Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

04-25-2017 , 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by prana
uke-sklansky math olympiad for rolls
Snap take uke
04-25-2017 , 03:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese
Cool. I do mostly algebraic geometry, but some stuff in my work has analogues in K-Theory I believe. I also studied a very simple sounding problem called the Horn problem, maybe you know it, (given three hermitian matrices A, B, C, when do A and B have conjugates that sum to C?), which has a symplectic geometric approach involving moment maps. Interesting that several 2p2 politards can have such similar paths, but I guess poker + politics attracts only certain kinds of people.

I'll probably end up not doing research also. Not that I dislike it, but the postdoc period is just too long and miserable ime.
English only at the table please.
04-25-2017 , 04:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
A+ reference, I lol'ed
04-25-2017 , 04:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by True North
So where exactly is the point where you cross the Canadian border and find yourself in Wisconsin?

Hint: It doesn't exist.
I'm going to guess Madison
04-25-2017 , 04:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
Something I bitched about a ton in the campaign is that once the media figured out Palin and Johnson were dumb they constantly tried to stump them because it was good for clicks and lols, but inexplicably Trump(who is much, much dumber) avoided that.

Like someone on Twitter said during the health care thing, the best question to ask Trump about health care is not some weird tangential bull**** about the Freedom Caucus or Democratic support, but instead:

"Can you briefly explain how your health care plan works?"
Stone cold lock that whatever answer he gives for this includes some mention of his YUGE Electoral College win.
04-25-2017 , 04:25 PM
My son lives in very northwestern Wisconsin.. Aka Trumplandia. He and my daughter-in-law have to bite their tongues or else get into never ending nonsensical arguments with Trumpkins. Should be a border there somewhere. Madison sounds correct.
04-25-2017 , 04:32 PM
The best border I can think of for someone in his spot is near Beloit. lol Wisconsin.
04-25-2017 , 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUberBob
Surprised he didn't drop a huge tariff on Mexican products and use that money to build the wall. That way, he could actually say that Mexico paid for the wall.
The end consumer pays for tariffs, either directly or by paying for higher priced domestic substitutes.
04-25-2017 , 04:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVaut1
Exactly. But it's emblematic of why you can't stump him like that. It's not just because most people don't know how we deliver nukes. I don't remember exactly what he said but IIRC it was just self-promotion ("I'll handle it great") and trite truisms and populist jargon that are actual valid words and phrases but mean nothing in context ("nuclear is dangerous, that's the whole game!") and then literally just gave up and said the devastation was the most important thing to him (???). It's not just that people don't know about how we shoot nuclear missiles off but it's also that any question which allows for subjectivity and doesn't have a singular correct answer can simply be babbled through with some trite nonsense and the interviewer is not going to be equipped to combat it without violating standards and unwritten rules about editorializing ("lolol wtf, you're a moron?!") like ATC noted.
So here is one last idea for using a test to help alleviate these problems. Instead of one that disqualifies the dumb, the gullible or the uneducated, what about one that identifies the opposite? Say the top 5% or so. Then do something like this:

Count everyone's vote equally at first. But note how the top 5 percenters break. But that second number only becomes relevant in close elections. Perhaps 52-48 types. When that happens check to see how the top 5 percenters voted. If they broke significantly the other way, say 55-45 or more, the other guy wins or perhaps alternatively there is a do over a month later.

Something along these lines would be more acceptable to the man in the street than a test that disqualifies incompetants for two reasons.

1. There is much less stigma on not making the top 5% than being disqualified to vote.

2. The smarties cannot nullify an election that isn't close.

Such a scheme would at least sometimes prevent results that I believe are more and more likely to occur if nothing is done to prevent experts in voter manipulation to take over.
04-25-2017 , 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
So here is one last idea for using a test to help alleviate these problems. Instead of one that disqualifies the dumb, the gullible or the uneducated, what about one that identifies the opposite? Say the top 5% or so. Then do something like this:

Count everyone's vote equally at first. But note how the top 5 percenters break. But that second number only becomes relevant in close elections. Perhaps 52-48 types. When that happens check to see how the top 5 percenters voted. If they broke significantly the other way, say 55-45 or more, the other guy wins or perhaps alternatively there is a do over a month later.

Something along these lines would be more acceptable to the man in the street than a test that disqualifies incompetants for two reasons.

1. There is much less stigma on not making the top 5% than being disqualified to vote.

2. The smarties cannot nullify an election that isn't close.

Such a scheme would at least sometimes prevent results that I believe are more and more likely to occur if nothing is done to prevent experts in voter manipulation to take over.

i take solace in the fact that you wouldn't be deciding any elections
04-25-2017 , 05:03 PM
Trump EO blocked in court again. This time it's sanctuary city funding.

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/856970200142499843
04-25-2017 , 05:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
17. 11th grade.
I have no idea why you seek vindication in a place where nobody will ever give it you. Are you just addicted to being mocked?
04-25-2017 , 05:05 PM
David - you're the hero we deserve but not the one we need right now.
04-25-2017 , 05:39 PM


https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...85065280208896

lol what a cuck
04-25-2017 , 05:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
i was thinking about why we don't need to secure the northern border too, and remembered the wall is essentially a multi-billion-dollar confederate monument
well ahead of you. we've been out there every night, planting seedlings. massive cedar hedge, vancouver to quebec city. should prove to be just as effective as your southern border wall (cause who would ever think to simply fly over it...), but ours will cost zipdeedoda (cdn$$).
04-25-2017 , 05:56 PM
Anyone else remember that time skalansky was on espn and said he woulda won a nobel prize if he tried?
04-25-2017 , 06:01 PM
LOL Trump and his sanctuary cities. So much winning!

A few years ago my brother and his wife came to Ft. Lauderdale on vacation. They loved it and and want to move to the area. They are huge Trumpkins and hate sanctuary cities. I knew they didn't know Ft. Lauderdale was a sanctuary city.

We were having dinner one night and they brought up how dangerous sanctuary cities are due to crime, drugs, and gangs. You should have seen the look on their faces when I explained how Ft. Lauderdale is a sanctuary city. You could actually see them trying to mentally calculate if an illegal was cleaning their hotel room.

They didn't talk to me for like a month after that. LOL. I think I'll ask them if they still want to move to the area.
04-25-2017 , 06:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic
I'm going to guess Madison
in that case we'll take Packers for $100
04-25-2017 , 06:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
this was the nuclear triad thing. but it didn't matter because the average american couldn't answer it either
Yeah, this is the "Bust doctrine" question for Palin, which was also a dumb gotcha.

DVaut is right.

Or, even better, do some chummy current sports/pop culture question. Ask him who he thinks will make the Eastern Conference finals in the NBA this year. Ask him who he'd take with the #1 NFL draft pick. Ask him his three favorite films from the Oscar best picture nominees. ****ing anything concrete where the answer can't be about himself.
04-25-2017 , 06:11 PM
A sports related question would probably be a good way to chip away at his "he's just like us, but a billionaire!" facade.
04-25-2017 , 06:16 PM
How many EOs have to get blocked before republicans just remove checks and balances or the judicial branch in general?
04-25-2017 , 06:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RV Life
Trumpkins
They're already out there degrading the judge who just ruled on this thing. "Oh, he fundraised $200,000 for Obama...", etc. etc. Can't wait to hear Jefferson Beauregard Sessions complain how some judge from this small state on the Pacific named California blocked his move.
04-25-2017 , 06:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
The something in the water is called logic, progressives politics and rational social policy.
Harper though...
04-25-2017 , 06:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPantz
How many EOs have to get blocked before republicans just remove checks and balances or the judicial branch in general?
the thermonuclear option
04-25-2017 , 06:21 PM
We already have a way to measure which candidate is supported by more incompetents and dumbos, just look at their campaign decision makers. Do they know where the key swing states are and how to swing them their way? It is clear that Hillary was surrounded by incompetents. And considering the job the candidates were running for was to run the country, showing that they can put together a staff to run an effective campaign is a relevant measurement.

      
m