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."
This is a new low for a slashdot post...
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.
The man has endorsed all three candidates at one point or another. I would not take this matter with any seriousness (which is probably what he hopes for anyways.)
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
The Libertarian party had a chance to go mainstream but they blew it big-time.
You aren't really able to understand what he's saying at all, are you?
Hint: He hasn't actually once changed who he is supporting or who he is saying you should support. This time is no different.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Since he's already endorsed Clinton, Trump, and Johnson, I look forward to Scott Adams' inevitable endorsement of Jill Stein. One of the most important things about being a "Master Persuader" is saying enough conflicting bullshit that you can point back to the time you got it right! ...
-------
Pay no attention to the man behind the comic strip
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...
Trump has a LONG and well documented history of misogynistic and racist behavior. This is merely the latest in a long line of horrifying behavior by him with regard to women and minorities. The man has been blatantly campaigning by appealing to (mostly via lies) the most base tribal instincts of scared white males. I can understand if someone dislikes Hillary or if you like some third party candidate but to pretend that Trump's behavior is some kind of made up reality by the Clinton campaign is just idiotic.
To be fair, Gary Johnson is a pot head who didn't know what Allepo was. I call that relatable.
One person's relatable is another person's ignorant. I don't give a shit if the president is relatable. Honestly I haven't seen a good one that was. I care if they are competent and I care that their political views don't diverge too far from my own. They don't have to be nice but they can't be an asshole like Trump. If Gary Johnson doesn't have a clue about international affairs (which accounts for about 2/3 of the job of the president) then I don't really think he's cut out for the job.
And why has /. gotten into the business of tracking who is endorsing whom?
Scott Adams is a compulsive cynic, who seems incapable of having a sincere, non-sarcastic thought. This cynicism is what makes his comics so entertaining, but it makes him badly equipped to comment thoughtfully on the real world.
Gary Johnson isn't aware of the world outside of the US's borders. He has repeatedly flubbed names of leaders and nations. And I'm skeptical if he could find the Middle East on a map.
BUT he can totally nail Middle Earth!
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
I'll make note of that. But I'm really waiting to hear from the guy who draws "Garfield." I usually don't make any kind of meaningful decision until I know what he thinks about it.
Turns out it was a self caricature.
He doesn't seem to be able to make up his mind.
Why would one make up their mind during the silly season of the primaries where both major candidates lie to their extreme base to get the nomination?
Why would one make up their mind prior to the debates where the candidates are not in scripted choreographed settings for the first time?
You sound like someone who is loyal to political party, meaning you not Adams are part of the problem if that is the case. People who are loyal to a party are irrelevant, their party can ignore them since they already have their vote, the other party can ignore them since they can not obtain their vote. Party loyalty enable crap candidates like Clinton and Trump.
Secondarily a for vote Hillary validates all the BS the DNC pulled on Bernie. The DNC and Hillary don't care if the revelations of their actions embarrass them, they only care if they win. If Hillary wins everything she and the DNC did to Bernie and his supporters become validated, successful, a good tactic. They are counting on Bernie supporters to be good little Democrats, to bitch and moan and then vote for the Democratic party. The ends justify the means to Hillary, her former DNC chair VP, the recently "fired" DNC chair working for the campaign and on a path to a White House position, etc.
Just because Bernie sold out to protect his Senate seat doesn't mean the revolution has to die. Vote for anyone other than Hillary or you are green lighting a repeat of her tactics.
Adams endorsed Clinoton because he didn't want to get beat up by her supporters.
It is interesting how many posters including the submittor and EditorDavid don't have a clue.
Scott... the man who uses sock puppets to brag about how he has a "certified genius IQ".
Scott... the man who argues that facts don't matter
Scott... who lies whenever it suits his purposes.
Scott is an embarrassing twat of a human being. He brags about being a mater persuader yet was passed over for promotions and more recently dumped by his wife.
When he started getting called out for his hypocrisy on his blog, he shut down comments citing "racism". But the fact is that he was getting called out left and right for his stupidity and just couldn't take it so shut down dissent.
He is a failure of a human being who happened to get lucky with a cartoon.
Gary Johnson isn't aware of the world outside of the US's borders. He has repeatedly flubbed names of leaders and nations. And I'm skeptical if he could find the Middle East on a map.
The President is not a quiz show contestant. A President consumes facts and information from the roomful of expert advisers. A President mostly needs honesty and integrity, those traits allow for better processing of the information.
Hillary knew lots of names, met many leaders as First Lady and visited many places. Look how terribly she performed as Secretary of State; relations with Russia, state of Iraq, Libya, Syria; Iranian nuclear deal; TPP; etc.
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!"
Really, she's not. And it's not because of all the trumped up crimes/lies/etc. They really don't matter.
She's not fine because she's a warmonger and in the pocket of the financial industry. So in four, or ugh, EIGHT years we will emerge deeper in debt, more hated, and less financially secure. The 1% will make out like bandits under her and the economy will flounder even more, since no one but the ultra-rich have the money to spend on anything to keep the economy working. (She's the only major candidate, for example, who supports H-1Bs.)
There are three kinds of states: Ones where Hillary will stomp Trump, ones which will vote him in just because he has an R next to his name no matter what, and ones where there's actually some sort of contest. If you're in either of the first two types of states, you need to vote for Johnson because your vote doesn't count unless you do, and it counts big time if you do.
If you're a Republican, you need to send a message to your party that letting this kind of crap happen is unacceptable. You WILL leave if they pitch for racism and stupidity.
If you're a Democrat, you need a to send a message to your party that you don't want a another Nixon-Republican pretending to be a Democrat. We've had one for eight years already. If they don't give you someone worth voting for, you WILL leave. (They currently think all the Bernie people will vote Clinton. Show them otherwise.)
You might think you could do the same by voting Green or writing-in a candidate, but that won't get reported because the numbers will be too small. A 10% showing for Johnson will get him on the cover of just about all the remaining print media and scare the CRAP out of both the big parties.
So there are a handful of states where it makes sense to vote for the Rep. or the Dem. But for all the other states, everyone who reads/thinks should vote for Johnson.
It doesn't matter how bad Johnson is. I don't want him as president, but that doesn't matter. He is fit for purpose: to scare the parties into worrying about the electorate, which is something they generally don't give a damn about. If you want an acceptable Republican or Democrat candidate in the next election, you need to vote for Johnson.
Problem is he's pro-TPP. I can't vote for anybody who supports the TPP.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
I decided a long time ago not to pay too much attention to art creators' opinions on much of anything. Mostly this applies to music. Turns out a lot of metal band members are idiots and/or aholes. But I do like the music. When I go to a restaurant I don't ask who the chef is voting for. Same when I look at art (I don't really go for political art).
Dilbert is funny as hell. The recent 'fire the bottom 10%' riff could have been taken from the company I work for. I'll continue enjoying the strip. But I won't start going to the blog for voting advice.
So anything not pro-Clinton is anti-Clinton?
http://2016.presidential-candi...
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.
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.
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
Coming from someone hiding behind Anonymous Coward, your action speaks louder than your words.
What I said about Adams is simple observation; he started out endorsing Clinton "for personal safety reason", followed by Trump and then now Johnson.
Each time he wrap his endorsement in humorous reasoning (good read, by the way) but ultimately my reading of his endorsement explanation isn't intended to be taken as an endorsement. I do question if you've read through his blog entries.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
I am still here.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
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.
an inexplicable hate on for Ms. Clinton
Inexplicable? Only if you haven't paid any attention to her crimes...
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I really had no idea about any of this.
And yet, it still doesn't change the fact that I care zero about what he thinks about the presidential race.
I don't care if he supports a re-animated Hitler for president. He makes a cartoon that I used to read and find very enjoyable. That is pretty much the end of Scott Adams' influence on my life.
The opinions of celebrities or well-known people carry no more weight to me than if it were an average person on the street. It is unfortunate that this has turned into people's opinions of the candidates instead of talking about their positions on issues. What really makes me sad is that whoever is elected, a large portion of the country will really hate them. I just don't understand it.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
..not good enough to be on the debate?
10% is also 5 states
In most of "free world", between 1% and 5% of votes will bring your party to the parliament.
Or Slashdot just became trite and boring and I only check it out for a few minutes once every week or two.
Times change, websites fade.
Does it make you happy you're so strange?
You've been here a long time. If you haven't left by now, you're not going anywhere.
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.
You should do your own research on it. There's just too many things to list in this space. Search through Slashdot's archives for plenty of discussion.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
I agree. An immobilized government is not going to take away and additional freedoms, which is the best we can hope for.
WALLY 2016!
Sorry buddy. Would you want a surgeon who doesn't know everything and rely on experts?
The presidency requires someone who can make instant decisions that can have a profound impact at any time. Sounds insane and unrealistic? It is!
Look at George W Bush as an example of a president with an above average IQ but not top end? Iraq war and certain decisions were disastrous?!
Yes if you are too dumb to know the leader of North Korea then God help us if you have the keys to the white House.
People keep voting with their gut and not heads. An average Joe Six pack knows better than to hire another Joe Six pack for surgery. Why does he not have the same concerns for a president.
http://saveie6.com/
This came to mind while observing the explosion of outrage over Trump's "Grab 'em by the pussy" video.
1. Take all the people who were outraged by Bill Clinton's sexual pecadillos and thought they made him unfit for office; make them equally outraged about Trump.
2. Take all the people who took the position that Bill's behavior was a matter of "personal character" having no relation to his ability to perform as President; make them adopt the same attitude towards Trump.
Now, re-draw the electoral map. What do you get?
Here is a thought. Replace it with vouchers which can be used by any accredited school.
Let the parents decide if the inner city school is serving their kids well by keeping the status quo that is sucking the life out of kids who want to learn, but can't.
Let the parents decide if they want to put their kid in a special school for "Really Smart People" that doesn't ignore the smart kids in favor of the trouble makers and idiots.
Let the parents decide if they want to put their kid into a School for the Arts and Music.
Let the parents decide if they want to put their kid in "Math and Sciences" based school.
Let the parents decide if they want to put their kid in the school for Snowflakes, Emos and Wallflowers, Computer in a wall (https://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_shows_how_kids_teach_themselves?language=en) or Green families, or Computer Nerds or .... whatever
Oh, I don't know, let the parents decide what school their kid deserves to be in. Hell you can even give vouchers worth "extra" to those with "Special needs" where they get to spend the money the way they think their kid needs.
Saying "Yeah, that's what I thought" shows dismissive answer to real problems that need addressing. Any and all protests against voucher or programs like that is that it might destroy public schools. Well, if they can't handle (compete) against better schools, then they should die. The most common answer by the anti Voucher people is "Yeah our schools suck, but you shouldn't have a choice because you might choose something I don't like for your kid"
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
You should do your own research on it. There's just too many things to list in this space. Search through Slashdot's archives for plenty of discussion.
Code for: "I don't really know." (But now that someone's called me on it, I will do some Googling and reply with stock Trump / anti-TPP information to show that I do know what I'm talking about.)
[ Please don't bother, your views are already clear. ]
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Eh? You can't be this new to slashdot. I didn't realize people on /. liked the TPP now. What do /.ers like about it? Is it the worldwide permanent copyright extensions? Yeah we love that shit here.
Code for: "I don't really know." (But now that someone's called me on it, I will do some Googling and reply with stock Trump / anti-TPP information to show that I do know what I'm talking about.)
Code for: "I'm a brain-dead leftist who was against the TPP and interventionist wars last year but since teh ebil Drumpf is the anti-TPP, anti-war candidate now and the bitch with the (D) next to her name is pro-TPP and pro-war fuck yeah I'm a neocon warhawk now shove corporate cocksucking permanent copyrights up my ass I love it so much madam president fuck me harder oooo yeah I love corporations suing governments for lost profits yeah yeah yeah more wars for israel yeah yeah #ImWithHer!"
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
While that seems like the conventional wisdom, it does not appear to be the case. Even the DNC is concerned about stealing votes away from Johnson.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
And besides, neither Johnson nor Weld is a Randian wackjob. All they want to do is incrementally increase the amount of freedom available to Americans and see how far this can be taken in practice. They alone promise to do rational things like end the abomination (Johnson's term) of civil forfeiture and introduce the concept of competition into healthcare.
Republicans and Democrats see positions like these as a threat, and this is exactly why the Johnson ticket deserves our support.
But now it's not Just Some Guy's Blog anymore
Leave me out of this.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I'm a lefty and I've been visiting /. since '98 or so. (18 years?? Wow.)
I only drop by occasionally because the site is a bit of a cesspool. It always attracted trolls and idiots, but there was a lot of humour and the level of intelligence and knowledge by many posters was incredible.
The average commenter here is now more right wing, less well informed, stupider and less fun. The editors post less interesting stories, with more bias and more nastiness. Some of it is just flamebait.
I have since migrated to other sites that have to some degree replaced the earlier incarnation of slashdot (not even going to mention where here).
You've been waiting about 17 years to say that, haven't you.
SJW n. One who posts facts.