ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
No bio...
User ID: 2935
On election night Trump looks poised for a victory.
In what way was Trump poised for victory? Most of the polls/predictions were pretty heavily in Biden's favour.
Even smarter and more homogeneous nations struggle a lot.
It took 40 years, untold billions of $ and much woe for Swedish nation to start thinking, collectively, maybe we shouldn't be importing refugees on a massive scale.
While I'm not going to defend Sweden's migration policy, I think you'd much rather be a victim of your own success (which is where progressivism comes from) than your failures.
Silver is also a biased Kamala supporter who tends to tweet about positive Kamala polls more than negative ones. But I trust him enough to say that he will ignore his biases and go where the data leads.
To his credit, he's open about his bias.
I really enjoyed the use of emojis in that transcription.
Kind of a weird ad. Someone's first in-person questions to a prospective date including "how much money do you earn" is pretty tacky, so despite it obviously being not real the only effect of the video on me was that I judged the female characters quite negatively. Also why would you need to ask how tall someone is when they're standing right in front of you?
I don't watch TV though, so maybe this is just standard for these kinds of dating shows. And I did like popping balloons to indicate when something is a turn-off. I could get into a showwhere the women carry increasingly impractical noise-making devices they trigger when prospective suitors do something unattractive.
It's not common, but it's also not terribly smart for a civilization to knowingly and intentionally bring into the world babies with such severe deficiencies.
Surely you could say the same about any pregnancy where one or both parents have a serious hereditary condition?
It sounds familiar but even apart from that the level of supposed sanctity that we're supposed to treat doctors' testimonies with is kind of dumb. The idea that being a doctor automatically confers on someone the kind of supreme ethical status that means they would never lie, be biased, or really hate Jews, has the sort of intuitive logic that I probably accepted as a child but shouldn't be convincing to any adult who tries to think critically.
And Al Gore too.
Is Ukraine a US state? Do they pay taxes? Can we conscript their sons to go die for the protection of our nation?
They don't pay taxes, but the view of the people running the US is that there's a substantial benefit for the US in defending the rules-based international system*, that in the long term is probably worth substantially more in dollar terms than the cost of funding Ukraine. Maybe they're wrong but it's still largely an economic calculation, not a decision based on abstract philosophical principles for their own sakes.
*Rules that the US sets and gets to break, before anyone comes with examples of the US being hypocrites on this front.
I mean, the US provides aid to Israel because they feel they gain some geostrategic example from it. Maybe they're wrong about that but I don't think there's a moral dimension to it.
But that may follow from my general skepticism on putting faith in "moral arc of history" memes: literal blood-and-soil nationalism even gets praise from self-declared progressives, as long as who, whom? fits. It's funny to me that the West is expected to allow any-and-all immigration of largely-unverified refugees seeking asylum and giving jus soli citizenship and votes to their descendants, but the residents of the (withdrawing) British mandate for Palestine in 1948 and their descendants are eternally allowed to "resist the occupation" in means that would make even the American far right nauseous. But again: who, whom?.
The basic model these people have of the world is that "the West", as colonisers/imperialists, have forfeited for all time the right to any ethnic criteria for who lives in their countries, while "Indigenous peoples" (basically everyone else) have always lived peacefully and harmoniously in the same spot and so have a fundamentally legitimate claim of ownership of their land.
One thing to consider is that the US military just isn't very high-performance at these kinds of logistical tasks. Remember the pier in Gaza? Cost hundreds of millions, took ages to put up, got unmoored several times and then scrapped after dispersing a fairly modest amount of aid.
I could be misremembering, but wasn't the genesis of that plan Biden randomly announcing it in a press event? For all we know setting up an aid pier like that might be inherently almost impossible and not something the military would ever have planned themselved. Maybe the behaviour of the sea or form of the beach at that exact point makes things particularly difficult etc.
Is the Ukraine video really that bad? She looks a bit stiff and uncomfortable but that's not particularly unusual when you've got a camera in your face. Her answers are vague but that's the modal politician response to most questions on contentious topics.
Looking back on his public performances it's clear that he absolutely wasn't dumb even if that was him at his best. The extent to which "Bush is a moron" took off as a meme is actually quite remarkable in retrospect.
The most surprising thing to me is that apparantly Iran didn't clear their airspace before launching their missiles, significantly raising the chances of a horrific accident.
This makes me suspect the attack was a rash decision, rather than something carefully thought through.
Just wanted to express my appreciation of this post.
That's pretty uncertain, many Muslims don't vote at all and the rest aren't, as a group, that focused on Israel/Palestine (despite the efforts and a drop in share a majority of them still voted for Labour in 2024 UK elections AFAIK).
Labour MPs in Muslim-heavy constituencies are probably very vocally pro-Hamas, though. I know it's more typical to vote for the party rather than the MP, but maybe it's different when it comes to Muslims in the UK?
The best way I've heard it explained is that it's not asking a guy (or anyone) out if there's plausible deniability. Batting your eyes and giving hints doesn't meet this threshold.
Can only imagine how angry Biden must be with Netanyahu after this
I think that's to help with evacuation. I think there's a long way to go before there's a chance US troops will actually be deployed for combat.
I would assume US pressure against a ground invasion is also a significant factor in Israel's decision making here.
For "The Palestinians" to have a chance of anything they need to have agency.
I'd be more sympathetic to this if not for just how transcendentally ecstatic the Palestinians seemed about the Oct 7th attack. I know Palestinians are used by Iran and the UN (only slightly exaggerating) in their mission to eliminate Israel but even without these influences the widespread resistance to any form of peaceful co-existence with Israel seems entirely organic.
Of course the prospects for peace would be very different if the UN used the resources it pours into Gaza to deradicalise the population rather than funding Hamas. But that's not going to happen for the foreseeable future.
Because they're still paying taxes to the US? No taxation without representation etc.
Russian fisheries practices have generally leaned towards conservation and effective management of existing stocks
Interesting. Perhaps this is bigoted of me but my general impression of Russian institutions would have led me to assume they'd take a far more recklessly extractive approach. Glad to hear that's not the case.
It's interesting seeing the split in perspective. About half of comments are saying things like "Hezbollah is destroying the country by dragging it into a conflict it clearly can't win" while the other half are along the lines of "This just shows how much we need Hezbollah, to protect us from the evil Zionist entity that would otherwise invade and us and try to take all our land".
Magnus Carlsen at age 13 was substantially weaker than Kasparov; I suspect the notion they were equals comes from the fact they drew a rapid game, but such upsets like that aren't unheard of (and Kasparov beat him in their next encounter, knocking him out of the tournament).
I'm extremely dubious of this. What's your source?
Starting young (below 10 at a max, ideally below 8) is essential to eventually playing chess at the highest levels. There probably isn't a single player in top 100 who didn't start learning the game before this cut-of (and I suspect 90% of them achieved the GM title before they were 20). The chance to rapidly absorb thousands of patterns while your brain is still plastic is an opportunity you only get as a child. Anyone who's spent much time playing chess will know that children improve dramatically quicker than adults, primarily because they've still got the mental wiring to make great leaps in their understanding of the game in a very short time.
More options
Context Copy link