philosoraptor
No bio...
User ID: 285
Trump's pretty bad at debate too. People considered him to have lost most of the debates he was in.
I suspect the people who say that are missing the point, from the Trump campaign's perspective. Perceptions of how Trump does in debates seem very polarized and, even moreso than normal for such things, watching him in debates mostly seems to intensify whatever the viewer already thought about him. And, a small minority are swayed by this charisma he apparently has (which is completely invisible to me) and do switch to him. Maybe not a lot, but it seems to be a lot more than I've heard of moving in the other direction, especially post-2016. So from his perspective they do their job regardless of who the Serious People think won.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
That's 7% of all interracial marriages that are black man/white woman compared to 9% of interracial marriages that are white man/asian woman. Hardly a substantial difference.
It's huge when you consider the relative proportions of Black vs Asian people in the US.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
I understood most of those individual words...
philosoraptor
1yr ago
The stolen item is just ... an item. Anyone can produce a backpack and say that guy stole it and my friend here saw them.
A backpack seems like an almost uniquely bad example. You just separate the parties and ask each a few questions about its contents and it's easy to figure out which one it belongs to.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
he does not indulge in masturbatory stylistic flourish
Maybe if you're used to his non-standard spellings and such. He reads like an arrogant 15-year-old to me (albeit a very clever one, though not as much so as he seems to think).
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Canadian here, and I'd never heard it until this year when it was suddenly popping up all over, and never for a school or daycare located anywhere other than Ireland or Faerun.
philosoraptor
2yr ago
Only 1/50 parents actually objected to nudity being shown (the other two objected to not being informed)
You (and others) talk like these are entirely disjoint concerns, but how separate are they really? Why is informing the parents required in this case in a way it isn't with, say, multiplication tables? Maybe it's a failure of imagination, but I'm having a hard time thinking of a plausible answer that isn't rooted in what some posters are calling "American prudishness".
philosoraptor
2yr ago
A significant portion of women seem to prefer sharing a top man over having a sub-par specimen for themselves.
Which women? Where? Based on what empirical evidence?
This seems to be one of those things - it has plenty of counterparts on the SocJus side of things - that's said because it follows from a theory someone is attached to, not because of any particular evidence that it's true. Outside of a very small number of poly arrangements, in which men at the top of the attractiveness scale aren't that overrepresented based on the ones I'm familiar with, I can't think of any cases where this is true. Yeah, it would logically follow if a lot of the ideas that float around the "manosphere" were true, but so much the worse for those ideas. But it's not something I actually see happening at any significant scale.
philosoraptor
2yr ago
Yankee Stadium has 12,000 seats
As perhaps an example of your larger point, this seemed implausibly low to me (it's about 20% smaller than the smallest full-time[1] arena in the NHL, a league with a much smaller following than MLB), so I did a quick Google and turned up a figure of 54,251, about 4.5 times your number. Where are you getting 12,000 from?
[1] I'm excluding the university arena the Arizona Coyotes are temporarily housed in, as that's not meant to be a permanent arrangement.
philosoraptor
3d ago
I quite vividly remember someone posting a comment about there being a siren and someone else saying "can't find any news confirming it" and not piping in with "it's me, I'm the news, posting from the spotty internet in the bomb shelter". And then it became just increasingly not the right moment for it (also I was quite sleep deprived and dealing with lots of other more immediate concerns).
Those posts from the shelter would probably have been awesome, actually, though I completely understand you having other concerns that were far higher priorities at a moment like that.
philosoraptor
2mo ago
Except this is literally the first time I've heard anyone include the "to do", and the extra two letters were just enough to make it look weird and unfamiliar even though I thoroughly lurked the recent discussions of it.
That only even remotely applies to the first one, and well, let's take a closer look at it, in two parts:
I don't find balancing US trade deficits to be a priority.
Almost nobody thinks it is! Including most right-leaning economists! This is an entirely reasonable sentiment.
Something like reshoring (high tech) manufacturing though, sure.
Very clearly states something that would change his priors, with no qualifiers of the sort you described. So even his first point only half fits your description, even being maximally generous to you.
Yes, it would be great if he could restore US shipbuilding.
That's the entire second statement. What is there in here that is accurately described as "explain[ing] why even if x y and z were to happen they are not high priorities and thus beneath consideration"?!? Even a straightforward yes doesn't satisfy you!
Peace in Ukraine is highly contingent on what the peace looks like. If it's effectively "force Ukraine to surrender and give up huge swathes of land that they wouldn't need to if Biden were still around" is not a good peace. If it was "ceasefire at current lines, and Ukraine protected from future invasions by European guarantees", that'd be reasonable.
Again, there's nothing unreasonable here. This is an entirely appropriate level of nuance for the topic (for a brief forum post - it would be too little in almost any other context!) and I submit that it fits my description far better than it does yours. In particular, the last sentence clearly spells out a circumstance where he'd change his priors with no hedging like you describe.
At best a sixth of his list fits your description; there is one sentence in the entire post, half of one of the three main points, that looks as you describe. Frankly, you seem to have some sort of weird bitch-eating-crackers thing going on with this poster on a personal level, that makes you look unhinged to people like me who don't know or care about the backstory behind it.
philosoraptor
9mo ago
I've alttabbed to degenerate tentacle hentai rather than let my wife notice I'm watching Tucker Carlson.
As opposed to the non-degenerate tentacle hentai preferred by polysyllabic wine-swirling sophisticates such as myself.
philosoraptor
11mo ago
Neither of the XY competitors even pretend to live as women.
Important if true, but warrants at least a link. (That unambiguously states this, not just kinda-sorta suggests it if you squint right.) As this stands I'm skeptical.
Any chance that they'll actually change that system? It seems ridiculous. Until now it mostly benefited Conservatives at the expense of labor and third parties, right?
The problem we keep seeing with this in Canada is that changing it is almost never in the interests of the sitting government, i.e. whoever actually won the most recent election. After all, they just won under the current system, and therefore probably think that system is pretty swell. So no-one proposes any serious electoral reforms who actually has a chance of pushing them through successfully, even if they might have made some noise about it during the election campaign. (The clearest example being none other than the sitting PM.)
philosoraptor
1yr ago
the guide @No_one posted the other day on what men are actually attracted to (https://www.jsanilac.com/dispelling-beauty-lies/).
Is that available anywhere in a non-stupid font? I probably wouldn't mind reading it but the typeface makes my eyes bleed.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Despite the "lock her up" rhetoric, Trump didn't actually try to lock Hilary up.
That's not magnanimity. At best it's baseline, expected behaviour. If you find that to be impressive coming from Trump, that seems like a meaner thing to say about him than even most of his leftie foes tend to use, at least the ones that are at all grounded in reality. (And I say that as one of those foes, though increasingly I'm only "leftie" by the standards of this place.)
philosoraptor
1yr ago
The teacher in Batley is still in hiding, the groveling of the West Yorkshire mum is still on full display to see
These could use links or at least slightly more explanation.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
I think we can set the bar a little higher than "not the absolute vilest possible (relevant) thing you could say".
philosoraptor
1yr ago
they get hammered 10-1
In basketball? That's an improbably bordering on impossibly low score, even if everyone's just learning. Getting shut out except for one free throw (the only way you could get exactly one point) is particularly weird.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
What was this in response to, originally? It seems interesting but without the original context it's hard to know what to make of it.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
If, in your experience, ordering dinner routinely turns into the kind of power play where these seem like the most salient questions, you have my condolences. All I can tell you is that I seriously doubt your experience is representative or, more importantly, in any way healthy.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Upper 20s is also pretty bloody hot for "room temperature". Try 20-21. Of course the basic point still stands.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
One thing, or rather a couple closely related things, I don't understand. If Carter left the union, how would she still fall under their CBA, and why would they be expected to represent her? Seems like she wanted to have her cake and eat it too. These are exactly the things she'd be voluntarily giving up by choosing not to be part of the union.
Honestly I'm surprised leaving the union is even something you *can *do at SWA - most workplaces I'm familiar with are either unionized or they're not, and in the former case you either belong to the union or you don't work there. Or maybe that statement was misleading? What exactly is meant by "had left the union several years prior" here?
Yes. Even if you don't like them, the genie's out of the bottle. They're going to exist no matter what any one person or organization does. Given this, surely it's better for them to be as compatible as possible. It's better for the people who like them and I don't see how it leaves the ones who don't any worse off. (Which in an odd sort of way, ties right back into the theme of the OP.)
More options
Context Copy link