Twitter

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

you have made zero argument that people on this site are not connected to reality.  

That is correct, because that is not my argument. I said I find 538 to be more connected to reality than MOL, which is different than saying people on this site are not connected to reality.

For someone who calls out straw men arguments, you sure make a lot of them. 

I'm not sure how being "more connected to reality" actually works.  Isn't reality binary?  So no, I'm not making a straw man argument.  I just don't understand your premise, and you have been refusing to explain it.  

so there we are.


Smedley said:

ml1 said:

you have made zero argument that people on this site are not connected to reality.  

That is correct, because that is not my argument. I said I find 538 to be more connected to reality than MOL, which is different than saying people on this site are not connected to reality.

For someone who calls out straw men arguments, you sure make a lot of them. 

Your strawman is talking about 538. Silver's tweet has nothing to do with 538.

(he says again, to probably no avail)

It's like thinking that Musks's tweets must make sense because Tesla or Space-X are successful.


I thought this was not a Politics thread, but it seems to be totally about Politics. 

So here goes:

The problem with saying that the Dems have moved "Left" is that history progresses. When VP Biden said he was OK with same-sex marriage (before Obama) he was pretty far out. No we have a Cabinet Secretary married to a person of the same gender, and anyone today who thinks that should be illegal is pretty far to the Right.

Anyone favoring same-sex marriage 20 years ago would be seen as radical. Remember the controversy when John Kerry mentioned in a Presidential Debate that Cheney's daughter was Gay?

Medicare was very Liberal when JFK proposed it. Today it's mainstream and someone who favors its abolition is off the deep Right end. Proposing it as universal for everyone is seen as at the Left end, but someone calling for its complete abolition would be considered a kook.

The movie "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" is about a Liberal couple dealing with their daughter getting engaged to a Black man. It tested their "Liberalism" and I suggest that when the movie came out only people on the Left would see no problem with a mixed-race marriage. Today the most "conservative" member of the Supreme Court is a Black man married to a White women. If you told a 1960's conservative that such a thing would happen in the near future he would have told you that you were crazy. (Or a Commie).


STANV said:

The problem with saying that the Dems have moved "Left" is that history progresses.

That’s what was funny about the cartoon Smedley shared: that we’re supposed to identify with the two people who didn’t let 13 years of living budge them from where they stood.


DaveSchmidt said:

STANV said:

The problem with saying that the Dems have moved "Left" is that history progresses.

That’s what was funny about the cartoon Smedley shared: that we’re supposed to identify with the two people who didn’t let 13 years of living budge them from where they stood.

and we're supposed to think it's "funny"


Isn't there a difference between laughing at something and laughing with it?


drummerboy said:

Isn't there a difference between laughing at something and laughing with it?

yeah.  I did admit that it was kind of funny because of how idiotic it is.  Certainly not funny based on any kind of insight.

If "it's funny 'cause it's true" is one of the foundations of comedy, does it also follow that "it's not funny 'cause it's not true?"


ml1 said:

yeah.  I did admit that it was kind of funny because of how idiotic it is.  Certainly not funny based on any kind of insight.

If "it's funny 'cause it's true" is one of the foundations of comedy, does it also follow that "it's not funny 'cause it's not true?"

Yes. That’s absurdity, of which Monty Python were masters.


ml1 said:

DaveSchmidt said:

STANV said:

The problem with saying that the Dems have moved "Left" is that history progresses.

That’s what was funny about the cartoon Smedley shared: that we’re supposed to identify with the two people who didn’t let 13 years of living budge them from where they stood.

and we're supposed to think it's "funny"

You're not "supposed" to think it's funny. Nobody ever said that. But perhaps you can allow others to think it's funny, without being preachy or judgmental, or trying to explain why it's objectively not funny.  

ETA: will respond to the other stuff in politics section. 



The GOP Senate primary in Ohio tomorrow, for Senator Rob Portman's replacement, is an example of how the GOP has gotten more crazy conservative instead of staying "in place".


nohero said:

The GOP Senate primary in Ohio tomorrow, for Senator Rob Portman's replacement, is an example of how the GOP has gotten more crazy conservative instead of staying "in place".

Big article in the NY Times yesterday about JD Vance and his campaign to replace Portman.


Smedley said:

You're not "supposed" to think it's funny. Nobody ever said that. But perhaps you can allow others to think it's funny, without being preachy or judgmental, or trying to explain why it's objectively not funny.  

...

what's the fun in that?

btw - when you post something and say it's funny, you are exactly saying others are supposed to find it funny.


drummerboy said:

Smedley said:

You're not "supposed" to think it's funny. Nobody ever said that. But perhaps you can allow others to think it's funny, without being preachy or judgmental, or trying to explain why it's objectively not funny.  

...

what's the fun in that?

btw - when you post something and say it's funny, you are exactly saying others are supposed to find it funny.

Thank you for this very helpful information on social convention.

So all these years I've had it wrong. When someone says "that's funny", I shouldn't think oh that person finds something funny, that's nice -- maybe I'll find it funny myself, or maybe I won't. Instead I should think oh that person finds something funny, and I'm supposed to find it funny too. Pressure's on.

Pray tell, what happens when I don't find something funny that I'm supposed to find funny? Is that proof positive that either the other person, or I, has a major malfunction? No leeway here for people possibly just finding different things funny?

Bucket list item: go to comedy club with ml1 and db.  


Smedley said:

Thank you for this very helpful information on social convention.

So all these years I've had it wrong. When someone says "that's funny", I shouldn't think oh that person finds something funny, that's nice -- maybe I'll find it funny myself, or maybe I won't. Instead I should think oh that person finds something funny, and I'm supposed to find it funny too. Pressure's on.

Pray tell, what happens when I don't find something funny that I'm supposed to find funny? Is that proof positive that either the other person, or I, has a major malfunction? No leeway here for people possibly just finding different things funny?

Bucket list item: go to comedy club with ml1 and db.  

**** me, you're tedious.


ridski said:

Smedley said:

Thank you for this very helpful information on social convention.

So all these years I've had it wrong. When someone says "that's funny", I shouldn't think oh that person finds something funny, that's nice -- maybe I'll find it funny myself, or maybe I won't. Instead I should think oh that person finds something funny, and I'm supposed to find it funny too. Pressure's on.

Pray tell, what happens when I don't find something funny that I'm supposed to find funny? Is that proof positive that either the other person, or I, has a major malfunction? No leeway here for people possibly just finding different things funny?

Bucket list item: go to comedy club with ml1 and db.  

**** me, you're tedious.

Do you see the irony in you saying I'm tedious so often, it makes you tedious? 

Now THAT's funny! (or at least I think it is)


Smedley said:

drummerboy said:

Smedley said:

You're not "supposed" to think it's funny. Nobody ever said that. But perhaps you can allow others to think it's funny, without being preachy or judgmental, or trying to explain why it's objectively not funny.  

...

what's the fun in that?

btw - when you post something and say it's funny, you are exactly saying others are supposed to find it funny.

Thank you for this very helpful information on social convention.

So all these years I've had it wrong. When someone says "that's funny", I shouldn't think oh that person finds something funny, that's nice -- maybe I'll find it funny myself, or maybe I won't. Instead I should think oh that person finds something funny, and I'm supposed to find it funny too. Pressure's on.

Pray tell, what happens when I don't find something funny that I'm supposed to find funny? Is that proof positive that either the other person, or I, has a major malfunction? No leeway here for people possibly just finding different things funny?

Bucket list item: go to comedy club with ml1 and db.  

maybe this will explain:

Jerry: Oh good. Anyway, I wanted to talk to you about Dr. Whatley. I have a suspicion that he's converted to Judaism just for the jokes.

Father: And this offends you as a Jewish person.

Jerry: No, it offends me as a comedian!

Smedley said:

Do you see the irony in you saying I'm tedious so often, it makes you tedious? 

Now THAT's funny! (or at least I think it is)

Well figure it out, Smedley, or I shall be forced to call you tedious a fourth time.


yahooyahoo said:

nohero said:

The GOP Senate primary in Ohio tomorrow, for Senator Rob Portman's replacement, is an example of how the GOP has gotten more crazy conservative instead of staying "in place".

Big article in the NY Times yesterday about JD Vance and his campaign to replace Portman.

And, the result - 


nohero said:

yahooyahoo said:

nohero said:

The GOP Senate primary in Ohio tomorrow, for Senator Rob Portman's replacement, is an example of how the GOP has gotten more crazy conservative instead of staying "in place".

Big article in the NY Times yesterday about JD Vance and his campaign to replace Portman.

And, the result - 

He is such a talentless clown.


yahooyahoo said:

He is such a talentless clown.

A clown who calls the shots. Worshipped by 40% of the country. What does that say about our society?

Anyone still thinking there is a Republican party is mistaken. In name only. Its the Trump party, lock, stock and barrel. The RNC, Republicans in congress and many Republican governors make it obviously so. The few not prostrating to Trump are outliers. 

If Trump told the RNC to rename the party to the MAGA Party the response would likely be, yes sir, great idea sir, we'll do it right away.

ps - for some illogical reason I thought you meant Trump


RTrent said:

yahooyahoo said:

He is such a talentless clown.

A clown who calls the shots. Worshipped by 40% of the country. What does that say about our society?

Anyone still thinking there is a Republican party is mistaken. In name only. Its the Trump party, lock, stock and barrel. The RNC, Republicans in congress and many Republican governors make it obviously so. The few not prostrating to Trump are outliers. 

If Trump told the RNC to rename the party to the MAGA Party the response would likely be, yes sir, great idea sir, we'll do it right away.

ps - for some illogical reason I thought you meant Trump

I meant Trump Jr.


Elon Musk is "shocked, shocked" to find that trolling is going on in the Twitter.


Elon doing his best to renegotiate the agreed price for Twitter.


yahooyahoo said:

Elon doing his best to renegotiate the agreed price for Twitter.

He's trolling (!) the CEO with a question that most buyers would look into before going into a deal. 


nohero said:

He's trolling (!) the CEO with a question that most buyers would look into before going into a deal. 

Does he actually think the internet isn't measured?


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.