The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician • Hacker News Board

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#51

Post by rubyist5eva » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:33 PM UTC

tasty_freeze wrote: post #38

cj wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Democratic Party using the judicial branch and SCOTUS to legislate from the bench because Hasn't the supreme court been majority conservative for quite some time? Not majority liberal? (unless your comment is sarcasm)

Republican presidents placed 11 supreme court justices in a row, from Nixon through GH Bush. Clinton placed two, and republicans have been whining about needing to fix the liberal supreme court ever since. GW Bush placed two, Obama placed two, and it looks like Trump will place three. You are quoting someone, but I want to add on that "legislate from the bench" is a phrase that is invoked when the speaker doesn't agr…

It's not about having a "liberal" justice or a "conservative" justice. It's about having a court that does what is supposed to do - _interpret_ the law, not create it. Republican Presidents have been very bad at choosing justices that do this as well, David Souter being probably the worst example.

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#52

Post by Schiendelman » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:34 PM UTC

FeepingCreature wrote: post #24

BoiledCabbage wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wish both sides would realizing their destroying people’s faith in the system And I wish people would stop saying 'both sides' when it's 95% only one side. That's the issue. One side is now against census so people aren't represented, restricting voting so people don't get a say, and people keep saying 'both sides'.

And I wish people would stop defending the other side in that 5% as if 5% was okay.

When someone claims it’s 50%, it’s critical to point out when it’s actually 5%, or corrective resources are misallocated. Focusing as much on the 5% as the 95% is the exact mechanism by which the 95% is allowed to get that bad.

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#53

Post by abathur » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:35 PM UTC

ghufran_syed wrote: post #33

learc83 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The census bureau was original granted an extension that has been rolled back. It's not being cut "unusually" short, but the pandemic drastically impacted the census bureau's ability to do their work, and we are giving them less extra time than they say they need.

What government agency has ever said they need less time or less money ? So giving them less than they say they need is the normal state of affairs for government agencies. The only difference is that now the aggrieved bureaucrats have a receptive audience in credulous journalists who are always ready to write a story about how the current administration is "ending democracy" if they don't do exactly what the bureauc…

Can you clarify what your scale and definitions of left|center|right are?

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#54

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:35 PM UTC

solstice wrote: post #39

bo1024 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many reasons. They discuss poverty in the article. I would agree with cultural distrust of government officials. And very importantly, everything around the citizenship question/issue. > The notion of these counts ever being used for enforcement — basically targeting high population, low citizenship-count blocks for ICE raids or whatever — that would be really, really problematic. Stepping back, think in ge…

Dutch census recording religion enabled the Nazis to quickly round up the Jews living there a few years later during the occupation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#55

Post by Schiendelman » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:36 PM UTC

rubyist5eva wrote: post #41

cj wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Democratic Party using the judicial branch and SCOTUS to legislate from the bench because Hasn't the supreme court been majority conservative for quite some time? Not majority liberal? (unless your comment is sarcasm)

Anthony Kennedy was a swing vote and he retired in 2018, so no - it was not "majority conservative". Kennedy voted in the affirmative for both Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Obergefell v. Hodges, both of which both being particularly egregious examples of legislation from the bench. I am both pro gay marriage and pro-choice - but neither of these things exist in the Constitution. Not one word. Either amend the Const…

If you think those hot button issues define liberal vs conservative, you may be farther to the right than you think.

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#56

Post by rubyist5eva » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:36 PM UTC

Schiendelman wrote: post #44

rubyist5eva wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all non-white people are poor.

Please don’t strawman on HN.

I didn't strawman anything. Original question was asking about race discrimination and the response was about "poor people".

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#57

Post by Schiendelman » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:37 PM UTC

rubyist5eva wrote: post #45

tolbish wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thought it was sarcasm at first, but it appears rubyistSeva genuinely isn't aware that the Democratic nominee was blocked four years ago on the basis of it being an election year, only for the Republican party to turn around and do exactly that this year.

The Republican party had no reason to hold confirmation hearings for Merrick Garland - the votes did not exist to confirm him. The role of the Senate is to provide advice and consent - there was no consent so there was no reason to do it. This year is different - Republicans hold the majority of the Senate and the White House. This nominee has the votes.

To me, your comment reads as an interesting bit of mental gymnastics.

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#58

Post by Retric » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:37 PM UTC

rubyist5eva wrote: post #41

cj wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Democratic Party using the judicial branch and SCOTUS to legislate from the bench because Hasn't the supreme court been majority conservative for quite some time? Not majority liberal? (unless your comment is sarcasm)

Anthony Kennedy was a swing vote and he retired in 2018, so no - it was not "majority conservative". Kennedy voted in the affirmative for both Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Obergefell v. Hodges, both of which both being particularly egregious examples of legislation from the bench. I am both pro gay marriage and pro-choice - but neither of these things exist in the Constitution. Not one word. Either amend the Const…

I think you will find the overwhelming majority of things decided by the Supreme Court are ‘not in the constitution’. That’s simply not how or why it was setup.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Supreme_...

First case: Attorney General did not permissibly construe Controlled Substances Act to prohibit the distribution of drugs for physician-assisted suicide

3rd: Habeas corpus relief may not be granted on the basis of debatable inferences used to overturn the trial court's finding vis-á-vis peremptory challenges

5th: Arbitrator must decide legality of contract unless arbitration clause is itself being challenged

10th: States may constitutionally limit the evidence of innocence a defendant convicted of a capital offense may present at his sentencing hearing to the evidence already presented at his trial.

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#59

Post by Schiendelman » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:38 PM UTC

VLM wrote: post #42

I realize for political reasons we have to only support one side via extreme sophistry, essentially the whole topic is a giant dog whistle test to make sure our community is politically pure. However its VERY hard to ignore the reality that essentially 100% of the US population has no difficulty, on average, kinda paying electric bills and property tax bills and phone bills. Part of the sophistry is pretending that n…

You’re so wrapped up in buzzwords you’ve lost the real conversations.

Re: The 2020 census is being ‘sabotaged,’ says leading U.S. statistician

#60

Post by cj » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:38 PM UTC

rubyist5eva wrote: post #41

cj wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Democratic Party using the judicial branch and SCOTUS to legislate from the bench because Hasn't the supreme court been majority conservative for quite some time? Not majority liberal? (unless your comment is sarcasm)

Anthony Kennedy was a swing vote and he retired in 2018, so no - it was not "majority conservative". Kennedy voted in the affirmative for both Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Obergefell v. Hodges, both of which both being particularly egregious examples of legislation from the bench. I am both pro gay marriage and pro-choice - but neither of these things exist in the Constitution. Not one word. Either amend the Const…

Wasn't Anthony Kennedy nominated by a Republican president?

> pack the court with justices

Without taking a side myself, I think the problem is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_...

And more specifically:

> He [Mitch McConnell] said the next Supreme Court justice should be chosen by the next president—to be elected later that year.[1][2][3] Senate Democrats criticized the move as being unprecedented, and responded saying that there was sufficient time to vote on a nominee before the election.[4]

Democrats are not happy with the double standard set by Republicans of blocking a nominee when a justice dies during an election year when it's a liberal one, and not blocking (instead, quickly accelerating) a nominee when it's a conservative one.