3 ms·

That sounds lovely but theory and practice vary in their overlap. One point I'll counter you on is that a significant portion of the population is literally be

That sounds lovely but theory and practice vary in their overlap. One point I'll counter you on is that a significant portion of the population is literally below average intelligence and that hate and spite are strong motivators for many. I've yet to see any capitulations by the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop but I'm willing to try to zero in on that with you to see if your words match your actions.

rendall 4y ago
> One point I'll counter you on is that a significant portion of the population is literally below average intelligence Yes, half, but IQ is only one measure of a person. Compassion, wisdom, grit are others. Someone can be low IQ and yet wise, compassionate, etc. > and that hate and spite are strong motivators for many. Not sure what you mean by that. How many? How do you know? > I've yet to see any capitulations by the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop What would capitulation look like to you? Do you see me as one of "the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop"? > but I'm willing to try to zero in on that with you to see if your words match your actions. Not really sure what actions are possible given the format. But sure, walk me through.
- pstuart 4y ago
  > Do you see me as one of "the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop"? Unfortunately, yes. > What would capitulation look like to you? To acknowledge the good/bad of each player based upon a reasonable understanding of their behavior. > (re hate/spite): Not sure what you mean by that. How many? How do you know? * I mean that people will act on emotion rather than rationale in a significant number of cases, and that hate can trump love. * How many? That's a silly question. Enough to matter. > But sure, walk me through. Ok, first try (true/false): a. Do you think Biden/Obama were materially moved by Hunter's participation with Burisma b. Do you think that the kerfluffle about Hillary's emails aided in her losing the election? c. Do you think that even that the laptop controversy itself hurt the Biden campaign? d. Are you aware of the concept of an "October Surprise"? e. If so, do you think they are real? f. If so, do you think they work? Essay question: This write-up about the affair aligns with my understandings; do you see any truth in this: https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-johnson-grassley-report-biden-and-burisma https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-johnson-grassley-repor... Bonus points: are you religious?
  - rendall 4y ago
    Where I am it's getting quite late, so I'll continue this a bit tomorrow. >> Do you see me as one of "the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop"? > Unfortunately, yes. Confused about that. I haven't discussed it at all. > That's a silly question. If we're going to have a conversation, that kind of thing is right out. Deal? You still haven't really answered the question I've been asking repeatedly. A little bit, but not to the depth you're asking of me.
    - pstuart 4y ago
      First and foremost, I appreciate the civil dialog and will do my best to maintain it; I'm doing this because of a desperate desire to find some commonality, not to score points. >> That's a silly question. You asked for numbers of a population that has no census, I stated that it was significant, which is the point in question. I can prove that those people exist and then it's a matter of threshold. E.g, "how many atoms in that falling piano" -- "enough to kill you if it hits you". > You still haven't really answered the question I've been asking repeatedly I don't follow, will review the thread(s) again to see what that is (would have helped to reiterate btw). The irony is that I'm feeling the same way (do you care about the corruption of the Trump administration as well?) Let's return when time allows? My intentions are honorable and maybe something positive could come of it.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - rendall 4y ago
        > You asked for numbers of a population that has no census, I stated that it was significant, which is the point in question. I can prove that those people exist and then it's a matter of threshold. E.g, "how many atoms in that falling piano" -- "enough to kill you if it hits you". You could have stated all of that without insult. I probably travel in different circles than you do, but Americans voting from the motivation of "hate" is not in my experience. Short-sighted self-interest, definitely. Way too influenced by partisan propaganda, absolutely. Hate per se, not so much. Whether your experience is truer than mine, dunno. But asking what you meant isn't silly, and if you do it again, I'll end the conversation. What is in my experience, though, the accusation of hate is often used in one-word partisan dismissal of valid concerns. For instance, rural voters have suffered economic devastation from government policies. They tend to perceive coastal elites as ignoring their concerns. True or not, coastal voters, including nearly all journalists and pundits, all agree with each other that this is definitely not actually true. And let's just say the quiet part out loud: rural people are Jesus obsessed, homophobic, uneducated, gullible, AM-radio-addicted racists. Their voting for Trump is therefore entirely due to white fragility and other irrationality, and there is zero - absolutely zero - valid reason to vote for him. Clinton was clearly the better choice, and any concerns about her were entirely due to sexism and lies. This is all so clear, that any disagreement at all is silly, am I right?

rendall 4y ago

> One point I'll counter you on is that a significant portion of the population is literally below average intelligence Yes, half, but IQ is only one measure of a person. Compassion, wisdom, grit are others. Someone can be low IQ and yet wise, compassionate, etc. > and that hate and spite are strong motivators for many. Not sure what you mean by that. How many? How do you know? > I've yet to see any capitulations by the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop What would capitulation look like to you? Do you see me as one of "the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop"? > but I'm willing to try to zero in on that with you to see if your words match your actions. Not really sure what actions are possible given the format. But sure, walk me through.

pstuart 4y ago
> Do you see me as one of "the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop"? Unfortunately, yes. > What would capitulation look like to you? To acknowledge the good/bad of each player based upon a reasonable understanding of their behavior. > (re hate/spite): Not sure what you mean by that. How many? How do you know? * I mean that people will act on emotion rather than rationale in a significant number of cases, and that hate can trump love. * How many? That's a silly question. Enough to matter. > But sure, walk me through. Ok, first try (true/false): a. Do you think Biden/Obama were materially moved by Hunter's participation with Burisma b. Do you think that the kerfluffle about Hillary's emails aided in her losing the election? c. Do you think that even that the laptop controversy itself hurt the Biden campaign? d. Are you aware of the concept of an "October Surprise"? e. If so, do you think they are real? f. If so, do you think they work? Essay question: This write-up about the affair aligns with my understandings; do you see any truth in this: https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-johnson-grassley-report-biden-and-burisma https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-johnson-grassley-repor... Bonus points: are you religious?
- rendall 4y ago
  Where I am it's getting quite late, so I'll continue this a bit tomorrow. >> Do you see me as one of "the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop"? > Unfortunately, yes. Confused about that. I haven't discussed it at all. > That's a silly question. If we're going to have a conversation, that kind of thing is right out. Deal? You still haven't really answered the question I've been asking repeatedly. A little bit, but not to the depth you're asking of me.
  - pstuart 4y ago
    First and foremost, I appreciate the civil dialog and will do my best to maintain it; I'm doing this because of a desperate desire to find some commonality, not to score points. >> That's a silly question. You asked for numbers of a population that has no census, I stated that it was significant, which is the point in question. I can prove that those people exist and then it's a matter of threshold. E.g, "how many atoms in that falling piano" -- "enough to kill you if it hits you". > You still haven't really answered the question I've been asking repeatedly I don't follow, will review the thread(s) again to see what that is (would have helped to reiterate btw). The irony is that I'm feeling the same way (do you care about the corruption of the Trump administration as well?) Let's return when time allows? My intentions are honorable and maybe something positive could come of it.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - rendall 4y ago
      > You asked for numbers of a population that has no census, I stated that it was significant, which is the point in question. I can prove that those people exist and then it's a matter of threshold. E.g, "how many atoms in that falling piano" -- "enough to kill you if it hits you". You could have stated all of that without insult. I probably travel in different circles than you do, but Americans voting from the motivation of "hate" is not in my experience. Short-sighted self-interest, definitely. Way too influenced by partisan propaganda, absolutely. Hate per se, not so much. Whether your experience is truer than mine, dunno. But asking what you meant isn't silly, and if you do it again, I'll end the conversation. What is in my experience, though, the accusation of hate is often used in one-word partisan dismissal of valid concerns. For instance, rural voters have suffered economic devastation from government policies. They tend to perceive coastal elites as ignoring their concerns. True or not, coastal voters, including nearly all journalists and pundits, all agree with each other that this is definitely not actually true. And let's just say the quiet part out loud: rural people are Jesus obsessed, homophobic, uneducated, gullible, AM-radio-addicted racists. Their voting for Trump is therefore entirely due to white fragility and other irrationality, and there is zero - absolutely zero - valid reason to vote for him. Clinton was clearly the better choice, and any concerns about her were entirely due to sexism and lies. This is all so clear, that any disagreement at all is silly, am I right?