|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On August 16 2016 23:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
If the two-way differential is 9 points but the Clinton-Trump differential for four-way is only 6 points, doesn't that mean that Hillary is losing more votes to third-party candidates/ hurt more by them than Trump is? She drops by 7 while he only drops by 4.
Sounds logical, Gary Johnston is kind of split and all of Jill Stein is Hillary.
|
On August 16 2016 23:37 Doodsmack wrote:
Honestly it's pretty fucking stupid that outlets are reporting on the results of two-way polls.
Why?
|
On August 16 2016 23:39 Plansix wrote:
Head to head polls generate headlines, despite being inaccurate predictors of how people will vote.
Well, the original reason was that early polls tend to overstate the actual amount third party candidates will get on election day. That likely isn't the case in this election, but no one thinks we're ever going to have a repeat of this one anytime soon.
Also it makes sense that Trump only loses 4 points, right now he only has voters he can't lose.
|
On August 16 2016 23:51 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 23:37 Doodsmack wrote:
Honestly it's pretty fucking stupid that outlets are reporting on the results of two-way polls. Why?
The election isn't two-way.
|
On August 16 2016 23:52 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 23:39 Plansix wrote:
Head to head polls generate headlines, despite being inaccurate predictors of how people will vote. Well, the original reason was that early polls tend to overstate the actual amount third party candidates will get on election day. That likely isn't the case in this election, but no one thinks we're ever going to have a repeat of this one anytime soon. Also it makes sense that Trump only loses 4 points, right now he only has voters he can't lose.
Yep. In most elections, the head to head polls today would be better predictors of vote shares (or victory margins, rather) than the four-ways. I think GJ and Stein were polling much higher than 1.7% of the vote combined in August 2012 (from a glance at RCP they almost definitely were), but that's where they ended up.
It's hard to decide what to go on when there's no clear precedent with both nominees have a pretty low floor.
|
|
|
Everyone who comes from a family that casually pretends grandma isn't shamefully racist understands this.
|
This makes me happy, as newer generations tend to be more liberal than their grandparents.
|
I can't help to wonder, about what will be the things, that the now liberal generation will be seen as bigoted about when we get old?
|
On August 17 2016 01:09 Evotroid wrote:
I can't help to wonder, about what will be the things, that the now liberal generation will be seen as bigoted about when we get old?
I've given that some thought as well. Polygamy comes to mind. I can imagine a lot of people being against legal recognition of 3 person couples. Why can 2 people join themselves but not 3? What if they are all married to each other?
I think our generation will continue to struggle with genetic modification of human embryos. But Europe and China will do just fine without us. That being said, the US is still the king of science. it is a shame how much progress towards solving aging we've just passed by. It should be the prime priority of humanity and we ignore it. It's humanity's greatest tragedy.
|
On August 17 2016 01:09 Evotroid wrote:
I can't help to wonder, about what will be the things, that the now liberal generation will be seen as bigoted about when we get old?
"People in your generation wouldn't let gays get married?" (Similar to how nowadays, it blows our minds about how interracial couples were shunned "back in the day".)
"People in your generation were Christian fundamentalists and actually wanted Creationism/ Intelligent Design taught in science classes in public schools?"
"People in your generation rejected vaccines and climate change?"
|
On August 17 2016 01:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
"People in your generation were Christian fundamentalists and actually wanted Creationism/ Intelligent Design taught in science classes in public schools?"
"People in your generation rejected vaccines and climate change?"
I would love if those things were gone by the next generation, but I'm also pessimistic about it actually happening.
|
Roger Ailes to advise Trump before the debates.
|
Man released from his job at major news network due to charges of sexual harassment to advise Trump on how to debate Clinton.
The worst part about this was I saw the headline and just went "Makes sense."
On August 17 2016 01:20 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 01:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
"People in your generation were Christian fundamentalists and actually wanted Creationism/ Intelligent Design taught in science classes in public schools?"
"People in your generation rejected vaccines and climate change?" I would love if those things were gone by the next generation, but I'm also pessimistic about it actually happening.
We just barely got school prayer out of schools and they are still pushing for "optional bible study". The only way that stops is if the GOP moves away from social conservatism.
|
What? Aging ist humanity's greatest tragedy? Uh, okay. I for my part prefer to die of old age compared to famine or war or murder. Being old is no tragedy. Getting so old your brain can't work anymore and still living 10 years is a tragedy. But getting old and eventually diying is a pretty natural thing and i hope we never get rid of it.
A society that does not age anymore is either one that kills off people at a certain time or stops reproducing and both seems pretty stupid.
|
Also what is already coming up is the legislation of incest. Especially with sameage-incest.
I'm pretty sure that this will see a similar story as homosexual relationships and similar in the past decades.
And I agree that with genetic modifications, and the progress of keeping humans alive in states that would be considered dead nowadays etc we will also have huge social challenges and rethinking coming up ahead. Or just today I read an article about a Russian patient and an Italian doctor who want to transplant an entire body! Only the head of the russian, transplanted on an entire body.... The entire method is heavily discussed and its doability is doubted, but there is enough stuff done in this direction that this will become more and more a topic in the future. (google Waleri Spiridonow, Sergio Canavero)
|
On August 17 2016 01:22 Broetchenholer wrote:
What? Aging ist humanity's greatest tragedy? Uh, okay. I for my part prefer to die of old age compared to famine or war or murder. Being old is no tragedy. Getting so old your brain can't work anymore and still living 10 years is a tragedy. But getting old and eventually diying is a pretty natural thing and i hope we never get rid of it.
A society that does not age anymore is either one that kills off people at a certain time or stops reproducing and both seems pretty stupid.
Being able to stop aging would be massive. We can already already store eggs and sperm to the point where we could always refresh the population when necessary. But reproducing for the sake of reproducing doesn't make sense when there's no longer a need to pass down information for the continuity of work. The reason we need children is we need someone to carry the torch. When people are able to live in their 30s forever and we have billions of eggs/sperm in reserve to ensure proper genetic diversity and all that, we can just stop reproducing.
|
On August 17 2016 01:26 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 01:22 Broetchenholer wrote:
What? Aging ist humanity's greatest tragedy? Uh, okay. I for my part prefer to die of old age compared to famine or war or murder. Being old is no tragedy. Getting so old your brain can't work anymore and still living 10 years is a tragedy. But getting old and eventually diying is a pretty natural thing and i hope we never get rid of it.
A society that does not age anymore is either one that kills off people at a certain time or stops reproducing and both seems pretty stupid. Being able to stop aging would be massive. We can already already store eggs and sperm to the point where we could always refresh the population when necessary. But reproducing for the sake of reproducing doesn't make sense when there's no longer a need to pass down information for the continuity of work. The reason we need children is we need someone to carry the torch. When people are able to live in their 30s forever and we have billions of eggs/sperm in reserve to ensure proper genetic diversity and all that, we can just stop reproducing.
Most people dont reproduce because they feel like they owe this to mankind but for very privately motivated reasons. If people actually stop dying, we would just worsen the problems we have. Because people certainly would not want to give up on their right to reproduce.
|
On August 17 2016 01:26 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 01:22 Broetchenholer wrote:
What? Aging ist humanity's greatest tragedy? Uh, okay. I for my part prefer to die of old age compared to famine or war or murder. Being old is no tragedy. Getting so old your brain can't work anymore and still living 10 years is a tragedy. But getting old and eventually diying is a pretty natural thing and i hope we never get rid of it.
A society that does not age anymore is either one that kills off people at a certain time or stops reproducing and both seems pretty stupid. Being able to stop aging would be massive. We can already already store eggs and sperm to the point where we could always refresh the population when necessary. But reproducing for the sake of reproducing doesn't make sense when there's no longer a need to pass down information for the continuity of work. The reason we need children is we need someone to carry the torch. When people are able to live in their 30s forever and we have billions of eggs/sperm in reserve to ensure proper genetic diversity and all that, we can just stop reproducing.
Population control would become a major issue since we still have the drive to reproduce built into us.
|
On August 17 2016 01:29 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 01:26 Mohdoo wrote:On August 17 2016 01:22 Broetchenholer wrote:
What? Aging ist humanity's greatest tragedy? Uh, okay. I for my part prefer to die of old age compared to famine or war or murder. Being old is no tragedy. Getting so old your brain can't work anymore and still living 10 years is a tragedy. But getting old and eventually diying is a pretty natural thing and i hope we never get rid of it.
A society that does not age anymore is either one that kills off people at a certain time or stops reproducing and both seems pretty stupid. Being able to stop aging would be massive. We can already already store eggs and sperm to the point where we could always refresh the population when necessary. But reproducing for the sake of reproducing doesn't make sense when there's no longer a need to pass down information for the continuity of work. The reason we need children is we need someone to carry the torch. When people are able to live in their 30s forever and we have billions of eggs/sperm in reserve to ensure proper genetic diversity and all that, we can just stop reproducing. Population control would become a major issue since we still have the drive to reproduce built into us.
The way I've always imagined this going on in my scientific Utopian fantasy is that people who receive anti-aging treatment are made infertile from the treatment. Wanna live forever? No more kids. Your sperm/eggs are still kept in storage for the sake of population control, but you don't get to indulge yourself with the experience of raising a child just because you feel like it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
