The Most Active Threads Since Friday

The most active thread since my last blog post on Friday was titled, "When the Dems Lose 2024..." and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. This thread was started back on September 14 but apparently gained a lot of traction over the weekend. But, since it's 18 pages long, I don't have time to read the entire thing and I am not sure why it was so active over the past three days. I've come to think of the DCUM political forum as sort of junior varsity political discussion, but even that may be overrating it much of the time. It is often just a level or so above drunk guys in the bar blurting out their political opinions. The main point the original poster makes in this thread is that President Joe Biden will lose the upcoming presidential election, leaving Democrats bewildered and confused. The poster starts out saying that Democrats mistakenly believe that the country loves Democrats, something that the poster does not believe to be true. The poster's second point is that the Biden/Harris ticket is untenable and that "you" — apparently meaning DCUM posters but maybe meaning Democrats at large — didn't develop a better option. Next, weirdly enough, the poster blames ActBlue for upsetting grassroots Democrats by emailing them too often. But, the poster really hits it out of the park by concluding that the Democrats should nominate a bipartisan ticket that includes a Republican. In a better world, this thread would have ended after the first post because everyone would have read it and decided it wasn't worth their effort to reply to such nonsense. Sadly, that did not happen. Contrary to the original poster's belief, there is not a Democrat in the world who is not chewing their nails to the quick in fear of Biden being defeated. I guarantee that absolutely nobody will be surprised if he loses. Disappointed, yes, but not surprised. Similarly, Democrats are well aware of the animosity they face in much of the country. Groups of Republicans who routinely stage armed protests in response to anything from Covid restrictions (real or imagined) to drag queen performances leave little doubt about their feelings. In a perfect world, Biden probably would have announced early on that he would not run for a second term. But, that likely would have left him as a powerless lame duck. So, I understand why he didn't. At any rate, this is not something the average person has much influence over. Similarly, we could ask why Republicans haven't found a better candidate than former President Donald Trump. As for the original poster's last point, selecting a ticket that includes a Republican, the original poster shows his true delusion. What motivation do Democrats have to put a member of the opposition party a heartbeat from the presidency? All available evidence suggests that the 2024 election will be close. Between now and then any number of things can happen to change the calculus. Anyone who believes they know the outcome now is fooling themselves.

Next was a thread posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. Titled, "2024 US News rankings", the original poster lists the top 28 entries from the latest rankings of national universities produced by US News & World Report. Posters in this forum seem to have a love/hate relationship with these rankings. They love when their favored universities are highly ranked, but hate when they are listed below rivals or other schools that posters don't appreciate. Some posters obsess over the rankings, treating them like sports fanatics treat athletic statistics. Predictably, posters are thrilled to see gains in the rankings by schools they support. They are gleeful when schools they detest show up lower in the list than in the past. Some posters believe that these rankings are useless and that the results have no value. Others hold the opinion that the rankings are of the utmost importance, with one poster saying, these are "the only rankings that matter". Considerable attention is paid to changes in the US News methodology reported on in the New York Times. According to the Times, the new rankings rely more on graduation rates of Pell Grant recipients and outcomes for first-generation college students. This disappointed some posters including one who lamented that the rankings were of little value to "academically gifted, well connected, will heeled students". Personally, I would love to see two out of three of those characteristics eliminated entirely as factors in college admissions and rankings. Some posters take these rankings very seriously, even resorting to name-calling and insults in response to taunts about where their favorite school ended up. Other posters turned to alternative rankings that they thought more accurately evaluated colleges. Apparently there is a significant number of posters whose hobby is studying college quality and who follow topics such as this fervently. As a result, there are posters gloating about their predictions that came true and others lambasting the rankings for failing to properly rank a university a poster expected to rise.

The third most active thread over the weekend was titled, "Hugh Jackman and wife separate after 27 years" and posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum. I will be brief with this summary because I absolutely don't care who in Hollywood is divorcing whom. I am certainly not going to read the 14 pages of this thread. Based on a quick skim of a few pages, it appears that many posters are disappointed by the news. Others are convinced that Jackman is gay. Some are fixated on their children and the fact that they are adopted. Several remark on the age difference between Jackman who is 54 and Deborra-lee who is 67. Others think the thread is gross, probably an accurate assessment.

The final thread at which I'll look today was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum and titled, "Teens steal a car and run over biker for fun". The original poster linked to a video showing a horrific incident in which teens recorded themselves while driving an apparently stolen car. They joke as they approach a man on a bicycle and intentionally run into him from behind at fairly high speed. The cyclist flys over the windshield and lands on the road where the car's passenger continues to film him as the car speeds off. The 64-year-old man was later pronounced dead at a local hospital. The police had arrested the car's driver shortly after this incident and, after learning about the video, charged him with murder. The interesting thing about this case is that the facts are not in dispute. The kids are on video clearly stating their objective of hitting the man and the crime is graphically captured on camera. But, there are vast differences of opinion about what should be done in response and what is the appropriate punishment for the driver. Many posters point out that the 17-year-old driver is a juvenile and therefore might only be incarcerated for a year. Others argue that he should be charged as an adult. Some posters contend that the incident does not warrant a murder charge, while others absolutely agree that it does. Whereas some posters argue for a stiff penalty up to and including a death sentence or life in prison, other posters argue that children should be given the chance for redemption. Many posters believe that there is no saving this teenager and that separating him from society for as long as possible is the only rational response. On the other hand, others believe that a life sentence, let alone the death penalty, for a 17-year-old is unreasonable. But, locking the boy up with harden criminals for a few years will only ensure that he leaves prison worse than he entered it. Therefore, they favor responses in which the driver can be rehabilitated and put back on a law-abiding track. This group sees the driver as less than a criminal and more as an immature youngster whose brain is not fully developed and who still has the capacity to contribute to society. The circle that cannot be squared by most posters is that the chances of a death or life sentence — even if warranted — seem unlikely. But, a year in juvenile detention is viewed as unacceptably lenient. Between these two extremes, what response best protects society?