This is Julio's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Julio's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Julio
Recent Activity
Yes, several of us criticized his use of the word "populism", in that previous article, to describe what he was criticizing. His current use seems to shed the negative connotations.
Toggle Commented 2 days ago on Links for 02-22-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Very good article, laying down the issues.
Toggle Commented 2 days ago on Links for 02-22-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
The statement you are quoting is ambiguous. The way you read it (the same persons voted both times, switching parties), then the statement is obviously false. If however it is about aggregates, then no. E.g. in a particular county Obama voters stayed home this time, and Trump voters came out in droves.
Toggle Commented 2 days ago on Links for 02-22-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
You are correct, this is slightly off topic if you refer to the actual ballot-casting process. The effort to hack registration databases is a different animal than the effort to influence public opinion. If the whole Russia thing concentrates on the former, and results in strengthening of our balloting infrastructure, it's all good. But it doesn't. The current effort to censor Facebook and Twitter accounts (because they are Russian), not censor equally biased pro-Israeli accounts (of whatever origin, is anyone checking whether they come from Israel?) and to censor and even imprison anti-Israeli speech (BDS) makes for a stark, nation-specific contrast. The invitations to Mandela and Churchill had broad bipartisan support. The invitation to Netanyahu was a partisan stunt to express support for a foreign leader against our own president. Not the same at all.
Toggle Commented 4 days ago on Links for 02-19-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Cannot separate them completely. Part of my quality measurement is that I get different perspectives (and even biases). One of the reasons I hate it when people in this space insult and drive away people with different opinions and biases.
Toggle Commented 4 days ago on Links for 02-19-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Well yes, if I had to pick only one news outlet, it would not be RT. Probably the NYT, far less biased overall.
Toggle Commented 4 days ago on Links for 02-19-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
No. I get plenty of that elsewhere.
Toggle Commented 4 days ago on Links for 02-19-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Yes, the hysteria about Russia is rich coming from a country that invites Netanyahu to Congress, where you cannot get elected President without kowtowing to AIPAC, and where there was a large and persistent Congressional constituency for pardoning an Israeli spy. The latest round is making support of BDS a crime.
Toggle Commented 4 days ago on Links for 02-19-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Yes, I agree. Among other ways, major press organs lie by omission, or, similarly, by an overwhelming repetition of the official version punctuated by an occasional sop to an opposing viewpoint. That's why I find it helpful to read alternative news sources, even if they have their own biases.
Toggle Commented 4 days ago on Links for 02-19-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
What is your beef with RT? It has many very reasonable reporters, some of them refugees from liberal channels probably unwilling (MSNBC) or unable (LinkTV, FreeSpeechTV) to support them. I watch some of their programs on internet channels, and that selection at least is more informative, less biased, and less sensationalist than mainstream channels.
Toggle Commented 4 days ago on Links for 02-19-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
As a kid growing up in Argentina I and my friends often faced one of the existential moral questions of our time: Do we let the kid who owns the ball play forward even though he cannot kick worth a damn? These days, I'm sure, the kid with the ball can find a game next block and everyone else's skills suffer from hysteresis.
1 reply
Maybe this? http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-richest-nancy-pelosi-vineyard-story.html
1 reply
You've found your niche! I'm hooked.
1 reply
The global version of the amazon dating game with cities.
1 reply
Small nit "No matter where" would be an improvement It's a race to the bottom for their choice of venues Look at our taxes They were "not competitive"!! Since when is that a criterion for taxation?
1 reply
Yes, I saw that after I replied to him. He's a thoughtful fellow.
Toggle Commented Feb 16, 2018 on Links for 02-15-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
I think we had this discussion elsewhere and we agree, but just in case: That's just my point. You need to guard against all those distortions. The current focus of our press and Congress is "the Russians", as if dealing with a foreign threat were the real issue. How much ink has gone to determine whether it was "the Russians" that hacked the registration databases, vs. "the DBs are vulnerable, to anyone, let's beef them up"?
Toggle Commented Feb 16, 2018 on Links for 02-13-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Food stamps come and go. For a skill with legs try dumpster diving.
Toggle Commented Feb 16, 2018 on Links for 02-13-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Too bad, I had you pegged as someone who could disagree without resorting to infantile insults. Arrivederci.
Toggle Commented Feb 16, 2018 on Links for 02-15-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Actually, Social Security benefits are a promise, not a contract. Congress giveth and taketh away.
Toggle Commented Feb 15, 2018 on Links for 02-15-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
What?? I am NOT poorly read.
Toggle Commented Feb 15, 2018 on Links for 02-13-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
What crisis is that, exactly?
Toggle Commented Feb 15, 2018 on Links for 02-13-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Now you sound like the Ludlow Memorial Party.
Toggle Commented Feb 15, 2018 on Links for 02-13-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
Doing business with the Saudis?? Bastards! Here's a thought experiment: What would Russia do if we dropped our hostile stance?
Toggle Commented Feb 15, 2018 on Links for 02-13-18 at Economist's View
1 reply
The vulnerabilities of our voting are a big problem that predates any foreign hacking or involvement. I was involved in one of the early projects to replace privately made voting machines with open-sourced, publicly financed ones. Part of my motivation was the number of recorded "errors" which seemed to favor one party. Many years later swing state of Pennsylvania still has paperless voting in some places, and if the vote counting were hacked, it would be almost impossible to know it happened, let alone by whom. Monitoring foreign influence in our elections is an important task, and we (and other countries) have regulations to try to minimize or prevent this. But to make this an issue about "the Russians" is a misleading distraction.
Toggle Commented Feb 15, 2018 on Links for 02-13-18 at Economist's View
1 reply