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 May 30 2017 06:53 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: Krugman has posted and written about how WV keeps voting against its own interests. Although I suppose it's possible they thought Trump actually was going to fix everything. Krugman does come of as a bit snobbish at times but he makes good points.
That last bit is why the progressive left drives me insane with their rhetoric....
Yeah Krugman's a bit snobbish. But he is a noble laureate in economics who's probably tired of people thinking they know more about economics than he does. I read him mainly because he makes good points. I do wish he'd mellow his rhetoric a bit. Again he's mostly looking at it from solely an economics and policy perspective.
Actually I didnt mind his words, I meant the bit he "quoted". It essentially tells us how effective talking down to people is...
well the quote was about voters in west virginia so he's not talking about the progressive left. He's referring to his frustration with urban and rural areas that go republican and tend to vote against their own interest. I guess you could apply it to the progressive left too in a sense.
I made an edit to that post because i realized how unclear i was:
Like "I dont feel respected' is actually a pretty valid thing to say. Expecting people to overcome this layer of hostility, consider your underlying points and see that, lo, they are good and vote accordingly is expecting an awful lot.
that makes sense. yeah I kind of get annoyed too with it. Politics is first emotional and second policy based. you can explain things to them all you want but until you try to understand how they feel you're probably not going to agree with you. they've done psych studies where showing people information that disagreed with them actually made them agree with whatever they believe even more.
Blatant BS as opposed to what? Almost everything Trump said was blatant BS, he still got elected, seems weird to suddenly assume that people were aware that he was lying on this specific instance (especially given how they react today)
which is why I also said should have known it. that some people chose to believe a proven con-man who was offering obvious bs, when everyone warned them what it was, and provided rigorous proof of that, is to a considerable extent on them.
ignorance of the law is not an excuse as they say; neither should ignorance count for much in defence here either, when it was proven so thoroughly. they voted for ignorance and non-solutions, so they got ignorance and non-solutions.
Okay but I wasn't trying to excuse it, was I? I was just saying that it seems foolish to assume they're trying to only repeal healthcare and not replace it when all of the signs point to the opposite being true.
then your comment was simply irrelevant to what he was saying, which was more venting than anything else. also, a LOT of republicans ran on straight repeal for a long while, so some of that should bleed throug hto trump, especially given that what he says means nothing, so the general republican position would matter more.
all the actual signs point to them being idiots who voted against their own self interest and against sound government and actual solutions.
Them being idiots doesn't invalidate what I said though, does it?
I'm pretty sure what he was saying is that when you do something drastic, there's a blowback, which is why you have to be patient with race relations in the US. And my answer is that his example of that is really, really poor, because Obamacare into single payer (of some sort) is the go-to example of something that you'd better advance really fast on.
you're just completely not getting the point. and /or you're blithely ignoring it. I'll say it again one more time to be clear: the original guy was VENTING; and the points are valid from a VENTING point of view.
...
I disagree with your interpretation that he was venting. Which is why I provided you with my explanation of what I think he was doing, rather than venting. It was there: "I'm pretty sure what he was saying is that when you do something drastic, there's a blowback, which is why you have to be patient with race relations in the US."
Maybe I was wrong. Maybe I wasn't. In any case, I didn't need you to condescendingly repeat your interpretation as if I didn't get basic english. Let me know if we're up to speed in our conversation.
I was venting. he looked to be venting. everything we've both said is consistent with the principle "voters are idiots who vote on things they don't understand and literally vote against things they favor sometimes because they don't understand." i'd say you did need it said that way. you've been raising low quality points repeatedly for some time now, both in this discussion chain and elsewhere. it's not been helpful.
I apologize if my points didn't meet your standards. I feel quite the same about your contributions, I trust you'll do with that feedback what you expect me to do with yours.
Just because voters "are idiots", or more precisely, are easy to fool, doesn't mean that you can't draw conclusions about what they want, or that you can't figure out that certain conclusions about what they want are absurd. And it especially doesn't mean that discussions about what they are looking for are unhelpful.
yes you do; dunning-kruger in action. and you're still missing the point that was clearly stated, so I' not going to bother with you if you're not going ot listen or understand or learn anything or provide anything actually useful. goodbye.
Dunning-Kruger is like the Godwin of people who want to sound smart. Have a nice life.
On May 30 2017 09:50 zlefin wrote: [quote] which is why I also said should have known it. that some people chose to believe a proven con-man who was offering obvious bs, when everyone warned them what it was, and provided rigorous proof of that, is to a considerable extent on them.
ignorance of the law is not an excuse as they say; neither should ignorance count for much in defence here either, when it was proven so thoroughly. they voted for ignorance and non-solutions, so they got ignorance and non-solutions.
Okay but I wasn't trying to excuse it, was I? I was just saying that it seems foolish to assume they're trying to only repeal healthcare and not replace it when all of the signs point to the opposite being true.
then your comment was simply irrelevant to what he was saying, which was more venting than anything else. also, a LOT of republicans ran on straight repeal for a long while, so some of that should bleed throug hto trump, especially given that what he says means nothing, so the general republican position would matter more.
all the actual signs point to them being idiots who voted against their own self interest and against sound government and actual solutions.
Them being idiots doesn't invalidate what I said though, does it?
I'm pretty sure what he was saying is that when you do something drastic, there's a blowback, which is why you have to be patient with race relations in the US. And my answer is that his example of that is really, really poor, because Obamacare into single payer (of some sort) is the go-to example of something that you'd better advance really fast on.
you're just completely not getting the point. and /or you're blithely ignoring it. I'll say it again one more time to be clear: the original guy was VENTING; and the points are valid from a VENTING point of view.
...
I disagree with your interpretation that he was venting. Which is why I provided you with my explanation of what I think he was doing, rather than venting. It was there: "I'm pretty sure what he was saying is that when you do something drastic, there's a blowback, which is why you have to be patient with race relations in the US."
Maybe I was wrong. Maybe I wasn't. In any case, I didn't need you to condescendingly repeat your interpretation as if I didn't get basic english. Let me know if we're up to speed in our conversation.
I was venting. he looked to be venting. everything we've both said is consistent with the principle "voters are idiots who vote on things they don't understand and literally vote against things they favor sometimes because they don't understand." i'd say you did need it said that way. you've been raising low quality points repeatedly for some time now, both in this discussion chain and elsewhere. it's not been helpful.
I apologize if my points didn't meet your standards. I feel quite the same about your contributions, I trust you'll do with that feedback what you expect me to do with yours.
Just because voters "are idiots", or more precisely, are easy to fool, doesn't mean that you can't draw conclusions about what they want, or that you can't figure out that certain conclusions about what they want are absurd. And it especially doesn't mean that discussions about what they are looking for are unhelpful.
yes you do; dunning-kruger in action. and you're still missing the point that was clearly stated, so I' not going to bother with you if you're not going ot listen or understand or learn anything or provide anything actually useful. goodbye.
Dunning-Kruger is like the Godwin of people who want to sound smart. Have a nice life.
On May 30 2017 09:11 Toadesstern wrote: follow up on merkel's stance on Trump the other day I guess:
Nonetheless, Merkel's plans to meet Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang this week reflect Berlin's willingness to work with other countries if Washington proves problematic on climate and trade policy.
German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said the West had become weaker as Washington increasingly put U.S. interests first. He said Trump's administration, for example, was unlikely to do much to tackle the causes of the migrant crisis - climate change, wars and persecution.
He referred to the "loss of the U.S. as an important nation" and said that while it was important to maintain dialogue with Washington, Europe needed to become stronger and Germany needed to be more prepared to work with its EU peers.
Juergen Hardt, the German government's coordinator for transatlantic policies, said Trump's administration was irritating foreign allies.
"Never before has there been so much uncertainty about the political course, and so many contradictions in the president's statements, four months after the inauguration of a new U.S. president," Hardt told Reuters.
"That weakens America and irritates its partners," said Hardt, the foreign policy expert in parliament for Merkel's conservative Christian Democrats.
(posting this in here instead of the EU thread because of the "Obama made us look weak abroad" from a couple people)
Maybe another apology tour is just what the doctor ordered.
When the rest of the world moves on to developing new energy source, we will be making the "please sell us your products and technology" tour. Or the "please give us a better trade deal" tour.
You mean like Gen IV nuclear reactors? Oh wait...
The West is moving backwards while China is moving forwards when it comes to electricity generation. The environmental luddites and the fossil fuel belts are a powerful force when it comes to propaganda against Nuclear especially with everything we know about the new line of reactors.
On May 30 2017 06:53 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: Krugman has posted and written about how WV keeps voting against its own interests. Although I suppose it's possible they thought Trump actually was going to fix everything. Krugman does come of as a bit snobbish at times but he makes good points.
That last bit is why the progressive left drives me insane with their rhetoric....
Yeah Krugman's a bit snobbish. But he is a noble laureate in economics who's probably tired of people thinking they know more about economics than he does. I read him mainly because he makes good points. I do wish he'd mellow his rhetoric a bit. Again he's mostly looking at it from solely an economics and policy perspective.
Actually I didnt mind his words, I meant the bit he "quoted". It essentially tells us how effective talking down to people is...
well the quote was about voters in west virginia so he's not talking about the progressive left. He's referring to his frustration with urban and rural areas that go republican and tend to vote against their own interest. I guess you could apply it to the progressive left too in a sense.
I made an edit to that post because i realized how unclear i was:
Like "I dont feel respected' is actually a pretty valid thing to say. Expecting people to overcome this layer of hostility, consider your underlying points and see that, lo, they are good and vote accordingly is expecting an awful lot.
that makes sense. yeah I kind of get annoyed too with it. Politics is first emotional and second policy based. you can explain things to them all you want but until you try to understand how they feel you're probably not going to agree with you. they've done psych studies where showing people information that disagreed with them actually made them agree with whatever they believe even more.
I watched a video about how information mechanically goes through emotional and anecdotal processing before you get to the logic and reason evaluation. Gotta give some sugar with that medicine. Mary P knew her shit.
On May 30 2017 10:41 riotjune wrote: I have no idea what a Dunning-Kruger or Godwin is, but I will try to have a nice life.
Godwin: Longer an arguement goes on, the more likely somebody is going to call/compare somebody else a nazi or hitler.
Dunning-Kruger: Unskilled people overestimate their skill in something and improve slower at a task. Skilled people are more capable of being self critical, improve faster, and tend to underestimate their competency.
On May 30 2017 10:41 riotjune wrote: I have no idea what a Dunning-Kruger or Godwin is, but I will try to have a nice life.
Godwin: Longer an arguement goes on, the more likely somebody is going to call/compare somebody else a nazi or hitler.
Dunning-Kruger: Unskilled people overestimate their skill in something and improve slower at a task. Skilled people are more capable of being self critical, improve faster, and tend to underestimate their competency.
If you want to learn about the second, you can play dota 2 and have a graduate level understanding of the phenomenon. And probably a couple years worth of Spanish and Russian languages, even if you don't want to.
On May 30 2017 10:41 riotjune wrote: I have no idea what a Dunning-Kruger or Godwin is, but I will try to have a nice life.
Godwin: Longer an arguement goes on, the more likely somebody is going to call/compare somebody else a nazi or hitler.
Dunning-Kruger: Unskilled people overestimate their skill in something and improve slower at a task. Skilled people are more capable of being self critical, improve faster, and tend to underestimate their competency.
If you want to learn about the second, you can play dota 2 and have a graduate level understanding of the phenomenon. And probably a couple years worth of Spanish and Russian languages, even if you don't want to.
I was going to google it but I doubt I could understand the long explanations due to my subpar reading comprehension skills. The concise answers here are much better, thank you guys
On May 30 2017 10:41 riotjune wrote: I have no idea what a Dunning-Kruger or Godwin is, but I will try to have a nice life.
Godwin: Longer an arguement goes on, the more likely somebody is going to call/compare somebody else a nazi or hitler.
Dunning-Kruger: Unskilled people overestimate their skill in something and improve slower at a task. Skilled people are more capable of being self critical, improve faster, and tend to underestimate their competency.
If you want to learn about the second, you can play dota 2 and have a graduate level understanding of the phenomenon. And probably a couple years worth of Spanish and Russian languages, even if you don't want to.
Na Dota 2 sucks. All my teammates are Nazis anyway. "Don't go dagon first anti-mage" "Why did you go jungle as Treant?" "Stop playing Vanilla Ice over mic" I'm better than them all anyway. I'm only stuck in 1k because of bad teammates.
On May 30 2017 10:41 riotjune wrote: I have no idea what a Dunning-Kruger or Godwin is, but I will try to have a nice life.
Godwin: Longer an arguement goes on, the more likely somebody is going to call/compare somebody else a nazi or hitler.
Dunning-Kruger: Unskilled people overestimate their skill in something and improve slower at a task. Skilled people are more capable of being self critical, improve faster, and tend to underestimate their competency.
If you want to learn about the second, you can play dota 2 and have a graduate level understanding of the phenomenon. And probably a couple years worth of Spanish and Russian languages, even if you don't want to.
I was going to google it but I doubt I could understand the long explanations due to my subpar reading comprehension skills. The concise answers here are much better, thank you guys
here's a pretty good animated video on the second one. It's a anti-trump though. but it is narrated by Stephen fry
Just to further put a nail in any debate that the Trump administration is fully committed to letting racists do whatever they want in the US, we have this. The federal government has historically been the only thing preventing states from abusing the shit out of their minority citizens. The aggressive indifference of Jeff Sessions will continue for the next four years. If you thought Obama was bad for race relations, you haven't see shit yet.
But did you hear that Corey Booker (D-DemoRAT) got donations from a Kushner aligned group back when Kushner was a Democrat a few years ago? That makes the Dems no better than the Republicans as they abolish Civil Rights Enforcement within the DOJ.
On May 30 2017 12:29 Nevuk wrote: Just a reminder - more Sanders voters voted for Clinton than Clinton voters did for Obama in 2008.
I have this wild theory: it is everyone's fault. From Clinton for running a terrible campaign. Her supporters for dismissing all her flaws as fake or made up. The DNC for clearing the path for her and trying so hard to shut down Sanders. Sanders for being unable reign in his own supporters to this fucking day. Everyone should just decide which group they were part of in that mess and look to their own shit, rather than pointing the finger literally everyone else.
The one reason am not member of Democratic party is I cannot deal with the left trying to eat its own while civil rights are on the chopping block.
Everyone should just decide which group they were part of in that mess and look to their own shit, rather than pointing the finger literally everyone else.
A good philosophy for life. A wise man said start by cleaning your own room; it's easy make placards and protest the problems out there. It's a lot harder to identify and sort out your own problems.
So we have one party that's completely useless, with another party actively looking to fuck over minorities, in the name of "eliminating waste". They gotta cut something in an attempt to balance the budget. It alternates between being sad and funny, but more sad these days.
EPT
