domain:acoup.blog
AvocadoPanic
4m ago
Being that there > 100 episodes, it persisted in syndication for some time after it's initial run completed. I remember it on Nick at Night in the late 90's.
Denzel Washington - 137 episodes
mrvanillasky
Indo Aryan Thot Leader
4m ago
I didn't take the short path but I'll be alright. Seeing people here has made me feel better about agein as you folks are still alive on the inside. You can stave off the decline by a lot. Modern times are a blessing this way, a man can be himself nowadays If he does things alright.
CriticalDuty
4m ago
Yes. The migrants you see milling around aimlessly in the public squares of London, Berlin, Rome etc. are largely poor, sporadically criminal, disorganized and disconnected. Their numbers will not stop a sufficiently determined Western state. What will stop that state is the lack of political will. There's plenty of capacity, but in a democratic state that capacity is always going to be subject to the whims of elected officials who all have their reasons not to use it.
faceh
8m ago
Don't even have to go to a specific site for it.
I have an OKCupid account that I haven't really touched in over a year, and whenever I log in I'll have a handful of likes from Filipina ladies.
Throwaway05
8m ago
obviously a Martian
This is goblin erasure.
HereAndGone
12m ago
Immigration was always going to be a mess, given the Democratic Party's agenda there - they rely on the votes of immigrant citizens and being seen as the compassionate party that wants to help your cousin Manuel to come join you here, as well as all the "kids in cages" campaigning they had done, so they can't very well turn around and go "back to your side of the border, no we don't care if you drown crossing the river!"
So she pretty much was handed the poisoned chalice and no real plan as to what to do with it. On top of that, she was using her own "my family are immigrants" backstory to win votes, and she was struggling with the Copmala perception so probably wanted to soften that (nationally, being pro-law'n'order isn't a handicap, but if her ambitions were to run for Governor in California, it very much would have hampered her there).
Zephyr
13m ago
I would argue that it’s selection effect.
If the enemy is strong, and I don’t think I can defeat them, I’m not going to bother trying.
If the enemy is weak, and trivially beaten, I don’t need to spend any time defeating them - especially if I have allies who are against them too.
It’s only the situations in which the enemy is plausibly the same strength as me in which this comes up. And due to the asymmetric nature of people, it’s easy for both to be true at once. Academia is fairly heavily captured by the left wing, so they are extremely strong when represented as “expert opinion.” (At the moment) the US government is captured by the Trump wing of the republicans, so they are extremely strong when it comes to court rulings and similar.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
14m ago
Every new administration tries to give the VP a prominent role after the election, and then like 2 months in they do something embarrassing, and the President's office just goes, "yeah, that will be a one-way trip to Siberia." Are there signs of life from J.D. Vance?
The framers almost immediately knew the VP was a dead office, I wonder why they didn't just significantly alter it when they passed the Twelfth.
HereAndGone
17m ago
She is ambitious, but I get the sense more in the context of California. Had Biden not decided to run for a second term, I wonder if she would have concentrated instead on running for Governor of California, as Newsom would probably then be gearing up for the presidential primary challenges?
But Biden did decide to run, and she was brought along as VP, and I imagine everyone expected either "we win and things go the same as before for a second term" or "we lose and I go for governor" and not the whole implosion and being left with no real choice but to shove Kamala out there as their candidate.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
19m ago
In a sworn statement, Barry O’Kelly said while conducting research for the programme he came across an advert on Facebook in Portuguese advertising rental accommodation at 79 Old Kilmainham Road.
I wonder if the renters were Portuguese or Brasileiros.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
24m ago
And the Tim Walz thing backfired -- a lot of the right started talking about his history and views and he turned off a lot of the moderate white men they were trying to get. And then he got creamed in the debate with Vance, which counteracted Trump's embarrassing performance against Harris ("they're eating the cats of the people who live there").
I personally noticed Trump getting a big boost from moderates in the months leading up to the election; I know people who hated his guts who were angry at the Democratic party after the Biden debate, and people who were horrified when Trump was shot and considered voting for him for the first time.
Trump won because Biden died live on stage, and because Trump didn't. The election was televised.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
25m ago
This data is from the census, which says:
Households (H table series)
These tables look at the number and type of households in the United States. They describe the size of the household as well as the demographic characteristics of the householder. A household consists of all people who occupy a given housing unit.
So the census considers 15 people in an apartment to be a single household.
In the red corner, weighing in at also 100 pounds soaking wet, but fired up and full of energy, is the Progressive Wing of the party. The Zohran Mamdanis, the AOCs, the Deja Foxxs, the David Hoggs.
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.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
28m ago
"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.
Tree
28m ago
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.
HereAndGone
32m ago
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".
HereAndGone
38m ago
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).
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
40m ago
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.
Rex
42m ago
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.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
42m ago
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."
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
48m ago
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.
ABigGuy4U
49m ago
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.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
52m ago
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!
erwgv3g34
52m ago
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.
I regret to inform you that you share a planet who believe in penis-stealing witches, and many of them don't even have Internet access.
The whole "misinformation" thing has always seemed strange to me. The default was that everyone was always wrong about everything, 100% of the time. Recently, in large part thanks to the Internet, some people are occasionally less than 100% wrong all the time. You might even say that the internet made people less wrong (bah-dum tiss).
People being wrong is not a new problem and the Internet didn't make it worse.
During the life of Marie Antoinette, there was a scandal involving a diamond necklace that severely damaged her reputation. Except she had literally nothing to do with it, and she could prove that she had nothing to do with it. The French press vilified her anyway.
And who could forget about Alfred Dreyfus, the Jewish military officer who was accused of selling secrets to the Germans? You know, the guy who was proven innocent and then dragged through the mud by the French press because the army was too embarrassed to admit they made it all us? The guy who was vilified because of a bunch of lying journalists and government officials? That guy?
/images/17528682967017636.webp
Hey, I'm starting to notice a pattern here. It seems like journalists and government officials have been spreading disinformation since before the invention of the telegraph. Maybe instead of giving journalists and government officials unlimited power to censor anyone who disagrees with them, we should consider that maybe the call is coming from inside the house.
More options
Context Copy link