Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • TalkRational: beep boop

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Quizalufagus

Anyway, back to the manifestbro, this is a fair description:

Point 3) is really stupid and beepboopy. Average differences in interests obviously do inform the discussion irrespective of whether employees are exclusively drawn from an exceptional applicant pool. If individuals from population X have identical aptitudes for something as population Y but only show interest in it at a fraction of the rate, then we'd expect any non-discriminatory selection of exceptionally accomplished candidates to be biased in favor of candidates drawn from Y because there will be more of them. This is a totally straightforward statistical expectation and it's dishonest garbage for the author to claim this authoritative banner of I TEACH PROBABILITY AND STATISTICS AT STANFORD while making this (and other) completely elementary errors.
John Dowd, one of Trump's lawyers, said on Thursday that he was unaware of the inquiry into Trump's businesses by the two-months-old investigation and considered it beyond the scope of what Special Counsel Robert Mueller should be examining.

"Those transactions are in my view well beyond the mandate of the Special counsel; are unrelated to the election of 2016 or any alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia and most importantly, are well beyond any Statute of Limitation imposed by the United States Code," he wrote in an email.
Look no further than Trump's lawyers for the real story! If all of that really is beyond the statute of limitations it could have some unsettling implications for why the FBI is investigating.
You never listen to me, testy. It hurts my feelings.
So they've settled on repeal now, replace later? I thought that didn't have the votes?

ETA: I guess they're just going to mess with the house bill, but the tone sure makes it sound like repealing is the only substantive commitment before midterms.
Have you ever seen Autism in Love? Something cool about that film is that it highlights the role of explicit communication in forming functioning relationships. The fact that communicating directly was the only way to do it for the autistic couples in the film turns a mirror on the rest of us, whose relationships so often suck because we rely on our heightened appreciation of the implicit when we should just be honestly and openly saying what we mean.
But what all of these men share in common, even my sons, is a relentless questioning and disbelief of the female experience.

I can't count how many times in my life men have told me what to think or how to feel or argued with me about shit like street or sexual harassment.

It feels to me that one reason that there's a disconnect in discussions about this stuff is that being told how to think/feel and having your direct experiences dismissed are basically universal experiences, and no one is ever really explicit about why they're describing something different from the same things everyone experiences. I mean, people tell me what to think/feel all the time, often in ways that are obviously inflected with a dismissal of my experiences grounded in whatever personal characteristics people imagine me to have. Similar things can be said re: being condescended to. But the op must be saying something else because otherwise it wouldn't be worth saying at all because everyone (or just about everyone) has those experiences. Do you know what that is?

ETA: not a rhetorical question, genuinely would like to know
Looks like it's time for everyone to update their official disclosures of foreign ties again!
Most of the stuff I'm hearing seems like it's settling on a two-pronged defense:

(1) The campaign wasn't run by professional politicos and we were all too stupid to realize that colluding with a foreign government was an unwise thing to do.

(2) Countries mess with each other all the time. Just politics as usual, guys. Why is everything such a big deal when Trump does it when everyone else has been doing it forever?!
It must be incredibly hard to remember all of your meetings with shady Russian political operatives. Everybody in the admin seems to have to file an amended list every few months.
this is why conspiracy theories and opposition derangement syndrome are dangerous.  if you convince yourself someone is the devil, then anything you do to them will seem justified.

it's trickier to make this point with trump in office, because he is legitimately scary in a lot of ways, and his personality and track record make it realistic to worry about him abusing his power.  but we are dealing with that possibility, and the situation is more or less under control.  contrary to what this shooter thinks, trump has not crowned himself dictator.  he's not the next hitler.  those ideas have grown out of control because of people being dumb and conspiratorial in the far left bubble.

I don't disagree with your overall point, but don't forget about the actual life-destroying consequences of Republican health care policy. Our political norms condition us to see these consequences as falling short of real violence, but this is largely a fictional distinction. There are plenty of people who quite reasonably fear that they or their loved ones will be literally killed because of Republican ideology.

reportedly, russian hackers tried to infiltrate election systems in 39 states.  not clear what or how much damage they might have done.

Whew, it's a good thing that the Russians failed to undermine the legitimacy of the election. Thank God that Obama was there tell us that Donald Trump was definitely absolutely the winner and that we need to come together as a nation and that Jill Stein's recount campaign was stupid.
I'm hoping they'll pass the worst, most draconianly awful bill possible. And the effects will hit home before elections in 2018. After which, there won't be much left of a Republican Party, if any at all. Yah, there's the 25 or so hold overs till the next election, but they'll have seen the blood in the streets. Meanwhile, Trump is doing his damnedest to fuck them up in every way possible. So far he's pissed off virtually every one of our friends and allies. Give his foreign policy, in particular, foreign aid cutbacks, a chance to hit home and the rest of them will be on his case. 

All the Dems have to do is to simply not fuck up. Just be normal. Not sure they can pull that off but one can hope.

Most of the damage, if it doesn't go on too long, can be undone to some extent. But the US will take a permanent hit on it's rep. Nobody is going to trust us ever again. We've shown we can be totally idiotic morons every four years with no telling how bad it might turn out.

Gerrymandering, voter intimidation, and a biased electoral system will keep Republicans significantly in power regardless of how bad they are at governing. Republicans already dominate government at every level despite being disfavored by every reasonable metric of public will.
Politics and Current Events / Re: Comey
I think the problem is that Trump literally can't stop himself from lying in general. he lies about the dumbest shit.

It's not the crime that gets you, it's the cover up having to make it through a whole deposition without lying compulsively.
Politics and Current Events / Re: Comey
Trump constantly lies about everything, usually without regard to how easy it is to verify that he's lying. Testifying under oath is such a terrible idea for him that it's hard to believe his lawyers will allow it.
Probably never outside of outright war or self defense

It's always self-defense.
The claim that
at least in these cases, the violence didn't start with the right
is pretty pretty ridiculous given the actual aims and history of Nazism.
If the worst-case scenario happens and the FBI concludes that the president acted in collusion with foreign operatives to sway the election (including the hack, etc.), what exactly do we do with that information? It seems like we have no mechanism of fixing this at all. It's not even a sure thing that congress would impeach.
But yeah. This shit makes me feel like goddamn Glenn Beck in front of a fucking chalkboard, but the nature of business in Russia in recent years is that if you do business in Russia at a higher level, like Trump, you're automatically dealing with the mafia and the government, even if you don't want to. It's hard for some people to really understand how extensive corruption is in a place like Russia, but jumping into bed with some very unsavory characters is basically unavoidable if you want in. It's really the nature of the Russian economy at that level of corrupt oligarchs that you end up with these weird tenuous connections and meetings and handshakes and back room deals and shell games. It all looks like insane conspiracy theory because none of it is above board or honest, and it then becomes impossible to separate actual conspiracy theory lunacy and legitimately complicated shady dealings.

I wonder if this is different from any organized crime investigation, though. I'm sympathetic to wanting to keep clear of baseless speculation, but it's also not like you'd expect to see smoking guns from mafia-like criminal collusion.
Is there some resource summarizing/organizing the many dimensions  this whole Russia thing? Trump's ties to people who have shady Russian business interests/secret meetings with Russians/lied under oath about talking to Russians are so extensive that it's hard to keep track of them.
Politics and Current Events / Re: Trumpocalypse
Can a mod please change the thread title to "First World Problems"?

rapidly sliding towards third second world problems, tbh
Science / Re: Memories of Schneibster
I really thought this thread was going to be like a Schneibster's greatest hits album and frankly I'm a little disappointed.
Putin personally involved in Russian hacking

There was direct involvement from the leader of a foreign country hack U.S. government and pseudo-governmental targets in order to help one presidential candidate. The same presidential candidate explicitly encouraged that hacking operation during the campaign, reportedly has business interests in said foreign country, heaped praise on the aforementioned foreign leader, and is now appointing cabinet members who've received citations from the aforementioned foreign country. This same presidential candidate was also soliciting illegal campaign donations from foreign legislators at one point, by the way. Is this kind of winkwinknudgenudge, almost-conspiratorial election tampering actually legal here?
Given how paranoid Americans are about terrorism and various kinds of government fraud, you'd think we'd have some kind of mechanism to prevent actual foreign intelligence operations to mess with our elections, but I guess not.