@FiveHourMarathon's banner p

FiveHourMarathon

Wawa Nationalist

17 followers   follows 6 users  
joined 2022 September 04 22:02:26 UTC

And every gimmick hungry yob

Digging gold from rock n roll

Grabs the mic to tell us

he'll die before he's sold

But I believe in this

And it's been tested by research

He who fucks nuns

Will later join the church


				

User ID: 195

FiveHourMarathon

Wawa Nationalist

17 followers   follows 6 users   joined 2022 September 04 22:02:26 UTC

					

And every gimmick hungry yob

Digging gold from rock n roll

Grabs the mic to tell us

he'll die before he's sold

But I believe in this

And it's been tested by research

He who fucks nuns

Will later join the church


					

User ID: 195

Headlines from the future:

Graham Platner in Hot Water After "Sieg Hiel" Salute at State of the Union: Platner says it was "clearly satire"

Graham Platner Spotted Driving with "I bought it before we knew he was crazy" bumper sticker on his Volkswagen GTI

Controversy Swirls Around Platner's "25 Point Plan" for the Democratic Party Platform

Senator Platner, Secretary Hegseth, FBI Director MIA: The three haven't been seen in public for three days after Platner offered to "get out a bottle" at Oversight Hearing.

Senate Debates Censure or Removal of One of its Own: Senator Graham Platner of Maine faces consequences from punching President Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner in the face at a meet and greet; Platner retorts that "everyone wanted to."

I guess I wasn't clear in my meaning, because I didn't think the point needed to be explicated at length.

People are not objective when talking about former, or current, lovers. There is no "real" and no "truth" to be found in their accounts of their former lovers. I don't know if she's lying in the sense of knowingly telling a falsehood, or telling the truth as she experienced/remembers it, and I have no way of knowing. The testimony of ex-gfs is useless, because they are in most cases incapable of objective truth, it's too close to their self.

This is not an area of human experience that can be explained through litigating facts and evidence.

This is Brett Kavanaugh all over again. Some things just shouldn't be talked about, because it's pointless to talk about them.

There's two different kinds of fraud. You have a fake election: there are no votes you just make it up. That can be done quickly. Then there's a real election where you insert enough fake votes to make up the difference at the end, that has to be done slowly.

The incentives are mixed, they want high circulation of their articles and they want people to pay for them, price discrimination not total lockout.

Ok and?

Women criticize ex boyfriends constantly and absurdly. I was confused by this, when I was in high school. Melodramatic nonsense.

You're probably reaching back to something like LBJ's Texas Senate race, where the candidates and their machines would hold counties in reserve to play against each other like trap cards, with each county having the margin needed to counter your opponent's reveal until they ran out.

Vote blue no matter who was only ever a hammer used to convince leftists to moderate, never a tool used to make moderates move left.

What does "real" even mean when you're asking someone's ex-gf questions about them?

The baseline expectation should be that if you ask a woman about her ex-bf, she'll describe him as some mix of narcissist/manchild/abusive/idiot/loser. Anything positive is actively surprising.

This is the level of attack ad the anti-Platner team is running: ex-gfs interpreting bad jokes in the most aggressive way possible.

He's the real life Almost Politically Correct Redneck:

Rape is about power, therefore I want to rape another man if he fucked with me, for the power.

Considering he easily has the resources to make this move more surreptitiously if he wishes, I would say that him making it so public belies it being a move motivated by fear.

Certainly, which means that by making it publicly and stating that part of the reason has to do with the state of the US vs the state of Argentina, he's making a deliberate action to make that statement.

I feel like there's a certain tone that attacks on candidates take, you saw it with Trump and with Mamdani, that goes something like "You aren't allowed to like this guy." We'll see if the pattern holds with Platner.

Why is Peter Thiel Moving to Argentina?

Some Irresponsible Speculation

Billionaire Investor and ideologue Peter Thiel has publicly announced that he is moving to Argentina. Among a grab bag of explanations that included nuclear war and AI risk, along with the obvious implications of the California wealth tax on his residency, Thiel reportedly was concerned about the political direction of the United States. Given Thiel's ties to much of the American political right, what does this tell us? What should our Bayesian update be from this information?

Some possibilities:

-- Get the obvious out of the way: Nothing ever happens. This is a non-event, Thiel is moving for publicity or tax reasons, and the announcements are just him engaging in punditry.

-- Alternatively, none of this may indicate anything because Thiel himself might be stupid/mistaken/prejudiced/insane.

-- Thiel is in deep with MAGA, but thinks that the wind is changing direction, the MAGA project has failed, and he doesn't want to be left holding the bag in America when the left comes back into power. This seems like a sub implication of the action even if he doesn't believe it, because his very act of fleeing and blaming the political climate will tend to reinforce the idea that MAGA has failed and increase the odds of it failing.

-- Alternatively, Thiel thinks MAGA will be triumphant, but Thiel is on the outs with The Donald, and he is concerned about being targeted after Trump turns on him. Moving to Argentina is an attempt to hedge risk.

-- Thiel is a true believer in the Argentine project, and thinks Millei-ism will succeed beyond all our wildest dreams.

It feels like something big for Thiel, who is intelligent and well informed if perhaps nuts, to make this move and publicly announce it is motivated by the state of the union.

I mean who cares? The annoying thing about this is getting dragged into a Trump discussion when it's a "$100 bills aren't big enough" discussion we need.

@FiveHourMarathon Did you ever end up tackling your 100-miler?

I have not. I'm still hoping on doing a 100k this spring, but my pregnant wife has been much less tolerant of hobbies that involve me leaving for hours during time I could be spending with her. Which is, yeah, totally reasonable. But complicated by her disjointed sleep patterns, which no longer allow me to easily sneak out at 5am and lose nothing.

The thing that broke the timeline was the Cubs winning the world series and Leicester winning the EPL. After the writers paid off those storylines, it was clear the series had jumped the shark.

The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there, and like any foreign country Symbols of wealth aren't necessarily easily translated. The great Agatha Christie quote applies:

I never thought I would be so rich as to afford an automobile, or so poor as to be unable to afford a maid.

I think we're overdue for a $250 bill. From 1969 when the $100 became the largest banknote, we've seen inflation to where the $100 in 1969 was worth about $800 today.

Large cash transactions are becoming difficult. If you sell an old car for $5,000 cash, just the act of accurately counting to 50 is difficult and introduces easy honest errors, which are impossible to distinguish from easy dishonest errors. Counting to 20 is much more reliably accurate.

A $100 bill in an inside jacket pocket or folded up in a cubby in your car were enough to get gas dinner and a cheap motel room in an emergency when I was a kid, now it's barely enough for the gas depending on your vehicle. A single $250 bill would serve a similar purpose today.

So it should be a Donald. After he's dead.