Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The U.S. has ‘worst elections of any long-established democracy,’ report finds

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–87 of 87 posts

Re: The U.S. has ‘worst elections of any long-established democracy,’ report finds

#81

Post by LionessLover »

douche wrote: post #50
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misogyny has no place here.

You're projecting. I simply said I cannot tolerate the frequencies of her speaking voice. There are men whose voices are profoundly unpleasant to listen to also - it has no bearing on which variety of wedding tackle they are packing. It's like nails on a chalkboard.

Your "criticism" is the lowest of the low. What can anybody do about the "frequency" of their voice? YOU are unpleasant to READ. Consider that - unlike the "problem" you invent this is one that you are actually 100% responsible for.

Re: The U.S. has ‘worst elections of any long-established democracy,’ report finds

#82

Post by LionessLover »

venomsnake wrote: post #54
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misogyny has no place here.

Sorry, but saying something for a specific woman even if insulting is not misogyny. When the insult is directed at a distinct being is it not -ism.

It isn't about HER, it is about her VOICE. Criticizing someone for something they have zero control over is on a level below the shit layer.

Re: The U.S. has ‘worst elections of any long-established democracy,’ report finds

#83

Post by venomsnake »

LionessLover wrote: post #82
venomsnake wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but saying something for a specific woman even if insulting is not misogyny. When the insult is directed at a distinct being is it not -ism.

It isn't about HER, it is about her VOICE. Criticizing someone for something they have zero control over is on a level below the shit layer.

Voice actors tend to disagree with you about the control. And even if it is shit level - still does not make her voice more pleasant to listen to the (grand)grandparent obviously.

Re: The U.S. has ‘worst elections of any long-established democracy,’ report finds

#84

Post by Grishnakh »

nitwit005 wrote: post #72
Grishnakh wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gerrymandering is completely overblown as a problem. Proof: the 2016 Presidential primaries.

The congressional districts are what get gerrymandered. They're completely irrelevant to the Democrats or Republicans picking their presidential candidates.

That is precisely my point.

Gerrymandering only affects Congressional districts, which only affects the House of Representatives. That's it. It does NOT affect: 1) gubernatorial races, 2) Senate races, 3) Presidential races. It is a problem, but it's not the huge problem that some people make it out to be. As we can see, our political system is totally broken at all levels: our Presidential races are a total farce, and we don't do much better electing Senators than we do House members. We elect some lousy governors too. Therefore, it's obvious that fixing gerrymandering is not going to fix our political problems, not by a long shot.

Re: The U.S. has ‘worst elections of any long-established democracy,’ report finds

#85

Post by Grishnakh »

maxerickson wrote: post #41
Grishnakh wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gerrymandering is completely overblown as a problem. Proof: the 2016 Presidential primaries.

Would you mind expanding the thought a bit? Many states have closed primaries (so participating in one primary precludes participating in others) and the delegate allocation rules are pretty complicated. Lots of delegates are awarded at the state level, where Gerrymandering won't have much impact.

Please see my reply to "nitwit005". Basically, we're doing a terrible job electing people in all our races, but gerrymandering only affects US House races. Therefore, even if we completely fixed gerrymandering, it's not going to have much effect.

Re: The U.S. has ‘worst elections of any long-established democracy,’ report finds

#86

Post by LionessLover »

venomsnake wrote: post #83
LionessLover wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't about HER, it is about her VOICE. Criticizing someone for something they have zero control over is on a level below the shit layer.

Voice actors tend to disagree with you about the control. And even if it is shit level - still does not make her voice more pleasant to listen to the (grand)grandparent obviously.

So should be a voice actor? Are you completely insane? What idiotic nonsense is your cognitive dissonance "I cannot possibly be wrong regardless how stupid what I said is" going to produce next?

Re: The U.S. has ‘worst elections of any long-established democracy,’ report finds

#87

Post by venomsnake »

LionessLover wrote: post #86
venomsnake wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voice actors tend to disagree with you about the control. And even if it is shit level - still does not make her voice more pleasant to listen to the (grand)grandparent obviously.

So should be a voice actor? Are you completely insane? What idiotic nonsense is your cognitive dissonance "I cannot possibly be wrong regardless how stupid what I said is" going to produce next?

>So should be a voice actor? Are you completely insane? What idiotic nonsense is your cognitive dissonance "I cannot possibly be wrong regardless how stupid what I said is" going to produce next?

I don't mind being insulted, but don't try that approach with other people on HN.

Insulting HRC for her voice is not misogyny. The same way insulting Donald Trump for his baldness is not misandry. End of story. If I interact with 10 women today and insult only one of them and I am respectful towards the other 9 - I may be a jerk, but I am not misogynist.

And anyway being a politician is about the presentation - acting, voice, walking, hitting the gym, looking the look.

Post reply on HN