@ArjinFerman's banner p

ArjinFerman

Tinfoil Gigachad

2 followers   follows 4 users  
joined 2022 September 05 16:31:45 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 626

ArjinFerman

Tinfoil Gigachad

2 followers   follows 4 users   joined 2022 September 05 16:31:45 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 626

Verified Email

A 10% chance that Trump is Hitler is a good reason for Americans who don't want to live under Nazi rule (or foreigners who might have to fight a future Nazi America - the main reason why Hitler is the worst is the aggressive war) to be worrying, but I still wouldn't want to bet on it.

As gattsuru pointed out, I'm happy to offer 10:1 odds. I just flat out don't believe that anyone actually thinks "Trump is Hitler" is even remotely likely, and I don't think they are actually worried about that.

If you think there's the slightest chance he'll run, bet me about it.

she should have confidently asserted that a woman was someone, anyone, who made it clear that they wished to be treated as such,

To be treated as what?

Likewise, he seems dangerously removed from a common understanding of the upper classes how things are done, the informal rules on how society is conducted. When Biden pardoned his son, that was noteworthy, scandalous. With the Trump administration, pardons of political allies, people who bribe him by buying his shitcoin etc is not a scandal but a Tuesday.

That's complete opposite of what happened. When Biden made his pardons, the pro-establishment people barely discussed it. Nowadays they bring up Trump's pardons as some unthinkable line to cross, and they do so without any reference to what Biden did.

You'd think that the EU making more money from fining American companies, than from taxing it's own tech sector, would have shown that it is about hobbling the US tech sector, and the Tea App debacle ia just a happy coincidence.

As a confirmed MAGAt myself, I feel a distinct discomfort reading this warning.

For my part, I can kinda see what you mean, if I squint. Otherwise it's hard to tell if this is supposed to be a criticism of Trump / populists, or our current establishment.

In contrast, true societal stability is only found in the Family, the bedrock on which all civilization stands. And while the modern assault on the Family threatens to break civilization as assuredly as any barbarian uprising, it is still an institution that takes only two willing companions and the providence of God to initiate.

Yeah... Look, I'm a big fan of the "clean your room" approach to life and society, but it's a bit hard to gloss over the "modern assault on the Family" bit, the way you did. Are we supposed to smile and nod as it's happening? Is every rebellion an assault on order and civilization? If not, what specific lines has Trumpism crossed to make it unacceptable to civilization 'n order enjoyers?

If I want to show that two distributions are statistically different then I start with the assumption that they are not and then set out to disprove that.

And what assumption do you use when you want to show that they are the same? It's just a matter of how you formulate your question.

As a matter of technical statistical terminology, the null hypothesis when testing two groups for equality is that the relevant average (usually the mean, but median tests exist) is the same for both groups.

In this case we know for a fact the averages are not the same, the debate is over the causes.

No, for your monthly horoscope.

And come to think of it, even if there's no money involved, it sounds like the kind of person that would use astrology to tell you what decisions you should make, and/or win arguments.

Yeah but "intelligence is equally distributed among all human races" is a positive hypothesis of it's own, that's why you are effectively doing what he said.

I could see it this way, if she wasn't certified (or at least wouldn't bring it up without prompting).

A "certified X" offering to make you a Y for free reeks of someone trying to recruit you into an MLM.

If I bothered sending my own agent, it would be to actively stir shit, not merely to measure it.

I think there are some agitators that understand this and are using it to reinforce the image of ICE (and the larger right in general) as heartless jackbooted thugs

The problem I have with that theory is that as far as I can tell, it's always been their tactic. If anything, they seem surprised it's not working anymore.

Oh, ffs. Thanks!

EDIT: Sorry - I made a wrong turn somewhere.

Still no tinkering this week. How are you doing @Southkraut?

Not exactly, but kinda? How much weeping, how many top level posts about how "Everything Is Not Fine" do you see for LEOs that got killed? Everybody sees it as part of their job.

No "sort by controversial"? Lame.

That's odd, I'm pretty sure I said what happened to you was evil too. I guess thinking that your argument was not relevant is past redemption.

Why are you comparing a highly divisive provocateur to a president like Kennedy?

I'd say killing someone who's main job is talking on college campuses is, if anything, more egregious than killing a president or a politician.

Also I think opinions are more polarized now than back then. There's possibly less expectation of dignity now.

Yeah, that would be my point.

I was under the impression that hew was a fringe radical at the time, and didn't come close to representing the views of 20% of either of the major parties.

"Didn't full-throatedly endorse" is not the same thing as "condemn". Yoi also make it sound like we're talking about taking out a high ranking official, rather than a dude accused of the high crime of "talking".

Also: are you sure those numbers aren't actually low? I'm pretty sure those numbers would have been appalling if we were talking about the Kennedy assassination (be it the president or the senator).

Ok, I'll bite, what did the polls say about the victims of past assassinations? Did 20% of Republicans say "Kennedy had it coming" after he got shot?

"Just"???