[US Election 2016] Democratic Primary Megathread III

[Khadgar]

I'm sure you're as shocked as I am.

I actually am bewildered by how many posters agreed with him.

I'm not remotely surprised. I'm cynical that way.

[Ashmoria]

I actually am bewildered by how many posters agreed with him.

I'm not remotely surprised. I'm cynical that way.

I try not to be cynical.

its not easy.

[Khadgar]

I'm not remotely surprised. I'm cynical that way.

I try not to be cynical.

its not easy.

All Hillary can do is play the woman card you know. That's what Donald says, depressing to see liberals taking his talking points and running. Guessing this year she can never mention women's issues or she'll be clubbed over the head with that shit. Kind of like 08 when Obama was going to only be the president for black folks.

[AiliailiA]

True but if we have 20% of the world's prison population and 30% of the world's prison population that is women, that's a gender issue. There's no doubt we lock up way too many people.

Actually, I think Hillary's figure is probably just inaccurate.

The link is for the notion that the US holds 25% of the prison population generally, buts its equally applicable to her female prisoner stat.

That factcheck finds "nearly 25%" to be TRUE.

About 22% according to what the WP calls the go-to source (unfortunately a broken link).

[Ashmoria]

I try not to be cynical.

its not easy.

All Hillary can do is play the woman card you know. That's what Donald says, depressing to see liberals taking his talking points and running. Guessing this year she can never mention women's issues or she'll be clubbed over the head with that shit. Kind of like 08 when Obama was going to only be the president for black folks.

her voice in that editorial was so screechy that I could barely read it!

[Valaran]

Actually, I think Hillary's figure is probably just inaccurate.

The link is for the notion that the US holds 25% of the prison population generally, buts its equally applicable to her female prisoner stat.

That factcheck finds "nearly 25%" to be TRUE.

About 22% according to what the WP calls the go-to source (unfortunately a broken link).

It then added some further qualifiers and caveats after that figure, like that the 100% is not actually 100%, becuase a number countries (including China) underreport their prisoner numbers. It came up 22% from the stats at face value, since its hard to know by how many China may be underreporting, but clearly its still too high.

Given these additional points, I thought roughly 20% seemed a reasonable figure.

[Ostroeuropa]

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/27/opini ... on-crisis/

The most stunning thing about her argument is that she lists off how most of the women in prison:

Are non-violent offenders
come from poor backgrounds
have drug problems

As arguments why women specifically should have different treatment.

At one point she also brings up how women are more likely to have custody of their children and so should get lesser sentences.

The entire speech is one long list of reasons why no man should vote for Clinton, and no woman should if she wants to consider herself in favor of equality of the sexes.

you have a problem with her talking about women in prison?

wow

Ailiailia covered it well.

This was actually relevant to the primary. Gender has come into the election a lot this year.

Clinton's comments are hard to defend. Particularly galling is how she mentions race and gender in the same sentence, implying that because African-Americans are discriminated against in policing and sentencing, therefore women are too. The opposite is the case.

It's fair enough to mention women in the corrections system. The excessive incarceration of the the US does affect women as well as men. Some of the comments can be taken to apply generally to all prisoners, like:

It is time we reform our broken criminal justice system. First, we need to reform policing practices, end racial profiling, and eradicate racial disparities in sentencing. Second, we need to promote alternatives to incarceration, particularly for nonviolent and first-time offenders, so families aren't broken up.

... at which point I'd expect her to mention the disastrous effect on African-American families of fathers being locked up.

But no. The words "woman" or "women" appear 22 times in the piece, the word "man" appears once and "fathers" once: both in deprecating comparisons to women:

Many of them grew up in abusive households, like Alice, and they are more likely than men in prison to have experienced sexual abuse or trauma in their life before prison.

Mothers in prison are five times more likely than fathers in prison to have to put their children in foster care while they serve their sentences.

Nowhere does she mention that over 90% of the people (including parents) in prison ARE MEN.

ayyy feel the Johnson

I get the joke, and one of the things I like about the LP is that they can joke about themselves.

But that particular joke draws attention to the party mostly appealing to men, which in my opinion is a problem for growing the party in future. Most particularly, you don't want to attract MRA's like Ostroeuropa to the party or the female members you do have will leave and it's all downhill from there.

The libertarian party has already hosted Karen Straughan a few times, and and prominent libertarians in Canada are associated with several mens rights organizations.
If women cannot handle men pointing out sexism against men, that's no argument against doing it. Not only that, some of the most prominent MRAs are women concerned about sexism against men. You could argue they've founded and led the modern movement.

[AiliailiA]

That factcheck finds "nearly 25%" to be TRUE.

About 22% according to what the WP calls the go-to source (unfortunately a broken link).

It then added some further qualifiers and caveats after that figure, like that the 100% is not actually 100%, becuase a number countries (including China) underreport their prisoner numbers. It came up 22% from the stats at face value, since its hard to know by how many China may be underreporting, but clearly its still too high.

Given these additional points, I thought roughly 20% seemed a reasonable figure.

Why even quote a "fact check" if you don't agree with its conclusion?

Even 20% is "nearly 25%". The fundamental point is that comparable developed countries have acceptable crime rates with a fraction of the imprisonment rate, so the US system is imprisoning people unnecessarily.

It's a shame the link in the article was broken. That might have contained a breakdown by gender so we could check the claim actually made in this case.

[Khadgar]

That factcheck finds "nearly 25%" to be TRUE.

About 22% according to what the WP calls the go-to source (unfortunately a broken link).

It then added some further qualifiers and caveats after that figure, like that the 100% is not actually 100%, becuase a number countries (including China) underreport their prisoner numbers. It came up 22% from the stats at face value, since its hard to know by how many China may be underreporting, but clearly its still too high.

Given these additional points, I thought roughly 20% seemed a reasonable figure.

I don't see accepting the best numbers we have as being dishonest. The numbers are probably not completely accurate but they're the numbers we have. Going beyond them is pure speculation.

[Ashmoria]

you have a problem with her talking about women in prison?

wow

Ailiailia covered it well.

Clinton's comments are hard to defend. Particularly galling is how she mentions race and gender in the same sentence, implying that because African-Americans are discriminated against in policing and sentencing, therefore women are too. The opposite is the case.

It's fair enough to mention women in the corrections system. The excessive incarceration of the the US does affect women as well as men. Some of the comments can be taken to apply generally to all prisoners, like:

... at which point I'd expect her to mention the disastrous effect on African-American families of fathers being locked up.

But no. The words "woman" or "women" appear 22 times in the piece, the word "man" appears once and "fathers" once: both in deprecating comparisons to women:





Nowhere does she mention that over 90% of the people (including parents) in prison ARE MEN.

I get the joke, and one of the things I like about the LP is that they can joke about themselves.

But that particular joke draws attention to the party mostly appealing to men, which in my opinion is a problem for growing the party in future. Most particularly, you don't want to attract MRA's like Ostroeuropa to the party or the female members you do have will leave and it's all downhill from there.

The libertarian party has already hosted Karen Straughan a few times, and and prominent libertarians in Canada are associated with several mens rights organizations.
If women cannot handle men pointing out sexism against men, that's no argument against doing it.

well no he didn't. an editorial about women in prison is an editorial about women in prison. it doesn't have to cover anything else.

[Valaran]

It then added some further qualifiers and caveats after that figure, like that the 100% is not actually 100%, becuase a number countries (including China) underreport their prisoner numbers. It came up 22% from the stats at face value, since its hard to know by how many China may be underreporting, but clearly its still too high.

Given these additional points, I thought roughly 20% seemed a reasonable figure.

Why even quote a "fact check" if you don't agree with its conclusion?

Even 20% is "nearly 25%".

It's a shame the link in the article was broken. That might have contained a breakdown by gender so we could check the claim actually made in this case.

Becuase that was only an initial conclusion. It then went on to qualify that figure, and yes I agree with those qualifiers.

Its still an overstated figure (and by a noticeable amount), and 5% is a lot, given the number of incarcerated people.

The fundamental point is that comparable developed countries have acceptable crime rates with a fraction of the imprisonment rate, so the US system is imprisoning people unnecessarily.

I don't disagree with this point, but I was never arguing against it in the first place.

[Ostroeuropa]

well no he didn't. an editorial about women in prison is an editorial about women in prison. it doesn't have to cover anything else.

When you're listing off things as though they only apply to women, that's misleading.
This isn't an editorial about women in prison because it doesn't actually address anything unique to women in prison. It just talks about mass incarceration problems, and makes out these are womens problems. It's an erasure of male victims.

It didn't actually cover anything to do with women in prison specifically. It also doesn't cover women in the prison system in terms of merely describing the totality of their experience, since it doesn't list off the ways they have it better.

I could write a better one, and i'm supposedly a misogynistic MRA. She didn't cover the tampon issue, which is serious and has led to human rights abuses and medical problems from people being assigned already used tampons and rationing them and shit, she didn't cover women being restrained and cuffed to beds during childbirth which causes completely unnecessary pain from the position, she didn't cover the comparative lack of ex-con programmes, she didn't cover anything. There's PLENTY she could have talked about to make out women need to be talked about in the criminal justice system if she wanted to.
She didn't.

The ONLY THING this article accomplishes is erasure of male victimization. That's it. She didn't talk about womens issues, and there are some. She didn't talk about the totality of their experience. She didn't talk about unique experiences.
She talked about how the prison system, in general, victimizes everyone, then went WIMMINZWIMMINZWIMMINZ.
That's the problem.

[Tahar Joblis]

I try not to be cynical.

its not easy.

All Hillary can do is play the woman card you know. That's what Donald says, depressing to see liberals taking his talking points and running. Guessing this year she can never mention women's issues or she'll be clubbed over the head with that shit. Kind of like 08 when Obama was going to only be the president for black folks.

Trump was not by any means the first to take note of the fact that Hillary's campaign and supporters have been very often running with the "You should vote for Hillary because she is a woman" message. ... remember this?

It is by no means "all she can do," but she is doing it, because it works.

I am not sure she will keep doing it in the general election. It works much better in the Democratic primary. The voters who might find the argument compelling aren't, by and large, swing voters.

[Tahar Joblis]

well no he didn't. an editorial about women in prison is an editorial about women in prison. it doesn't have to cover anything else.

An editorial about women in prison that focuses on the problem of how many women are in prison is like an editorial about white people in prison that focuses on the problem of how many white people are in prison.

[Kelinfort]

Clinton has called for an end to mass incarceration and a more lenient prison system that does not jail for non-violent crimes, lower sentences, and a bigger focus on rehabilitation.

...

Just for the poor wimminz though.

...

kay. Third party it is.

It's obvious, every answer to every question cannot be gendered at all. We have to address every sex equally in every answer ever, else you're a sexist.

[Ashmoria]

well no he didn't. an editorial about women in prison is an editorial about women in prison. it doesn't have to cover anything else.

When you're listing off things as though they only apply to women, that's misleading.
This isn't an editorial about women in prison because it doesn't actually address anything unique to women in prison. It just talks about mass incarceration problems, and makes out these are womens problems. It's an erasure of male victims.

It didn't actually cover anything to do with women in prison specifically. It also doesn't cover women in the prison system in terms of merely describing the totality of their experience, since it doesn't list off the ways they have it better.

I could write a better one, and i'm supposedly a misogynistic MRA. She didn't cover the tampon issue, which is serious and has led to human rights abuses and medical problems from people being assigned already used tampons and rationing them and shit, she didn't cover women being restrained and cuffed to beds during childbirth which causes completely unnecessary pain from the position, she didn't cover the comparative lack of ex-con programmes, she didn't cover anything. There's PLENTY she could have talked about to make out women need to be talked about in the criminal justice system if she wanted to.
She didn't.

The ONLY THING this article accomplishes is erasure of male victimization. That's it. She didn't talk about womens issues, and there are some. She didn't talk about the totality of their experience. She didn't talk about unique experiences.
She talked about how the prison system, in general, victimizes everyone, then went WIMMINZWIMMINZWIMMINZ.
That's the problem.

yeah

right

problem.

[Kelinfort]

well no he didn't. an editorial about women in prison is an editorial about women in prison. it doesn't have to cover anything else.

Snip

With a few minor alterations, I wonder who that reminds me of.

[Ostroeuropa]

Snip

With a few minor alterations, I wonder who that reminds me of.

If you catch me doing it by all means call me out. It's great how nobody ever provides specifics for any of these smears they keep using.
Assuming you're talking about me ofcourse.

Although, if your argument is;
"Hillary clinton is as sexist as someone we routinely say is extremely sexist" then I suppose my point has been made.

[Ashmoria]

well no he didn't. an editorial about women in prison is an editorial about women in prison. it doesn't have to cover anything else.

An editorial about women in prison that focuses on the problem of how many women are in prison is like an editorial about white people in prison that focuses on the problem of how many white people are in prison.

sure

whatever

[Kelinfort]

With a few minor alterations, I wonder who that reminds me of.

If you catch me doing it by all means call me out. It's great how nobody ever provides specifics for any of these smears they keep using.
Assuming you're talking about me ofcourse.

Although, if your argument is;
"Hillary clinton is as sexist as someone we routinely say is extremely sexist" then I suppose my point has been made.

No, that's not the point at all.

In fact, you can look no further than my sig for the answer

[Galloism]

An editorial about women in prison that focuses on the problem of how many women are in prison is like an editorial about white people in prison that focuses on the problem of how many white people are in prison.

sure

whatever

Sadly, he's right.

Women have substantial societal privilege when it comes to criminal justice, much as white people do.

[Guy]

sure

whatever

Sadly, he's right.

Women have substantial societal privilege when it comes to criminal justice, much as white people do.

oooooookay

this is when the discussion goes kooky

[Ashmoria]

sure

whatever

Sadly, he's right.

Women have substantial societal privilege when it comes to criminal justice, much as white people do.

so what?

mrs Clinton wrote an editorial about women in prison. there is no problem with that.

[Khadgar]

Clinton has called for an end to mass incarceration and a more lenient prison system that does not jail for non-violent crimes, lower sentences, and a bigger focus on rehabilitation.

...

Just for the poor wimminz though.

...

kay. Third party it is.

It's obvious, every answer to every question cannot be gendered at all. We have to address every sex equally in every answer ever, else you're a sexist.

MISANDRY!

[Ostroeuropa]

Sadly, he's right.

Women have substantial societal privilege when it comes to criminal justice, much as white people do.

oooooookay

this is when the discussion goes kooky

The sentencing gap between women and men is larger than between white and black.
Women are more difficult to convict, if they are even arrested in the first place.
If you're interested in actually learning about the issue, there's plenty of places to learn about it, and it's a fairly complex one so I shouldn't go into it too much here.

If you catch me doing it by all means call me out. It's great how nobody ever provides specifics for any of these smears they keep using.
Assuming you're talking about me ofcourse.

Although, if your argument is;
"Hillary clinton is as sexist as someone we routinely say is extremely sexist" then I suppose my point has been made.

No, that's not the point at all.

In fact, you can look no further than my sig for the answer

Fair enough then.
It's easily possible that my particular hobbyhorse is making me more irritated about this comment than I should be.

Sadly, he's right.

Women have substantial societal privilege when it comes to criminal justice, much as white people do.

so what?

mrs Clinton wrote an editorial about women in prison. there is no problem with that.

But she didn't. She wrote an editorial about problems with the prison system that effect everybody, and then made out that these were womens problems.