Slashdot Mirror
Dilbert Creator Scott Adams Endorses Gary Johnson For President (dilbert.com)
Long-time Slashdot reader SonicSpike writes: Scott Adams, creator of the popular comic, Dilbert, has decided to endorse
Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson for President. He writes at his blog:
"Clinton supporters have been telling me for a few days that any visible support for Trump makes you a supporter of sex abuse.
From a persuasion standpoint, that actually makes sense. If people see it that way, that's the reality you have to deal with. I choose to not be part of that reality so I moved my endorsement to Gary Johnson. I encourage all Clinton supporters to do the same, and for the same reason...
"To be fair, Gary Johnson is a pot head who didn't know what Allepo was. I call that relatable. A President Johnson administration might bring with it some operational risks, and policy risks, but at least he won't slime you by association and turn you into some sort of cheerleader for sex abuse in the way you would if you voted for the Clintons or Trump."
The essay concludes, "You might enjoy my book because you're not sure if I'm really endorsing Gary Johnson or just saying so to protect my brand."
"To be fair, Gary Johnson is a pot head who didn't know what Allepo was. I call that relatable. A President Johnson administration might bring with it some operational risks, and policy risks, but at least he won't slime you by association and turn you into some sort of cheerleader for sex abuse in the way you would if you voted for the Clintons or Trump."
The essay concludes, "You might enjoy my book because you're not sure if I'm really endorsing Gary Johnson or just saying so to protect my brand."
He doesn't seem to be able to make up his mind. First he did the world's fakest endorsement for Clinton:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1...
Then he switched over to trump:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1...
There are some brutally funny and plain brutal Dilbert comics out there, but he seems to have gone a but nuts in his old age. He seems to have forgotten that DNRC was all a big joke and has started to actually take it seriously.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
New information? What new information. We've known pretty much all of this nonsense on all sides since the beginning.
Perhaps filling in an occasional sordid detail, but this isn't new or news.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I work in Public Education, and saying it can't be improved by competition the reason why it is failing in so many places. You can spend all the money in the world on "Tech Toys", but it only obfuscates what some of us already know, some teachers just suck. And there are enough of them that you can't dodge all the raindrops.
When I walk into a classroom, and the teacher has Ricki Lake on the TV for the class, and is reading a newspaper, and there is nothing I or anyone else can do (like fire the teacher), the system is already been destroyed from within. The public schools aren't educating kids, they are indoctrinating them. We are more concerned with "safe zones" and "anti-bullying" (which doesn't stop bullying, but is used to dodge lawsuits) than if the kids can read, write and do math.
Our educational system is built on Industrial style schooling, and isn't about to change. We have one size fits all education in a world that is built on information age tools. Treating our kids like robots is the goal of our educational system, and there is almost nothing you can say to dissuade me from my view.
We aren't building cogs for use in factories, why are we educating our kids that way? So, when you say Gary Johnson wants to destroy something that is already broken, you're not going to get any argument from me, it NEEDS to be destroyed. Fuck the Establishment Educational system. it is a dinosaur, 70 years out of date.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Satire—once the cynicism becomes too thick—is nothing more than a devious way of getting the reader to work four times as hard as normal, to ultimately decode the underlying message "look at meeeeee!"
As a professional comedian/cartoonist. There is a seriousness inside his joke.
He may or may not be really endorsing any candidate. But using absurdness of endorsing to point out problems.
Over the past generation or so. We have been equating a person's personal ethics and their stance as a human being based on their political and who they vote for.
Studies show that a person's political stance is based on what they grew up with. So if you lived in a republican family with republican friends you will be republican or vice versa. Growing up in such an environment the opposing political party is seen as evil, stupid, or part of some grand conspiracy. So attacks on that candidate of your choosing are usually ignored or considered exaggerated for political reasons. While what they do well, is strongly weighed. Thus making your choice seem perfectly rational.
Now if you are actually a person in the middle, and you observe all these families and lives you find that they are quite similar, have the same problems and often think of the same solution, until the party of their choice states it is different.
While I personally will be voting for Clinton,it isn't because Trump voters are all racists. Nor do I expect the democratic party turn the US into a communist nation.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I have been posting here since back when Slashdot was Rob Malda's blog. Then, the politics of the posters, where discernible, was decidedly extremely left wing. But there were not that many posts on politics. There were, however, a lot of posts on Buffy the Vampire Slayer...
But there was also a lot of activity, period. Every day, numerous stories spawned 500, 600, 700 posts, easily. And these were stories about the latest tweaks on the linux kernel, the merits of one spreadsheet or another, the latest laptop specs, or -- of course -- Buffy.
But now it's not Just Some Guy's Blog anymore, it's gotta make money for somebody. And that somebody who bought it got handed a bag of snakes, because operating a "community website" in this post-Facebook web world is a job for a buggy-whip manufacturer. So, yeah, the editors obviously got a mandate to do whatever they can to drive traffic/eyeballs/impressions or whatever web marketers are driving these these days, And Politics stories -- especially in this End Of Days Election Season we are going through -- do that.
As far as an answer to the question, "Where have all the Slashdot Lefties from the 90's gone?" I suppose the answer is either [a] they're still here but they've all grown up and become Righties, [b] fled to their online safespaces and echo chambers because engaging in a level exchange of ideas is anathema to them, or [c] a little of both.
Versus what? Trump? Trump doesn't pay employees, and has a short fuse, and you can be certain that whatever damage Hillary can cause, will just be more of the same like Obama. The howling right-wing poop flinging monkeys will not be appeased by anyone that doesn't want to destroy the establishment.
Libertarians subscribe to an ideology that you get out of life exactly what you put into it. So entitled man-babies who thing they're going to get anything are going to be sorely disappointed when everything gets cut. Space program, cut. Military, cut. Trade treaties, cut. Everything will get insanely more expensive, not cheaper.
Libertarian ideology is basically you are either super-rich, or super-poor, and if you're super-poor you should be selling your organs and blood to afford food. It sounds insane, is insane, and voting for the third party will just split the vote. If you hate Trump, and can't tolerate the idea of a Woman president, please throw your vote away or don't vote at all. If you hate trump, but can tolerate the idea of a Woman president, then hold your nose and vote for Hillary. If you throw your vote away on a third party, you will be splitting the vote.
And had Bernie run as an independant, Hillary would lose due to vote splitting. Had Trump not been running as a Republican, you could be sure he would go independant, and that is why he got the GOP nomination, because otherwise he would split the GOP vote for certain. A three party ticket is a guaranteed lose for the less popular of the Dem/GOP, and the GOP has been swirling the toilet ever since the Tea Party hijacked it.
If the Republicans ever hope to get a President or majority congress/senate again, they will need to back away from the howling liberatarian anti-tax, states-rights, racist, sexist, religious zealots nutcases out of the party. But unfortunately that is one of the pillars of the Republician ideology, is to oppose and reverse progressive human rights and social safety nets.
What's your point? A lot of people feel like that's exactly the kind of president we need right now. There is a lot of stuff to rebuild within our own borders so we don't need to worry about how other people around the world are living their lives. We are not the world police.
This is one example of how poorly educated most voters are. Foreign policy is one of the few parts of our government where the President has a great deal of control. With the exception of supreme court justices, foreign policy, and the military, all other talking points are mostly irrelevant since Congress is responsible for most domestic issues.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Johnson absolutely will not be elected, but a vote for him sends a message to the major parties. Maybe in the future some Libertarian presidential candidate will actually be in the running, but not this time.
Oh to have a ranked ballot system where we could choose whoever we wanted as 1st, and then go down the list (of more and more stinkyness) until we got to the D/R choices and could select them based on whatever small differences we may seem them to have.
I can dream.
Trump supporters are absolutely vilified online and in the main stream media ("deplorables"). Yet a sizable segment does support Trump. This might suggest the polls are not accurate because people don't want to be publicly state they support Trump, when in fact they actually do.
The Brexit polling was an example. And this is just one factor. Another factor could be that with increased use of social media, people are getting their RDA of human interaction, and are less inclined to speak with anonymous callers on the telephone, thus skewing polls again.