adamcz

many a moon ago, i switched from intensedebate (a comment management system) to disqus (a comment management system with more moderation tools). i paid nothing for either one. so i understand the need to revisit your business model and figure out how to make your free thing pay, without losing your users.

the new ads around the comments here are served by disqus; this was their solution. and i’m not ad-averse, nor am i deaf to their need to make their product start making money for them. it’s that the ads are always the same, no matter the website, no matter what the pitch is. these ads do not work on my audience. i do not want to have the audience that these ads work on.

i’m changing them up so hopefully we will no longer see the one that implies melissa mccarthy died (not true), when in fact she is just “getting fired for losing too much weight with this amazing supplement” (also not true)

come on internet. are we not better than this

The struggle over who can vote on Election Day is becoming more heated in courtrooms, judges’ chambers and statehouses across the country, paralleling the intensity of the presidential race. And at the moment, the side that wants fewer voting restrictions seems to be winning.

The battle began in earnest after 2010, when several Republican state legislatures began tightening identification requirements on voters. It has reached a new level in the 2016 election, when voters in 17 states faced new restrictions that ranged from photo ID requirements to cutbacks on early voting and same-day registration. Republicans said the laws were necessary to prevent fraud; Democrats and voting rights advocates said the restrictions were really designed to reduce participation by minority groups and young voters who traditionally support Democrats.

“It’s the biggest rollback of voting since Jim Crow,” said Jonathan Brater, an attorney at NYU Law’s Brennan Center for Justice, which compiled the list of restrictions.³¹

But in just the past few weeks, several of these laws have been blocked or overturned by federal judges. On Monday, a District Court judge issued a preliminary injunction against a voter ID law in North Dakota. In the previous 10 days, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the ID law in Texas violated the Voting Rights Act, a panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a law in North Carolina, and a District Court judge in Wisconsin ruled that elements of the law there were unconstitutional. There is also major voting-law litigation ongoing in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Ohio and Virginia.

Things are taking such a rapid turn that, while we were on the phone early this week, Brater was still deciphering the ruling fresh from North Dakota.

The legal fight has become a significant issue in the presidential race. Hillary Clinton has spoken forcefully against the voter ID laws in speeches and op-ed articles. “They’re doing everything they can to stop black people, Latinos, poor people, young people, people with disabilities from voting,” she said in Houston earlier this year.

On Tuesday, Donald Trump warned that the election would be “rigged” against him, and he cited as an example the court decisions throwing out voter ID laws. “If you don’t have voter ID, you can just keep voting and voting and voting,” he told The Washington Post. (As the Post pointed out, however, that kind of fraud almost never happens.)

The proliferation of these laws was spurred, in part, by the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which declared key sections of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional. This decision effectively eliminated the requirement that certain states with a history of racial discrimination in voting to clear changes to their election laws with the federal government. “The gutting of the Voting Rights Act certainly emboldened states to push forward with these restrictions,” Brater said. It also made it easier to pass new restrictions in places that had previously been covered by the pre-clearance requirement, such as North Carolina and Texas.

But 2013 wasn’t the beginning. The court’s decision merely “gave a green light to efforts that were already underway,” Ari Berman, a writer at The Nation and author of “Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America,” told me.

This avalanche of efforts to enact voting restrictions was really triggered a decade earlier, after the 2000 election, the chad debacle in Florida and the Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore. Many politicians came to a fateful realization. “In a very close election, the rules of the game matter,” said Richard Hasen, a professor of law and political science at the University of California, Irvine, who runs Election Law Blog. “So there was more litigation and more attempts to manipulate the system.” During the George W. Bush administration, the first strict voter ID laws were introduced in Indiana and Georgia.

The movement gathered further momentum after the 2008 election. “The effort to try to restrict the electorate really intensifies after Barack Obama’s election, because I think lots of Republicans were really scared,” Berman said. Scared not only of the election of the first black president, but that the record levels of turnout among young voters and voters of color in 2008 would become a “new normal.”

This momentum has led to ID laws that are of substantially different character from the early ones. They’ve gotten stricter. Rather than requesting an ID at the polls, new laws often require one. And in some cases the required ID must be a specific type of photo ID.

But now, it seems, some may have gone too far, outstripping their justification as checks on voter fraud, and being called out as racially discriminatory by the courts. In the North Carolina decision, Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote: “In response to claims that intentional racial discrimination animated its action, the State offered only meager justifications.” And in the Texas case, the 5th Circuit, one of the country’s most conservative, found that the law there discriminated against black and Hispanic voters.

Beyond the constitutional question, do these voting restrictions have a practical effect on voter turnout? In 2012, my boss Nate Silver found that the academic literature on this question was in broad agreement: Voter ID laws “seem to decrease turnout by about 2 percent as a share of the registered voter population.”

Indeed, a 2014 Government Accountability Office report, one of the most cited pieces of research on this topic, looked at two states (Kansas and Tennessee) that added voter ID requirements, compared with a handful of states that did not. It found, essentially, that the requirements depressed turnout somewhere between 2 and 3 percentage points.

But none of the academic studies available to Silver in 2012 measured the disparate impact on Democratic and Republican voters — in other words, none measured the “effectiveness” of these laws in suppressing certain subsets of the electorate. So he took it upon himself, performing some calculations and finding “some detrimental effect” of these laws on Democrats.

And now new research, with the aid of additional hindsight and data, suggests the disparate impact of these laws might be bigger than previously thought. A paper forthcoming in the Journal of Politics, titled “Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of Minority Votes” and written by a trio of political scientists, finds that, in the presence of strict ID laws, the predicted gap in participation between black and white voters in general elections increases from 2.9 points to 5.1 points, and in primaries increases from 2.5 points to 11.6 points. A similar result holds for the gap between Latino and white voters. More starkly, they find “that voter ID laws skew democracy toward those on the political right.”

“The enactment of strict voter ID laws tends to double or triple the gap in turnout between whites and racial and ethnic minorities,” Zoltan Hajnal, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego, and one of the paper’s authors, told me.

The paper is only able to come to these sharp conclusions as a result of the proliferation of stricter voting laws. The paper draws on data from the 2010, 2012 and 2014 elections, for example — elections with strict ID laws in place in more than one or two states, increasing its sample size from that in earlier studies.

Although there’s lots of evidence that minorities are less likely to have the required identification, the exact mechanism driving the results isn’t yet well understood. It might be that some voters are going to the polls and being turned away, some might not go to the polls at all, some might not think they have the required ID when they in fact do, and some may have a sense, given a history of racially exclusionary laws, that they are not welcome at the polls.

Could these laws change the outcome of the election? Some of the states with new voting restrictions are high on FiveThirtyEight’s list of likely tipping points: Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Wisconsin.

But even if we have evidence of a widening gulf in the electorate, we don’t know how that will play out on Election Day. “We don’t have a lot of conclusive evidence about how these laws have affected an electoral outcome,” Hajnal said.

“Turnout is a really hard nut to crack,” Hasen said. Indeed, a 2009 paper in the Election Law Journal concluded that, when it came to turnout effects, “the data are not up to the task of making a compelling statistical argument.”

But perhaps this is the wrong question to ask. “The right question is: ‘Is the state making it harder for people to register and vote for any good reason?’” Hasen said.

Proponents of voter ID laws typically offer several reasons. The laws may curb voter impersonation fraud, they say, or instill a sense of confidence in the fairness and proper functioning of the system. But impersonation fraud is all but nonexistent, with research revealing only 31 cases in over a billion ballots cast since 2000 — about 0.000003 percent. And a 2008 paper in the Harvard Law Review found no relationship between voters’ perceptions of fraud and their likeliness to vote and, further, no increase in confidence for voters under strict ID laws.

mcconville:

6/15/2012 is the release date for That’s My Boy. This poster is still up on 7/27/2016 and I hope it stays up forever. (at Colombo’s Italian Restaurant & Jazz Club in Eagle Rock, Ca)

“if your keyboard starts smoking, you’re being hacked. what color is the smoke?”

“Time’s almost up, you two. Those stage names ready yet?”
“Almost there.”
You have 5 seconds left.“
"SHIT.”

Story

Everyone Poops is essentially plotless.

Link

​how do you say poop in Chinese

boobs

oh boy

i’m revisiting this comic that i did two years ago to include common arguments made by opponents of the comic. i have a hard time distilling these thoughts into structures that aren’t analogies, and analogies by their very nature are simplifications. if they do their job right, they at least make the reader consider how another side sees an issue. “okay. i can at least understand why it would be looked at that way, even if i don’t.”

my biggest problem isn’t even people who take issue with the analogy. it’s people who have argued against it via things like fire safety protocols. “actually, it’s a good idea to wet down a house if it’s near a fire. so what’s your point?”

the point is, all lives do matter. but lives in mortal peril need more immediate consideration than those that aren’t. that’s not to say there aren’t different levels of jeopardy in everyone’s lives, all of which need to be addressed. there’s always someone with a worse situation, and we get to decide which one to put our energy into. that’s how it’s always been. yes: all lives matter.

but i have the luxury of getting in my car today, getting pulled over for an expired sticker, and having a reasonable expectation that i’ll only receive a ticket instead of four bullets to the torso.

right now, a lot of people don’t have that luxury. “black lives matter” never meant “only black lives matter.” it means they matter as well. as much as. i am not black. i don’t feel devalued by that assertion in the slightest. why on earth would i?

good luck out there today, friends. and whatever your opinion is, be patient in the comments when voicing it. it’s worth the conversation, and i won’t put a lid on it if it’s done respectfully.

@thesimpsonstattoo

@samreadtattoos "Good news, Lisa! I don't need your mother anymore. I've created a replacement for her that's superior to her in almost every way." ------------------------------------------ #thesimpsonstattoo #thesimpsons #simpsonstattoo #simpsons #tattoo #moe #inked #tat #tattyslip #simpsonsfan #homer #bart #lisa #maggie #marge #mattgroening #futurama #cartoontattoo #cartoontats #epictattoo #simpsonstat

6095  209

#tat, #simpsonstat, #bart, #thesimpsons, #thesimpsonstattoo, #simpsons, #simpsonstattoo, #futurama, #cartoontattoo, #marge, #mattgroening, #moe, #homer, #tattoo, #simpsonsfan, #epictattoo, #inked, #tattyslip, #cartoontats, #maggie, #lisa,

»WEBSTA

After 27 seasons of The Simpsons, by now poor Marge should be inured to her husband Homer’s hapless, misguided, and yet still sincere romantic gestures. He’s been making them since before they were married. Remember that piping-hot onion ring he placed on her finger in the “I Married Marge” episode instead of an actual engagement ring made of precious metal? A flashback to the couple’s casino-based nuptials in the season-eight classic “A Milhouse Divided,” meanwhile, reveals that Homer celebrated what should have been the happiest day of his life by presenting his pregnant bride with a store-bought cake with the oblivious, insulting inscription “To A Whale Of A Wife.” While not warmly received by Marge, that cake must have made a strong impression on Paste’s Laurel Randolph, who has decided to make the infamous dessert in real life and present the recipe so that readers can ...

​ What do you call a ufo that looks like a butt?

A buttfo

@thesimpsonstattoo

@_jonika_ "That's not even Michael Nesmith's real hat." --------------------------------------------- #thesimpsonstattoo #thesimpsons #simpsonstattoo #simpsons #tattoo #moe #inked #tat #tattyslip #simpsonsfan #homer #bart #lisa #maggie #marge #mattgroening #futurama #cartoontattoo #cartoontats #epictattoo #simpsonstat

10302  520

#tat, #simpsonstat, #bart, #thesimpsons, #thesimpsonstattoo, #simpsons, #simpsonstattoo, #futurama, #cartoontattoo, #marge, #mattgroening, #moe, #homer, #tattoo, #simpsonsfan, #epictattoo, #inked, #tattyslip, #cartoontats, #maggie, #lisa,

»WEBSTA

Playground song parodies of the theme have become part of children’s street culture around the world,[20][21] usually interpolating “frying pan” or “garbage can” into the lyrics as Popeye’s dwelling place[22][23] and ascribing to the character various unsavory actions or habits[24][25][26][27] that transform the character into an “Anti-Popeye”, and changing his exemplary spinach-based diet into an inedible morass of worms, onions, flies, tortillas and snot.[28]

Link