Jump to content

Marxist ßastard

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2741

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Marxist ßastard

    Why Trump Won

    in Debates

    Posted · Edited by Marxist ßastard

    According to a chart on The Washington Post... His net worth has been on a fairly steady rise since the last recession

    Have you been listening to a word I said? If Trump had invested his inherited fortune in a neutral investment like an index fund, he'd have more money. He has underperformed the market. He is, by definition, a below-average businessman, and all his “deals” have been simple exchanges of money for entertainment and to feed his ego.

     

    It is no doubt The Donald is wealthy, but only so far as Wall Street, The Crown, The Vatican, The Russians et al. will allow.

    You forgot the Freemasons and the Bilderberg Group.

    Why Trump Won

    in Debates

    Posted · Edited by Marxist ßastard

    The fact is that Trump would be worth more today had he simply put his inherited fortune in a totally neutral investment like an index fund. So yes, he has just been playing around with what he inherited, at a net loss.

     

    You need to disabuse yourself of the notion that Trump is a successful businessman. He's not. He's a loser, has been for decades. His entire life has just been him burning through the same stack of cash he got from daddy.

    Why Trump Won

    in Debates

    Posted

     

    I seriously doubt trump is a 'pathological liar'.... He didn't get where he is today by lying to everyone he meets

     

    Okay, and what do you mean by “where he is today?” His position of 100% inherited wealth, or his being the President-Elect? Because the latter certainly is due to his rapid-fire lying capability, as I've already been over.

    Why Trump Won

    in Debates

    Posted

    The problem is that slightly less than half of the country has a very closed-off belief system that shuns critical thought, and “without built-in protective functions like critical analysis… bad information in a closed-off system ends up doing massive damage in short period of time.” Trump won because he targeted those people and shouted at them one lie after another, at such a rate that their rudimentary critical thinking skills simply couldn't keep up. Then, thanks to one of our flawed electoral system's many quirks, those people's votes counted more than the actual majority who voted for Clinton.

    Constitutional Convention and Changes

    in Debates

    Posted · Edited by Marxist ßastard

    If I were given the chance? Our presidential primary system has got to be rebuilt from scratch:

    • Instead of each state and each party conducting primaries its own way (including undemocratic caucuses) and on its own schedule, things would be fixed at the federal level.
    • The schedule of primaries would not favor any state unfairly – it would be randomized each election cycle, or all states would vote at once.
    • Primaries would include all candidates from all parties, plus independents.
    • Unlike existing first-past-the-post ”jungle primaries,” there would be an alternative vote system.
    • The two candidates with the most votes (after elimination) would go on to the general, which would function as a final runoff election.
    • No candidate besides those two would be allowed votes in the general election.
    • Primaries would happen at most eight weeks before the general election.
    What does this mean?
    • No more silly, undemocratic Iowa caucuses setting the tone of the entire election.
    • No more year-long election seasons. The serious campaigning happens in the eight weeks between the primaries and general.
    • No more elaborate party conventions wrapped in pageantry and obscure rules about delegates. The parties vote on their platform, and candidates decide whether to run on that platform. That's it.
    • No more voting based on how you predict everyone else will vote. In the primaries, you simply say who your personal first choice as president would be (even if they're a fringe candidate), then your second choice, and so on. The alternative vote system automatically takes care of all the mental calculus of ”okay, but this candidate can actually win,” by its elimination system. In the general, spoiler candidates just aren't allowed.
    • People who think this is all too complicated can just skip the primaries and vote in the general instead, where they can engage in their familiar A-or-B, lesser-of-two-evils voting pattern. Their choice.
    You can use most of this system in gubernatorial, congressional, senatorial, etc. races as well, all the way down to county dogcatcher #7.

     

    It's a far better primary system then what we've got, and still maintains the familiar first-past-the-post mechanics for the general.

    Safe Zones Are they havens or isolation chambers?

    in Debates

    Posted

    Could you possibly learn to read beyond the first sentence of anything I link? It says right on page 160 (of that volume of Journal of College Student Development):

     

     

     

    The results of this study also show that women’s colleges seem to foster an environment that fuels women’s understanding of self and others. That is, students at women’s colleges report greater gains in self-understanding, including learning effectively on one’s own and working effectively with others, than women at coeducational institutions. These skills, which are typically associated with career success and leadership, reveal some of the conditions that contribute to the high production of leaders from women’s colleges (e.g., graduates of women’s colleges constitute more than 20% of women in Congress and are 30% of a Business Week list of rising women stars in corporate America). Women’s colleges also appear to create conditions that support women’s development of quantitative skills, and these gains are particularly significant for science and math majors. This is contrasted with studies that show that women generally report relatively low gains in quantitative skills in college (see Davis et al., 1996).

    Safe Zones Are they havens or isolation chambers?

    in Debates

    Posted · Edited by Marxist ßastard

    The 30% Businessweek link actually just goes to a womens college application help site and the other relevant link just goes to a blank page

     

    Sigh... Learn to Internet. I found the original source inside of two minutes. As for the rest of you, I've given proof. I've requested contrary evidence from any of you, and you've failed to provide it. Instead, you're just restating the same false assumption over and over again, and giving each other high-fives after each iteration.

    Safe Zones Are they havens or isolation chambers?

    in Debates

    Posted

    With that logic, you'd think that graduates of women's colleges, for instance, would be coddled delicates who can't combat sexism as they haven't experienced it as much. But you'd be dead wrong: women's college graduates are hugely over-represented in Congress and high-ranking corporate positions. Giving oppressed people a respite from the constant harassment aimed at them lets them thrive, develop a self-image as a worthy person, and go on to challenge the systems of oppression they face later on.

    Safe Zones Are they havens or isolation chambers?

    in Debates

    Posted · Edited by Marxist ßastard

    That was directed at anyone offended by the mere concept of safe spaces. And the idea that this is discrimination is laughable... "random jackass who likes to insult anyone different from themself" is not a protected class.

     

    EDIT: And weren't you the one who was railing on and on, not too long ago, about the sanctity of single-gender bathrooms? Don't you think it's just a little bit disingenuous that now you're all about making sure everyone is allowed everywhere?

    Transgender Our rights as opposed to those who look the part.

    in Debates

    Posted

    It may be true that among non-passing trans people, there is "no drive" to use the bathrooms of their identified gender. I doubt that's the case. But I wouldn't really know, I guess.

     

    The thing is, these laws that the radical right-wing are trying to shove down our throats? They also affect passing trans people, who have been using their identified genders' restrooms all along. And those people, I know, are pissed, and quite rightly so.

    Transgender Our rights as opposed to those who look the part.

    in Debates

    Posted

    SJW

     

    Alt-righter confirmed. What next, will you come in brandishing rare pepes from your favorite child porn website?

     

    these people are really no more than social studies people (a subjective study) , practicing pseudoscience... there is no evidence

     

    Well if you dismiss out-of-hand all findings from psychology and the other social sciences, of course there's going to be no evidence either way when you look at something under those fields' purview.

     

    Personally I think this type of thinking is gonna lead to a generation of really screwed up people.

     

    Really? Well where's your evidence to support that? :rolleyes:

×
×
  • Create New...