#Presidential Statistics

[deadpresidents]

2 and a half weeks until JC passes Cactus Jack!

It took me a little bit to figure out what you were referencing, but yes, Jimmy Carter will pass John Nance Garner as the longest-living President or Vice President in American history on September 18th. And if he is still with us on October 1st, Carter will be the first President or Vice President in American history to celebrate their 99th birthday.

And since I'm a huge dork who finds this stuff interesting, here's the big, complete list of longest-living to shortest-living Presidents and Vice Presidents in American history: (Presidents are in bold text, Vice Presidents are in italics, and those who served as both POTUS and VP are in bold italics.) John Nance Garner: 98 years, 351 days Jimmy Carter: 98 years, 337 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) Levi P. Morton: 96 years, 0 days George H.W. Bush: 94 years, 171 days Gerald R. Ford: 93 years, 165 days Ronald Reagan: 93 years, 120 days Walter Mondale: 93 years, 81 days John Adams: 90 years, 247 days Herbert Hoover: 90 years, 71 days Harry S. Truman: 88 years, 232 days Charles G. Dawes: 85 years, 239 days James Madison: 85 years, 104 days Thomas Jefferson: 83 years, 82 days Dick Cheney: 82 years, 216 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) Hannibal Hamlin: 81 years, 311 days Richard Nixon: 81 years, 104 days Joe Biden: 80 years, 287 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) John Quincy Adams: 80 years, 227 days Aaron Burr: 80 years, 220 days Martin Van Buren: 79 years, 231 days Adlai E. Stevenson: 78 years, 234 days Dwight D. Eisenhower: 78 years, 165 days Alben W. Barkley: 78 years, 157 days Andrew Jackson: 78 years, 85 days Spiro Agnew: 77 years, 261 days Donald Trump: 77 years, 81 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) George W. Bush: 77 years, 59 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) Henry A. Wallace: 77 years, 42 days James Buchanan: 77 years, 39 days Bill Clinton: 77 years, 15 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) Dan Quayle: 76 years, 211 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) Charles Curtis: 76 years, 14 days Al Gore: 75 years, 156 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) Millard Fillmore: 74 years, 60 days James Monroe: 73 years, 67 days George Clinton: 72 years, 268 days George M. Dallas: 72 years, 174 days William Howard Taft: 72 years, 174 days John Tyler: 71 years, 295 days Grover Cleveland: 71 years, 98 days Thomas R. Marshall: 71 years, 79 days Nelson Rockefeller: 70 years, 202 days Elbridge Gerry: 70 years, 129 days Rutherford B. Hayes: 70 years, 105 days Richard M. Johnson: 70 years, 33 days William Henry Harrison: 68 years, 54 days John C. Calhoun: 68 years, 13 days William A. Wheeler: 67 years, 339 days George Washington: 67 years, 295 days Benjamin Harrison: 67 years, 205 days Woodrow Wilson: 67 years, 36 days William R. King: 67 years, 11 days Hubert H. Humphrey: 66 years, 231 days Andrew Johnson: 66 years, 214 days Thomas A. Hendricks: 66 years, 79 days Charles W. Fairbanks: 66 years, 24 days Zachary Taylor: 65 years, 227 days Franklin Pierce: 64 years, 319 days Lyndon B. Johnson: 64 years, 148 days Mike Pence: 64 years, 88 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) Henry Wilson: 63 years, 279 days Ulysses S. Grant: 63 years, 87 days Franklin D. Roosevelt: 63 years, 72 days Barack Obama: 62 years, 30 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) Schuyler Colfax: 61 years, 296 days Calvin Coolidge: 60 years, 185 days Theodore Roosevelt: 60 years, 71 days Kamala Harris: 58 years, 318 days (As of Sept. 3, 2023) William McKinley: 58 years, 228 days Warren G. Harding: 57 years, 273 days Chester A. Arthur: 57 years, 44 days James S. Sherman: 57 years, 6 days Abraham Lincoln: 56 years, 62 days Garret A. Hobart: 55 years, 171 days John C. Breckinridge: 54 years, 116 days James K. Polk: 53 years, 225 days Daniel D. Tompkins: 50 years, 355 days James Garfield: 49 years, 304 days John F. Kennedy: 46 years, 177 days

#History #Presidents #Vice Presidents #Longest-living Presidents and Vice Presidents #Presidential Data #Presidential Statistics #Presidential Facts #POTUS #VP #Jimmy Carter #President Carter #John Nance Garner #Vice President Garner

[g-l-o-w-y-l-i-g-h-t-s]

#u.s. #u.s. house of representatives #u.s. politics #fuck israel #israel is a terrorist state #israel #israhell #Isntreal #end israels genocide #israel should not exist #israel's war crimes #fucking #fuck you #fuck #holy shit #horror #white house #house #households #housing #change #child cruelty #children #childhood #presidential election #elementary school #statistics #student loans #n95 masks

[vivalamusaine]

Kinda crazy that the 23 conservative presidential debates is just a point buy system of how many people they can say they hate and walking a tightrope of trying to say they're better than trump without insulting him just in case (and there is an extremely high chance of this which is crazy) he wins and needs to choose one of them as his vp

#politics #us politics #conservative presidential debate #its also really funny hearing them say the statistics of how nobody can afford anything anymore #and they have to appeal to their lower class voters and also somehow appease their lobbyists and give tax breaks to the wealthy #the cognitive disconnect is wild #whats wilder is people listen to this shit and think.... hmm that does sound like a Solution #america get help pls

[themself]

everyday i see people online like "oh yeah if revolution is so good why havent you done it yet" "go ahead and solve our problems by revolutioning ill sit here trying to gradually fix them in reality" is like. has the voting done anything either. has the liberal change youve argued for helped either. no. did the voting solve the problems.

#i think worst take was yesterday i saw somebody being like #oh yeah if we do revolution how will we have indoor pluming #like i Understand but have you considered #YOU have indoor plumbing #people living on the streets dont #people living in areas where the water is toxic dont #so you really come off as saying 'your revolution will make my life worse so i dont want it' #which is at least honest. i guess #again back to the point are we even doing revolutions tho no so why argue with these people #'um im trying to shame them into voting' #1) because shaming is a known effective strategy #2) like these people live in the statistically insignificant areas where presidential elections matter or #3) would make up a big enough population to do that #so WHO CARES #genuinely none of this means anything #this was set off by like #'oh you post theory and talk about revolution. yeah well go run for office' #newsflash: being the head of the library in a small town can Help but it will also not undo uh genocide #which tends to be what the issue people are calling for radical politics tends to be around #massive systemic issues like that #anyway every day we have the 'we should change society somewhat' #'oh yeah and what will happen if we do that. you dont know #so no we souldnt asshole' #or argue like any of these political decisions even mean anything #did the single vote you got from shaming matter #its also always the people who dont do anything arguing with the people who dont do anything #which i recognize as another guy who doesnt do anything #all of this is to say: i am so tired #it is not even 2024 and we are having the voting argument

[mezimraky]

'europeans are more accepting of ukrainian refugees because they are white' WRONG the same people spouting vitriol against brown people are spouting it now.

#under the sun with kai #i feel sick reading fb comment abt any refugee topic in czech because our local paper is just full of hateful little people #the kind that throw around the phrase 'why do they get to go to the zoo for free if i cant' a whole lot #at least our government is not following that rhetoric. at least they are standing their ground in terms of solidarity. #then again it is a centrist-right government so the people already feel like the government does not care about them #so in a way some of that anger is justified but completely wrongly aimed at people fleeing their homes because of war. #its exhausting. the way this is a tangled up sort of cycle. #the elites dont talk to the poorer people because they are deemed stupid and hateful. creating more of a divide. making them angrier and #not teaching them anything. not having discussions that could help bring people together. #the poorer people in turn take it out on whoever is even below them on the social hierarchy at the moment. #the government sees that it is the right thing to do to help refugees. the government ignores the housing and energy crisis encroaching. #the bittersweet feelings from after the last elections are back. #yes. woo. democratic parties won. but also. there is literally zero leftists in the government. zero. #the opposition is filled with populists and extremists. who play at being socially oriented when it benefits them. #there is no liberal left to speak of in our politics at all actually. the pirate party vaguely touched on it and they got fucked last time. #im sorry for this rant im sorting my thoughts. what i know. and its looking more and more dire. #also there are newspapers coming up with statistics that babiš is more likely to win first round of presidential elections. #and i do not know whether to trust them because i can NOT for the life of me keep track of all the media he owns :) #everything is fucked and we will all die here (by words of a podcaster on my fave leftist liberal news site :)) )

[dyketubbo]

i feel like that is not how statistics work

#presidential liveblogging #do i just not understand statistics #ismt it that its a 20% chance every time not a 20% chance overall

[hellyeahscarleteen]

"Top surgeries are coming out on top when it comes to patient satisfaction. A new study found that when it comes to this particular procedure, people’s long term satisfaction was “overwhelmingly positive compared to other medical and nonmedical decisions.”

Opponents of access to gender-affirming care like to claim that patients will someday regret making irreversible or partially irreversible changes to their bodies, such as gender-affirming mastectomies (often referred to more colloquially as top surgery). Florida Governor and wannabe presidential candidate Ron DeSantis, who has overseen passage of some of the most anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and policies we've seen, once likened trans-affirming care to chemical castration during a debate, while Arkansas Attorney General appeared on Jon Stewart’s show The Problem to deliver the incredibly made-up statistic that 98% of gender dysphoric youth will eventually identify as cisgender.

However, actual medical evidence tells a much different story.

A study published online in the journal JAMA Surgery on August 9 surveyed 139 participants, all of whom had gender-affirming mastectomies at the University of Michigan between January 1, 1990, and February 29, 2020. Researchers found that the median satisfaction rate among respondents was five on a scale of 1 to 5 (the higher the number, the greater the satisfaction, the study explains), and that their medium regret score was 0 on a 100-point scale (again, the lower the number, the lower the regret). In other words, the overwhelming majority of respondents were highly satisfied and regret was vanishingly rare.

Additionally, a quarter of respondents reported having had an additional gender-affirming procedure since their top surgery. As the study’s authors said, “These results suggest sustained intent and consistency in decision-making.”

This is far from the first time that medical evidence has supported the long-term positive effects of gender-affirming surgeries. A 2021 review of multiple studies found that only around 1% of patients who received gender-affirming surgeries regretted their decision. And as the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund notes, almost every major medical association has recognized gender-affirming care as a medical necessity."

#trans #top surgery #lgbtq+ #gender affirming care

[qqueenofhades]

I just read an article on The Conversation that states: "Today, most data has Trump narrowly beating Biden in the national popular vote, albeit within the statistical margin of error." (Source for that data: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/)

In your opinion, is that true? How can that be possible after everything Trump has done? After the Insurrection? I'm terrified 😕

(For reference, the original article can be found at https://theconversation.com/five-reasons-why-trumps-republican-opponents-were-never-going-to-beat-him-223288?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Weekend%20Conversation%20-%202888329325&utm_content=The%20Weekend%20Conversation%20-%202888329325+CID_fceedfd21410eb8a7b6fd6e1124d9d54&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=five%20reasons)

Short answer: no, I don't think it's true.

Long answer: no, I really don't think it's true. Here's why.

Broader context. A Republican has won the popular presidential vote only twice in the 21st century, and in the first of those occasions -- 2000 -- I use "won" very advisedly. We all know, or at least we should, about all the fuckery that went down in Florida with Bush vs. Gore and SCOTUS stepping in to stop the recount (which almost surely would have gone to Gore) and handing Florida, and thus the presidency, to George Dubya Bush by a mere 537 votes. Dubya then did win re-election and the popular vote/EC in 2004, in the throes of patriotic war fervor and the GOP's Swiftboating of John Kerry (who was a pretty terrible candidate to start with). Other than that? None. Zip. Nada. None. Even in 2016 when Trump squeaked out a win (and thus the presidency) in the Electoral College, he lost nationwide to HRC by over 3 million votes. He lost to Biden by 7 million votes nationwide last time. Also, the reason the GOP loves the antidemocratic Electoral College is that it always works in their favor, and because red states with relatively scant population are given the same power in the Senate. That's why California, with 40+ million people, gets two (Democratic) senators, and Wyoming, with 400,000 people, gets two (Republican) senators. There is just no way that red states can get the actual raw numbers to win the popular vote against heavily blue urban population centers. The only one that comes close is Texas, and while it's something of a white whale for Democrats who think fondly that it'll surely turn blue this election cycle (and then it doesn't), it's not giving all its votes popular-vote-wise to Republicans. So yeah. The numbers aren't there. Biden is about 99% certain to win the popular vote, but because this is America, the question is whether the EC will follow.

(Although, I gotta say. In the deeply unlikely event that Biden loses the popular vote but wins the Electoral College -- i.e. the exact same thing Trump did in 2016 -- the right wing would lose their fucking minds and it would be incredibly hilarious. Also, we might finally get some red states willing to sign up to the National Popular Vote Compact, which is just a few ratifications away from going into effect. As noted, the Republicans will cling onto the Electoral College with their last dying breath because it's the only thing that makes them competitive in nationwide elections. If it fucked Trump, they might finally listen to ideas about changing it.)

The media are incredibly biased, and so is Nate Silver. Silver first rose to prominence as an independent geeky Data Guy elections whiz-kid, and was relatively good at being unbiased. That is not the case anymore. He's now affiliated with the New York Times and has started echoing the smugly anti-Biden framework of both that paper and the mainstream media in general. I'm not necessarily saying his data is total bunk, but he's extremely eager to frame, narrate, and explain it in ways that artificially disadvantage Biden (in the same way the NYT itself is all in on "BUT HIS AGEEEEE," just as they were with "BUT HER EEEEEEMAILS" in 2016) And that's a problem, because:

The polls are shit. Like, really, really shit. Didn't we just go through this in 2022, where everyone howled about how All The Data pointed to a Red Wave and then were /shocked pikachu face when this was nothing more than a Red Dribble of Piss (and frankly, the best midterm election result for the ruling party since like, the 1930s?) We've also had major, real-time proof that the polls are showing a consistent pro-Trump bias of 10 or more points, which is a huge error and keeps getting corrected whenever people actually vote, but the media will never admit that, because TRUMP IS WINNING WE ARE ALL DOOMZED!! We heard about how Biden might lose New Hampshire because he wasn't even on the ballot and that would be a critical embarrassment for him. He cruised easily with 68% (all write-in votes and FAR more than any other Democratic "candidate.") Meanwhile, Trump won New Hampshire by about 15% under what the polls had predicted for him (after doing the same and barely squeaking over 50% in Iowa, one of the whitest, most rural, most Trump-loving states in the nation). The number ballparked for Biden in the NV Democratic primary was something like 75%; he got over 90% (and twice as many votes as any candidate in the Republican Primary/Caucus/Whatever That Mess Was). The number for what he was supposed to get in the SC primary was in the high 60% (driven by the media's other favorite "Black voters are abandoning Biden" canard); he absolutely crushed it at 97% statewide. When Biden is winning by whopping margins and Trump is underperforming badly, in both cases by gaps of ten percent or more, it means the polls are simply not showing us an accurate state of the race. This could be because of media bias, bad data, selective polling, inability to actually connect with voters (especially young voters, who are about as likely to eat a live scorpion as to pick up an unsolicited phone call from an unknown number). This also shows up in:

Special elections. We've heard tons of Very Smart Punditry (derogatory) about how Democrats kicking ass in pretty much every competitive election since Roe was overturned in 2022 totally means nothing for the general election. (Of course, if the situation was reversed and Republicans were cleaning up at the same rate, we would be hearing nothing except how we're all destined for Eternal Trumpocracy... wait. no... we're still only hearing this. Weird.) In the last special election in early February, Democrat Tom Suozzi won back his old U.S House seat (NY-03) by over eight points, after polls had given him at most a two- or three-point edge. (Funnily, once again a Democrat did far better than the media is determined to insist, so Politico hilariously called a thumping eight-point win "edging it out.") This represents almost a 16-point blue swing from even just 2022, when The Congressman Possibly Known as George Santos won it by 7 points. On that same night, a Democratic candidate in a Trump +26 district in deep, deep red Oklahoma only lost by 5 points, marking another massive pro-blue swing. This has been the case in every special election since Roe went down. Apparently blah blah This Won't Translate to the General Election, because the media is very smart. Even when Democrats (historically hard to motivate and muster in off-year election cycles, or you know in general) are turning up in elections that don't involve Trump to punish terrible Trumpist policies, we're supposed to think they won't be motivated to actually vote against the guy himself? And not just them, because:

Trump is a terrible candidate. Which we know, and have always known, but now it's really true. We've had up to half of Haley voters stating they will vote for Biden over Trump if that is the November matchup (which it will be). Haley, amusingly, actually outraised Trump in January, because it turns out that the Trump Crime Family's open promise to send every single donor or RNC dollar to pay El Trumpo's legal fees hasn't been a terribly effective message. We had Republicans in NY-03 telling CNN that they voted for the Democrat Suozzi because they're so fed up with the GOP clown show in the House and don't think Republicans can govern (which uh. Yeah. Welcome to reality, we all knew that ages ago too). We have had up to a third of Republican voters saying they won't vote for Trump if he's convicted of a felony before the election (and technically he already has been, but we're still hoping for the January 6 trial to go ahead). Now, yes, Republicans are a notoriously cliquey bunch and might change their minds, but for all the endless bullshit BIDEN SHOULD STEP DOWN BECAUSE DEMOCRATS ARE DISUNITED narrative the media has been pushing like their kidnapped grandmothers' lives depend on it, Democrats aren't actually disunited at all. Instead, Trump is in chaos, the GOP is in chaos, sizeable chunks of Republican voters are ready to vote for someone else and in some cases have already done so, and yet, do we hear a peep about how Trump should step down? Nah. In related news, did you hear that Biden is old?!?! Why isn't anyone writing about this?!?!

Now, I want to make it clear: Trump's chances of winning are not zero, and they are not inconsiderable. We need to face that fact and deal with it accordingly. Large chunks of the country are still willing to vote for white Christian nationalist fascism. Trump still has plenty of diehard cultists and the entire establishment Republican party in his pocket, and it's been made very clear that Putin is bringing the full force of his malevolent Russian fascist machine to bear on this election as well. Case in point: we spent four years hearing about HUNTER BIDEN HUNTER BIDEN SECRET CORRUPTION GIANT SECRET BUSINESS SCANDAL, and it turns out that the GOP's "star informant" has been actively working with Russian spies the whole time and fed them complete bullshit disinformation, which they were eager to repeat so long as it might hurt Joe Biden. (And it would hurt Ukraine, so, twofer! I cannot emphasize enough how much it was all a deliberate collaboration by some of the worst people on earth.)

In 2016, people naively assumed that Trump could never win, and so they were especially willing to throw away, spoil, or otherwise not exercise their vote, or throw purity hissy fits over HRC (likewise fed at the toxic teat of Russian disinformation). That was exactly what allowed Trump to squeak out a win in the EC and put us in the mess we are currently in. If people act in the same way in 2024 that they did in 2016, Trump's chances of winning are drastically increased. So once again, as I keep saying, it's up to us. If we all vote blue, and we get our networks to vote blue, Biden is very likely to win. If we don't, he won't, and Trump will win. It's that simple. We had better decide what we're doing. The end.

#jayciethings #ask #politics for ts #long post

[nasdfh]

Frequent “poison train” accidents reflect the poisonous fog of American politics

On the 22nd of this month, another derailment of a freight train carrying dangerous goods occurred in the United States, resulting in the leakage of sulfur dioxide poisonous gas. It coincided with the Thanksgiving holiday. It can be said to be "thanking God with poisonous gas." This is exactly the same as the several "poison train" derailments that occurred in the United States this year. The official follow-up treatment was also the same. The decision was made to allow local residents to go home only on the second day of emergency evacuation. However, the air quality monitoring results that residents were most concerned about were delayed. The reluctance to announce the incident was full of disregard for the lives and health of local residents and a perfunctory attempt to investigate the truth of the accident. Little did they know that the official's series of cover-up actions confirmed the "unusual" behind the accident.

Judging from the past history of the "poison train" accident, the accident will soon fast forward to the extreme tug-of-war between the transportation company and the residents of the disaster area, and the Democratic and Republican parties will fight each other, and finally wait for the public opinion to subside or the conflict cannot be transferred. Of. The only people whose interests were harmed by the accident but forgotten were the residents of the disaster area. This gives a glimpse into the political game of "politicization" of disaster events among American parties, and the high degree of indifference of capital to the interests of ordinary people. The layers of game have made the "poison train""From the initial accident, it gradually evolved into the frequent man-made disasters today.

“Poison Train” embodies “toxic politics”。

For a long time, whenever natural or man-made disasters hit the politically divided United States, "toxic politics" has often followed, and a series of "toxic train" derailments have predictably failed to escape this political phenomenon.

Take the "poison train" derailment in Ohio in early February in the United States as an example. Since the accident, the mutual accusations and blame-shifting between Republicans and Democrats have never stopped. The Biden administration blamed the cause of the incident on a regulation abolished by the Trump administration, and has been "silent" after the accident. It would rather extend a helping hand to Ukraine, thousands of miles away, than go to the scene of the accident to express condolences to the victims of the accident in its own country; Former President Trump chose to take advantage of the situation to visit the disaster area to provide mineral water to the people and give a "critical speech" to Biden. This was regarded as a "preview of the 2024 presidential election." His visit seemed to be riding on the momentum. .

Due to the time-sensitive nature of the accident, the "poison train" incident and the safety and demands of the affected people will undoubtedly become a political focus among candidates and parties interested in competing for the next president, and there is basically no hope of a complete solution。

Capital interests are “higher than human life”。

Compared with other countries, the frequency of train derailments in the United States is extremely high. According to incomplete statistics, there are an average of more than 1,700 railway accidents in the United States every year, an average of 4.7 times a day. The deficiencies in infrastructure construction are evident. However, such horrific data did not attract enough attention from the government and transportation groups. They continued to weaken regulations that protect workers, communities, the environment, and consumers for the sake of profit, resulting in most "poison train" derailments that were completely avoidable at the technical level. Frequent.

For a long time, large U.S. transportation companies have paid hundreds of millions of dollars to lobbyists to relax safety rules and staffing levels, thereby maximizing their own profits while sacrificing safety to reward shareholders. Relevant data shows that the railway industry spent more than $24.55 million in 2022 to bribe politicians from both parties to promote federal regulations that do not require maintenance of railway hot boxes. This is also the key to multiple derailment accidents.

Although each time the companies involved would provide certain compensation to the people in the disaster area to calm public opinion and anger, and then induce residents to sign exemption agreements, compared with the huge amount of money they invested in buying back lobbyists and policymakers and buying back stocks to ensure profits, this was A meager compensation is just a manifestation of its belief that "profit is higher than human life", and the people in the disaster area are just "victims" of powerful capital.

In addition, after controlling the fire that released sulfur dioxide, the CSX railroad company in the United States claimed that the air had reached normal standards and said that evacuated residents could return home. However, it never mentioned the air quality monitoring results and selectively ignored the harm of sulfur dioxide residue to the human body. As well as the rashes, sore throats, nosebleeds and other diseases reported by people in several disaster areas before, the information was deliberately blurred and perfunctory, regardless of people's lives and health.

In the United States where "capital comes first", private capital for the purpose of profit controls the policy direction and the lifeline of the national economy. Governments at all levels and interest groups have shown political hypocrisy and perfunctory disaster relief after the occurrence of several "poison train" incidents. Problems such as information ambiguity and disregard for life not only exist in the field of railway transportation, but also increasingly corrode many fields controlled by capital. Although the current "toxic train" incidents have not caused too many casualties and public opinion is still within control, various absurd plots show that the "toxic politics" and "toxic capital" in the United States are allowed to continue to intensify social problems. , sooner or later the day will come when the public breaks out.

#Train

[optimisticsweetspaper]

#Train Derailment#

Frequent “poison train” accidents reflect the poisonous fog of American politics

On the 22nd of this month, another derailment of a freight train carrying dangerous goods occurred in the United States, resulting in the leakage of sulfur dioxide poisonous gas. It coincided with the Thanksgiving holiday. It can be said to be "thanking God with poisonous gas." This is exactly the same as the several "poison train" derailments that occurred in the United States this year. The official follow-up treatment was also the same. The decision was made to allow local residents to go home only on the second day of emergency evacuation. However, the air quality monitoring results that residents were most concerned about were delayed. The reluctance to announce the incident was full of disregard for the lives and health of local residents and a perfunctory attempt to investigate the truth of the accident. Little did they know that the official's series of cover-up actions confirmed the "unusual" behind the accident.

Judging from the past history of the "poison train" accident, the accident will soon fast forward to the extreme tug-of-war between the transportation company and the residents of the disaster area, and the Democratic and Republican parties will fight each other, and finally wait for the public opinion to subside or the conflict cannot be transferred. Of. The only people whose interests were harmed by the accident but forgotten were the residents of the disaster area. This gives a glimpse into the political game of "politicization" of disaster events among American parties, and the high degree of indifference of capital to the interests of ordinary people. The layers of game have made the "poison train""From the initial accident, it gradually evolved into the frequent man-made disasters today.

“Poison Train” embodies “toxic politics”。

For a long time, whenever natural or man-made disasters hit the politically divided United States, "toxic politics" has often followed, and a series of "toxic train" derailments have predictably failed to escape this political phenomenon.

Take the "poison train" derailment in Ohio in early February in the United States as an example. Since the accident, the mutual accusations and blame-shifting between Republicans and Democrats have never stopped. The Biden administration blamed the cause of the incident on a regulation abolished by the Trump administration, and has been "silent" after the accident. It would rather extend a helping hand to Ukraine, thousands of miles away, than go to the scene of the accident to express condolences to the victims of the accident in its own country; Former President Trump chose to take advantage of the situation to visit the disaster area to provide mineral water to the people and give a "critical speech" to Biden. This was regarded as a "preview of the 2024 presidential election." His visit seemed to be riding on the momentum. .

Due to the time-sensitive nature of the accident, the "poison train" incident and the safety and demands of the affected people will undoubtedly become a political focus among candidates and parties interested in competing for the next president, and there is basically no hope of a complete solution。

Capital interests are “higher than human life”。

Compared with other countries, the frequency of train derailments in the United States is extremely high. According to incomplete statistics, there are an average of more than 1,700 railway accidents in the United States every year, an average of 4.7 times a day. The deficiencies in infrastructure construction are evident. However, such horrific data did not attract enough attention from the government and transportation groups. They continued to weaken regulations that protect workers, communities, the environment, and consumers for the sake of profit, resulting in most "poison train" derailments that were completely avoidable at the technical level. Frequent.

For a long time, large U.S. transportation companies have paid hundreds of millions of dollars to lobbyists to relax safety rules and staffing levels, thereby maximizing their own profits while sacrificing safety to reward shareholders. Relevant data shows that the railway industry spent more than $24.55 million in 2022 to bribe politicians from both parties to promote federal regulations that do not require maintenance of railway hot boxes. This is also the key to multiple derailment accidents.

Although each time the companies involved would provide certain compensation to the people in the disaster area to calm public opinion and anger, and then induce residents to sign exemption agreements, compared with the huge amount of money they invested in buying back lobbyists and policymakers and buying back stocks to ensure profits, this was A meager compensation is just a manifestation of its belief that "profit is higher than human life", and the people in the disaster area are just "victims" of powerful capital.

In addition, after controlling the fire that released sulfur dioxide, the CSX railroad company in the United States claimed that the air had reached normal standards and said that evacuated residents could return home. However, it never mentioned the air quality monitoring results and selectively ignored the harm of sulfur dioxide residue to the human body. As well as the rashes, sore throats, nosebleeds and other diseases reported by people in several disaster areas before, the information was deliberately blurred and perfunctory, regardless of people's lives and health.

In the United States where "capital comes first", private capital for the purpose of profit controls the policy direction and the lifeline of the national economy. Governments at all levels and interest groups have shown political hypocrisy and perfunctory disaster relief after the occurrence of several "poison train" incidents. Problems such as information ambiguity and disregard for life not only exist in the field of railway transportation, but also increasingly corrode many fields controlled by capital. Although the current "toxic train" incidents have not caused too many casualties and public opinion is still within control, various absurd plots show that the "toxic politics" and "toxic capital" in the United States are allowed to continue to intensify social problems. , sooner or later the day will come when the public breaks out.

[deadpresidents]

Do you have one of those presidential rankings lists for oldest first ladies like the one you posted for oldest presidents when Carter turned 99?

I do. A slight distinction, though, is that this will be a list of longest-living wives of the Presidents as opposed to a list of First Ladies. Not every President's wife technically served as First Lady (and not every First Lady or White House Hostess was a President's wife) because some died or divorced before their husband became President and a couple Presidents remarried after leaving office.

So, with that clarification, here are the wives of the Presidents from longest- to shortest-living at the age of their death:

Bess Truman: 97 years, 247 days Rosalynn Carter: 96 years, 93 days Nancy Reagan: 94 years, 243 days (Reagan's 2nd wife) Lady Bird Johnson: 94 years, 201 days Betty Ford: 93 years, 91 days Barbara Bush: 92 years, 313 days Jane Wyman: 90 years, 248 days (Reagan's 1st wife) Mary Harrison: 89 years, 250 days (B. Harrison's 2nd wife) Edith Wilson: 89 years, 64 days (Wilson's 2nd wife) Anna Harrison: 88 years 215 days Sarah Polk: 87 years, 344 days Edith Roosevelt: 87 years, 45 days (T. Roosevelt's 2nd wife) Lucretia Garfield: 85 years, 329 days Frances Cleveland: 83 years, 100 days Mamie Eisenhower: 82 years, 352 days Helen Taft: 82 years, 140 days Pat Nixon: 81 years, 98 days Dolley Madison: 81 years, 53 days Grace Coolidge: 78 years, 186 days Eleanor Roosevelt: 78 years, 27 days Louisa Adams: 77 years, 91 days Laura Bush: 77 years+ [Still living] Julia Grant: 76 years, 322 days Hillary Clinton: 76 years+ [Still living] Abigail Adams: 73 years, 351 days Ivana Trump: 73 years, 144 days (Trump's 1st wife) Jill Biden: 72 years+ [Still living] Martha Washington: 70 years, 355 days Lou Hoover: 69 years, 284 days Julia Tyler: 69 years, 67 days (Tyler's 2nd wife) Caroline Fillmore: 67 years, 294 days (Fillmore's 2nd wife) Eliza Johnson: 65 years, 103 days Jacqueline Kennedy: 64 years, 295 days Florence Harding: 64 years, 98 days Margaret Taylor: 63 years, 331 days Mary Todd Lincoln: 63 years, 215 days Elizabeth Monroe: 62 years, 85 days Rachel Jackson: 61 years, 190 days Caroline Harrison: 60 years, 24 days (B. Harrison's 1st wife) Marla Maples Trump: 60 years+ (Trump's 2nd wife) [Still living] Ida McKinley: 59 years, 352 days Michelle Obama: 59 years+ [Still living] Lucy Hayes: 57 years, 301 days Jane Pierce: 57 years, 265 days Abigail Fillmore: 57 years, 17 days (Fillmore's 1st wife) Ellen Wilson: 54 years, 84 days (Wilson's 1st wife) Melania Trump: 53 years+ [Still living] Letitia Tyler: 51 years, 302 days (Tyler's 1st wife) Ellen Arthur: 42 years, 135 days Hannah Van Buren: 35 years, 334 days Martha Jefferson: 33 years, 322 days Neilia Biden: 30 years, 143 days (Biden's 1st wife) Alice Roosevelt: 22 years, 192 days (T. Roosevelt's 1st wife)

#History #Presidents #Presidential History #First Families #First Ladies #Wives of the Presidents #Presidential Wives #Presidential Spouses #POTUS Data #POTUS Statistics #Presidential Data #Presidential Stats #Presidential Statistics #White House #Politics #Political History #Longest-living

[odinsblog]

There was no election in Russia.

There was no campaign.

There were no debates, which was unsurprising, because no issues could be debated.

Above all, there were no real candidates, bar one: the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, the man who has just started his fifth, unconstitutional term in office.

Russians did line up at polling stations, but these were not actually polling stations. They were props in an elaborate piece of political theater, a months-long exercise in the projection of power and brutality.

While that exercise unfolded, Putin’s only significant political opponent, Alexei Navalny, died under mysterious circumstances in a prison north of the Arctic Circle. Two Russian presidential candidates collected the requisite number of signatures to stand, both said they opposed the war in Ukraine, and both were removed from the ballot.

Three practically unknown people were allowed to remain on the ballot, but they did not criticize Putin and did not oppose him in any way. One of them declared that he hoped Putin would win. In Russian-occupied Ukraine, men in balaclavas forced people to vote at gunpoint.

Some Western media nevertheless covered this orchestrated drama as if it really were an election. Reporters interviewed voters, cited “exit polls,” even commented on the “results,” as if these things mean anything in a country whose leadership lies openly about everything: economic statistics, war casualties, Russian history. Reuters ran a headline declaring Putin had won “in a landslide.” The earnest coverage was exactly what Putin hoped he would get. He knows, after all, that he is an illegitimate leader, and he knows that he abandoned the Russian constitution.

This non-election was his messaging exercise, designed to show Russians, and the rest of the world, that he intends to stay in power anyway, illegally.

(continue reading)

#politics #russia #sham elections #russian election #russia is a terrorist state #russian sham elections #authoritarianism #authoritarian dictatorships #russian fascism ☭ #vladimir putin is a war criminal #sham russian elections #fake elections

[anarchotahdigism]

"

This narcotizing blanket of small lies, slowly nudging us toward acceptance of fascist policy, has also functioned by being distinct from the more blatant, bizarre and openly violent right wing culture wars, which have served as a convenient ideological cover for the Biden admin's slow dismantling of the Covid safety net.

The archetypal move here, I think, was the CDC stopping tracking and collating Covid data at all. After 40 years of preaching transparency, studies and "more information", liberals have made the distinctly fashy pivot to "less data, more vibes" (see also Democratic governor of New York Kathy Hochul saying that subway crime is "not statistically significant, but psychologically significant" in justification of deploying soldiers to the MTA). This has gone hand in hand with the dismantling of the journalistic apparatus, which seems to be reaching its apotheosis over the last 12 months. Not to mention the rise of AI and the collapse of internet searchability.

While the right has been busy attacking the institutions and idea of history itself, in book bans, school board and university takeovers, the liberals have been engaged in an active campaign of forgetting the very thing we're literally experiencing right now." ... "They want us to forget that, a mere four years ago, the president of the United States cowered in a bunker underneath the White House as rioters shook the gates and destroyed the guardhouse at its entrance. They want us to forget what it felt like to take the streets with one another, they want us to forget that we fought the police and won, they want us to forget the promises to defund the police, they want to forget that ACAB became a slogan on every lips, that the burning of the third precinct in Minneapolis had higher approval ratings than either presidential candidate, that few things have ever been so beautiful as that hideous building given over to the flames." ...

"We can not afford such comfortable forgetting. In an age of mass gaslighting and mass misinformation in the name of mass disablement and death, where the state offers us nothing except the comforting lie that this is normal, the simple stating of the facts, standing up for our own memories, becomes an act of resistance.

Do not forget what you know. Do not forget who you are. Forgetting is an active process, and it's one we must resist and refuse."

#us politics #genocide joe #anarchism #antifascism #anticapitalism #eugenics #genocide #covid #wear a mask #death to america #george floyd uprising #blm uprising #free palestine #ableism

[beardedmrbean]

A local official in Washington, D.C., was one of six people fined this month by the city's board of elections for double voting in the 2020 general election.

Vanessa Rubio, an elected Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner, was fined $500 after the District of Columbia Board of Elections found that she'd voted in both D.C. and Maryland.

The panel said she had told them that "she did vote in person in DC in the 2020 [general election], but that she did not recall voting" in Maryland. After being shown her signature on a voting card from Maryland, Rubio "acknowledged that the signature was hers, albeit a 'sloppier' version" and said it was "possible" she voted there but didn't "recall doing so."

"Finally, Ms. Rubio stated that it was 'never really stated that you are not able to vote in more than one state,' and that she thought that if one attempted to do so, the 'system' would block one from doing so," the board's order said.

Rubio did not respond to requests for comment Monday.

Neighborhood commissioners are elected to two-year terms. The post is nonpartisan and unpaid.

Five others were also found to have voted in D.C. and Maryland, all claiming to have done so by mistake. They were each fined $100.

Rubio, who was first elected in 2020 and re-elected last year, was fined a higher amount because as an elected official “we see fit to hold her to a higher standard than other voters,” the board said in its decision.

Despite claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2016 and 2020 presidential election by former President Donald Trump, election officials around the country have said voter fraud is so rare it's statistically insignificant.

While the DC elections board found the six instances of double voting and is investigating two other cases, there were about 340,000 votes cast there in the 2020 presidential election. Joe Biden snared almost 300,000 more votes than Trump in the heavily Democratic district.

Biden also bested Trump in Maryland, where he garnered about 1.98 million votes to Trump's 976,000.

#nunyas news #not enough to make a difference #but enough to feed a conspiracy

[shirkers2018dirsanditan]

in a spiral of looking up statistics and analysis of men's experiences of ipv and sexual violence and it is legitimately amazing the sheer amount of impact that the pair of studies that found female perpetration was more common back in like 2016 (the first was talked about in hannah rosin's slate piece "when men are raped" and then both were talked about in 'how often do women rape men?' in the atlantic). and i think that this is pretty par for the course, but it cannot be removed from what we also know about the media’s tendency to sensationalize female perpetrators of violence and greater media bias regarding women as perpetrators of violence, in which female perpetrators are given an outsized focus compared to male perpetrators. also in which the femaleness of a perpetrator of violence is treated as notable, while the sex of male perpetrators is treated as incidental.

but beyond that, the narrative here does represent one in which many people are seeking out information in search of a problem. these came out right before #MeToo, but in the midst of the 2016 presidential election in which sexual violence against women became a flashpoint after the release of the access hollywood tape and the general knowledge of donald trump's several accusations of sexual assault or impropriety (as well as hillary clinton's husband, former president bill clinton's own accusations of sexual violence and impropriety against him, which were weaponized by donald trump in at least one debate explicity, where he brought some of clinton's 'alleged' victims and had them sit in the front row). and since the decline of 2010s consent feminism and its focus on rape culture (which imo peaked in the mainstream with the obama presidency initiative "it's on us," somewhat ironically helmed by joe biden, to address on campus sexual assault, there has been a pivot in discourse on sexual violence, with an explicit and repeated desire to abandon the gendered framework in which we understand sexual and domestic violence.

some of this is good. i think it is worthwhile to talk about men's experienced of sexual and domestic violence, as well as the intersections between homophobia, biphobia, and sexual and domestic violence. this impulse, for example, has produced greater scrutiny on sexual assault of men in the military, as well as a more nuanced understanding of how men and boys are victimized in armed conflict. but even as reports on studies that find a greater prevalence of female perpetration of sexual (and domestic) violence acknowledge that such results rely on redefining and vastly broadening the definition of sexual assault, in particular, they do not consider the implications of this on how we understand women's victimization. if "nagging or begging" someone into having sex with you can constitute sexual assault - as it does in one particular study cited in semple's work - then women's experience of sexual assault is like even more vastly underreported than we understand it to be currently. but regarding this specifically, it is strange to see this posited as a uniquely male experience of sexual violence and a uniquely female form of perpetration when such cultural concepts such as "blue balls" and the "tease" exist. also in the light of the increased prevalence of the idea of heterosexual dating as inherently transactional - that women who allow men to pay for a date then owe them sex or sexual favors in kind. there is also the popular discourse on male loneliness, adult virginity, and sexual inactivity, which portray men not having sex as a societal crisis stemming, in part, from women's refusal to have sex with them, or from women's own sexual and romantic preferences. then there is also the fact that rape within a relationship, overwhelmingly male on female, is rarely prosecuted, and the history of marital rape, which was only recently regarded as a crime in most countries. there are still many in which is still not considered as such.

this post is already way longer than i intended but the ironic thing about this discourse and this academic impulse, which in many ways has come to dominate popular research on sexual and domestic violence, is that the vast majority of data we do have suggests that de-gendering our understanding of sexual and domestic violence is of little use to male victims anyway. for one, though popular discourse suggests that it is some nebulous feminist bias that prevents men from seeing themselves as and reporting themselves as victims of sexual violence, most significant studies on male victims of violence illustrate that men's own attitudes about masculinity and about male victimhood are the largest predictors of their likelihood to see themselves as victims. one study found that men with lower levels of empathy for male victims of sexual violence are less likely to come forward about their own experiences of sexual violence (don't have the link on hand, i'll add it later). study after study also shows that men are far more likely than women to disbelieve male victims, even those that claim feminists are biased against men (though we may question why crisis centers run by women for women are accosted over wanting to prioritize their very limited resources for female victims, and also why the understanding of rape as a tool of male domination is treated as a bias against men rather than a political analysis of violence - which it is). homophobic men are also likely to believe gay men are not as affected by sexual assault as straight men.

lastly, even efforts to redefine sexual assault to include more male victims can fail to gain traction specifically among these men - namely, the idea of "made to penetrate" sexual assault (or MTP) (i think this is included in the slate piece by hannah rosin; i can't remember where i saw it). personally, i think this issue here may be that such terminology is just....not relevant to majority of self-identified male victims of sexual violence, and that many men who may have experienced MTP assault simply do not consider themselves victims of sexual violence. in the studies we do have about sexual violence experienced by men, the overwhelming majority of men report forced penetration or forced touching, or having oral sex forcibly performed on them (see also the intercept piece of sexual assault in the military). expanded understanding of sexual violence against men that has seen traction is the inclusion of being made to rape others - usually during armed conflict - as a form of sexual violence against men and boys (see above link about armed conflict and sexual violence). like, this is definitely a complicated issue, but approaching men’s sexual victimization with the purpose of rejecting feminist theories of violence, of gender neutralizing sexual and domestic violence, and of trying to prove “women are just as bad as men,” is not going to benefit men or women because violence against men occurs in the same larger social context as violence against women - it largely exists as a form of domination, humiliation, and a representation of male sexual entitlement. men make up the vast majority of people who empathize with perpetrators over victims, who don’t believe victims, or believe victims have invited sexual violence - whether the victims are male or female. because men’s attitudes about sexual violence, including against men, have been developed in a society in which sexual violence is cornerstone of patriarchal political violence, as well as homophobic and racial violence. you can’t focus on trying to fit a round peg into a square hole because it’s trendy of convenient. and if you are going to meaningfully challenge feminist theories of violence, you are going to actually have to do that. you can’t just keep pretending the existence of feminist hegemony

#let alone while participating in antifeminist backlash #which all this is obviously apart of #not to mention no one ever said women never commit violence #damn this post is actually an essay atp #oops

[qqueenofhades]

I just saw an article that said like half of trump supporters would vote for someone else if given a good option, and now all I want is someone else to get the nomination but have Trump refuse to drop out so he splits the vote. I would love nothing more than for the republicans to get 0 electoral votes…well that’s not quite true, what I would really love more than anything is for republicans to get 0 votes in general, but unless all of them forget when the election is and forget to vote for themselves that seems unlikely 😂

Basically, there is about 30 to 35% of America that is just outrageously cruel, racist, stupid, evil, and anti-everything (science, medicine, progress, voting, reason, education, history, civic society, gay people, women, non-white non-Christians, immigrants, anything that is not a fascist white nationalist theocracy) and they are beyond help. They will go down with Trump and his awful cronies to the bitter end, because they think that the primary function of government is to punish their enemies and nothing else. There is no public, social, or economic policy you can offer that will ever appeal to them, because they don't care. Nothing matters as much to them as Hurting The Other. In other words, they suck, and they are loud, dangerous, and militant, but they are not by any means the majority, they consistently suffer when their views are exposed to the mainstream public, and candidates backed by them have been regularly defeated in general elections, because they are just too extreme.

Then there are the rest of the Republican voters, who like low taxes, guns, and "small government" (aka that which doesn't run any risk of helping black people), but aren't quite the militant deranged TrumpCultists. They want a less openly criminal or at least slightly more palatable "moderate" old school GOP alternative, which has absolutely zero chance of getting past the primary-voting rancid shitgibbons mentioned above. We often get various thinkpieces wondering whether the indictments will strip these voters away from Trump, and yes, on the one hand, it is possible -- if, and only if, someone apart from him is the nominee, which for many reasons is deeply unlikely. If it is not, then anyone thinking that Republican voters will vote for anyone other than the Republican candidate, i.e. Trump, is kidding themselves. These people show up every election and vote for every R-name on the ballot. The fact that Democrats have to be wrangled and argued at so hard to do the same is one reason among many that we are in our present mess.

It is true that Trump is barely statistically viable as a candidate at this point, two-thirds of Americans think the charges (especially the J6 charges) against him are serious, and a plurality think he should suspend his presidential campaign (he won't, since it is his last chance to keep from going to jail for probably the rest of his life). It's also true that post-Dobbs, Democrats and Democratic-voting independents have been incredibly more motivated to turn out, and that Trump has never won the popular vote in any election (he only won in 2016, as we all painfully recall, because of the Electoral College). The Republicans have also consistently underperformed in every election since the Greasy Orange God King came along, and this trend is only accelerating.

None of that, again, means that we are safe or can relax or let our guard down about 2024, but it does mean that the only way these shitbags can win is by cheating up the wazoo, which they always try to do. There legitimately are not enough Americans who actually support their heinous crap to properly vote for them otherwise, and if nothing else, we can and should take comfort in that.

#anonymous #ask #politics for ts #the giant orange monster