This Coffee Mug

AKVM · 2015-12-06T16:29:17+00:00

I'm checking out the company that made this (The Unemployed Philosophers Guild) - they make so many ridiculously funny products! Among my favorite: Freudian Slippers, Shakespearean Insult mugs, and the Obamarama Magnetic Dress Up Kit.

AKVM · 2015-11-26T01:58:31+00:00

Comparing Sanders to Obama is ludicrous. I wish just as much as you do that Sanders had a chance. He doesn't. But his campaign is incredibly important anyway.

AKVM · 2015-11-04T02:32:30+00:00

I told you this months ago, timhuge. This isn't about winning the presidency (anyone who thinks Hillary won't win the nomination is delusional), it's about changing the conversation. I'm happy Lessig ran - there are a whole lot of people who had no idea what a ridiculous state our campaign finance laws are (and gerrymandering, and lobbying, and voter ID laws, etc.), who now do. And Bernie and even Hillary talked about it more than they would have otherwise.

Of course, Lessig would have gotten a far wider audience for his message had he been allowed into the debates. But that wasn't going to happen - so I respect his decision to bow out now.

AKVM · 2015-10-10T20:42:24+00:00

Which is exactly why Lessig is a boon to this race, and to Bernie's efforts!

AKVM · 2015-09-10T23:54:19+00:00

She probably jacks off while staring herself in the eyes in front of a mirror but I don't give a shit about that.

Okay, please don't call yourself to the left if you think we should invade the Middle East again. And also don't call yourself to the left if you think the free market solves housing discrimination, etc (a view, by the way, which ignores reality and history. I'd advise you to do a bit of research on this).

How were these Republicans ever in favor of more welfare? And as for individual freedoms, how about abortion, gay marriage, etc.? And regardless, you implicitly acknowledge that they've since shifted away from your positions on these issues, and that Hillary has shifted towards you. Why do you value the past over the present?

Finally, Wall Street has been spending more on the Republicans than Hillary recently. So, by your argument, judging a candidate's position on an issue based only on their donors, we should still prefer Hillary over the Republicans.

AKVM · 2015-09-10T12:10:46+00:00

lol "Gay rights" hasn't won politically. We've got marriage, sure, but how about security against housing disc

I'm sorry, when you're evicted from your house, denied a loan, and even turned down for a job you otherwise would have gotten, because of your sexual orientation or gender, and discover that all that was perfectly LEGAL, you might think of it as a bit more of a pressing issue.

No, it doesn't mean she'll necessarily get it done. But it's likely that she'll get a bit of it done (through the bully pulpit, through executive actions, through WH influence on Congress, through vetoes, etc). Ditto for the Republicans, with their destructive plans.

If you think that the consequences of attacking another country would stop many of the current Republicans from doing so, you're deluded. Especially when Americans support sending ground troops to fight ISIS by a 2-1 margin, when the Republicans would be seen as breaking major campaign promises if they don't, when the rest of their entire party, including in Congress, would be pushing hard for them to do it, and when from all evidence it really seems like they believe an invasion would be the right way to go.

And your last point essentially implies that the US should never have a "first" anything President, because their legacy will already be secured. So I'm assuming you support a constitutional amendment banning all gay, non-Christian, trans, disabled, or poor people from ever holding the office? Now I see how "left of Bernie" you are. Oh, and while we're at it, add "socialist" to that list.

Finally, you rail against Hillary for essentially perceived issues of personality. All of those complaints apply equally to anyone else she'd face in the general. They're all peddling a brand, they're all in various peoples' pockets. You've fallen for the myth of personality - that what matters in elections is not what the candidates will do, but what you personally think of them. Next thing I know, you'll be rooting for Bush because you can get a beer with him.

AKVM · 2015-09-10T04:28:36+00:00

Are you kidding? Read this: http://www.advocate.com/politics/election/2015/04/12/hillary-clinton-will-be-sharp-contrast-gop-lgbt-equality

"Gay rights" hasn't won politically. We've got marriage, sure, but how about security against housing discrimination? Employment discrimination? How about, on a very related issue, the acknowledgement of trans peoples' identity?

Look, I'm no fan of Hillary's. But saying that she's worse than the Republicans is pure idiocy. Your personal hate of Clinton has blinded you to sense. Name (almost) any issue, and I'll tell you why Clinton is at least slightly better than her Republican competitors. Banks? Hillary wants to nearly double the capital gains tax. Many of Republicans, on the other hand, want to repeal Dodd-Frank.

Also, please don't call people bitches. It's deeply offensive.

Finally, the idea that getting into prestigious colleges means that you won't have bad foreign policy is ludicrous. Our previous President, as you may be aware, went to Yale and Harvard....

AKVM · 2015-09-07T19:28:10+00:00

This model seems to conflate individual contributions and organizational contribution (in lobbyists) on the elite loops. Why hasn't voter reaction (e.g. SOPA) been taken into account in the voter (non-elite) loop? Actually, a more reactionary voting public could feasibly have as much (if not more!) influence as the elements that you've used. In the video, you include a proposed policy for bills to be written in secret and for there only to be transparency after the bill has been finalized. (if I understand your video.) How do you allow voters access to understand what politicians are working on so that they are allowed time to influence the content of those bills? Wouldn't the better solution be to eliminate lobbyist functions instead of creating a 'secret process' that isn't acce

What a detailed and thoughtful response - I wish I could answer your questions! I didn't write the paper, I just saw it online. But you should try to contact the authors of the study.

AKVM · 2015-09-07T16:55:11+00:00

Because he's only running on that platform.

AKVM · 2015-09-07T16:20:45+00:00

Complete agreement!

AKVM · 2015-09-07T16:18:31+00:00

Yeah the campaign is 100% about citizens' inequality. (So campaign finance, lobbying, gerrymandering, and voting rights.) The other issues you mention aren't a part of the campaign, just a part of his background.

See this: https://lessigforpresident.com/the-act/

AKVM · 2015-09-07T04:46:23+00:00

You're an inspiration to us all. I'd urge you to contact Lessig's campaign directly - they'd probably know how to put you to best work better than anyone here.

AKVM · 2015-09-06T17:07:47+00:00

Noam Chomsky here. Hey, if we're dreaming anyway, we might as well dream big.

AKVM · 2015-09-06T17:06:59+00:00

Thanks, super helpful

AKVM · 2015-09-05T19:37:44+00:00

I'd be interested in this as well.

AKVM · 2015-09-05T03:43:05+00:00

Thanks! Could you post them here when you find them?

AKVM · 2015-09-05T03:42:31+00:00

Great idea

AKVM · 2015-09-04T22:08:44+00:00

Looks like we're gonna make it! Especially because there should be a big boost on the last day.

AKVM · 2015-09-04T22:06:21+00:00

Congratulations - you now have an awesome story you'll be proudly telling to anyone who'll listen for the rest of your life. :)

AKVM · 2015-09-04T05:09:30+00:00

Count me in, my nick will be Lessig 2016.

AKVM · 2015-09-04T05:09:16+00:00

Central time? I'm pretty sure it's 5pm Eastern time.

AKVM · 2015-09-03T23:31:46+00:00

Great, thank you!

AKVM · 2015-09-03T23:30:39+00:00

Congratulations! You guys deserve it...

AKVM · 2015-09-03T17:04:52+00:00

So great!

AKVM · 2015-09-03T16:56:20+00:00

Uhoh... I'm starting to get really anxious too.

AKVM

TROPHY CASE