I'm assuming 45% or whatever the Romney share minus demographic drift is.
I mean, you can't expect any of them to vote for Hitlery.
Higher. Sure he'd be revealed as a self-serving murderous monster, but he'd still be a self-serving murderous monster on the "correct" side of the culture war. Plus he can alternatively and simultaneously claim that the bombs purposefully killed no one and that if they had killed anyone they'd be the wrong kind of people.
Washerdreyer!
And you're probably right. On all points. Not much higher though, although I imagine there'd be a significant number who would assume he was framed by Clinton, even if he did take responsibility. Because Clinton.
"You know what else they say about my people? The polls, they say I have the most loyal people. Did you ever see that? Where I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters, okay? It's like incredible," Trump said.
My only defense against despair in this election season is a brute cynicism of jokes about the thirty years of score-settling, backbiting memoirs that will flow out of the Democratic contraption if Hillary loses.
I'm still optimistic about the debates. They're be widely watched. Trump doesn't handle not being in charge well. Clinton knows what she's doing. Hopefully the media will wake up to how asinine the narrative they're pushing is by then.
6- Don't worry, no one will publish memoirs because Democrats won't be allowed to publish any writing.
7- Unless she happens to get sick again during one of them, in which case it's game over.
I can't remember if this is the worst I've ever felt about the American public, or if the 2004 re-election of Bush was worse.
"Did I order the false flag? You're goddamn right I ordered the false flag!"
And then a bunch of campaign surrogates will go on the Sunday fuckwit shows to argue that Mark Penn and Sid Blumenthal toyed with the idea of a false flag during the 2008 campaign, and it will all end up in a cloud of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.
Or maybe Hilary wrote an email about false flag domestic terrorism and deleted it. Is it irresponsible to speculate? It would be irresponsible not to.
9: Oh, 2004 was definitely worse. If Trump actually wins, that will be worse, but for the moment I've got all sorts of psychological defenses.
I'll admit that the rise of naked hatred is jarring, but Trump polling at 42% vs 38% doesn't really move the dial on that.
Washerdreyer!
Holy shit. What's it been, like, eight years?
It's partly Trump polling at 42% vs 38% and partly people not being able to handle the idea that Clinton is competent and trustworthy.
In 2004, I had the psychological defense that people couldn't stand to uproot a wartime president. That was certainly the lowest I've ever felt, nationally, but I'm not sure it wrecked my opinion of people quite the way this is wrecking my opinion of people.
Is this post pure outlandish speculation or is there some rumor circulating along these lines?
Imagine it's revealed that Trump paid Rahami
Unthinkable. Trump would never pay anyone if he could possibly avoid it, particularly not in advance.
13: What's it been, like, eight years? RTFA.
6: "a cynicism of jokes"
This needs to become standard usage.
16: Maybe he got his Foundation to pay for it.
Just so we're clear where this is going...
This definitely feels worse than the 2004 reelection of Bush. I was shocked and appalled by Bush but I understood his mainstream appeal. I can't say the same about Trump.
I could believe people were fooled by Bush and the media.
22: Likewise. My BIL voted for Bush based on "moral values" which seems to me like the dumbest possible reason to vote for a politician, but I can get it on some level. It's a heuristic that gets you around having to engage with the tedious details of policy preferences. Trump on the other hand... I can only see him as viable as the un-Clinton, and I rather like HRC. I'd totally have a beer with her. There's the crazification factor support for Trump, and the undiluted racists but the rest of his support seems to me to have been painstakingly constructed over the past two and a bit decades by the right wing noise machine. She's been a favored target for years, to the point where on the alt-right it's dogma that she's an evil castrating bitch with a vagenda of manocide.
I guess people are venting a little, certainly the (white) electorate is horrible, but there is still an objective reality, and Trump literally admitting to being a terrorist would be enough for that to poke through past partisan lenses. Crazification factor at the very most, more likely he gets kicked off the ballot and everybody but the white pride crowd is relieved.
The hypothetical that tells us more about the world we're living in is if he doesn't admit it but doesn't do an at all plausible job of covering it up either. Then, yes, conspiracy theories starring Clinton, alternate realities, to prosecute would be divisive, he gets at least 38%.
What puzzles me about the poll numbers is that they contradict my admittedly limited direct exposure to right wingers. I'm mostly in a bubble, politically speaking, but there's one hobby related web site that I visit regularly, and it's my main source of exposure to right wingers in the wild.
Much as they despise Clinton, none of them plan on voting for Trump. I guess it's not a representative sample, but I assumed that if I was going to encounter any Trump voters, it would be there.
and Trump literally admitting to being a terrorist would be enough for that to poke through past partisan lenses.
I don't think this would be particularly worse or splashier than calling for violence against Clinton, which he's done twice to no penalty.
25. People are older and more cynical. Everybody under 40 had a baby about 3-4 years ago. Ogged went and came and went and came. Otherwise, much as ever.
Also, they don't change the hover text as often.
27: Intellectual hobby? I think his voters are clustered among the non-college educated.
In the blog Ogged comes and goes, talking of Michelangelo.
I don't know a single person who is voting for a Trump for any affirmative reason (that they are willing to articulate to me--which may be a very significant caveat). I know a few people who say they are voting for Trump with resignation because "he's terrible, but at least he's not Hillary." I know many (many!) people who normally vote Republican who claim they will be voting for Gary Johnson. (I don't know a single person who ordinarily votes Republican who is planning to vote for Clinton. She really is an abomination in their eyes.)
Ogged went and came and went and came.
He does have two kids, doesn't he.
10, 11 - in this cycle, it's been the Glenn Greenwalds of the world, not the Mark Penns, who are mostly responsible for that kind of thing.
28: They're both very bad. One is much worse, in the eyes of law and public.
The evidence is in, baby boomers suck.
Here in the heart of America I know plenty of people enthusiastic for trump, it is normally a combination of dislike of the Republcan party as a corrupt system, and barely disguised hatred of non-white immigrants.
Appreciate the synopses.
34: Mine will be four weeks old tomorrow.
40.3: Not even 4 weeks old and already has driven you back to unfogged! An overachiever!
Congratulations!
First time I've ever seen a distinction between "baby-boomers" and "middle-aged." Inevitable, I suppose.
43: That's not true. You're just forgetting when the boomers were the young voters.
Time keeps on slipping, slipping slipping....
43: I'm middle-aged, and I'm ten years younger than the boomers.
38: To be pedantic about it that graph shows the biggest supporters of Trump are in the 70-80 age bracket and those are mostly pre-boomers.
More accurately it would be boomers and silent generation, although 70 is squarely boomer. Boomers go from what, 1945-1960? 1945-1965?
Although, if you think of the iconic boomer stuff, younger boomers were all way too young. No one born in 1960, or 1955, for that matter, was probably at Woodstock.
No one born in 1960, or 1955, for that matter, was probably at Woodstock.
They just say that they were. They were all personally in the audience when MLK gave his "I Have a Dream" speech as well.
Yeah, Boomers are just averagely bad, since Trump and Clinton are tied amongst people born 1950-1965. The Silent Generation really sucks though, preferring Trump by almost 10%. But the drop in Trump support below age 50 is pretty remarkable. As is the increase in support above age 80 (which I think must be because women start to outnumber men by substantial margins at those ages).
The kids are all right, but about 10-15% of them are reprehensible monsters who (in Florida!) will vote for Stein or Gary Johnson over Hillary Clinton, possibly because of some dank memes.
I mean, the reprehensible monster young people who are actually Trump voters are even more reprehensible and monster-y, but you know what I mean.
You're saying over 80 Trump has more support because more women are alive at that age? Shouldn't that work against Trump since he does better with men?
My mom is just pre-boomer but she does tell me about flying out of DC just as the riots following MLK's assassination were starting.
I got it backwards. Trump support drops off below age 50 and above age 80.
I had no idea how old New England was though. Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire all have higher median ages than Florida, and Connecticut and Pennsylvania are close.
The decline of Trump support and the rise of Hillary support past 80 is probably due to gender imbalance. By the time you get post 90 the sex ratio is pretty skewed. Anecdotally all the women 90+ I know are voting for Clinton. My boyfriend's grandmother hates Trump, and she was an actual Fascist.
At some point I took a look at the evolution over time of a cohort's presidential votes from several different sources. Basically, everyone has gotten more Republican as they age over time but at different rates and starting at different places. The more republican groups relative to age were the Silent and whatever folks born mid 60s to about 1980 are called. I think the best that can be done is attempt to bend that curve a bit as people age sad to say.
Median age by US state. DC (not a state) is surprisingly low.
Despite my disdain, I take it easy on Stein voters because it won't matter in Texas so I don't want to strain friendships over it, but I can't tolerate people who went for Sanders voting for Johnson. It's deeply offensive to me in a way that voting for Jill Stein isn't to go from Bernie to Johnson.
61 is pretty interesting. Utah I guess is low because Mormons have 10 kids. Why on earth does Alaska have such a young median age? College kids on crab boats?
Looking more closely, it's the younger boomers who kind of suck, and the silent generation that sucks a lot. "Classic boomers," those who are about 58-65, are a bit better, which jives with what I've read about younger vs. older boomers.
I'm now over the median age in whatever state I go to. Great.
60 was me. And this voting like self-serving morons trend as cohorts age has been a big headwind countering the changing racial and country-of-origin demographics. Things that might make it better in the next decade or so are the lower numbers of folks progressing through late middle age--but the big issue will be if the late boomers (the flattish area on the curve and a group somewhat more Dem before this election than surrounding groups when adjusting for age) accelerate their march to Republicanism past 65). The dying off the relatively liberal Greatest generation is not helping this particular election.
I'm surprised at overall how high the median age is.
More detail on ages and sex ratios here
Utah is young because of Mormons.
Alaska is young, but otherwise the counties with highest median ages are in rural and/or economically depressed places (Northern Plains, upstate Michigan, Appalachia, rural West).
66/60 seem right. The silent generation in particular seem like the world's biggest dickheads. No fighting in a world war for you! Reap all the benefits of the postwar boom for nothing! Still hate minorities!
Also, the highest female/male ratios are found in black counties in the South and the lowest are found in Alaska and the mountain West.
68.last: It would be interesting to see age-corrected partisanship maps by state/county. (Though probably not as big of an effect as I might be imagining.)
I wonder if the oil boom has changed the position of North Dakota in recent years. In AZ the retirees seem to be balanced out by younger people. I easily guessed Utah would be lowest; Idaho is probably also full of young Mormon families.
Surprisingly, Idaho is filled with old men. Well, at least the northern 2/3rds is.
It's deeply offensive to me in a way that voting for Jill Stein isn't to go from Bernie to Johnson
Its about legalizing the weed, man. Some people are one issue voters.
72
I agree. It'd be an interesting way to try to separate culture from demographics.
Surely Stein is also for legalization?
62- Isn't Texas occasionally polling close enough that it might actually matter?
I mean, I guess not matter in the sense it will swing the EC, if Hillary win's Texas she's already approaching 400+EVs, but matter in the sense of humiliating Trump.
For sanity I've decided the narrowing polls is simply because everyone has decided to fuck with the MSM. On election day, it's a 49 state sweep, and Trump gets less than 15% of the national vote.
The "I'm Marie of Romania" strategy.
Surely Stein is also for legalization?
You would think Green Party would say it all.
You know, if Trump were to come out for legalization, he could probably peel off a sizable chunk of the Johnson vote. Somehow he would have to frame it as "legalization for white people only," but I don't think that would really be a challenge for him.
My uncle says that everyone his age (i.e. boomers) went insane because of Fox News. He's a liberal Democrat, and he wasn't nearly as much of an outlier 10 years ago. I think old people are really vulnerable to fear-based messaging, and Fox News has exploited that.
I just saw a survey that said that 50-60 year olds were the most likely to smoke pot. So why is this such a big issue for young folks?
Because they're not confident about not getting arrested for it? Someone over 40 either doesn't want to smoke pot, or has a system worked out where she feels perfectly safe about it.
84: I sense that Trump likely has a visceral hatred for weed. He'd rather legalize coke and speed.
87: You're not going to share your system with the rest of the commenters?
I have sadly never managed to get enjoyably high smoking pot, so I never bothered. If I lived where it was legal, I'd probably experiment some more, but it never seemed worth the trouble.
I wonder how much cocaine, total, has been consumed in the Trump Tower. Seems like one of those consultant interview questions.
85: Man, this is so, so true. My parents are, I think, slightly too old to be boomers, or they're at least on the old margin of boomerism, and Fox News has basically ruined them, and our relationship.
My dad was always conservative, but he used to be an intellectual one with whom it could be a pleasure to argue about policy. Now he's just a moron who regurgitates every obviously absurd conspiracy theory the right wing media offers. My stepdad used to be a union man with some sympathies that sounded downright commie, and now he regurgitates the same dumbass conspiracies as my dad. My mother used to be a crunchy-ass hippie and now, although most of her ire is directed at Monsanto and all those vaccines that cause autism, she's pretty sure Obama is a gay muslim, too.
And that shit is ALL THEY EVER WANT TO TALK ABOUT.
There is so much to be angry at the right about, but making conversation with my own parents impossible is near the top of my list.
It will be quite something if Murdoch's decades-long campaign to fuck over the world for his own amusement paid off in both Britain and the US in the same year.
My mom watches non-Fox local TV news. I think the problem is not just Fox, but is also structural, having a lot of free time watching something ostensibly edifying. The news channels want to avoid being boring at all costs, so they saturate with fear.
She's convinced that her whole city (Chicago) is dangerous rather than just several disastrous neighborhoods.
I can understand why he hates Britain : he learned it at his father's knee. I can't understand why he's so down on the USA though.
92: At least your parents' conspiracy theories are kind of interesting (if outrageous and objectionable in every respect). The cranky oldsters in my family are obsessed with the rising price of electricity, and seem to believe the premier of Ontario has a personal agenda to freeze them out of their homes. They're like the people quoted in this article, on how the premier was booed at a plowing match because of the hydro rates.
92 I hear you Swipe, I'm in the same damned boat. My hatred for Murdoch and Ailes is boundless.
Second only to autocorrect.
Swipe s/b Swope
It seems to be about getting your news from television, which was a habit formed, in old people, when there were "gatekeepers" and the news was reliably non-partisan to a fault.
News was not a profit center then, but a prestige-building one. Like passenger trains were for the railroads.
When you point out the bias, structural or otherwise, it goes against their grain and sounds like crazy talk. Fifty years ago only extremists thought the news was seriously biased in the way it is now.
Then there's the memory that certain news was held back, such as JFK's womanizing. So many older viewers think newscasters are trying to communicate something about Hillary, for instance, that they know but can't say.
What astonishes me is how many people my age get their news from tv, and have watched sitcoms and the like all these years. I grew up in a house where that was done but by college I was only watching sports, live comedy like talk shows and movies.
I kind of feel like age race and education each is a factor. As a 58er, I'm a young boomer by any reckoning but really nobody I spend any time with is in the Trump Fox vortex.
but nearly everyone I spend any time with is either college educated, a starving artist, a lesbian, or some combination thereof. Not exactly Trump demographics, even in a state he'll win handily.
100: For a second, I wasn't sure whether you meant you were born in 1958 or that you're 58. Then I was enlightened.
Enlightenment involves a process of forgetting your own name, apparently.
92: And that shit is ALL THEY EVER WANT TO TALK ABOUT.
Perhaps you should let them know that THE BORMANN SIX GIRL IS GOT TO HAVE SOUL!
Anybody wanna make odds that this guy just fathered a thousand potential jihadis?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/minnesota-restaurant-owner-defends-muslims-get-out-sign/
The odd choice of letter color makes it look like he has a problem with people who like müsli. At least he plays to stereotype and calls it "pop."
I'm a young boomer
You're an oxymoron.
I wasn't sure whether you meant you were born in 1958 or that you're 58.
Wow. I just got that, and I'm two years younger than Charley, so it should have been pretty obvious.
78/79
The only poll that showed it to be even close for HRC (which actually showed her leading) had some pretty bad sampling bias IIRC. 538 rates it C-. Everything else shows Trump pretty far ahead.
Why on earth does Alaska have such a young median age? College kids on crab boats?
1. Economy dominated by industries with highly transient workforces (mostly oil but also fishing and tourism).
2. Large military presence.
3. Substantial Native population with very high birthrates.
It's partly Trump polling at 42% vs 38% and partly people not being able to handle the idea that Clinton is competent and trustworthy.
Wait a minute, people do believe she is competent. Not so much the last one, but that was baked into the cake 20 years ago.
The decline of Trump support and the rise of Hillary support past 80 is probably due to gender imbalance. By the time you get post 90 the sex ratio is pretty skewed. Anecdotally all the women 90+ I know are voting for Clinton. My boyfriend's grandmother hates Trump, and she was an actual Fascist.
When you get to 90-year-olds you have people who actually remember the Depression. Those people of both genders have always been more liberal than people born between 1930 and 1965.
I kind of wish Hillary had won in 2008, just to see Trump try to run a white supremacist campaign against Obama. And it would spare me from voting for someone who'll be Reagan-old while in office. I'm not worried about Hillary consulting astrologers, but I'm not looking forward to eight years of the media speculating about her mind slipping, either.
I'm not worried about Hillary consulting astrologers, but I'm not looking forward to eight years of the media speculating about her mind slipping, either.
Given how much trouble she's having against what should be the easiest possible opponent, I'm not exactly optimistic that, should she win in November, we will be seeing 8 years rather than 4. And a loss in 2020 would be conveniently timed to ruin the Democrats hopes for redistricting a reasonable House of Representatives.
Basically, we are fucked, is what I'm concerned about.
Fortunately, the purportedly "liberal" shitbird men of the internet will bear no responsibility whatsoever for that fuckitude.
Seriously, fuck the "liberal" media. I'm past caring whether it's because their jobs depend on a close race or if they just have an irrational hatred of Hillary. If one more person talks to me about emails or the Clinton Foundation I will fucking punch them in the face.
I have clearly lost it in a way I managed not to lose it during the Bush years. Despite the fact that it was the same fucking deal (Swift boat anyone?).
I strongly recommend never talking politics with anyone in real life, or online outside of Unfogged. Avoiding talking politics on Unfogged would be even better, but that's a hard goal to reach.
It's even more stunningly irresponsible now given that Trump is the opponent, it's blatantly tinged with sexism, and if you're around soi-disant "left" people on social media you get the I'm-just-a-liberal-raising-questions nonsense on both the horrible Matt Lauer CNN end and on the Glenn Greenwald end. I still think we win this election but JFC do I ever hate the American electorate and political culture, at all ends of the spectrum.
Congrats to the NYTimes Public Editor for finally realizing that there is a lie so egregious that her newspaper can finally call it a lie. But not without clearly stating that they should pretty much never do that. Heaven forbid that the press should be "playing the referee" in "frivolous" political pursuits.
Because we all know that the decision between a highly competent but possibly flawed candidate and a fluorescent racist pumpkin is totally "frivolous"
Heaven forbid that the press should be "playing the referee" in "frivolous" political pursuits.
Indeed, their proper God-given role is to objectively document the burning of the world, while being very careful to avoid making any value judgments about whether it should be burning or not.
I feel like the NY Times realized its pneumonia-gate/Whitewater style coverage risked leaving it with the blood of the strangled remnants of American polity on its hands by causing a Trump victory, and that it has tilted its coverage slightly back in the last past few days.
That I even have to talk about this in this way is so fucking ridiculous, and if there is a Trump victory the NY Times senior leadership is as guilty as fuck and should be treated as pariahs.
126.1: Yeah, I've noticed that too. Maybe a hopeful sign.
It's the only reason I've delayed canceling my subscription until the end of the month.
That I even have to talk about this in this way is so fucking ridiculous, and if there is a Trump victory the NY Times senior leadership is as guilty as fuck and should be treated as pariahs.
I'm sure President Trump will have them executed for treason shortly after he repeals the First Amendment, probably within his first 100 days. So, you know, problem solved. Sort of.
The problem is that the leadership is fine with a Trump presidency. And the reporters, too, probably, thanks to the constant stream of shit spewing from him. Everyone I know who wants to blow things up is clearly in a position where it doesn't matter that much to them.
I think they sort-of realize that too, or at least I hope they do. But if there's one thing we've learned this election it's that ingrained years of the Clinton hatred that random people from all ends of the spectrum like to foster is a hard habit to shake.
131 to 129. The "blow shit up and see what happens" faction is class-diverse and ideology-diverse and the reasons for blowing shit up seems to vary with the wind but IME there's one uniting factor: they are almost all white men.
FWIW, Tigre, at least on twitter Greenwald is pretty strongly not of the "blow shit up" school and is strongly opposed to Trump.
132 doesn't surprise me at all, even though I've seen essentially none of this stuff myself.
I've actually only seen a couple of Trump bumper stickers, even, and those just in the past few days. Granted that I live in a relatively liberal bubble by Alaska standards, and it's very unlikely that he doesn't ultimately win Alaska, but his style is really not an easy sell here.
133 -- bullshit. He's been unequivocally of the "just raising questions" school. I know that his officially stated position is to not vote for Trump, but the same is true of the NY Times. Putting that aside, he's an idiot and an asshole (and a shitty lawyer) and deserves contempt for many reasons, of which his current position is only one.
if there is a Trump victory the NY Times senior leadership is as guilty as fuck and should be treated as pariahs.
How many likely Trump voters read the NYT? It occurred to me in a relaxed moment that they (the Times) might have a strategy of seeking to rile up the Democratic base to ensure they vote out of annoyance. But probably not.
I think what's crazy-making about this time is that while Trump is much less likely to win than Bush was either time, nothing that's happening now makes any sense. We just saw how bad a Republican Presidency can be. Even if Hilary is a political clone of her husband, it's nothing like what a Republican Presidency would be like. And Trump is horrible even for a Republican. The Republican establishment has repudiated him as too horrifying. There should be total unity on keeping Trump out of the White House.
I think what's crazy-making about this time is that thanks to the sterling efforts of the US paper of record, Trumpery is now part of the new normal. So that although he probably won't win this time, when the electorate tires of triangulating Democratic bureaucrats, some other tin pot Mussolini will be returned as though it was perfectly acceptable.
And it might well take a revolution to eject him. Not that I'm against all revolutions in principle, but a revolution whose outcome is merely to revert to the status quo ante 2000 seems like an egregious waste of blood and treasure.
The section in this Pew Research report on politics sorted by which administration people cam of age (turned 18) is instructive for looking at generational effects.
They need separate tables for Nebraskans (who come of age at 19) and wizards (age 17).
That is pretty interesting. Voting as pop music - your tastes stay what they were at 18.
I guess it's a general phenomenon of brand-affiliation-stickiness which is why companies spend so much marketing to the 18-34s.
I can't wait for the Fiber One commercials using My Chemical Romance songs.
These are national averages, so local and regional norms can vary a lot. I'm an older boomer, Nixon-aged, but grew up in a conservative suburb and region. While I fit the norm for my age my outlook was in a distinct minority when I was young, and I would guess it still is today among my hs classmates.
Both my brother and sister are conservative Republicans, for instance.
I have a theory that one reason that The Kids have drifted more liberal is because parents started giving more lip service to liberal-ish values in early childhood. Young children don't really see whether or not the parents are actually being hypocritical, it just indoctrinates them to values that seem right, in their gut, later on.
That's why Newt always wanted to defund PBS. Big Bird was destroying the Republican Party.
I think that's right. My parents are good liberal voters, and white-bread polite about stuff in public. They've also got some very questionable racial/anti-semitism stuff going on when they're being unguarded in adult company. Given that my sister and I weren't adult company until we were, you know, adults, we got brought up with the surface liberalism, and really didn't pick up the underlying weirdness until it was sort of too late for it to rub off by contagion. And I think there are a lot of people my age and younger with similar stories.
I am a huge fan of pious hypocrisy on social issues for this reason.
When I turned 18, Gerald Ford had less than a month left as President. I guess this manifests in my unspoken reaction to the Numbers question: do you count persons for whom you've lusted in your heart?
One thing, along these lines, that gives me more hope than anything, is that environmentalism is taught this way to small children. They are constantly - even in Texas! - being harped on to recycle and think green and so on. The idea that people can ruin the environment is truly being indoctrinated into basically all young kids right now.
Plus, it's fun to watch little kids who are both afraid of the dark and really smug about reminding adults about turning off the lights.
151 -- I think you can take that back to the mid-60s, at least for Yankee parents, so even people my age raised by polite Republicans got surprised when dog whistling worked so well.
146 - have you seen that Monty Python-esque ad for something or other to help you have regular bowel movements?
Regular in terms of frequency or shape?
I am a huge fan of pious hypocrisy on social issues for this reason.
Even more than the shame this might be the defining characteristic of being raised Catholic or Catholic-adjacent.
157: as opposed to small, grande or venti.
Squatty Potty- I actually saw one for sale in Target and considered buying it, it was $25 or so. Supposedly it's actually quite good.
You could probably just stack up some books to get the same effect.
I bought a squats potty at target and highly recommend.
That Pew report is fascinating, thanks. Takeaways:
1. I like Millennials a whole lot more now.
2. I'd guess that in addition to economic uncertainty and racism, another reason that they're so pissed is that US politics and society is changing away from them and there's nothing they can do about it.
3. White people suck. Romney had 20 point leads over Obama in every generation of white people except for the Millennials. The new Democratic coalition really is young people, Hispanics and non-whites.
4. Old Republicans really did lose their minds after Obama was elected.
5. Everyone hates the Republicans equally, but old people hate Democrats more.
6. Every stereotype about a crotchety, fearful old person is apparently 100% true.
Are we talking about racist turds we always have with us, or just the regular kind?
142: Interesting link, but it makes GenXers look like assholes, so I'm going to refuse to believe it.
Wait a minute, I guess I knew a lot of assholes growing up. Never mind.
Gen X assholes are inflamed because pooping with your feet on a stool wasn't invented when we were kids.
Everybody is listening to Sheryl Sandberg.
Squatting is much more common in the sorts of countries that have refugees so Trump is opposed to it.
Maybe there can be a question about squatting on the test he proposes to require.
"Thank you for your time, we just have one last check to perform, could you please provide us a stool sample? You can choose an American Standard toilet seat or this unadorned hole in the floor."
That reminds me of the time in college when I guy puked down our cold air return.
Everyone is of course aware that the awful Weekly Standard was very nearly called the American Standard before someone noticed that that name had already been used.
It's good to know somebody is reading their toilets and not just reading while on them.
I noticed while traveling because in Europe the brand is instead "Ideal Standard"
OT: There are three non-metaphorical jackhammers running right outside my office. The closest, a large one mounted on a Bobcat, is less than 30 feet away from my window. It's getting old.
The "kids learn from hypocritical parent's idealism" thing is why it is so ominous that trump and 4 chan are getting rid of the dog whistle method of political racism.