US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2474

And i don't know - there has to be alot more than what you assume there is to intelligence. Newton was intelligent. Einstein was intelligent. They looked at the same problem, one of them could not solve it. Why? Keep in mind that Einstein first developed his theory theoretically, then had it checked (it was a pure brainstorm, no technological advancement). So is Newton a stupid person now? He could've done exactly the same.

On November 01 2015 08:05 TheTenthDoc wrote:
You should elect people based on whether or not the policies they say they will implement will be better than the other candidates as well as any enumerated policy positions about hypothetical future happenings (like "I will not invade Iran unless XYZ"). Of course, there is also a trust element involved (which is why incumbents are generally better off).

Is there every really a case where you would elect a candidate whose policies you disagree with because of some bizarre, non-logical non-probabilistic semi-mystical intelligence calculus says that they're smarter than the other guys?

Edit: Semi-mystical is probably a better phrase here.

On October 31 2015 04:43 Plansix wrote:
The US healthcare system is a pile of garbage and is a joke compared to other nations. The fact that we even debate that it was functional before the ACA is embarrassing. But people worship the “free market” and assume it will solve the healthcare problem. Even though its impossible to get a quote on medical services or be 100% sure what your provider will pay.

But the invisible hand cures all problems.

On November 02 2015 09:46 OtherWorld wrote:
So, how's the Clinton - Sanders battle going?

(CNN)Bernie Sanders released the first TV ad buy of his presidential campaign on Sunday, going on air in Iowa and New Hampshire with a biography spot that casts the senator as an "honest leader" who has long stood on principle, not politics.

Sanders' campaign will spend more than $2 million on the ad over the next 10 days, according to Michael Briggs, the campaign's spokesman. The large buy comes months after Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign went on air in the key early nominating states.

"Thousands of Americans have come out to see Bernie speak and we've seen a great response to his message," said Jeff Weaver, the campaign's manager. "This ad marks the next phase of this campaign. We're bringing that message directly to the voters of Iowa and New Hampshire."

To date, Clinton has released at least a dozen ads in the early nominating states. In the third fundraiser quarter Clinton's campaign spent $3.4 million on media, according to its filing with the Federal Election Commission.

On November 02 2015 09:46 OtherWorld wrote:
So, how's the Clinton - Sanders battle going?

On November 02 2015 10:28 ticklishmusic wrote:


RCP polling average

The numbers aren't the most useful (Bernie is almost certainly "doing better" that suggested due to his ability to generate turnout), but the trend is that as of two weeks ago Clinton stopped slumping after a good debate performance and an even better testimony in front of the Benghazi panel. The interesting thing will be to see who gets the lion's share of Biden's support, or if it splits down the middle. Still, anything could happen.

(come on guys, just confirm the goddamn Clinton Sanders ticket already, the combo would be like the Williams sisters versus me and my little brother in tennis).

Unrelated entertaining Onion Article

On November 01 2015 23:12 farvacola wrote:
Actually, it's the other way around The US is the world leader when it comes to palliative treatments; as for preventative medicine, unfettered access to healthcare is a core, threshold factor and in that regard the US is sorely lacking.

On November 01 2015 10:26 Paljas wrote:

What the fuck are you talking about?

this is an awful example

On November 02 2015 21:25 corumjhaelen wrote:
So Einstein was smarter than Newton because he managed to conciliate two theories that Newton didn't know of because one was devised a century and a half after him and he was busy inventing the very other ?

On November 02 2015 22:36 m4ini wrote:


Newton didn't "invent" anything there. He actually stated, he can't tell why "gravity is happening" (and was annoyed by that), and that it's up to the reader to come to a conclusion. Like the Le-Sage theory. He certainly tried to think of a reason as to what's causing gravity and how it's working at vast distances.

And maybe my example wasn't clear enough, seeing that you have it completely backwards. I'm not saying Einstein is smarter. Exactly the opposite. There's no thing as "smarter" between those two.

Another example: are people with spatial visualization ability smarter than others? It's actually debated, but what would you say?

On November 02 2015 23:50 corumjhaelen wrote:

I don't care about your second question, I wasn't really part of the original debate. For the reste, appart from the term invent, which I choose because nothing came to me in English faster, I tried my best to understand what the hell you could have meant in your original post, because that sure is as unclear to me as my post should seem to you.

I am quite than skeptics about that Einstein smarter than Newton. At least not because of relativity theory.
And I'm also skeptic about that vision of science. Maybe it won't even be persons who make the next "breakthrough". Or no one will. Or someone lucky as you say (and researching the right thing at the right time in the right place obviously helped some people, and I'm not only mocking Watson and Creek :p )
Edit : for the at least in maths, maybe. Or maybe not, Newton made up quite a lot more maths than Einstein, and they certainly were quite complicated. And special relativity certainly isn't a good example of something horrificaly complex mathematically. I mean even Einstein managed it alone l-u-l.

And i don't know - there has to be alot more than what you assume there is to intelligence. Newton was intelligent. Einstein was intelligent. They looked at the same problem, one of them could not solve it. Why? Keep in mind that Einstein first developed his theory theoretically, then had it checked (it was a pure brainstorm, no technological advancement). So is Newton a stupid person now? He could've done exactly the same.