drop it to 40. Would make no difference. There is not enough vaccine for the people already eligible.

Proof of the pudding are Miami, Florida City and Tampa. Lines long waiting for shots. Get to the head of the line and told there is no more vaccine. All out!

Many of these people waited hours.

“Promises made, promises kept” was a joke when it came to Trump. The only “promise” he ever kept was the tax cut for the wealthy which kept millions of dollars in their pockets.

DeSantis no better. Makes a promise. Cannot deliver. Not because he is devious. Rather he does not check facts out before he speaks.

Anyone recall Katherine Houghton? She was the lovely young daughter who planned to marry Sidney Poitier in Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner. Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn played her parents.

A terrific movie. I can’t see it enough.

Katherine is now 75 years old. Hard to believe!

An interesting fact which many may not be aware. Katherine Hepburn was Katherine Houghton’s aunt. Hepburn was instrumental in helping Houghton launch her career.

Done!

Enjoy your day!

MORNING STEW #48 was originally published on Key West Lou

1 note · View note

redbeardace · 5 years

Text

The Equality Act

What is the Equality Act?

If you’ve paid attention to politics (in the US) over the past few weeks, the Equality Act has been name-checked quite frequently. It was listed as a Day One priority of virtually every major Democratic presidential candidate at a recent town hall. It was brought up in response to a recent pair of Supreme Court employment discrimination cases, one involving a gay man, the other involving a trans woman, both of whom were fired after coming out. But what is it?

The Equality Act is an update to a number of federal anti-discrimination laws, primarily the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This act explicitly provides anti-discrimination protection on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. You can read the full text of it here, but if you don’t feel like it, the basic summary is that it’s mostly a Find-And-Replace job, substituting “sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity)” for the word “sex” in existing anti-discrimination laws.

Why is the Equality Act important?

Right now, across the entire US, it is illegal for someone to be fired due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. In many states, there is a specific state law prohibiting this form of discrimination. However, in the rest of the states, where there isn’t an explicitly state law, it’s prohibited because of an interpretation of the word “sex” in existing anti-discrimination laws.

These existing laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex. For a plain, simple example, that means that you can’t reject a qualified candidate for a job, simply because she’s a woman. Sex cannot be the deciding factor.

And that’s where the interpretation comes in. Over the years, guidance of federal agencies and findings in court cases have held that this protection on the basis of sex extends to sexual orientation and gender identity. Let me tell a quick pair of stories to illustrate:

1: You have a hardworking, recently promoted employee named Alex. One Monday morning, Alex comes into the office, sporting a shiny new ring. Intrigued, you ask about it. “I got married to Elizabeth on Saturday!”, comes the excited reply. You congratulate Alex and wish him a happy life.

2. You have a hardworking, recently promoted employee named Alex. One Monday morning, Alex comes into the office, sporting a shiny new ring. Intrigued, you ask about it. “I got married to Elizabeth on Saturday!”, comes the excited reply. You fire Alex and throw the contents of her desk on the street.

In this scenario, the only difference between Alex and Alex is their sex. Their sexual orientation is effectively irrelevant. You fired Alexandra for doing something you would have been fine with Alexander doing, therefore you have illegally discriminated against Alexandra on the basis of sex.

Or so says the interpretation.

The thing about an interpretation of this kind is that it’s fragile. It’s great when you have LGBTQ-friendly people at the wheel. But all it takes is one fascist dictator wannabe to tell the federal agencies to change their mind. All it takes is five people in black robes with a lean to the right to say “Nah, I think it means this”.

And that’s where we are today.

The court cases heard last month will be decided next June, and there is a very real possibility that the Supreme Court will reject the interpretation that sexual orientation and gender identity are protected on the basis of sex. If that happens, it will immediately become legal to fire people or refuse housing or kick someone off a bus for being gay or being trans in more than half of the states in this country.

So that’s bad.

The Equality Act, by explicitly including protection for sexual orientation and gender identity, will make it clear that kind of discrimination is illegal. It won’t be open to interpretation, and will be far more resistant to the direction of the wind in DC.

What else should I know about the Equality Act?

It explicitly provides protection for intersex people. When I did a survey of state-level anti-discrimination laws earlier this year, I found that intersex people were largely ignored. That leaves them in legal limbo land where maybe they’re protected and maybe not. The Equality Act includes “sex characteristics, including intersex traits” under the definition of “sex”, and would thereby unambiguously include that in all of the protections provided. However, while the Equality Act is a step in the right direction, but it does not address specific intersex issues.

It covers the “perception or belief, even if inaccurate” case, which plugs some potential loopholes in protection.

It is worded vaguely enough to protect agender and non-binary people, but it does not explicitly mention them.

Unfortunately, sexual orientation is defined as a specific, enumerated list: “homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality”. Asexual and pansexual, etc., are not included. This is a common failure of many anti-discrimination laws. I doubt it’s born of malice. Instead, it’s a combination of ignorance and inertia. So many existing laws define it this way, it’s easy to copy and paste without thinking. I prefer the language in New York City’s ordinance: “A continuum of sexual orientation exists and includes, but is not limited to, heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, asexuality and pansexuality.”

There is no mention of romantic or affectional orientation in the Equality Act. This strikes me as a huge hole. Not only does this mean it completely leave out protection for aromantic people, it opens a loophole for discrimination based on romantic orientation of all types.

Nothing in the Equality Act tries to fix unnecessarily gendered language that exists in the law. That would be a far more involved undertaking.

So where does the Equality Act stand?

The Equality Act has been passed in the House of Representatives, where it was a priority of the Democratic majority there. After passage, it was sent to the Senate, where it will die, because the Republican majority there wants nothing to do with it. And the President wouldn’t have signed it anyway. There is no chance in hell that it will be passed before 2021, and even that would require Democrats holding the House, taking the Senate, and getting the White House.

So, you see, that’s a bit of a problem. The Supreme Court’s ruling on these cases will come out in June 2020...

What you can do about it!

VOTE.

And vote for the Democrat where applicable. Republicans are actively opposed to this issue. You have seen what happens when Republicans have control over the government and it is up to you to make sure that doesn’t happen again. Yeah, sure, Democrats aren’t perfect, but they’re a hell of a lot better than this fascist clown show and homophobic sidekick we have now, so vote Democrat and then keep the pressure on to force them to get better. (And while you’re at it, push them for Ranked Choice Voting so we can maybe get rid of the two party stranglehold...)

Find out about your local anti-discrimination laws. Local anti-discrimination laws won’t be overturned by the court decision in these cases. So, if your state or city does not already have LGBTQ protections in its anti-discrimination laws (or doesn’t even have any anti-discrimination laws at all) band together and make noise. Get them to pass one.

Tell everyone you can about this. Be loud. Silence will let them get away with it.

Fight back. If it all goes to hell in your state next June, boycott any business that fires someone for being trans, picket any apartment complex who evicts a gay couple. Broadcast their bigotry, shame them publicly. Make noise.

Reach out to your lawmakers and tell them that you support the Equality Act and think it needs to be improved and passed. And “improved” is key. Since it hasn’t passed yet, there’s still time to make it better. So tell them they need to make it better. (At the same time, don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good. As it stands today, it’s a vast improvement over existing law, so work to get the Equality Act passed, even if they don’t fix it.)

But Wait... There’s More!

Another interesting (and unexpected) side story related to this which came up after I’d written most of this post is that ratification of the ERA is now within reach, thanks to Virginia going fully blue. While it’s very likely that VA will vote to ratify in one of their first actions in January, there’s some haziness about whether or not it will count. That means it will be a fascinating backdrop for the presidential election, with one side fully supporting ratification, maybe even with a woman carrying the flag for the second time in a row, and the other side being forced to explain why they don’t think women are equal, while they run a disgusting misogynist and/or someone who refuses to even eat with women. Popcorn time!

But... What’s the ERA, you ask? That’s a fair question, because it hasn’t been talked about much since it was killed by a pack of anti-feminists back in the 70s. It’s the Equal Rights Amendment, a constitutional amendment that reads “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”

The haziness surrounding ratification is twofold: First, the original congressional language had a deadline, which has long since passed. Second, some states which ratified it early on have since rescinded their ratification. Proponents of ratification will note that the original deadline was extended once, and can be extended again, if needed, and beyond that, a deadline may not even be valid. As for rescinding the ratification, it’s not clear whether or not a state can even do that. At any rate, it’s bound to head to court and make a lot of noise along the way.

As you may have noticed, the language is very similar to the vague meaning of “sex” that the Equality Act is trying to fix. Will the ERA protect gender identity and sexual orientation? That’s unclear. It’s open to the same interpretation and court opinions that come up in the Civil Rights Act. In fact, the Supreme Court decision in those cases I mentioned above, whichever way it goes, will probably be the precedent at work, should the ERA actually get ratified and take effect.

So you know what that means, right?

Once the ERA is ratified, we're going to need the ERA 2 to explicitly include what the original ERA leaves out.

We have a lot of work to do. Time to get busy.

#equality #equality act #era #equal rights amendment

135 notes · View notes

wombwindow · 4 years

Text

Voting Faith

With the 2020 Election just a week away, I thought it would be helpful to discuss the importance of the faith vote and what it means to vote your faith. Voting is an important fundamental American right, experience, and duty. One I would encourage every citizen to exercise, especially in a republic democracy such as ours. In America the people have the privilege of shaping, empowering, and curbing their government through their collective voice and choices. A tremendous opportunity that can have profound and lasting consequences, but an opportunity many among us neglect and avoid. Why? Perhaps it’s because some people believe their voice doesn’t matter. Maybe they feel their beliefs are not represented. Or stronger still that the candidates presented are unacceptable. But how will a Christian’s lack of participation change these circumstances? If Christians want better candidates, greater representation, more focus on their values and beliefs, they must get involved in the political process. Very little, if anything, changes in a vacuum! Christians aren’t likely to influence or shape our nation through apathy and inaction. No, we must participate, we must lead, we must fight, and we must vote. But how should we vote? And why are Christians so divided in their votes?

Looking at research data about the 2016 election will confirm a general election turnout of around 60% of eligible voters (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/10/22/voter-turnout-2020-ranking-us-presidential-elections/6006793002/). As well as the reality that around 40% of Christians fail to vote. And that among Christian voters each major party secures at least 40% of the votes cast by Christians, creating a substantial divide between the way Christians see the candidates, parties, and issues surrounding the elections (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/). Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, vote more for the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, but not by an overwhelming majority when all subsets are examined. Looking at the numbers one realizes that if all professing Christians voted, and voted with greater harmony, the influence God’s people could exert in the representative leadership of our nation would be enormous. However, a divided church, largely negates its opinion and renders a much smaller influence in the governing affairs of the nation. So, why are Christians divided and how can they become more unified? By looking to Scripture and the ways of the Lord.

The Christian community must rally around the authority of Scripture and the baseline teachings of God. The Bible encourages participation within our world systems and speaks to the most important issues facing our nation. Jesus, in responding to taxes, said, “…Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s...” (Matt. 22:15-22). And Paul advised in the Book of Romans that, “Every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed…” (Romans 13:1-7). Christians, when given the opportunity to vote, need to vote. As God’s representatives on earth and His agents of light, we must vote.

As for the issues that are presented before the body of Christ in elections, Scripture also must be our guide. The issues of life and abortion have been before the American voter for nearly five decades. The Bible is emphatically clear on how we should side. Christians must side with life and against abortion, the intentional destruction of preborn human beings. Psalm 139 declares we are, “knit together in our mother’s womb” (Ps. 139:13-16). And the Book of Acts reminds that, “He himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:22-26). The Scriptures declare marriage is between one man and one woman. Genesis proclaims, “A man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24). With the Book of Hebrews reminding Christians to, “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous” (Heb. 13:4). Regarding today’s gender question, Scripture is also not quiet. The Bible affirms that gender is a reality of creation and not a choice of the whim. Genesis states, “When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them” (Gen 5:1-2). And the Book of First Corinthians reminds: “In the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God” (1 Cor. 11:11-12). Making clear there are only two genders, each with purpose and supporting roles. As to race, the Bible declares there is only one. Genesis One, the Bible’s chapter of beginnings, reveals that, “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it…’” (Gen 1:27-28). And again, in Acts, “He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place” (Acts 17:26). When Christians embrace that WE ARE ONE RACE and begin to treat all God’s children as brothers and sisters, we will see the beginning of the end of what we today call “racism”. As to poverty, healthcare, fair wages, education, judges, and a host of other issues, if we’ll turn to Scripture and prayer, we will discover God’s plans, inform our minds, and build common ground around God’s revealed truth. The Bible is not silent about today’s issues and questions, do we know it?

Finally, as to the candidates, those modern-day Caesar’s vying for power, Scripture asks us to pray for them and evaluate them in light of God’s ways. Prayer is vital to the life of our nation and all things. Christians are admonished to pray and pray routinely for God’s will to be done on earth as it is in heaven. Paul urged in Timothy, “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Tim. 2:1-2). Christians should vote and they should pray—are we praying for this election and all those who serve our nation in government? When it comes to candidates running for secular office, we need to evaluate their character and their policy positions and past actions. Paul, writing in Corinthians, understood that the world is different from the church when he communicated, “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world” (1 Corinthians 5:9-10). And similarly, as Christians evaluate their choices for president or the congress, they will not often have the luxury of choosing from superb moral people. However, by examining a candidate’s personal character, their affiliations and positions, and their policies and actions, we can make determinations about which candidates align most closely with God’s teachings and principles. Holding the candidate up to Scripture’s declarations about good and poor leadership is a good place to start. Proverbs 29 tells us, “By justice a king builds up the land, but he who exacts gifts tears it down” (4) And, “If a ruler listens to falsehood, all his officials will be wicked” (12). And further still, “If a king faithfully judges the poor, his throne will be established forever” (14). Looking at these and other Scriptures, Christians can discern which candidates best represents the counsel of God.

I pray my fellow Christians will vote and pray during this election. May the Word and the Spirit guide us to the best representatives for our government. May we get involved in the political life of our nation at all levels and may we routinely pray for those in office. Let us serve God at all times, but especially as we exercise the privilege of voting for our representative government.

God bless, Joel

Colorado voters, remember to vote “yes” on 115. The measure will ban late-term abortion! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mDaXCxxrbU

Please enjoy the following incites about faith voting from Barna:

https://www.barna.com/research/notional-christians-big-election-story-2016/

https://www.barna.com/research/religious-beliefs-have-greatest-influence-on-voting-decisions/

3 notes · View notes

airlock · 4 years

Text

so, folks, I’m here to start another heinous text post series!

once again, we have results on a FEH poll -- and once again, IS has fucked up the vote counting beyond repair, leaving me filled with desire to tally things up nicer and properer. which I will try to do anyway, but the only numbers published were the ones above their top 100, so I guess we’ll technically have some missing information

but then, I thought, hey, while I’m at it, why don’t I offer some pointed critique as to whether the most voted characters deserve their votes?

let’s start with the professors. below the cut: the top 15 most wanted teachers in Fire Emblem, and whether they are any good as professors!

#1: BYLETH (10574 votes across all genders and forms)

yeah, yeah, that figures; if you don’t want to think too hard about this, why not go with the character who is only known as Professor, right?

that said, I’ve had classes with professors whose facial experssions never change and whose dialogue choices don’t matter, and let me tell you, regardless of who was controlling them behind the scenes, I can’t recommend that experience

#2: ROBIN (3110 votes across all genders)

ehm, sure? I mean, if taking over the plot and arbitrarily succeeding at everything you try are teachable skills, sign me up I guess-

#3: CECILIA (2426 votes)

our first extant personality is here, and not a bad choice at all! I mean, if her curriculum is whatever Lilina is doing, then I’d learn happily. even if she can be astonishingly blunt and I happen to have weaknesses and insecurities-

#4: CAMILLA (1303 votes)

look, I get it; those of you who played fates are ever so often telling me that, despite all the hype, there’s an actual character there somewhere beneath the slab of meat. I’ve heard you tell me a million times by now. but please, by all means, explain to me what this can possibly represent if not 1303 people with a teacher kink

and yeah, I hope you’re bracing yourself for that already, because we’re going to be running into multiple characters who are obvious horny votes. potentially even some who are sneaky horny votes -- like, sure, Cecilia is a good teacher, but she’s also the series’ first bangable teacher, and I have no way of knowing where one ends and another begins out of her 2426

#5: IKE (1121 votes across all appearances)

what’s there for him to teach, anyway? how to get away with yelling at a foreign monarch whose help you need? how to do handstands with a sword? ... actually, you know what, sign me up for both of those, even if this is basically an additional horny vote

(pew pew peeeeeeeeeeew I went there)

#6: LYN (877 votes)

er, I don’t even... are people counting it as “teaching” if she sometimes talks exposition at the player character? I mean, even as far as that goes, exposition usually falls to the other people in her team anyway...... hmmmmm

like yeah, regardless, she’s passably nice -- opinionated, sure, but that doesn’t usually grate much -- and dedicated to self-improvement... like, it’s not that she has any outstanding qualities for a teacher, but she’s already a better candidate than probably half this list

#7: CLAUDE (869 votes across all appearances)

869 votes total, of which 619 are for his post-timeskip appearance. nice. (and also, booyaka booyaka)

... I guess you can accuse this one of being a horny vote also, because I mean, it’s claude, he does that to everyone -- but considering that Dimitri didn’t get into the top 15 despite what Erica Lindbeck would have wanted, I think it’s safe to assume that this is at least partially about Claude’s brains.

that said, though, being clever doesn’t alone make someone a good teacher, so, what does he really have going for him? well, he’s very eloquent -- although he’s never struck me as the good-at-being-the-center-of-attention type. and he’s funny, which is a thing that a lot of people look for in a teacher, although let me tell you, years of cram school have really shown me to only want that in a secondary capacity,

... wait, on second thought, how many people voted for this just because of Joe Zieja?

#8: SHANNAM (852 votes)

wow, I can’t believe 852 people have been completely duped! ... well, he did accidentally teach Mareeta how to Astra, but that sounds like it had nothing to do with what he was doing at all. I guess it’d be nice to discover a hidden talent just like that, but it doesn’t seem to be something we can rely on Shannam for. just like everything else

incidentally, I’m told there’s going to be a lot of random Jugdrali nobodies on the next categories too -- I’m guessing that must be the newest FE Reddit mob prank. too bad there’s probably not going to be a category that Dorcas can take over

(in case you’re wondering, the actual shannan has a modest 171 votes to his name)

#9: MANUELA (851 votes)

I’m not going to call this an outright horny vote, but one thing I can tell you all for sure is that nobody who’s voting for this wants to have an actual class where things get done

like, sure, she’s not without her share of admirable wisdom, but we’re talking about someone who openly felt like jumping into a lake when someone told her they look up to her and think she has made good decisions

#10: TITANIA (818 votes across all appearances)

the very first character on this list I can’t fault or make fun of at all, and it’s taken us the entire top 10 to get there. bravo, Fire Emblem fans. and bravo IS for splitting the tellius votes again, making her rank even worse on the official list

#11: EDELGARD (766 votes across all appearances)

what. I mean, sure, she’s a fantastic public speaker, but like, I hope you haven’t had enough yet of the teacher who boasts about how they WILL fail you

#12: SETETH (733 votes, possibly with uncounted change)

being taught by seteth is, presumably, like being taught by snape, minus all of the venom. solid choice, I suppose!

plus, if we’re following up on the Joe Zieja thing, I’d really be lining up to take classes from Mark Whitten. or Allegra Clark. or Christian La Monte, but that’d just be because he’s adorable and I’d watch him doing like anything

(get your mind out of the gutter)

#13: CANAS (685 votes)

I’m like, at least halfway sure that’s the one I voted for. hell yeah!

what’s there not to love? sure, he might be a spot awkward, but that unmatchable passion for knowledge is one of the best traits to have as a teacher, not to mention that he’s humble, happy to teach, and even good with kids! er, other people’s kids, that is. kids other than Hugh

(technically, he’s also voiced by Joe Zieja, but eh, I doubt anyone’s thought of that)

#14: ATHOS (664 votes)

if Seteth was the Snape pick, this is the Dumbledore -- again, without the venom, if he does have skeletons in his closet. that said, he forgets to eat just because he probably doesn’t have to anymore, so y’know, brace yourself for how that translates into keeping the class organized

(incidentally, his student Pent just barely missed my cut, as he is #16)

#15: LUKAS (647 votes)

you know what? it’s not that Lukas isn’t kind and passionate for knowledge and a bunch of other things that make a good teacher, but I regret to say I am 100% calling this both a horny vote and a voice actor vote. a horny for the voice actor vote, if you will. you’re not looking for a class, you’re looking for an ASMR roleplay of one

HONORABLE MENTIONS (highest vote in their continuity, without reaching top 15)

Maiko (622 votes): I haven’t played TMS#FE, so someone else will have to gauge the extent to which this is a horny vote

Marth (544 votes across all appearances): look, marth’s whole thing is how he’s just a naïve whelp standing on the shoulders of giants, so let’s be real -- you want Jagen to be your teacher. and hell yeah, so do I

Plumeria (400 votes): holy shit, look, 400 people who aren’t funny at all. like not even a little bit

Eirika (363 votes): it’s strange that she’s beating out the plethora of proper teacherly characters in Magvel, like Saleh and Duessel. I guess the upshot is that she’s never going to catch you cheating in a test?

unlike what I normally say on my heavily opinionated text posts, I’m eager to hear what you all have to say about all that -- this poll is a lot less fun than the discussions it raises! so yeah, who deserves all the votes they got here? did the one you voted for make the cut? are you on the defensive because I’ve seen right through you? let me know in the replies and reblogs!

#anniversary poll critique series #my stupid text posts #Fire Emblem is tagged in this post #Fire Emblem Heroes is tagged in this post

13 notes · View notes

heymeowmao · 5 years

Video

youtube

[FULL] E9 _ Our Songs

- Ren Xianqi x Liu Yuning - Zhou Huajian x Jiang Yiqiao - Na Ying | Angela Chang x Xiao Zhan - Hacken Lee x Zhou Shen - Fei Yuqing x Ayanga

(Just for my own curiosity’s sake: Ayanga ‘87 | Yuning ‘87 | Zhan ‘91 | Shen ‘92 | Yiqiao ‘94)

9:03 - MC: I personally think there are two teams who have more pressure than the others. One of them is Fei Yuching x Ayanga- because they are a whole new group. The time they’ve had to work with each other is short. The other group is Na Ying x Xiao Zhan. XZ: /nods/ MC: Because- in case. I’m saying IN CASE- you know what I’m saying right? XZ: /feeling the pressure/ MC: Na-jie still wants to come back, you know? Angela is only here as a lifesaver, the more important one is you. Will you let Na-jie come back? XZ: I.. definitely will!

9:48 - MC: The rounds have already been decided backstage. Would the person who picked #1 (first to go) please stand up. /Ren Xianqi x Liu Yuning stand up/ - Backstage - 9:56 - RXQ: Xiao Yu, you tell me to stop and I’ll stop. LYN: Ok, 3-2-1, stop! (There’s only 2 envelopes left) ZS: I just hope you don’t pick #1. Thank you. XZ: !! Last time I picked the envelope and it was #1. It scared me to death. ZS: Your hands are better! AC: We have no choice now. XZ: It can’t be number 1 right? IT IS. But since Na-Zhan team won in popularity in the online voting, they are allowed to switch places with another team. AC: Alright then! Excuse us! AC: /stops in front of FYQ/ Xiao-ge… FYQ: … yes? AC: No, nothing. /moves on/ FYQ: Scared me to death… LYN: /avoiding all eye contact/ Hacken: Ok, come on. Take it. ZS: /WHAT??!/ AC: I don’t like the number 4. /takes 3/ RXQ&LYN: … :’) AC: It’s ok. I saw your outfits and I thought that you would have something really exciting. XZ: Suitable to start the show. RXQ: No problem.

11:37 - MC: What song have you brought for us today? LYN: “Ru Guo Yun Zhi Dao” RXQ: /to aYUNga/ Do you know? A: How do I not know??

Ren Xianqi x Liu Yuning - 如果雲知道 (Ru Guo Yun Zhi Dao (If The Clouds Know)) [I love (1) rock-ballad boy: Liu Yuning]

Zhou Huajian x Jiang Yiqiao - 孤枕难眠 (Gu Zhen Nan Mian (Sleepless)) (Yiqiao is sounding better and better every week!)

25:32 - MC: Let’s hear from someone- who do you want to hear? ZHJ: How about Xiao-ge? FYQ: […] This song is deeply representative of Huajian’s music. As soon as you hear his songs on the radio- the DJ doesn’t even need to introduce the song. You hear his unique voice, his years of music, even listening a hundred times, you won’t grow tired of his voice. Very good. ZHJ: Thank you, thank you. FYQ: I’m sure your points will be high as well. Just wait and see. MC: I know now the reason FYQ is sitting in the middle. After each of you sing, he knows how to elicit votes. “Your points will definitely be high.” FYQ: I’m sure. Everyone sounds good. ZHJ: He’s too good of a person. At the very end his points will be the highest.

26:54: ZHJ: I listened to Xiao-ge’s songs growing up. FYQ: /K.O/ This.. this IS true. I debuted way before him. When he debuted- his person, his voice- was just like a dark horse. ZHJ: Oh, no, no. My generation all did imitations of him. FYQ: Ah. – 27:35 - MC: Can you really imitate him? ZHJ: There was no helping it! At that time 8 out of 10 songs were his! MC: HJ-ge, the hardest thing is having the real thing here, and still performing. Xiao-ge. Could you please come and stand by ZHJ? ZHJ: I didn’t realize the situation would become this big. I was half joking. FYQ: I was able to see HJ a lot on shows back then. We would always find the time to joke around with him. We would always use his songs- /starts the impersonation/ ZHJ: When I released my own albums, I always said that one day I would have FYQ impersonate MY songs. When he does, that’s when you know you’ve made it. This was a real goal. I’m not kidding. FYQ: Thank you, thank you. ZHJ: I really learned a lot of his songs. MC: Right, so HJ-ge. Let’s be fair here. (FYQ sang ZHJ, so ZHJ HAS TO sing FYQ) FYQ: My songs might be a little difficult for him. ZHJ: At that time there was one song you HAD to sing. Everywhere you went, you heard this song. FYQ: Oh, alright. Let’s hear it. I was originally trying to give you a way out… ZHJ: No, no. I prepared for this! – ZHJ: And then when I sang my own songs after, I forgot to change back (to his original voice)

30:28 - MC: Now that we’ve heard from the senior, let’s hear from the junior. RXQ: I don’t dare critique him. Because we all consider HJ to be the Nation’s Song King. His songs really stir up people’s emotions and are very popular. Before, HJ would invite us juniors to open for him at his concerts. We all thought- since it’s his concert, let’s just sing however we want. We tried out a lot of different effects, atmospheres, and singing styles. He gave us a huge space for us to improve ourselves. So we are all very thankful to him.

Angela Chang x Xiao Zhan - Faded (remix) (HOLY SHIT!!!!)

33:31 - XZ: When I sang with Na-jie, we did more quiet, lyrical songs. I’ve always wanted to try something with some more stage presence and get people hyped up. AC: Then let’s go for something explosive! XZ: Something that can get people jumping. Stand up! Don’t sit there. Move your left hand, your right hand- get moving!

34:07 - AC: Do you feel like we’re missing something? XZ: Yes! AC: The two of us will be very hyped up, yes, but- XZ: I know what we’re missing! A drink! [LOL, he needs to be drunk to get in the mood?]

37:00 - [LOL. Liu Yuning. SAME THO.]

40:39 - LYN: I thought it was amazing. I started rocking out. Really hyped up. Also AC’s high note was really amazing. JYQ: I was totally entranced by the stage- immersed in Angela’s glamour, and XZ’s sexiness. ZHJ: !! XZ: !! ?? /Me??? Sexy??/ MC: Did you discuss with ZHJ about the word “sexy”? JYQ: What do you think, master? ZHJ: No, oh no. (Was not consulted on the use of the word “sexy”) But I have another feeling. Angela came and did what Na-jie could not. XZ: /uh oh/ ZHJ: If Angela weren’t here- you wouldn’t have picked this song, or this type of performance. It was fun. When Na-jie comes back I won’t be used to it.

41:44 - MC: Angela- after you came I suddenly saw a different side of XZ. I had never before seen his ending pose like this before. His eyes were filled with a “killing” intent. My goodness. AC: The first time I came here I wasn’t too familiar with what sort of arrangement or music to consider. So this time, I wanted to make some changes, and I thought that XZ would resent me, but he said, “OK! We can try it out!” XZ: I’ve been waiting a long time for this. MC: !! Xiao Zhan. Are you SURE you’ve been “waiting a long time” for this? [hinting that xz has been unfulfilled with Na-jie] XZ: … Wait. What do you mean. There’s a problem with this sentence. I don’t know how to play this game of chess. MC: See. He’s filmed with me for a long time already. He knows how to maneuver around my comments. What I’m trying to say is.. your words.. there’s a possibility Na-jie could be listening. XZ: !! MC: AND! Singing with Na-jie, and singing with Angela… is there a difference? XZ: /mouthing nonsense, but not saying anything/ [LOL. GOOD CALL.] XZ: These words can get me in trouble, you know.

43:18 - MC: Did the English present any difficulty for you? XZ: Not really. :) MC: Did the DJ table present any difficulty? XZ: Oh, yes! Yes! That did. /xz practicing backstage, but making scary ghost sounds instead/

Hacken Lee x Zhou Shen - 那片海 (Na Pian Hai) (LOL at Hacken trying to get ShenShen to play sports. The acapella in the beginning of the song. The high notes. Transcendent.)

Fei Yuqing x Ayanga - 贝加尔湖畔 (Bei Jia Er Hu Pan)

–

Current Rankings: 1 - LKQ x ZS (two point difference between Ranks 1 and 2) 2 - FYQ x Ayanga 3 - AC x XZ 4 - RXQ x LYN (1 point difference from Rank 3) 5 - ZHJ x JYQ (2 point difference from Rank 4)

#我們的歌 #Xiao Zhan #meowmao works #our song

36 notes · View notes

hachama · 5 years

Text

Democratic debate analysis

I’ve read the transcripts. I read the fact-checkers’ analysis. I have ranked them.

Due to the size of the field, I’ll be splitting my analysis into four groups. This first one will be the Please Do Not Make Me Vote For Them group:

Ryan, Hickenlooper, Williamson, Bennet, Delaney, O’Rourke, and Biden.

Under the break, I’ll be analyzing their debate performance, how effectively they represented themselves on the issues, and how much I hate them, in reverse order of preference. Let’s begin.

20) Biden

Biden is so… so out of touch. Even the moderators asked if he was out of touch, and when the moderators of a debate you’re participating in think you don’t know what you’re talking about? For a career politician, that has got to hurt. Frankly, they were right. Biden thinks that the reason people can’t pay their student loans without sacrificing everything else they want to do with their lives is because we’re not earning more than $25k a year, that freezing payments and interest until the graduated student crosses that threshold would magically make everything ok. If he were right, there’d be no Fight for 15. A $15 minimum wage, assuming full time hours, is more than $30k per year.

His response to accusations of racism was to point to his “black friend,” former President Obama, which… dude. You’ve got to know better than that by now. Please tell me you know having been the first and only black President’s VP does not immediately absolve you of being an old white guy who worked with Southern Segregationists against integrating schools.

His entire platform seems to be “remember when I was a senator/the vice president? Wasn’t I great, back when I had ideas and did things?” and I gotta say, No. No, you weren’t that great, Joe. Even his closing comments were lackluster, talking about “restoring the soul of America,” and “restoring the dignity of the middle class,” and “building national unity.” His answers to simple questions were, frankly, terrible.

Joe, what would you do, day one, if you knew you’d only be able to accomplish one thing with your Presidency? Thanks for asking, I’d BEAT DONALD TRUMP! Joe. Joe, that’s how you get to Day One. Unless you mean “grab him by the collar, haul him out on the White House lawn, and bludgeon him with heavy objects,” you’re not answering the question. Joe, which one country do you think we need to repair diplomatic ties with most? NATO! Joe. Joe, NATO is more than one country. I just… *sigh*

To his credit, Biden trotted out many of the same old campaign promises Democrats have been making for as long as I can remember. Closing tax loopholes, universal pre-K and increased educational funding, let Medicare negotiate prescription drug prices. These are tried and true campaign promises because they’re things we can all generally agree we want. But they’re old, a lot like Biden. They’re not the bold solutions we need. His newer ideas all sound pretty moderate and old, too: free community college (not 4 year public university), creating a public option for healthcare so people can choose between insurance companies and Medicare, rejoining the Paris Climate Accord, and instituting national gun buybacks. His suggestion of requiring all guns to have a biometric safety is also a vague gesture in the direction of a solution.

Biden is too old, too timid, and too arrogant to understand that he’s got nothing to offer in an election where Millenials and Gen Z are going to be the largest portion of the electorate.

19) O’Rourke

Beto, or as I like to call him, Captain Wrongerpants, got off to a roaring start by giving a non-answer in two languages. This incredible display of pandering, and wasting precious time, made him seem pretentious and obnoxious in twice the number of languages most politicians aspire to.

Possibly more than any other candidate, O’Rourke completely failed to answer any question he was asked. He presented a few good ideas, saying that he sees climate change as the most pressing threat to America and calling for an end to fossil fuel use. He supports universal background checks and reinstating the assault weapons ban. He wants comprehensive immigration reform, to reunite families separated by the Trump administration, and to increase the corporate tax rate.

Unfortunately, he wants to increase the tax rate from the new-for-2019 level of 21% to a lower-than-2018 28%. He wants immigration reform to protect asylum seekers, but thinks other immigrants should “follow our laws” and makes no guarantee to decriminalize undocumented border crossings. Like Biden, he supports healthcare “choice,” meaning that for-profit healthcare would continue in this country until everyone, in every city, state, county, and cave, can be convinced that insurance companies don’t care about them.

In short, O’Rourke reaches for relevance and relatability, and lands in pretension and centrism.

18) Delaney

John Delaney is the first candidate on my list to have been caught in a bald-faced lie by Politifact. Good job, John. His lie, by the way, was about Medicare for All. He claimed that the bill currently before Congress required that Medicare pay rates stay at the current levels, and that if every hospital in America had been paid at Medicare levels for all services, every hospital would have to close. The truth? The Medicare for All bill does not require that pay rates stay at current levels, and even if it did no one knows what effect that would have on the country’s hospitals. There is no data to support his assertion, even if he was right about the terms of the legislation being considered.

Unsurprisingly, John is another healthcare “choice” advocate. I think I’ve said enough about why this position doesn’t fly for me, so I won’t rehash it again.

In a discussion of family separation, he interjected that his grandfather was also a victim of family separation, which must make him feel so relevant. He also referred to company owners as “job creators,” a lovely little conservative talking point, and claimed that America “saved the world,” in some vague appeal to American Exceptionalism. He also agrees with Nancy Pelosi about not pursuing impeachment proceedings.

On the “I don’t hate him quite as much as Beto and Biden” front, he’s in favor of tax breaks for the middle class, increasing the minimum wage, funding education, family leave policies, a carbon tax (which he imagines would fund a tax dividend paid to individual citizens, rather than, I don’t know, paying for green infrastructure development?), thinks China is our biggest geopolitical threat, and is scared of nuclear weapons (a very sane, reasonable position, really).

If you want to pick a candidate based on who your moderately conservative uncle will yell about least if they win the White House, Delaney might be your guy. If you want to pick a candidate based on issues like student loan debt and healthcare, keep looking.

17) Bennet

I had never heard of Michael Bennet before the debates. In fact, I just Googled him to find out his first name. After the debates, though? You guessed it: I hate him.

His closing statement was an appeal to the American Dream. He thinks there are too many people in America to make a single payer healthcare system work. Asked to identify one country to prioritize diplomatic repairs with, he named two continents. And he believes the world is looking to America for leadership.

However, he did rate higher than three whole candidates, and here’s why: He supports a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. He wants to end gerrymandering and overturn Citizens United. He wants to expand voting rights and electoral accessibility. He considers climate change and Russia to be the biggest threats to America, and he didn’t use any obvious racist dogwhistles. He’s from Colorado, so he’s kinda proud of the state’s marijuana legalization and reproductive health policies, but he’s way too quick to see partnership with private businesses as the ideal path forward.

16) Williamson

Oh man. Marianne Williamson. I almost threw something every time she opened her mouth. She is like a walking, talking, uninformed Tumblr guilt trip post. At a nationally televised debate, she asked why no one was talking about… something. I didn’t write it down in my notes because I would have had to gouge out my own eyes if I had. According to Google, she is a self-help speaker and that explains So Much.

In her closing statement, Williamson claimed that she would be the candidate to beat Trump, not because she has any plans, but because she will harness love to counter the fear that fuels Trump’s campaign. I am not making this up and I wish I was.

She claimed that Americans have more chronic health issues than anywhere else in the world, and attributed this to all sorts of factors, starting with diet and chemical contamination and extending, I assume, to solar activity and Bigfoot. According to Politifact, the only American demographic with a higher incidence of chronic illness than other countries is senior citizens, and I’m going to guess that has a lot more to do with our crappy healthcare system than it does a lack of detox teas.

When asked what policy she would enact if she could only get one, she said that on her first day in the White House she’d call the Prime Minister of New Zealand and tell her that New Zealand is not the best place in the world to raise a child, America is.

When asked which one country she’d make a diplomatic priority, she said “European leaders.”

By now you must be wondering how she rated higher than the bottom four, and I can sum it up in eight words: She supports reparations and the Green New Deal.

Please, please do not make me vote for Marianne Williamson.

15) Hickenlooper

John Hickenlooper is the former Governor of Colorado, and proudly takes credit for everything good that has ever happened in the state. He is also proud of being a small business owner, a statement that makes me immediately suspicious of any politician.

To his credit, he supports “police diversity,” a charmingly non-specific term that could mean one gay Latine nonbinary single parent in an otherwise entirely white male department, or could mean he wants the demographics of the police force to match the demographics of the population being policed. He also considers climate change a serious threat, and China. The best thing he said all night? He supports civilian oversight of police, a policy which has improved police relations with citizens.

Sounds pretty good, right? Wrong.

He also supports ICE “reform,” as if there is anything redeemable about that agency, and thinks that the worst thing the eventual Democratic candidate could do is allow their name to be connected to anything socialist. He said it twice, it wasn’t an accident.

14) Ryan

That brings us to the last of the worst, Tim Ryan. Tim here cannot stop using conservative dogwhistles, like talking about “coastal elites,” and saying that acknowledging differences between people is divisive. He is a basic ass white boy in the worst, most boring sense.

He wants to bring about a green tech boom, supports decriminalizing border crossing, supports gun reform, and thinks China is a serious threat to America. He also thinks that, in addition to dealing with the issues that allow school shootings to happen, we need to address the trauma kids are growing up with as a result. Unfortunately, he thinks that school shooters are misunderstood victims of bullying.

His confrontation with Tulsi Gabbard was very instructive and possibly the most damning exchange all night. He mis-identified the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center as being “the Taliban” (they were Al-Qaeda) and said that our military forces have to “stay engaged” for… stability? I guess? As a veteran, I’m with Tulsi on this one: that’s not acceptable.

#politics #democratic debate #there is not enough wine for this

10 notes · View notes

sole-cuore-amore-e-droga · 5 years

Text

Tel Aviv 2019: Straight outta France to Eurovision with king of controversy

youtube

T’was a good decision for the French televisions to make Destination Eurovision a thing for yet another year. Sure, I only end up having heard of only 1 name per year beforehand (Nassi from 2018 and Florina from 2019, additionally hearing music from one other act from each year but forgetting their names soon after!), but that doesn’t stop everyone else for me from showcasing their best. Heck, I have listened to quite a lot out of some of my Destination 2018 favourites and I have never had any idea who they were! (They were Masoe and Max Cinnamon, je suis absolutely NOT désolée.)

And honestly I found this year extremely much more better to care about. For the previous edition I ended up not caring for like 5 or more songs, because I spent more of my investment in the finalists. This year I pretty much cared about way many more songs, even those that I didn’t wound up liking THAT much. Seemone for example, AKA “the only best possible choice for France from those that don’t need to have big followship numbers to have fans for the song, unlike Bilal tsk tsk”. I can’t say I was 100% mesmerized with her song, but I do remember her more than June the Girl, which was quite a fan fave but also a disaster from 2018. Oh sorry, I mean, June the Who?

And of course Destination 2019 paved the way for some more exciting plot twists and turns, for example, two of the bigger fan favourites fizzling out in the semis (and I already lowkey discussed them on my other segment, Fanwank Assimilation), and another two lowkey favourites crashing and burning live (one of them sounding like she was drunk and scared, another one being less energetic than her song requires). What did that give out at the end? Why, nothing but a homosexual French-Morrocan social media starlet Bilal Hassani of course. Let’s go ahead and review his entry.

My first impression of this song turned me off a little because of how... poppy bland it sounded. Nothing against Madame Monsieur’s co-crafting (they did make a song I liked for last year’s Eurovision), it’s just that I think that I’m a person that’s looking more into pop songs with expectations full of excitement, but then getting something average at the end. The English lines in this are ‘reasonatable’(?) with though - it’s a self-empowerement against haters, telling to oneself that they’re the “king” (yes Bilal may be wearing wigs a lot but for the last time - HE DOES NOT IDENTIFY AS A SHE) and that they “can see [their] kingdom”.

Though it grew on me overtime, to the very point I couldn’t see anyone taking his way, not even Seemone, not even any other darkhorse of the comp. No. My organism was fully adapted to the fact Bilal will win, so I ended up there lowkey supporting his win, even if I wanted someone else deep inside. (Same for A Dal 2019 but my inner systems refused to bring myself to Joci possibly winning an A Dal again, though they saw it being a likely endgame... just in a different light of events, but more on the Hungarian writeup, buckle up for that one because there’ll be buckets of everything for that one! >:) ) That and Bilal was kind of a runaway choice considering France is huge and the jury in there can’t do shit if the televoting is valuated in stronger numbers than in Melodifestivalen (I mean, look at how many points did he get??? His telescore beat the televote’s runner-up’s one by 87 points!), so if he has that many fans in a big enough country then of course they were gonna flock to him massively, and ain’t no Eurofan can’t object against the French televote numbers like these. Though they might seem too big because last year Madame Monsieur won with 118 as opposed to the artist’s of a song’s they have co-written with him for this DESC 150. And the televote gap between the 1st and the 2nd was much more humble - 29.

Maybe it has had to do it with the fact that it has a pretty damn alright pop melody that doesn’t sound specifically written for an ESC NF (unlike most of stuff that’s been done by Ylva & Linda and the like)? Maybe it has got to do with the golden hands of both Madame Monsieur members (pretty sure it might have just been Jean-Karl) touching upon this track (and some randomer whose name I don’t remember rn and I don’t want to? idk)? Maybe it’s the state of Bilal’s studio voice capabilities that carry this across for me nicely enough? Maybe it’s the persona? Somehow I don’t think I know but I’ll probably choose the first option. This is listenable, yes. Flows through like a normal pop song would. Maybe would have needed some polishing in some places (for that exists an up-and-coming revamp that will only be revealed on rehearsals (youhou Moldova 2014), but actually I only think that it will impact the song in a way that it will now be in F minor rather than F sharp minor?? So that Bilal could avoid being one of those kind of people that did sth like this:

RETWEET IF YOU CAN HEAR THIS PICTURE

Anyways. For all that it is, I savour it, it’s pretty decent, it stands out with its message if you know what it is (a kiss-off of the haters that once doubted this “roi”), I kind of like the way it’s being sung (and that vocal variation at 1:21) and some of the lyrics are not that bad actually, and for the matter of fact, I’d DIE for a possibility to create a song like this at best; I don’t quite know if it can do as well as his fanbase imagines, but I really hope it at least doesn’t do France dirty for choosing its up-and-coming-ish social media icon over the NF acts that I’ll be going off about a little later and brings a savourable result! I cannot remove my like for this song now that the deed is done, period. And I really hope that someday all this outrageousness over Bilal in a bad way will be stopped because poor 19 year old, let him be whatever sexuality he wants to be as of now, let him have his fans, let him wear those wigs, and keep those upcoming TV series about a terrorist man with an intent to blow up Eurovision in Israel (or something like that) at bay. Not to mention, these nasty caricatures. I definitely did not like seeing them. I legit feel like we’re almost talking about Lithuanian situation and what do my country’s citizens think about gay rights and all that (spoiler alert: they’re not friendly towards them). Stop it, get some help.

Oh and I know this is essentially 2,5-ish months late now but can I adress something real quick before finishing off this review and moving down to my chance-o-meters and all? Pretty please?

To all the Nightcore lyric videos of “Roi” that did this and would still do this:

Please consider looking back at the official lyric video for “Roi”, where it says:

and thank me in advance.

Not can’t, can. No wonder he’s a “roi”, ffs. What would be a king who cannot see his kingdom now? I’m sorry but this is just lowkey absurd, ngl.

Anyway:

Approval factor: As of the time I’m finishing this, I sort of approve it for now. The big dilemma though is to where do I rank this big boy - do I think it deserves to go higher than UK or lower? Do I drown it in the bottom 3 just because I had a rather negative first impression for it? God knows. For now though I’ll aprove it and carry on, dreading for the revamp obliterating some of the song’s charm that I had for it, just like maybe for Spain.

Follow-up factor: I think it is quite of a stepdown, considering last year a lot of guys publicly ADORED “Mercy”, and Madame Monsieur didn’t even need to have a huge social media following just to get that far as to win Destination! Bilal, however, did, and most people didn’t even fancy his self-empowerement ‘anthem’. And so did I at first, and eventhough I kind of like it as of now, I still prefer “Mercy” big time. France for the kings of controversial song topics and controversial entrants!

Big 5 factor: at the end of the day, you cannot change the fact that most of the Bilal fans are definitely centered in France (and maybe in some outskirts in Belgium as well) and not around Europe, especially the first time viewers, boo. So Bilal’s memorability levels in there from a Big 5 country will be questionable, unless his massive-ass French fandom decides to mass-emigrate for a week, get some foreign Simcards and start spamming votes for their idol - that’s a guaranteed televote for a guaranteed low jury vote, and if high any-votes are any indicators for where things are heading (like for Poland 2016 for instance), then Bilal will finish decently, but without any high-votes, he’ll be stuck in a low-low, maybe somewhere in the bottom 10. Sorry if you’re reading this, any remaining Bilal fans on Tumblr... you better get ready for your mass emigration for a week then?

NATIONAL FINAL BONUS

Destination’s memes are still glorious to look at, even if it feels like it’s been years since them, considering my social media timeline does not have all that many of them remaining, BUT we still got some highlights from them saved and I can’t wait to freshen up the minds of the mutuals that seemed to have forgotten them. As well as some note-worthy NF songs that the others won’t get the chance to see because only one can represent France and Bilal can’t stand in for any other ones but himself, cuz he is he, and you know he’ll always be. Let’s go:

• Silvàn Areg, probably the biggest underdog-turned-overdog-overnight act of them all out there. Back when his song was still “Le petit Nicolas” (it was changed to “Allez leur dire” thanks to copyright turmoil with some book’s publisher - no it wasn’t about Le petit prince, there ARE Le petit Nicolas stories in there), I don’t think anyone really saw THAT much potential in this song to stand out, maybe except a few select others? I mean who’d even DARE to support this upbeat guitar French-like tune that... has cartooney visuals on stage and that way wows the viewing audience??? NO WAY!!! Yeah these visuals made me truly forget this was one of the songs that didn’t come out in full release yet (as of DESC 2019, only 3 songs weren’t released in full yet, along with The Divaz and Doutson (the latter dragged his kid on stage for his performance BTW, maybe that kid liked Silvàn’s stage illustrations despite maybe not seeing them the way they were supposed to be viewed?) and enjoy the king of popup-book visuals taking it away. So much so I ended up rooting for both visuals AND the song during the final as well (and the final had the colouring book painted!). Don’t you love it when your fave has an impeccable staging AND can nail their performance as well? I sure do... Click to find out his performance serve. I stan men who can sometimes rap out of nowhere when necessary and unexpected.

• Looking for typical French chansons/ballads that make you think of how longsome and melancholic (with a hint of happiness) can things be? Look no further than aforementioned Seemone and her alive-father-ballad, “Tous les deux”. If you’re not here for all this French zany, you can sit back and relax with hearing this piano delight with Adele-ish vocals on top and the paternal gratitude intertwined in the lyrics... well duh, if the constant repetition of “PAPAAAAAA” in the bridge doesn’t give it away for you, an unassumer, then idk what does. Noir, compelling, heart-wrenching, stunning, solid and all that it is. For all the ballad lovers out there. Hope her father’s proud of her achievements (for what did she do is to take the Eurofans by storm against this inevitable Bilal-ness with her feelings-over-fireworks and her strenght to carry out this beauty without crying... in the NF final at least, making International juries side with her more than Bilal, for whom we firstly thought it was over until 150 televotes, even getting the Bjorkdaddy on her side in the semis... only to never win the televoting as hoped to (Bilal was in a different semi so another man won over the girl, while in the final Seemone was 3rd and voted just under another experienced artists and Bilal obviously) and just remain the jury darling) and will hold this song up to himself dearly. We love supportive and thankful children <3

youtube

• This 25 year old chanteuse/violinist Gabriella Laberge, hailing all the way from Canada but with a passionate love to France probably ever since performing in La voix (je t'aime nuit et jour), I mean, The Voice France 2016, dived head-first into the social interraction game, with being all-round positive with her supporters, retweeting their stuff, liking their posts, being in groupchats... she did all she could. And the international jury still let her flop big time. Probably they were too underwhelmed at how engaging her entry, “On cherche encore (Never Get Enough)”, was on the big stage, with Gabriella out there, rocking her yellow pantsuit and dancing on top of a rectangle with other cello-or-contra-bass player madames inside of it and stairs to get on top of that rectangle besides the rectangle. Oh and playing the piano at the beginning. Were they afraid she was gonna fall off the rectangle with her musical ‘gun’ the next time? Was it the show opening that startled her chances (as people are afraid that the same will happen to Srbuk in Eurovision 2019)? I don’t know, but for one that I know is the fact that the poor woman was robbed to the core for all the friendliness she radiated. And the violin lady realness she delivered. Here’s now hoping her strong friendship ties with Olivier Dion will persuade him to fly to France from Canada next for a Destination Eurovision adventure, then? (tbh he’s pretty decent!)

• UH-OH! GIVE A LITTLE RESPECT for The Divaz! Seen by me as a little bit of those girlies that will definitely be drowned in the results because of their... aura and decision of paying a tribute to the late Aretha Franklin, I was shooketh to the core when I saw them NAIL “La voix d’Aretha”... the passion, the drive, the energy, the sass, the style, the dresses, THEM VOCALS! Needless to say I got incredibly sold and even more so happy I was interested in hearing that song all along beforehand, so much I think I tried skipping our own NF over just to see these gurls S-L-A-Y! Hopefully this ain’t the last of them together, they’re a true cool bunch. Happy to see that the international juries saw something in them!

• Emmanuel Moire... now, his song “La promesse” is even more so boring sounding imo and would do less of an impression if people didn’t know the message of it, but the message (and his status in the French music skies), boy does it shine. He sings about making a promise to stay true to himself and not be afraid to admit that his heart beats... FOR A MAN! And where is the Eurofan community that denounces a ballad unless it’s gay?? Some happen to still denounce gay ballads too, but only if it comes to NFs apparently :F I applaud for this song existing tbh as I find it nice myself. Such a shame the man couldn’t really sell his song THAT strong enough though, as I couldn’t help but crack a smile at hearing his falsettos go terribly off, but still feeling sorry for the guy. His staging (that has two men playing around, further going for his song’s memo) and the fact that he beat Seemone in televoting due to his bigger status than the rest of the most other DESC participants this year (save for Chimène Badi which has a status as big as his?). And this one moment that made me feel like I’m looking at Malena Ernman’s true form:

• So how about these few other bedazzling NF flops in a little bit of blitz summary, seemingly as the paragraphs here are already going out of hand? Sure! Allow me to introduce y’all to the shy French Mélovin named Ugo who was tryna get to the spotlight all by himself with a song about... crushing I think (he’s fantasizing of meeting a gal in some interesting interesting ways), but tanked majorly live due to being nervous and letting the pre-recorded backings overwhelm him majorly. Then comes the other up-and-coming chanteuse Florina which I also talked about in the fanwank flops section (though I published it right after Spain’s NF because I had enough of THAT rattling around my drafts... and same goes for the rest of my 2019 reviews!) but I’ll put up a mention for her because I undercooked my thoughts for her. “In the Shadow” - studio god-tier that sadly reeked of “Chandelier” heavily and another NF underperformance that grew condescencing during the rehearsal-snippets period that maybe made people keep their hopes up during it just like for Rykka’s, Jana Burčeska’s and Sennek’s odd pre-party performances. Who knows if Michela would have followed them suit if she was allowed to attend all the pre-parties despite “rehearsals”! In the end we still got a lackluster performance and a total 0 point score from the international juries. Wow. I hope that didn’t scar her for life. Also worth a mention are Battista Acquaviva, the Basque-singing goddess that had some sort of a potential but heavily crushed it by sounding weak and a bit drunk even (or even similar to this) on her own performance + adding some Roman-esque shirtless hunks for no reason (sweetie if they didn’t work for Anggun then what’s the point saving your live with them? Unless you can mask it up like Demy, just leave), and the other studio fave that tanked that was Tracy de Sá who served a French-Spanish (!! that’s where the title came from, you really thought the song was gonna b called “Par ici” noooo) summer bop with her rapping skills on fleek and her desire for “whiskey cocktails rum rum rum” as a cherry on this delightful cocktail has also got really grinded down by her live performance where she was barely even enthusiastic to live up to her own song and maybe have needed some of those liquors she offered on the song to make it sound better. But hey, at least from Tracy we got 1) studio version leak drama that obviously affected the poor sis so hard she raged about it on Instagram a bit; 2) slapping track about parties n stuff for our own summer 2019; 3) her own little version of that notorious song which wouldn’t probably be remembered so fondly in the memedom if not for some mother’s pasta dish; 4) the light tunnel she emerged from at the beginning of the song during her performance, which in reality is just the NF arena exit tunnel; 5) this meme:

Yeah well, good luck at your hairbuns and your hoop-de-hoop ‘rings trying to save you this time

• I was also gonna add this interesting phenomena of “hot violinist guy” because of course I remember this hype being set up for some dudes (especially for THAT violinist. I remember almost everyone suddenly crushing on him but I couldn’t care enough to buy it because lol!) even without their song coming out to public - yes I’m talking of Lautner who obviously also tanked during their live performance of this song but the international juries loved the shit out of it (same for aforementioned Ugo... and mind you I wrote them down as sure NQs after seeing their carcrash performances live! To think they would have almost MADE it thanks to them and SHATTER my predictions???) and their bromance probably lived on... for another 15 minutes

And the ‘drunken auntie’ of someone’s that sang a rather underrated catchy spring-esque sunflowery song but completely ruined it by her awkward jumping around in red suit on stage, PhilipElise, but that’d require me to brief my thoughts upon like nearly all of the damn roster of the irrelevants, so it’s best if I forget all the rest and move on!

• Not to mention, Bilal himself is a highlight. On an occasion he’s such a mood, as demonstrated on this first biggest ESC 2019 NF season meme down here:

And keep in mind, that wasn’t the final. But for the final this happened, which is still as amusing as the first:

Epic hairspin! Laura Rizzotto wishes she remembered this technique just in time to engage some more audience so that they could at least pull her out of the NQ zone.

• Who cannot forget the occasional thought of Garou, the NF’s host, singing. This year he was one of the final’s interval acts, and his choice to sing was because of honouring a Frenchman who passed away not so long before the DESC broadcast. Truly the dedication <3

youtube

• One of those NF cases that had people rallying up against Eurovision being in Tel Aviv and withdrawing the broadcasters from it by their own force because “well fuck you, our feelings and sentiments towards Palestine are more important than this schlager-ridden shitshow musicfest!!” lolno. Some protesters came on stage sometime after Netta’s guest performance during Semifinal 2, and both Garou and the security guards did their best and hardest to chase them away, but some still got on shot because reasons. This is ridiculous (as much as it was when it was found out that some people in Spain were waiting outside RTVE’s headquarters before the OT 2019 ESC Gala just to make THEIR move) and thankfully it didn’t follow on many more NFs to come.

youtube

• oh and also the neon cube argh

Feels like a way larger post than I intended to, and this review is waaaaay long overdue, so at least I tried reminding you of the memes, didn’t I? Anyway, I wish Bilal for all the best in Tel Aviv! xx

#eurovision 2019 #tel aviv 2019 reviews #france 2019 #bilal hassani #roi #france

3 notes · View notes

theliberaltony · 6 years

Link

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to Secret Identity, our regular column on identity and its role in politics and policy.

In the days after Hillary Clinton’s defeat, the two people who seemed like the Democratic Party’s most obvious 2020 candidates, then-Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, hinted that Clinton had gone too far in talking about issues of identity. “It is not good enough for somebody to say, ‘I’m a woman; vote for me,’” Sanders said. Other liberals lamented that the party had lost white voters in such states as Ohio and Iowa who had supported Barack Obama, and they said Democrats needed to dial back the identity talk to win them back.

But that view never took hold among party activists. Liberal-leaning women were emboldened to talk about gender more, not less, after the 2016 election. We’ve had women’s marches and women running for office in greater numbers than ever — all while emphasizing their gender. President Trump’s moves kept identity issues at the forefront, too, and gave Democrats an opportunity both to defend groups they view as disadvantaged and to attack the policies of a president they hate.

The Democratic Party hasn’t simply maintained its liberalism on identity; the party is perhaps further to the left on those issues than it was even one or two years ago. Biden and Sanders are still viable presidential contenders. But in this environment, so is a woman who is the daughter of two immigrants (one from Jamaica and the other from India); who grew up in Oakland, graduated from Howard and rose through the political ranks of the most liberal of liberal bastions, San Francisco; who was just elected to the Senate in 2016 and, in that job, declared that “California represents the future” and pushed Democrats toward a government shutdown last year to defend undocumented immigrants; and who regularly invokes slavery in her stump speech. (“We are a nation of immigrants. Unless you are Native American or your people were kidnapped and placed on a slave ship, your people are immigrants.”)

Sen. Kamala Harris has not officially said she is running in 2020, but she hasn’t denied it, either, and she’s showing many of the signs of someone who is preparing for a run, including campaigning for her Democratic colleagues in key races and signing a deal to write a book. The Californian ranks low in polls of the potential Democratic 2020 field, and she doesn’t have the name recognition of other contenders. (Her first name is still widely mispronounced — it’s COM-ma-la.) But betting markets have her near the top, reflecting the view among political insiders that Harris could win the Democratic nomination with a coalition of well-educated whites and blacks, the way Obama did in 2008.

Whatever happens later, the rise of Harris and her viability for 2020 tell us something about American politics right now: We are in the midst of an intense partisan and ideological battle over culture and identity; the Democrats aren’t backing down or moving to the center on these issues; and politicians who want to lead in either party will probably have to take strong, clear stances on matters of gender and race.

An opportunity

Harris, who went from district attorney of San Francisco to attorney general of California, was a heavy favorite in her 2016 Senate race. But once elected, she was expected to become a virtually powerless freshman senator in Hillary Clinton’s Washington. In fact, she might have been only the second most important person in Washington from her family, since her younger sister, Maya, was a top Clinton policy adviser on the campaign and in line for a senior White House job.

But Clinton’s loss created an opportunity for Harris. The Democrats had the normal leadership vacuum of a party without control of the White House but also a specific void of people who were well-versed in immigration issues and were willing to take the leftward stances on them that the party base wanted as Trump tried to push U.S. immigration policy right. Meanwhile, Biden and Sanders were not natural figures to defend Planned Parenthood when, as part of the repeal of Obamacare, the GOP sought to bar patients from using federal funds at the nonprofit’s clinics. African-American activists went from being deeply connected to the White House to basically shut out of it, as Trump had few blacks in his Cabinet or in top administration posts. And, electorally, while Sanders or Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren were obvious potential presidential candidates for the populist wing of the party that backed the Vermont senator in the 2016 Democratic primaries, the coalition of minorities and more establishment-oriented Democrats1 who had backed Clinton didn’t necessarily have an obvious standard-bearer, particularly with the uncertainty over Biden’s status as a candidate in 2020.

While veteran party leaders like Biden may have wanted the party to move to the center on identity issues, Democratic voters had moved decidedly to the left, a process that was happening under Obama but may be accelerating under Trump. For example, a rising number of Democrats say that racial discrimination is the main factor holding blacks back in American society, that immigration is good for America and that the country would be better off if more women were in office.

“The Democrats are the party of racial diversity, of gender equality — and there’s no going back from that,” said Lee Drutman, a political scientist at the think tank New America, who has written extensively about the growing cultural divide between the parties.

Harris has seized the opportunity. From attending the annual civil rights march in Selma to pushing legislation that would get rid of bail systems that rely on people putting up cash to be released from jail, she has seemed to try to lead on issues that disproportionately affect black Americans and to position herself as their potential presidential candidate. She was one of the earliest critics on Capitol Hill of the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration policies, and her push for a government shutdown over the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program delighted party activists (even if the strategy ultimately failed). Harris was among the first Senate Democrats to call for Minnesota’s Al Franken to resign amid allegations that he groped several women, and she has been a strong defender of Planned Parenthood.

A different moment

You might be thinking, “Didn’t we just have a biracial person (who was often described as and embraced being a ‘black’ politician) who was fairly liberal on cultural issues as a major national political figure? Wasn’t he president of the United States?”

Well, yes. But here’s the big difference: Obama didn’t emerge as a presidential candidate by highlighting his strong stands on these divisive, complicated cultural issues, as Harris is attempting to do. In fact, his rise was in large part because he implied that America was not as divided on those issues as it seemed — and that those divides were diminishing. The 2004 Democratic National Convention speech that launched him to the national stage seems, now that we are in the Trump era, almost crazily optimistic. (“There’s not a liberal America and a conservative America; there’s the United States of America,” he said back then. “There’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America.”)

Whatever the reality of such statements, the political strategy behind them made sense: It’s hard to imagine that America a decade ago would have embraced a nonwhite politician who wasn’t downplaying cultural divides and emphasizing unity. Back then, someone regularly talking about his or her ancestors being kidnapped and enslaved probably had no chance at being elected president.

But 2018 is much different than 2004 or 2008 in terms of the national debate on identity issues. For example, compared with a decade ago, a much higher percentage of Americans, particularly Democrats, see racism as a major problem. Over the past decade, Americans went through the birther movement, shootings of African-Americans by police captured on video, Black Lives Matter protests, Trump’s racial and at times racist rhetoric and Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” remark. And it’s not just race — think about #MeToo, the legalization of gay marriage and new debates on the rights of people who are transgender.

Harris can’t take the Obama “Kumbaya” route to the White House — I’m not sure at this point that a white Democrat could, either. By the end of his term, Obama didn’t sound particularly hopeful about America getting beyond its cultural divides. Clinton spoke more directly about race and racism in 2016 compared with Obama in 2004 and 2008. Sanders and other white Democrats are already talking taking fairly liberal stances on these issues, and I expect that to continue into next year.

I’m not sure Harris had much choice anyway. She is a Democratic senator from heavily Latino California with Trump as president, so it’s a virtual job requirement for to her to take leftward stances on immigration issues. She is a minority woman at a time when minorities and women are trying to gain more power in national politics, particularly within the Democratic Party — and she is the only black female senator. In other words, Kamala Harris and Barack Obama are, of course, different people. But they also arrived on the national scene at much different political moments.

“When you speak truth, it can make people quite uncomfortable,” Harris told a group of Democratic activists earlier this year in a speech in Henderson, Nevada. “And for people like us who would like to leave the room with everyone feeling lovely, there’s sometimes a disincentive to speak truth.

“But this is a moment in time in which we must speak truth.”

This is a bit longer than our normal Secret Identity column, so let’s skip “What else you should read.” But please contact me at [email protected] for your thoughts on this piece or ideas for upcoming ones.

#IFTTT #Politics – FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #Perry Bacon Jr.

6 notes · View notes

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

Who Are Republicans For The Rule Of Law

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/who-are-republicans-for-the-rule-of-law/

Who Are Republicans For The Rule Of Law

Other Conservatives Are Starting To Make Noise

Republicans for the Rule of Law Ad Featured on Shepard Smith

Republicans for the Rule of Law is not the only group of conservatives mobilizing against the presidents efforts to politicize the DOJ. On Wednesday, the New York Times profiled a new group organized by George Conway husband of White House senior counselor Kellyanne Conway called Checks and Balances.

We believe in the rule of law, the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights and the necessity of civil discourse, the group said in a statement. We believe these principles apply regardless of the party or persons in power.

The Times reports that the group is meant to encourage debate about some of the Trump administrations policies and actions among legal organizations that usually support him, like the Federalist Society.

Despite his wifes central role in the administration, Conway has emerged as an outspoken critic of Trump especially on Twitter.

This is flabbergasting.

George Conway

Conway has also been critical of Trumps decision to appoint Whitaker. Asked about Conways criticisms during a question-and-answer session with reporters last week, Trump dismissed him as a selfish attention-seeker.

Hes just trying to get publicity for himself, Trump said.

In Relation To Economics

One important aspect of the rule-of-law initiatives is the study and analysis of the rule of law’s impact on economic development. The rule-of-law movement cannot be fully successful in transitional and developing countries without an answer to the question: does the rule of law matter to economic development or not?Constitutional economics is the study of the compatibility of economic and financial decisions within existing constitutional law frameworks, and such a framework includes government spending on the judiciary, which, in many transitional and developing countries, is completely controlled by the executive. It is useful to distinguish between the two methods of corruption of the judiciary: corruption by the executive branch, in contrast to corruption by private actors.

The standards of constitutional economics can be used during annual budget process, and if that budget planning is transparent then the rule of law may benefit. The availability of an effective court system, to be used by the civil society in situations of unfair government spending and executive impoundment of previously authorized appropriations, is a key element for the success of the rule-of-law endeavor.

Studies have shown that weak rule of law discourages investment. Economists have found, for example, that a rise in discretionary regulatory enforcement caused US firms to abandon international investments.

Theyve Been Jabbing At Mike Lee & Praising Maryland Governor Larry Hogan On Social Media

The women of Utah have questions for Senator Lee, including: Do you mean you already fully understood his utter disregard for the rule of law, and just dont care?

Republicans for the Rule of Law

Republicans for the Rule of Law recently reposted a letter to the editor that appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune, slamming Utah Senator Mike Lee. The letter, written by the Utah chapter of Mormon Women for Ethical Government, asked Lee why he continues to stand by the president. The letter reads:

When you state that nothing in this report changes your view of this president, do you mean that you already fully understood that President Trump was doing whatever he could to obstruct justice and was saved only because his staff refused to follow his orders? Do you mean that you support the president despite this unethical and self-serving behavior?

Republicans for the Rule of Law has also been showering praise on Maryland governor Larry Hogan. Hogan is the son of the late Maryland representative Lawrence Hogan, who was the only Republican representative to vote for all three articles of impeachment against Nixon. More recently, Larry Hogan made headlines when he called the Mueller Report disturbing and said it didnt exonerate the president.

Also Check: What Is Republicanism And What Does It Value

A Loyalist Runs The Justice Department

Trump made no secret that his antipathy to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was rooted in Sessionss decision to recuse himself from the Russia investigation a move that ultimately resulted in Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointing Mueller as special counsel.

The ad that Republicans for the Rule of Law ran on Fox & Friends highlights comments Whitaker made during TV appearances before his stratospheric rise to the top of the DOJ, such as the appointment of Bob Mueller I dont think was necessary or appropriate and what I see is a president that is starting to figure out that if I want to I can terminate you legally there is certainly a way for that to happen.

Perhaps the most prominent member of the group, Bill Kristol, shared video of the ad on Twitter.

Republicans for the Rule of Law is running this ad on Fox and Friends this morning.

Bill Kristol

Whitaker thus far has given no indications that he plans to recuse himself from overseeing Muellers investigation. Trump reportedly became a fan of his thanks to TV appearances where Whitaker suggested Muellers work could be brought to an end by slashing his budget, and characterized his appointment as ridiculous and a little fishy.

The many scandals of Trumps new acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, explained

Status In Various Jurisdictions

2005 map of Worldwide Governance Indicators, which attempts to measure the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by the rules of society. Â;Â;90â100th percentile* Â;Â;0â10th percentile *Percentile rank indicates the percentage of countries worldwide that rate below the selected country.

The rule of law has been considered one of the key dimensions that determine the quality and good governance of a country. Research, like the Worldwide Governance Indicators, defines the rule of law as: “the extent to which agents have confidence and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, the police and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime or violence.” Based on this definition the Worldwide Governance Indicators project has developed aggregate measurements for the rule of law in more than 200 countries, as seen in the map at right.

Recommended Reading: What Do Republicans Stand For Today

Republicans For The Rule Of Law Ad Targets Johnson Over Covid

Republicans for the Rule of Law have announced an ad campaign targeting GOP U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson for pushing ahead with efforts to fill a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court while opposing a new COVID-19 relief bill.

A group spokeswoman said it is spending more than $250,000 on TV in the Madison and Milwaukee markets on Fox News, MSNBC and CNN. The buy runs today through Sunday with a digital component as well.

The group describes itself as life-long Republicans dedicated to defending the institutions of our republic and upholding the rule of law. Its also targeting: U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas; Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Bob Portman, R-Ohio; and Marco Rubio, R-Fla.; as part of an overall $1 million ad campaign.

Johnson hasnt said if he plans to run for re-election in 2022 or if he will stick to his pledge to serve two terms in the Senate.

The narrator in the ad says Johnson blocked a confirmation vote in 2016 before playing a clip of him saying, Eight months before the election, why not let the American people decide the direction of the Supreme Court?

Now, the narrator adds, Johnson supports rushing through a new judge, but refuses to pass COVID relief.

Call Ron Johnson and tell him to pass COVID relief now and let the peoples voice be heard on the Supreme Court, the narrator says to close the ad. Sen. Ron Johnson is letting Wisconsin down.

The Rule Of Law In The United States

The Constitution serves as the foundation for the rule of law in American justice. It establishes a system of rights, freedoms, and checks and balances that ensure a fair and just society for all without government overreach and tyranny. This includes separation of power between three distinct branches of government .

Ultimately, no person, whether individual or policymaker, has the right to subvert the rule of law. Amendments are possible if and when societal shifts make them necessary, but the process is challenging for a reason. Not only does it prevent rulers from changing the law to suit their needs, but it also helps to maintain a more stable government and freedom for all Americans.

Also Check: Which Region In General Supported The Democratic Republicans

About Republicans For Voting Rights

Republicans for Voting Rights is an initiative of the Republican Accountability Project with the purpose of defending the accessibility, integrity, and competitiveness of American elections.

Voting is a sacred American right. But after the 2020 election, some Republicans began pushing for more restrictive voting laws designed to support unfounded accusations that the election was stolen and the results were illegitimate. Some even believe that voting is harmful to their electoral prospects. More still believe our electoral system is rife with fraud and security failures.

Republicans for Voting Rights rejects the false choice between voting access and election integrity. We believe that Republicans in federal, state, and local government should protect the right to vote, protect our election systems from partisan or foreign interference, and help build trust in our democracy.

What Happened To Bill Kristol And Republicans For The Rule Of Law

Did you ever imagine the President could act like this?

In 2013, American Conservative Union head David Keene took a direct shot at then Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, while;addressing;a crowd at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference.

Some political operatives think we lost because of our ideas and valuesand what we really ought to do is change them, said Keene, attacking Republican strategists concerned over electoral defeat, including Kristol.

A lot has changed in seven yearsin terms of political players and issuesbut Keenes warning still holds true.

In an act of appeasement toward the political left, many self-professed limited government conservativesonce heralded as firebrands by their supportershave abandoned the conservative tradition.

Theres no doubt that the recent death of George Floyd raises questions about the state of the current justice system. Any conservative or libertarian-minded individual truly concerned about big government should fight to hold everyone accountable to the law.

But establishment GOP leaders and consultants have shifted their reform efforts. Instead of standing up for traditional conservative valuesgovernment accountability, the rule of lawtheyve pinned the blame on those stubborn conservatives.

Take for example, Max Boot, one of President Donald Trumps strongest critics.;According to;Boot, The president is pouring gasoline on the flames of racial division, and the Republican Party is holding the jerrycan for him.

Also Check: How Many Registered Democrats And Republicans In The Us

About The Rule Of Law

Rule of law is an ancient philosophy first outlined by Aristotle in ancient Rome. It purports that all people and entities, including the government, must be bound to the same system of laws and regulations. This prevents rulers from abusing their powers or engaging in tyranny while also setting guidelines under which all people pursue happiness without harming others.

This does not necessarily mean that all governments who adopt the rule of law are forced to follow the same exact system. For example, both Canada and the US believe in the rule of law, but the justice system adopted by each contains very different laws. The term rule of law is more about the government and the people agreeing to the same system as a whole.

Republicans For The Rule Of Law Is Financed By A Democrat

Just hours after Jeff Sessions resigned as attorney general last Wednesday at the presidents behest, #TheResistance found its newest target for destruction: Sessions interim replacement, Matthew Whitaker….NeverTrump conservatives are aiding Schiff and the media in their campaign to paralyze if not remove Whitaker. Commercials attacking the acting attorney general were aired on several Sunday morning political shows. The ads were sponsored by Republicans for the Rule of Law, a group founded earlier this year by Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large of The Weekly Standard. The groups primary role so far appears to be pimping for the Mueller probe, a political witch-hunt that Kristol and his fellow NeverTrumpers pray will lead to the impeachment and removal of the president. The Left and their NeverTrump footsoldiers fear Whitaker will thwart the special counsels investigation instead of rubber stamping Muellers ever-expanding investigation as Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has done over the past 18 months.

Recommended Reading: Why Do Republicans Hate Ted Cruz

The Council Of Europe

The Statute of the Council of Europe characterizes the rule of law as one of the core principles which the establishment of the organization based on. The paragraph 3 of the preamble of the Statute of the Council of Europe states: “Reaffirming their devotion to the spiritual and moral values which are the common heritage of their peoples and the true source of individual freedom, political liberty and the rule of law, principles which form the basis of all genuine democracy.” The Statute lays the compliance with the rule of law principles as a condition for the European states to be a full member of the organization.

In Relation To Culture

The Treaty on the Protection of Artistic and Scientific Institutions and Historic Monuments or Roerich Pact is an inter-American treaty. The most important idea of the Roerich Pact is the legal recognition that the defense of cultural objects is more important than the use or destruction of that culture for military purposes, and the protection of culture always has precedence over any military necessity.The Roerich Pact signed on April 15, 1935, by the representatives of 21 American states in the Oval Office of the White House . It was the first international treaty signed in the Oval Office.The Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict is the first international treaty that focuses on the protection of cultural property in armed conflict. It was signed at The Hague, Netherlands on 14 May 1954 and entered into force on 7 August 1956. As of June 2017, it has been ratified by 128 states.

Don’t Miss: How Many Republicans Voted For Daca

A Viral Ad Released By The Group Says Republican Silence On The Mueller Report Is Deafening

Republicans, your silence is deafening. Stand up for the rule of law.

Republicans for the Rule of Law

A new ad from the Republicans for the Rule of Law has been going viral on social media; you can see it above. Many people are retweeting it and adding instructions to listen with your sound turned all the way up, because this video is supposed to be all about silence. The spot, shot in black and white, features close-ups of Republican Ben senators Sasse, Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, John Kennedy, Tim Scott. Theyre all looking straight ahead and saying nothing. You can hear a bit of static and the faint sound of a ticking clock.

A caption at the end reads, Republicans: Your silence is deafening. Our president attempted to obstruct justice. Stand up for the rule of law.

Some Trumpists Turn Against Cheneys Successor

Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York, who entered the House as a centrist in 2014 but has recast her as a Trumpist with support of Trumps disinformation, has been endorsed by House GOP leader McCarthy as Cheneys successor.

But some Trumpists are already jabbing at Stefanik as a moderate in disguise. Rep. Chip Roy of Texas sent a memo to every Republican representative that Stefanik had cast a series of votes opposed to Trumpism.

We must avoid putting in charge Republicans who campaign as Republicans but then vote for and advance the Democrats agenda once sworn in that is, that we do not make the same mistakes that we did in 2017.

With all due respect to my friend, Elise Stefanik, let us contemplate the message Republican leadership is about to send by rushing to coronate a spokesperson whose voting record embodies much of what led to the 2018 ass-kicking we received by Democrats.

Members of the hard-right Freedom Caucus have privately expressed reluctance, if not opposition, about Stefaniks ascendancy.

The New York representative has sought to appease critics by promising that she would resign as Conference chair before casting a vote that differs from the majority of House Republicans. She told reporters on Tuesday, We have a great deal of support from the Freedom Caucus and others.

Freedom Caucus co-founder Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Trump have backed Stefanik.

Read Also: Why Do Democrats And Republicans Disagree

International Commission Of Jurists

In 1959, an event took place in New Delhi and speaking as the International Commission of Jurists, made a declaration as to the fundamental principle of the rule of law. The event consisted of over 185 judges, lawyers, and law professors from 53 countries. This later became known as the . During the declaration they declared what the rule of law implied. They included certain rights and freedoms, an independent judiciary and social, economic and cultural conditions conducive to human dignity. The one aspect not included in The Declaration of Delhi, was for rule of law requiring legislative power to be subject to judicial review.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations defines the rule of law as:

a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency.

1 note · View note

statetalks · 3 years

Text

Who Are Republicans For The Rule Of Law

Other Conservatives Are Starting To Make Noise

Republicans for the Rule of Law Ad Featured on Shepard Smith

Despite his wifes central role in the administration, Conway has emerged as an outspoken critic of Trump especially on Twitter.

This is flabbergasting.

George Conway

Hes just trying to get publicity for himself, Trump said.

In Relation To Economics

Theyve Been Jabbing At Mike Lee & Praising Maryland Governor Larry Hogan On Social Media

The women of Utah have questions for Senator Lee, including: Do you mean you already fully understood his utter disregard for the rule of law, and just dont care?

Republicans for the Rule of Law

Also Check: What Is Republicanism And What Does It Value

A Loyalist Runs The Justice Department

Perhaps the most prominent member of the group, Bill Kristol, shared video of the ad on Twitter.

Republicans for the Rule of Law is running this ad on Fox and Friends this morning.

Bill Kristol

The many scandals of Trumps new acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, explained

Status In Various Jurisdictions

Recommended Reading: What Do Republicans Stand For Today

Republicans For The Rule Of Law Ad Targets Johnson Over Covid

A group spokeswoman said it is spending more than $250,000 on TV in the Madison and Milwaukee markets on Fox News, MSNBC and CNN. The buy runs today through Sunday with a digital component as well.

Johnson hasnt said if he plans to run for re-election in 2022 or if he will stick to his pledge to serve two terms in the Senate.

Now, the narrator adds, Johnson supports rushing through a new judge, but refuses to pass COVID relief.

Call Ron Johnson and tell him to pass COVID relief now and let the peoples voice be heard on the Supreme Court, the narrator says to close the ad. Sen. Ron Johnson is letting Wisconsin down.

The Rule Of Law In The United States

Also Check: Which Region In General Supported The Democratic Republicans

About Republicans For Voting Rights

Republicans for Voting Rights is an initiative of the Republican Accountability Project with the purpose of defending the accessibility, integrity, and competitiveness of American elections.

What Happened To Bill Kristol And Republicans For The Rule Of Law

Did you ever imagine the President could act like this?

In 2013, American Conservative Union head David Keene took a direct shot at then Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, while;addressing;a crowd at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference.

A lot has changed in seven yearsin terms of political players and issuesbut Keenes warning still holds true.

In an act of appeasement toward the political left, many self-professed limited government conservativesonce heralded as firebrands by their supportershave abandoned the conservative tradition.

Also Check: How Many Registered Democrats And Republicans In The Us

About The Rule Of Law

Republicans For The Rule Of Law Is Financed By A Democrat

Recommended Reading: Why Do Republicans Hate Ted Cruz

The Council Of Europe

In Relation To Culture

Don’t Miss: How Many Republicans Voted For Daca

A Viral Ad Released By The Group Says Republican Silence On The Mueller Report Is Deafening

Republicans, your silence is deafening. Stand up for the rule of law.

Republicans for the Rule of Law

A caption at the end reads, Republicans: Your silence is deafening. Our president attempted to obstruct justice. Stand up for the rule of law.

Some Trumpists Turn Against Cheneys Successor

Members of the hard-right Freedom Caucus have privately expressed reluctance, if not opposition, about Stefaniks ascendancy.

Freedom Caucus co-founder Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Trump have backed Stefanik.

Read Also: Why Do Democrats And Republicans Disagree

International Commission Of Jurists

The Secretary-General of the United Nations defines the rule of law as:

source https://www.patriotsnet.com/who-are-republicans-for-the-rule-of-law/

1 note · View note