HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Nuclear Unicorn » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 22 Next »

Nuclear Unicorn

Profile Information

Member since: Wed Sep 16, 2009, 06:33 PM
Number of posts: 17,973

Journal Archives

State by State, More Guns Mean More Killing of Women

I found this over at the Whine Cellar --

State by State, More Guns Mean More Killing of Women

A new study from Boston University has found a strong correlation between a state’s rate of gun ownership and its rate of women murdered by people they know. The article, soon to be published in Violence and Gender, stands to combat claims from conservatives that guns make women safer. In fact, relaxing gun laws may have dire implications for domestic violence.

Authors Michael Siegel and Emily Rothman studied firearm ownership rates and how they compared with gun-related homicides of both men and women, committed by both strangers and nonstrangers, from 1981 to 2013. After controlling for age, race, region, poverty, unemployment, education, divorce rate, alcohol use, and a number of other potentially extenuating factors, they found that higher levels of gun ownership corresponded to higher rates of women being killed by people they know, but not by strangers.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/01/25/state_by_state_more_guns_mean_more_killing_of_women.html


Did you notice this part --

After controlling for age, race, region, poverty, unemployment, education, divorce rate, alcohol use, and a number of other potentially extenuating factors...

That's a euphemism for "torturing the data until it told us what we wanted." I'd wager alcohol and other forms of substance abuse is a far more greater indicator of domestic violence than firearm ownership but that was excised because GUNZ!
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Sun Feb 7, 2016, 08:01 AM (10 replies)

Iowa Democratic party altered precinct's caucus results during chaotic night

Iowa Democratic party altered precinct's caucus results during chaotic night

In the Iowa Democratic party’s chaotic attempt to report caucus results on Monday night, the results in at least one precinct were unilaterally changed by the party as it attempted to deal with the culmination of a rushed and imperfect process overseeing the first-in-the-nation nominating contest.

In Grinnell Ward 1, the precinct where elite liberal arts college Grinnell College is located, 19 delegates were awarded to Bernie Sanders and seven were awarded to Hillary Clinton on caucus night. However, the Iowa Democratic party decided to shift one delegate from Sanders to Clinton on the night and did not notify precinct secretary J Pablo Silva that they had done so. Silva only discovered that this happened the next day, when checking the precinct results in other parts of the county.

The shift of one delegate at a county convention level would not have significantly affected the ultimate outcome of the caucus, but rather, it raises questions about the Iowa Democratic party’s management of caucus night.

...

The party issued a statement early on Tuesday, detailing final delegate numbers that had Clinton winning the caucuses. However, the statement came shortly after party officials gave the impression to the Sanders campaign that no statement with results would be issued at all that night.

Instead, they were told “they would reconvene at 9am and let’s talk”. As of now, Clinton has a lead of just over two-tenths of a percent over Sanders in the overall apportionment of delegates in Iowa. This would equal an overall share of 23 delegates to the national convention for Clinton, to Sanders’ 21. The Iowa Democratic party has refused to audit the results.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/05/iowa-democratic-party-altered-precinct-caucus-results-clinton-sanders?CMP=share_btn_tw
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Fri Feb 5, 2016, 06:37 PM (7 replies)

A case of FGM is reported in England every 109 minutes

A case of FGM is reported in England every 109 minutes

LONDON — Children's charity Plan UK has warned of the alarming scale of the "hidden danger threatening girls at home and around the world." The latest figures reveal that a case of female genital mutilation (FGM) is recorded in England every 109 minutes.

In 2015, 2,421 cases of FGM were recorded in England from April to September, according to the government's Health and Social Care Information Centre. Despite those numbers, there has never been a successful prosecution for FGM in the UK.

http://mashable.com/2016/02/05/fgm-reports-england/#pPTSCtVE7Zqm


It's not a sin, it shouldn't be a crime to be a girl.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Fri Feb 5, 2016, 04:32 PM (5 replies)

Is the "well-regulated" argument for gun control inadvertently reinforcing RW talking points?

Many gun control advocates treat "regulation" to mean "restricted" whereas those without an prohibitionist agenda would see it as referring to "well-performing."

In fact, there is nothing restrictive in the nature of regulation. I believe it is an inherently RW argument to interpret regulations as restrictive, designed to deny otherwise well-meaning people with legitimate intentions access to the thing being "regulated." The RW constantly complains that regulations kill business whereas Progressives tend to see regulations as improving business environments and worker safety so as to make the economy more efficient/well-performing, not less.

So why reinforce RW talking points and validate their suspicions?
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Thu Feb 4, 2016, 02:30 PM (20 replies)

Imagine Ron Paul had lost Iowa by a half dozen coin tosses

This is not an endorsement of Ron Paul, who is nuttier than a squirrel's birthday cake, but rather a thought experiment.

Imagine how we, as the opposition to the GOP, would view Paul's showing. Would he still be dismissed as merely a fringe candidate or would we all suddenly, simultaneously sit bolt upright at the clarion call that he was now a legitimate threat to be contended with?

Would Paul's supporters say to themselves, "Well, we fought our hardest, I guess we should just pack it in, though" or would they see their goals within reach and redouble their efforts making them even more of a threat to their opponents?

Would the claims he was not a viable candidate still ring with the undecideds or those who originally sought safe haven among more acceptable candidates or would that showing allow him to draw in more support?

Would the halls of the Establishment, with its promises of safe haven from the enemy, seem as unshakeable as they once did?

Now imagine -- what if it wasn't nutty Ron Paul but rather someone who actually has consistently argued for the Democratic party's core values for decades.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:57 PM (25 replies)

Pre-Game Coin Toss Makes Jaguars Realize Randomness Of Life

Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Tue Feb 2, 2016, 10:34 AM (0 replies)

The Iowa caucuses, both D and R, were canaries in the Establishment coal mine

Sanders, Cruz and Trump are running as anti-Establishment candidates, albeit from their respective sides of the political spectrum. None of them should have, would have, done as well as they did in prior elections. If the Establishment had its way it would have been Hillary by at least 20 percentage points and Bush or, as a fallback position, Rubio.

Of the two parties the GOPers were the real winners. First, their anti-Establishment candidates may be within 5-percentage points of each other but the real story is the Establishment guy only garnered 23 percentage points to the antis combined 53 percentage points. That greater than 2:1 anti-Establishment margin will continue to hold once the field narrows into a nominee.

Oh, and by the way, the Rs were able to muster a record turn-out meaning they're motivated.

Meanwhile, across the aisle the guy who shouldn't have been within 20 percentage points only lost by 6 coin tosses. Turn-out was good and by "good" I mean "typical." If the usual number of people are willing to caucus and half the caucus goers are willing to go anti-Establishment where are the margin of Ds that correspond to the additional turn-out of Rs?

Sitting home demoralized, I would imagine.

They want their own anti-Establishment candidate but they're being told it's too unrealistic. Such a candidate could never get anything past the GOP Congress which is just another way of saying Congress has been conceded to the GOP and the Establishment plans on working with them. Oh yeah, and remember when we rallied you to cheer for single-payer? Well, you're all idiots now -- probably racists, too.

Last night wasn't a win for the future nominee, it was the opening of a schism so finely split down the center that the only way to settle it was 6 out of 6 coin tosses. Meanwhile, the enemy is mustering record numbers to coalesce around ideals over personalities; a far stronger motivating force.

The electorate is angry and the only argument the Establishment candidates can make is they're the safe, predictable choice against their respective opposition even if they have to burn down their own previous platforms to do it.

Standard political playbook triangulations are not going to carry this election. If anything that will only exacerbate the anti-Establishment mood. But the Establishment will not change course because it is invested in one thing and one thing only: It's own power. It's only attraction is for those who think they will find safety within its walls.

This will not end well even if it ends in victory.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:08 AM (9 replies)

To Martin O'Malley supporters --

I'm genuinely sorry for your candidate. He wasn't my candidate but I've always seen you guys as decent and sincere folks.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Mon Feb 1, 2016, 10:40 PM (6 replies)

Venezuela is on the brink of a complete economic collapse

Venezuela is on the brink of a complete economic collapse

The only question now is whether Venezuela's government or economy will completely collapse first.

The key word there is "completely." Both are well into their death throes. Indeed, Venezuela's ruling party just lost congressional elections that gave the opposition a veto-proof majority, and it's hard to see that getting any better for them any time soon — or ever. Incumbents, after all, don't tend to do too well when, according to the International Monetary Fund, their economy shrinks 10 percent one year, an additional 6 percent the next, and inflation explodes to 720 percent. It's no wonder, then, that markets expect Venezuela to default on its debt in the very near future. The country is basically bankrupt.

That's not an easy thing to do when you have the largest oil reserves in the world, but Venezuela has managed it. How? Well, a combination of bad luck and worse policies. The first step was when Hugo Chávez's socialist government started spending more money on the poor, with everything from two-cent gasoline to free housing. Now, there's nothing wrong with that — in fact, it's a good idea in general — but only as long as you actually, well, have the money to spend. And by 2005 or so, Venezuela didn't.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/29/venezuela-is-on-the-brink-of-a-complete-collapse/
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Fri Jan 29, 2016, 06:42 PM (13 replies)

If Bernie Sanders and his supporters are as racist/racially insensitive as many suggest

do the other candidates want them shifting to their own camps once the primaries are concluded?

Can you imagine any good Democratic candidate saying, "It'll be a tight race. I think we should court the David Duke voters"?

Because that's pretty much how Sen. Sanders and his supporters are being portrayed these days; but I have a sneaking suspicion that should another candidate carry the primaries into the nomination those very same Sanders supporters, once vilified as racist and unrealistic, will suddenly become a cherished commodity.

So, are the allegations of racism overblown, cynical rhetoric or are those making the accusations willing to accept common cause of those they deem to be racists?

Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:16 PM (14 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 22 Next »