What an interesting situation this has turned out.
现在变得越来越有趣了呢。
First of all, RIP Tay. You will be missed.
首先，TAY，祝你一路走好。
Bernie is sweeping the states. From Hawaii to Alaska to Washington, he’s beaten Hillary soundly. Yesterday he won Wisconsin by larger than expected margins, too. The pundits are still saying that he has no chance, though, and I guess New York will show us once and for all just who – Sanders or Clinton – has the support of the people.
左边总书记横扫五州。从夏威夷到阿拉斯加到华盛顿（州），希拉里被打的丢盔卸甲。昨天他更是大大的赢了威斯康星。目前媒体仍然喷这家伙说他没有任何机会，所以我想咱走到几个星期后的纽约看看，这家伙到底有没有机会吧。
Mathematically, Sanders is behind. He’ll need to upend Clinton in big states like New York in order to have a chance to win the nomination. New York’s one of the biggest ones coming up, so it’ll be interesting to see. Plus, there will be a debate. An extra one, that wasn’t part of the schedule originally. I really think this one’ll be worth watching. So hope you’re gonna go see it!
数学上来讲总书记目前落后。他需要在大州里击败克林顿才能有nomination的机会。纽约是比较大的其中一个，所以这个对民主党那边是很重要很重要的。哦哦，对了，纽约会有辩论。我感觉这个可能是少数几个真正值得看的辩论。有机会一定要看看哦。
As for the uh, class change? Look no more. We also finally found a different meme for Hillary, so, hey, why not. Here it is.
至于为啥总书记得了装备升级…梗在这里。（抱歉各位需要翻墙。我找了周愚大大贴的那个秒拍好久，死活都找不到）
另外这次终于找到了一个希拉里的梗。梗在这里。
The Republican side? Hoo boy. Where to begin. First of all turns out chibing politicians are harder than it looks. We ended up having to get a little creative to make some folks identifiable. Cruz is easier to draw now when we have, well, folks with less than obvious physical traits.
共和党啊？妈呀，我从哪里开始说起好吧。首先问题就是…萌化政治家难度好大啊。我们不少人物其实是形式化以及格式化了。克鲁斯其实不难。上次我吐槽错了。当有些真大众脸路人甲面孔的政治家需要出场时，这才是真正的逗逼难度。
First, Cruz won a couple of large victories. Utah he managed to get over 50% of the vote, taking all of the delegates. He also won Wisconsin rather handily, and I believe that he has captured most of the delegates there. The current strategy appears to be deny Trump enough delegates so that he cannot get the nomination on the first ballot, and there’s a lot of ugliness going on there. Lots of politicking, as per usual.
首先克鲁斯赢了两场比较大的胜利。犹他直接锁定了50%以上的票数，神皇一个delegate都没拿到。昨天威斯康星也是他赢了，并且看分析是应该打掉了大多数的delegate，所以也是大胜。目前看他们的计划就是想办法阻止特朗普，让特朗普在第一选票上拿不到名额。所以各种政治的纷争啊也变的越来越变本加厉。越来越脏了呢。
I was commenting to my friend the other day. I personally find it ironic that the GOP establishment has finally rallied around Cruz, but if you knew about Wisconsin – itself being a very politically active state and have a horde of GOP elites (Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, Governor Scott Walker, GOP chair Reince Priebus) – I’m honestly not surprised at the result. I think the victory was well-deserved given the status of the state and the fact that Trump has been under nonstop attack by both sides of the media for the last few weeks. Cruz was able to appeal to more people in Wisconsin. That’s a fact.
不过啊，我昨天还跟朋友吐槽呢。共和党的大佬们选择挺克鲁斯蛮奇怪的。不过，威斯康星的结果并不奇怪。这地方政治特别活跃，基本上的大佬（几个不同的共和党的大官 – 包括人民代表大会的首席泡软（你们这个起名起的太萌啦），GOP总主席（图里面克鲁斯旁边的金毛），和威斯康星州州长（顶着奶酪帽子的））都是这里面冒出来的。考虑到特朗普这几个星期就不停的被他们以及州内所有媒体攻击，再加上本地优势的话，我感觉克鲁斯赢这个理所当然。我并不感觉有什么作弊或者问题的。
Oh. Speaking of media. Ted Cruz is (was) currently embroiled in a sex scandal and most major news networks are completely glossing over it. A cursory google search using news show that there’s been virtually nothing over the last week.
不过说起媒体啊，目前看样子克鲁斯有点性丑闻的问题。不过似乎被媒体无视了。我搜了搜发现上个星期基本上绝大多数媒体都是保持沉默的哦。
Hey, look. I was in high school when John Edwards got nuked back in ’08. I remember basically frantically keeping up with the mess for social studies class, and it ended up destroying the man’s candidacy. From what I can see just on my own, this is way bigger than that. Now, I’m not accusing Cruz of anything. I personally have very little interest in the private sex lives of politicians. However, I find it remarkable that major news networks across the spectrum are overwhelmingly choosing to attack Trump rather than choosing to focus their attention on this. Either the media’s all suddenly decided to care about journalistic integrity, or maybe, just maybe, they’re up to something.
嘿，你知道我上高中的时候正好碰上08年的性丑闻事件。当时虽然是为了作业而疯狂刷这个，但最后爱德华的总统梦就是被这个东西打破了。而目前来说，据我所了解，克鲁斯的这件事似乎比那个要严重的多。
然而媒体的沉默我感觉很有趣。我个人对政治家的私生活没兴趣，但我感觉一般来说这是绝对的故事点啊。媒体咋了？突然间都开始道德上线，还是他们要藏啥呢？
Hey, look. Just let me show you something. This is from an Israeli newspaper, and it basically highlights one of the issues where the White House basically censored “Islamic Terrorism” from the words of a foreign leader.
嘿，给你们举个例子吧。看看这里。这是个以色列新闻的报道。美国最近跟法国谈某绿教国事情的时候，白宫选择了封杀法国总统的演讲。理由？因为他说了不该说的话。上面英文你可以看到到底是什么词。
You can see from that article that there are two perspectives. One side believe that it was a “technical error,” the other side believe that, well, it’s censorship in the name of political correctness. If you know anything about video editing or have common sense, I suspect you could probably tell just by watching the thing about which one is more likely to be correct.
基本上，我挑那个文章是因为他指出了两个观点。官方说是因为仪器出了问题，所以嘛，反正就是正好恰恰那几秒，碰到敏感词汇的时候出现了问题。而非官方（也就是不少美国民众）认为这就是谎言，因政治正确而进行的封杀。总之我感觉如果你看过视频的话，你自己其实就能看出来谁可能更对更错了。
But you see the problem with America? We’re entirely polarized at this point. We’ve reached a point of no return, where people are so convinced that their side is right, that people don’t even try to seriously think about the possibilities of the alternative anymore.
但你看到美国的问题了吗？美国现在已经分裂了。我们已经到了一个可能走不回来的问题，就是当人认为他们正确到不可能有错误的可能，他们已经不能考虑到如果自己可能是错误的原因了。这让我非常担心。
Warning: linkstorm coming.
警告：链接很多。
Look, when people are crying trigger warning and complaining that their lives feel threatened because some college students wrote “Trump 2016” on the sidewalk using chalk? We’ve got a problem and it needs to be addressed. When cultural appropriation mean that people are attacked for choosing certain kinds of hairstyles? I think that’s absurd. It’s a problem and it needs to be addressed. When our media arbitrarily censors, changes, blocks, or otherwise just flat-out bombard people with the things that they want people to see, I think that’s a problem and it needs to be addressed.
伙计们。当逗逼大学生们因为大道上某人用粉笔写了特朗普2016而感到受到了生命威胁，我感觉这是个问题。需要被解决。当政治正确表示你梳个发型也是文化盗窃，开始直接攻击人身，我感觉这是个问题，需要被解决。当我们的媒体已经毫无顾虑的删除，改变，遮挡，或者直接清理人民的观点，直接塞给我们他们想让我们看到的东西，我还是认为这是个问题。这需要解决。
（稍微解释下我拿出来的例子，各位。大概是这样。美国这边呢，Atlantic和Daily Beast等给我个人感觉是相对偏中评的。RealClearPolitics也是什么都有。上面链接里面的Huffington Post以及Politico还有Washington Post都是左翼媒体，Federalist, National Review, 以及Breitbart是右翼媒体）
“But Morgane,” you say. “These are all from rightwing talk points. These people are horrible and bigoted and evil and racist and intolerant and (insert a lot of words here).”
“但莫根酱啊你怎么啦，”你说。“这不是都是右翼的观点吗？这些人难道不是又偏见又歧视又邪恶又不包容的各种挑起问题的坏蛋吗？”
Really?
真的吗？
So what?
又怎么样呢？
I am confident or arrogant enough to believe that I’ve got a brain and I can read and decide for myself what’s “right” and what’s “wrong.” Equating chalking with hate speech, for instance. That’s just dumb. The last time I checked, this is a free country and people are free to support and express what support they’d like. When “tolerant” folks are trying to shut that down, they’re NOT being tolerant.
我自己认为我有足够的智慧，或者我足够自大能认为我有个大脑，所以我可以自己去看信息来自己去分析。我认为我可以自己判断对错。举个例子上面这个写点粉笔字就成了人身攻击，这就是错误的混蛋逻辑。我记得我是美国人，这国家是有“自由”的。既然理论上我们让你去支持你想支持的人，他们要表达自己，并且支持一个合理合法的候选人有啥错啊？
所以这些自称自己各种博爱容忍(tolerant)的人恰恰并不容忍。
This isn’t a debatable position here, folks. This isn’t a liberal or a conservative issue. This is an American one. If you believe you have the right to take away someone else’s freedom of expression, I’m going to fight you every step of the way. I’m not going to shut you down. That’s not right. I’m going to say, that’s stupid, and try to tell people my perspective and why I think I’m right and you’re wrong.
这不是啥好辩论的，伙计们。这不是一个保守派或者民主派的问题。这是个跟美国根本有关系的事情。如果你认为你有权利能直接删除其他人的自由言论权，对不起，我会站起来跟你斗。我不会让你闭嘴。我也不会删除你的言论。但我会说你这观点是傻逼，然后我会试图说服读者为什么我认为我是对的，而你是错的。
I’m not some high-minded philosophy major who have concrete frameworks of thought. I’m just a medical student with an opinion and internet access. I believe that you cannot take away other people’s rights to expression without people in turn taking your rights to expression. If you shut down a Trump rally, for instance, then there is no moral impetus for anyone else to let you hold your rallies in peace.
我不是啥哲学家，有什么深奥的思想。我只是一个嘴大的有网络的医学生。我认为你不能辖制别人的这类自由，因为当你辖制别人的言论自由时，这表示你自己的言论自由也可以被辖制。如果今天你去暴力阻挡了一个特朗普的支持会，那问题就是下次如果人想暴力阻挡一个你的支持会的话，我们是没有任何道德原则来停止或者阻挡他们的。明白吗？
Either nobody have rights, in which the world would be a pretty miserable place, or everyone have rights. When you make it so that only some people have rights, you are in effect dictating that nobody has rights because at any time you could become the somebody whose rights are taken away.
要不然这世界谁都没有言论，咱活在一个北斗神拳一样的世界里面。要不然大家都有这些自由。当你要把世界变成一个只有某些人有自由的时候，你其实在说：我要一个没有人有自由的世界，因为随时随刻这些自由都会被别人剥削。因为你随时都可以成为那个某些人。
I don’t want you to lose your rights. I certainly don’t want to lose mine. That is why I support tolerance, which – by definition – is the ability AND willingness to accept something that you yourself disagree with.
我不想让你失去你的言论自由。我肯定不想丢掉我的。这就是为什么我支持容忍。不过你忘了吗？容忍的定义，就是能承受住（以及愿意接受）与你个人观点不同的事情。
< Florida II: Judgment Day ◇ TIME LINE ◇ NEW YORK! I’M COMING HOME! >