domain:alexepstein.substack.com
"Damn girl, you live like this?"
I am sure there are such situations in America but they are probably limited to illegal immigrants. Considering this ad was in Portuguese, I'm not sure it reflects the living standards of Irish people.
There is a much more parsimonious explanation why she spurns the lentil millionaire and welcomes a big spender, even on credit: she likes money. No evo psych needed. If a male chimp gives a female a banana for sex, the female was not attracted to the chimp‘s banana procurement skills or his status: she was attracted to the banana.
Biden was running on "I beat Trump before" and Harris was running on "I'm not Trump" plus a helping of "I'm Black and Asian and a woman". Seemingly they brought Walz in as "well those racist sexist white guys need to see a white guy to vote for" which, God Almighty, no wonder they lost; if their view of being moderate is "let's pander to the deplorables" then they really are out of touch:
With a looming deadline that Democrats concluded they had to meet to finalize their nominee, people close to Harris and outside allies began a few days before his announcement to start thinking about what her campaign might look like and started batting around names of potential running mates at daily meetings.
Almost immediately after Biden dropped out, her team concluded that it most likely had to be a middle-aged white man, for many of the reasons Barack Obama chose Biden as his running mate.
It’s not “rocket science,” said a person familiar with the Harris campaign’s thinking. “Let’s just face it. There’s a lot of sexist, racist white dudes out there in America who don’t like Trump but just need a little extra validation.”
They needed “someone who gives moderate Republican voters a place to go,” said another person familiar with the process. “The Nikki Haley voters that are like, ‘God, JD Vance is terrifying and Trump is horrifying, but I wasn’t really sure that Biden could do the job, and I’m not sure that she can do the job.’”
I don't know why Vance is "terrifying" (is it because he's Catholic?) rather than "he's a hick with no idea of how to govern" or "he's a blood-sucking capitalist".
She basically had a classic "fork in the road": do I stay the course and hope that Trump is too unpopular to win, letting me win by default, or do I try to do something notable to make me stand out, and run a more traditional campaign?
After reading "Original Sin", the impression I get is (1) she was really beholden to Biden and his supporters, e.g. a lot of his ex-staff or people connected to him ran her campaign, so she could not afford to piss off any Biden loyalists in the party and (2) she's indecisive: she takes a long time to make decisions, doesn't handle input from others well, and is constantly second-guessing decisions. See the Call Her Daddy appearance where she or her campaign were so terrified by the prospect of not being in complete control of the outcome, they picked this instead of an appearance on Joe Rogan. And she didn't even go on the podcast! Instead they spent campaign funds on "we'll mock up the studio in a hotel room, fly you out, and you feed her pre-screened questions where she gives prepared answers" for something that was essentially preaching to the choir: Harris already had the young white liberal college-educated female podcast audience as voters, she didn't need to chase after them.
So if she decided to strike out on her own, that would leave her wide open for "so why didn't you do any of this when you were VP? why weren't you speaking out and disagreeing with those policies?" and she just hasn't the flexibility to handle that sort of questioning without being prepared fifty ways from Sunday with soundbites from focus groups.
Hence the lack of any actual policies - the need not to be openly in dissent from the Biden administration, the need not to state anything definite that would piss off any of the million little splinter groups that would go for her throat online, and being hobbled by the 2019 run where she did tack too far to the left (and then left herself wide open on "yes I would use government money to pay for gender reassignment surgery for illegal immigrants who are criminals locked up in jail", for instance).
C'mon Turok, I like tolerate you, but you gotta stop making yourself such an easy target. It's a bad look to start your post with "some rando on Twitter said something", you could have easily made the point yourself.
Anyways, I'm pretty sure that people believing and spreading factually false things is an unsolvable problem, certainly with the existence of the internet. While I am regularly dismayed by the selective gullibility/incredulousness of the twitterati, it probably can't be helped at any sort of scale, and the sort of public concessions that you seem to seek would probably backfire and result in further ideological entrenchment. You can call out that attitude where it happens here, but don't just complain to us about wrong and stupid everyone else is.
dropped in on a teen beauty pageant while they were changing
This always struck me as one of those accusations that's either complete BS or lacking context. I have no doubt that pre-politics trump would drop in back-stage constantly at his own events or other peoples events, even when doing it would be rude. Dropping in to be the boss, to gladhand with people, to make connections. This story is presented like he's some pervert trying to sneak a peak at naked teenagers to get his rocks off. It seems far more likely that if the story is true, he does this as a power move to show that he's the in charge. Or a more charitable version would be that he's sincerely interested making the contestants and the event successful and wishing them well or telling them to break a leg.
I suspect most people agree since this particular accusation doesn't seem to even make the top 50 of his greatest hits. But its just another shot in a long litany of things to make him look bad.
two or more unrelated persons living together who pool their income to make joint expenditure decisions.
New term for cohabiting just dropped: "two or more unrelated persons living together."
I really have to wonder how much of this is people just not taking care of themselves.
For people complaining on the internet, it's mostly this. All sorts of complaints about random aches and pains and injuring themselves in their 30s that bears no resemblance to my experience.
Personally I'd probably put my physical peak around 32 when I was fighting fit and winning tournaments.
Interesting choice. For longer-distance endurance races, men's performance seems to peak around age 33. I would expect an earlier peak for more explosive/fast-twitch dominated events.
The reason is that most woke stuff kills verisimilitude (think fantasy filled with black people in clearly Northern Europe).
True, all The Pitt’s lecturing about Current Thing is still less immediately risible than getting fifteen minutes into The Northman (a serious movie about Vikings) and seeing an actress that is obviously a Martian.
In surveys like this, "household" normally is defined so that 15 unrelated adult occupants of a single house count as 15 one-person households.
This is insane. I love a good example of governmental statistical fudging, thanks!
Chess is a fun hobby, and definitely a healthier way to spend time than staring at a screen, but it's not really useful in any way. As the siblings note, it is one of those tournament professions where only a tiny handful of people can ever hope to make a living, so unless you want to go full Polgar and make an all out attempt at raising a champion, that's out. Transfer of learning doesn't exist, so all those quotes about how chess teaches foresight and vigilance are full of shit; learning chess teaches you to play chess, period. And we are not in an age or place where it is a common pastime, so it is not particularly useful as a social skill, either.
I would say it depends on what it's funging against. If chess time or money comes out of the soccer budget, which keeps the body healthy, or the reading budget, which is useful in general, it's probably not worth it. If, on the other hand, time at the chess club would otherwise be spent on Instagram and YouTube, by all means go ahead.
To be serious for a moment (and because I don’t want to get banned again for making a joke)
I’m of two minds with this - on the one hand I can totally believe that Trump was a client of Epstein. he is a history of using prostitutes, cheated on his wife, had leaks about grabbing women by the pussy, probably groped some women before, dropped in on a teen beauty pageant while they were changing (?), and other scummy things. He was friends with Epstein, talked about having a fondness for young women, etc
On the other hand, the letter is way too on the nose, and it comes up JUST WHEN HEAVY SUSPICION IS COMING DOWN ON TRUMP FOR BEIG A CLIENT OF EPSTEIN?
Seems way too convenient. Why hasn’t this been dug up before? Why now? And it doesn’t read like something Trump would ever write and it’s basically a confession.
Ukraine has ..about 40 Gepard systems, I think. Maybe in total 60 high performance point defense systems. Definitely not enough to cover all targets of military importance around the country.
but you could never imagine him saying "libs are right"
He would not say it because of all the things libs are definitely wrong about, this is the one that they are the most wrong about.
There is enormous danger of misinformation and disinformation, and of modern lysenkoism, in enshrining the opinions of any class of people, even your beloved Elite Human Capital's. Letting ideas compete is the long term solution, not the problem, even if it can be sometimes subobtimal in the short term.
Dear Jeffrey,
Happy 50th you old dog!
Just want to say
I’ve committed many crimes with you! There’s a list people will be talking about in 20 years- I’m on it!
It’s me, Donald Trump, writing this letter
In surveys like this, "household" normally is defined so that 15 unrelated adult occupants of a single house count as 15 one-person households. For example, here is the definition used by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.
A consumer unit (CU) is the measurement unit collected for the eligible individuals represented in the expenditure reports.
The CU is defined as
all members of a particular housing unit who are related by blood, marriage, adoption, or some other legal arrangement, such as foster children;
a person living alone or sharing a household with others, or living as a roomer in a private home, lodging house, or in permanent living quarters in a hotel or motel, but who makes independent financial decisions; or
two or more unrelated persons living together who pool their income to make joint expenditure decisions.
In publications, and with [Consumer Expenditure] respondents, “household” is occasionally used for simplicity, but nevertheless refers to the CU.
So your link is not useful in this context.
I understand the point you're making, but
The opposite is what Coil wrote. A blackpilled message where the underlying reality is that some things are set in stone. There was never a chance, every effort futile beyond making more lives worse off.
This is true (at least from his and apparently your perspective), but you're framing it in a some non-partisan way. In a context where whiningcoil is obviously partisan and would never apply the same logic to groups near and dear to his heart, the foil is still someone writing equally inflammatory rhetoric about red tribe groups.
In other words, you're describing a symmetry between earnest/optimistic and doomer/blackpill, and I (being the braindead culture warrior that I am) am describing a symmetry between left and right. I'd guess OP is more upset by the latter than the former.
Happy Birthday! IMHO 25 is peak cockiness. If you took the short path you've completed your education, begun your career, are getting attention from the opposite sex, and are in the full flower of adulthood such that all the old farts of jealous. Enjoy it.
Just don't ask about your 30's.
At the age of 25, you're at your physical and cognitive peak, and it's all downhill from here.
I really have to wonder how much of this is people just not taking care of themselves. Personally I'd probably put my physical peak around 32 when I was fighting fit and winning tournaments. But that might have been an artifact of not really having proper training or nutrition until my late 20's. It's more difficult to assess my mental peak, or separate alacrity of though from wisdom, since wisdom provides so many shortcuts. I will say, when I was pre-diabetic I thought my mental acuity was falling off and I was just aging. Then my doctor caught it, I cut out a ton of sugar and snacking, started intermittent fasting, and now I'm right as rain again in my 40's.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, if you peaked at 25, maybe see a doctor, nutritionist or trainer?
Another important point was trans issues — Reddit was really starting to crack down on that.
Alas, I'd probably have to extend attorney-client privilege in order to get her to talk, so they'd have to offer me a ton of money to breach that with the goods.
My apologies - regardless, I wasn't trying to start beef, just point out that you're the foil to whiningcoil in that you gore red tribe oxen. Sometimes. And it make people big mad.
Harris running can be laid at Biden's feet, because he insisted on a second term and then had to be dragged out and knifed in the back by the party in order to dislodge him, by which time there really wasn't anyone else they could run, never mind that the funding by donors had all been earmarked for the Biden/Harris campaign and there was a real fear they'd have to pay it all back if they went with a primary.
The party didn't do itself any favours by then acting the opposite of the 'open, transparent, democratic' process by making her a fait accompli candidate before any race could start, but they were - to be fair to them - really hobbled by their own past bad decisions in humouring Biden (mostly for the "who the hell else do we have? and who else can beat Trump?" considerations).
Well, yes. But ultimately the problem is people forming their worldviews based on fiction instead of balancing their intellectual diet with non-fiction or, better yet, first-hand experience of the real world. It's a problem as old as Don Quixote, and I don't think the correct lesson to take from Don Quixote is 'how dare those irresponsible poets fill their ballads with giants, virtuous knights, and loyal servants? we need more books about windmills and scumbags to fix impressionable readers' sense of reality'.
(Granted, biases might still cause writers to limit themselves to a particular kind of man biting a particular kind of dog. But that's a whole other conversation than one about realism.)
God forgive me, I nearly want this side to win the internal battle, just for the pure amusement value. The DNC had to re-do their vice chair election (and kick out Hogg) since the "three genders" vote was screwed-up. Just contemplate with me, for a moment, an electoral ballot for state and national elections that instructs the voter to pick "one of any other gender after you pick one of the male gender and one of the female gender candidates".
I think the blue corner will probably win, since they already have their hands on the levers of power, and they might just be the more sensible of the two options.
More options
Context Copy link