SomethingMusic
No bio...
User ID: 181
People have been begging the past 8 years for a 'return to normalcy' and believe that Kamala, whose sycophants are scouring the internet in an attempt to rebrand her as a moderate Democrat, will most likely represent this return. Trump can never brand himself as status quo by the sheer nature of his personality. The media is guaranteeing that upon reelection the media is promising 4 years of obsessive hatred and hit pieces against the man.
The best thing Kamala can do is shut up, hide, and let the Democratic machine work their propaganda. The less she says and the less she's in the spotlight the more likely the strategy can work. As soon as she comes on stage and exposes herself the jig will be up. The Democrats only hope is that their spin overwhelms anything she the person excretes.
Do not go gentle into that good night, Old age should burn and rave at close of day; Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right, Because their words had forked no lightning they Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight, And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way, Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height, Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray. Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Thought maybe a bit more coordination would be a good idea than wild looting.
You would have to argue that the gifts he received was quid pro quo, and that multiple justices have done it in recent history, as one dissenting ruling doesn't seem to have an impact on the supreme court. Democrats have been attacking Thomas for 30 years, so him hobnobbing with wealthy friends hardly constitutes a new attack on his character. Who doesn't bellyache about getting paid enough?
What's the point of instituting and codifying an 18 year term limit except to boot out outliers? It makes it seems it's at best a short-term political play to get the most longstanding conservative judge off the bench and refresh an old Democratic judge and is a purely partisan reform.
Lots of young women would like to be able to get abortions in case they get pregnant while having fun casual sex. Why is the male version of this something cool and fun while the female version of this cat lady hectoring?
I've never understood this argument. It's not cool and fun when men engage in casual "fun" sex, nor is it cool when women do it. The more we treat sex as something separate from a person emotionally, physically, and spiritually, the more it become commodified and exposed to a 'free market' exchange of sex, in which selfishness is prioritized instead of mutual building. Suddenly we have an increase of single parents which is well documented to lead to worse behavioral outcomes for men, which even the politically washed Bing-GPT still spits out:
Male children of single parents face unique challenges and experiences. Here are some key points:
Demographics: A growing number of single-parent households are headed by fathers. As of recent data, 16.1% of single-parent households are led by fathers, up from 12.5% in 2007 1.
Educational and Behavioral Outcomes: Studies show that boys raised in single-parent households may face more behavioral and academic challenges compared to those in two-parent households. However, the presence of a supportive and involved parent can mitigate many of these issues2.
Economic Factors: Single-parent households, especially those led by mothers, are more likely to experience financial difficulties. This can impact the resources available for the child’s education and extracurricular activities2.
Emotional and Social Development: Boys in single-parent households might experience different social dynamics. They may take on more responsibilities at home and develop a strong bond with the custodial parent1.
Role Models: The absence of a male role model can be a concern, but many single mothers and fathers actively seek out positive male influences for their sons through family, friends, and community programs3.
The whole point of no term limits on supreme judges is so they remove the incentive of selling out to interest groups to maximize their income or social interested during their tenure. Unless there's evidence that long standing judges do in fact profit more than, say, congressmen in the nature of their duration as supreme court judges, #2 is pure culture war and could end up backfiring spectacularly.
#1 is from what I've read on this from here and other places, is a way to push things through this through disingenuous reading of the ruling and ignores the nuance of what the judges put forth. The only reason to put this into the reform is to go after an ex-president legally, and if it doesn't go through is a way to blame "those wiley Republicans are preventing the rule of law, what power hungry hypocrites!" It's pure dog-whistle for Democrats.
#3 is too open ended and essentially is a way to perpetuate those in power by hemming in the presidency. The liked president who toes the party line will get a pass, the unliked or controversial president will be hamstrung by 'morality' and 'ethics' which will mean whatever people want it to mean at the time.
I can't help but see that the crux of your opinion and argument is largely based off your personal experiences and it sounds you live in a red-coded area doing a job that will involve you with a lot of poor red coded individuals. This is nothing new for a lot of people and I suggest that it doesn't significantly impact your personal political identity. A lot of people I met who left conservative bastions to the big bright blue cities have their political opinions informed by the people they met. They hate the same schitzo red tribe that you just met, and because they don't want to associate with them, they feel like it's necessary to take every opposite political opinion to socially and intellectually disengage from the people they so disparage.
This is why it's important to realize your bubble. I currently live in an area that is HEAVILY dominated by Democrats and I see the same schitzo squealing as you do, but just blue coded. Fat feminists rioting for women's rights, endless signs of the "liberal's creed (we believe in science, etc.)". Pro-abortion and acceptance flags in every business window, while at the same time dozens of people begging and pan handling in the streets, accosting people on the street. There's a lot of low intelligence people in every region that are absolutely bat-shit, and while our brains are very good at recognizing problematic individuals as a safety precaution, it's also important to realize that these people are largely the statistical outliers and do not represent the political tribal spectrum.
My question is, where the hell are people getting these Zoom links? I haven't seen any advertising or public posting for any zoom calls, and if I did, I would probably immediately consider is a scam.
I honestly missed their segment; I was flipping between TV and my work computer in another room so I mostly popped my head out when there was a piece of classical music I recognized.
While I agree 2028 will be worse from a culture war perspective, I'd at least give them that it will be much more choreographed and better rehearsed than what just was on the TV.
I didn't even catch that it was a video game reference, I haven't played an assassins creed since ACII
The French Olympic ceremony is a travesty. The lack of rehearsal and disjointed segments swapping unceremoniously between live and made-for-TV videos, the ham-fisted DEI multiculturalism, and the overriding of historical French artists for modern Hollywood slop all imply the horrendous organization of this opening. Cameras have to constantly cut around to find something to show while most of the performers are largely walking around waiting for some unknown cues.
Dukas' Sorcerer's Apprentice getting prematurely cut off for an awful video featuring the Despicable Me's (tm) minions was, for me, the most poignant moment so far. Out with the traditionalism and that boring culture, in with the latest schlock to maximally consume product!
What is the breaking point? At what point does the logistics, infrastructure, and labor fail to support the bloated mass of the new? At what point will the cultures, artists, and creativity of Europe be crushed under a mass of a billion immigrants, a throng of unproductive mouths to feed? Will it go out in a bang or a whimper? Will it evolve and find a new way to thrive, or will it be absorbed and cannibalized into something unrecognizable?
At least the baroque counter tenor was a nice touch, even if it is framed in the modern nonbinary perspective.
I dislike discord. Not just because of the discord -> degeneracy meme, but because so much tech specific knowledge is now hidden in a generally unsearchable archive where the only way to find it is BY joining and searching various discords. At least forums have a single post buried in the google archives from 15 years ago. With discord suddenly a huge amount of information is gated, and short of 'joining the community' it's impossible to locate the information now.
A problem that took me two days to iron out could have been done in 15 minutes if I simply remembered that Discord = information. However, my general use of discord means that connection in my mind doesn't take place.
Got it, thanks!
This is very similar to my mental model as well. The mugshots of this kid is one of being a terminally online NEET who was going out with a bang, not one of an ideologue. The failing of SS is gross incompetence of lazy risk-adverse officials quiet quitting to pull a paycheck off a political target they didn't care for.
Don't feel bad, I only contribute to threads that interest me since a lot of the high-volume posters are incredibly integrated into the rationalist community which seems largely related to west coast thinking and influences. This is simply one of the best places for discussion on the internet right now, so I tend to hang out here a lot.
I'm a big advocate of 'be the change you want to see' but I understand that it requires a lot more effort and time that makes being a catalyst for change on an internet forum a challenge, so I'm fine lurking the majority of the time.
That makes sense, I got confused because I was focused on the 'stag hunt' scenario having cooperative actors while 'prisoners dilemma' has competitive actors when the actual focus is on the number of stable Nash equilibria per scenario.
I'm not sure if it's a stag hunt (I'll admit needing to look this up) considering AI development (so far) has not been a particularly communal process. As far as I know, China's and the US' AI models haven't shared code/development information and from the way chip stocks are down this morning, the segregation between the two major power players is not a cooperative model.
It would be great if we decided military AI is against the Geneva convention, but game theory kind of dictates that if AI gives a notable advantage to one side, it's pretty inevitable the other side will also increase development in military AI. I am with you in that I'd hope some international agreement against AI developed for military applications take place, but with how paper thin these agreements are already I speculate that there is no real off ramp.
It didn't break down as much as it did in 2020, but I do agree with you that they were hamstringing Trump by not letting him have time to respond and it slowed down the debate topics because he was forced to reiterate old topics and it derailed the debate. This didn't bother me too much as I've attended too many events to know how quickly things become disorganized or run late, the best laid plans often run awry.
This may also be why Trump's 'lying' doesn't bother me much because it's the lying of humans interacting of each other. It's not a calculated lie to manipulate people but the lie of being in the moment, of verbal sparring, bullshitting, and the barstool one-up-mansship that men do to each other. It's why I find the pundits constantly talking about the strange things that come out of his mouth as juvenile and childish and ultimately doesn't sway my opinions of him. Trump doesn't try to hide who he is, so his personality and choices doesn't bother me nearly as much as the way that Biden, Hillary Clinton, or Pelosi tend to lie to manipulate, deceive , and gaslight.
The lies Biden espoused were defensive 'nu uh'. He was on the back foot the entire time, intellectually and socially. It was kids fighting on the playground, not a nuanced discussion or breakdown on policy. I do think Trump should have continually associated Biden's failure to curb illegal immigration with drug trafficking of deadly narcotics/opioids and the loss of (black) Americans to addiction instead of direct murders, but it's very hard to have a nuanced take in a heat of the moment debate and decided to stay on his course.
I thought Biden looked old and tired, and it was hard for me to hear half the things he said, but he didn't actually seem senile. It's actually OK with me if he wants to take a low-key approach where he only handles president business from 10-4 and lets other people handle things the rest of the time. Trump was a better speaker but just sort of rambled from soundbite to soundbite with no logic.
I disagree. Trump was able to respond to most of the retorts when allowed in the debate format, while Biden was rigid and unable to follow the path of discourse nearly as well as Trump. Trump started getting bogged down in the 2nd half of the debate because he wanted to get the last word in on previous topics, but is a natural extrovert and engaged with the audience and connected to viewers while Biden was unable to be creative in spur of the moment debate. This is especially concerning as he should have ample experience with engaging people and being in the center of attention every day. How often does Biden interact with staff, intelligence agencies, CEOs, diplomats, and international leaders? The president isn't a programming job, it's a customer service job, and Biden has just publicly shown he is completely unable to interact with people in a meaningful day to day experience. Trump blusters, speaks in hyperbole, brags relentlessly, but he does it in a way that is immediately engaging and creates dialogue and interaction between himself and whoever he is engaged with.
I think Papal Infalibility is deliberately misunderstood to construct bad faith attacks on Catholics, just like how this supreme court ruling is being deliberately misinterpreted by the proles to construct bad faith attacks against Republicans. Of course, the problem is that the answer/debunking takes longer and is much less vitriolic than the hyperbolic misinterpretation, so the misinterpretation becomes what is public consensus, even if the law, and the ruling, is clear that this is not the case.
Or Trump is just the loudest. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Not only do you not need her to take positions, there's a strong incentive for her to not take positions. Stand for nothing and people will fill in the gaps in their own mind. I bet if being a human being wasn't a requirement we would have a pet cat as a president.
More options
Context Copy link