Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Recently, Trump has repeatedly released things that he thought would make him look good that, uh, don't at all. Like the memo about the call with the Ukrainian President. And the letter he sent (allegedly) to Erdogan. And the tweet with the picture of Pelosi today. His judgment for such things seems seriously off, when it used to be so good. It feels like he is delaminating. Is it the brainworms?

I suspect a mix of strategy and brainworms. In the past, doing things in plain site has insulated him from allegations of bad intent. I think the brainworms are telling him, "Keep doing that... it's working for you."

In a strange way, it sort of does hack the prosecutorial/investigative process. It's hard to prove bad intent where the alleged perpetrator is out of his depth, would never take the time to actually learn the rules that apply to him, and admits doing things that, while bad, aren't so bad a totally clueless person couldn't accidentally do them and think is wasn't a violation of a law.

But there's definitely some dementia. And underlying native imbecility.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

80% of them need to drop out, and their true motives are belied by the fact they haven’t. But Joe needs to drop out for reasons having nothing to do with his son. If you were the candidate Trump would come up with something you did that was criminal. Background noise. We need someone that can ignore his shit, and respond in a way that makes clear he is an idiot and crazy. And with Joe the q becomes which one is more insane?

I can't look it up, but a few months back I posted that Hunter would damage Joe quite substantially. Folks in DE have joked about him being a coke nut for years.

I never thought he'd totally sink Joe, but that interview was truly awful, and this Ukraine thing is sticky, so... Told ya so, kinda?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

The fact that you seem to think the point of my post was to dispute the substance of your statement about how to "measure smart" only further strengthens my belief that you are completely phoning it in.

I didn't want to reply to the point you intended to make. I found it dull. What was I going to do? Post a similar one about you? That's tiring.

OTOH, I was legitimately interested in how people define "smart." It's a deep question I ponder from time to time as, like KRS One, I think very deeply.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

OTOH, I was legitimately interested in how people define "smart." It's a deep question I ponder from time to time as, like KRS One, I think very deeply.

So you were trying to say that people who make money are "smart"?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

So you were trying to say that people who make money are "smart"?

No. I was trying to determine whether succeeding in getting what you want, which could be any number of things, is a form of intelligence that many people ignore.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

I'm seeing a lot of people on Twitter who are skeptical that Sondland did not know why Trump wanted Burisma investigated, but it seems plausible to me.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

No. I was trying to determine whether succeeding in getting what you want, which could be any number of things, is a form of intelligence that many people ignore.

I'm sorry, but that's inane. Succeeding in getting what you want is surely the confluence of a great many things, some of which are forms of intelligence. To take one public example, Donald Trump was born to wealth. If you think that's what he wants, does that make him smart? If he had had a twin brother whose life differed only in wanting passionately to end malaria, does that make him smarter than his brother?

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I didn't want to reply to the point you intended to make. I found it dull. What was I going to do? Post a similar one about you? That's tiring.

OTOH, I was legitimately interested in how people define "smart." It's a deep question I ponder from time to time as, like KRS One, I think very deeply.

Ha ha! You're just so very precious with your post hoc rationalizations. Replying to what I was actually saying was just TOOO BOOOORRRRRING for you! So instead, you decided to deliver a lengthy unhinged rant replying to something I DIDN'T say? Brilliant.

O.K., let's go back to that post. "Stated otherwise, are you the kind of person who values most what others think of their abilities? Because that’s how you seem to measure 'smart'.” Um, what?!?? What gigantic gaping orifice of yours did you pull that out of? I said absolutely nothing about how I "measure smart" and, as you acknowledged, my post did not address the substance of that issue at all. Was this supposed to be some sort of Jedi mind trick?

You: You seem to measure smart by putting value on what others think of your abilities.
Me: I seem to measure smart by putting value on what others think of my abilities.
You: Your measurement betrays insecurity.
Me: My measurement betrays insecurity.
You: These are not the droids you are looking for . . . .

Or were you just having a disassociative episode, responding to the voices in your head? I'm having increasing concerns about your cognitive abilities. Because, once again, the "point" that you wanted to rebut was one that neither I nor anyone else here was making.

Or maybe you thought your unbelievably obvious little epiphany about how some people think it is more important to get votes or money than to be book smart was so fucking brilliant that you just needed another chance to say it again, as it were some Magical Gem of Wisdom. Which is fine, but that is not going to stop me from pointing out that, when you do that, you come off like some half-wit douchebag with a motivational social media page, peddling the most basic and obvious conclusions as if they were rare diamonds. The same type of people who have Instagram pages devoted to repeatedly preaching about how important #LOVE is, and how #BLESSED we are every day to fill our thoughts with #GRATITUDE.

Do better.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Recently, Trump has repeatedly released things that he thought would make him look good that, uh, don't at all. Like the memo about the call with the Ukrainian President. And the letter he sent (allegedly) to Erdogan. And the tweet with the picture of Pelosi today. His judgment for such things seems seriously off, when it used to be so good. It feels like he is delaminating. Is it the brainworms?

Dude, as he has replaced shitty people who actually understand what should and shouldn't go out with completely shitty sycophants and morons who will do whatever he says, he has increased the danger he's in. He hasn't changed at all. It's just that he's actually making the decisions now. And he's a fucking moron.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I never thought he'd totally sink Joe, but that interview was truly awful, and this Ukraine thing is sticky, so... Told ya so, kinda?

You have balls of fucking titanium given how you have been completely wrong about everything on this board since you tried to convince everyone that you were mainly correct a decade ago.

TM

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

No. I was trying to determine whether succeeding in getting what you want, which could be any number of things, is a form of intelligence that many people ignore.

Hey, this reminds me of Sebby arguing that Sarah Pallin was really really intelligent! Remember that! Good times!

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I can't look it up, but a few months back I posted that Hunter would damage Joe quite substantially. Folks in DE have joked about him being a coke nut for years.

I never thought he'd totally sink Joe, but that interview was truly awful, and this Ukraine thing is sticky, so... Told ya so, kinda?

"Moderate" Republican: we are in a mess, Trump is screwing our economy with these tariffs, he's let a bunch of ISIS terrorists loose, he's turned on our friends, comforted our enemies, and he's really pretty racist and disgusting to boot. And he and his kids look like they've filled their swimming pools with foreign money and are swimming in it. And all their emails and phone calls are insecure and on non-government servers! I wish we didn't have Trump.

Fox: But Joe Biden has a son who got a bunch of money for little work.

"Moderate" Republican: Oooh, reminds me of Hillary. I guess we have to vote for Trump again.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Dude, as he has replaced shitty people who actually understand what should and shouldn't go out with completely shitty sycophants and morons who will do whatever he says, he has increased the danger he's in. He hasn't changed at all. It's just that he's actually making the decisions now. And he's a fucking moron.

TM

I think his faculties are declining, and fwiw I'm seeing more people (e.g., Norman Ornstein) suggesting the same. Pelosi walked out of the meeting yesterday and suggested we pray for his health. I'm sure it's harder to see deterioration when you see someone all the time, because you miss gradual change, and we all see him all the time.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I think his faculties are declining, and fwiw I'm seeing more people (e.g., Norman Ornstein) suggesting the same. Pelosi walked out of the meeting yesterday and suggested we pray for his health. I'm sure it's harder to see deterioration when you see someone all the time, because you miss gradual change, and we all see him all the time.

Maybe. But he seems to be as stupid and crazy as he was during the campaign. "Russia, if you're listening..." Making fun of a disabled reporter? Etc.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I'm sorry, but that's inane. Succeeding in getting what you want is surely the confluence of a great many things, some of which are forms of intelligence. To take one public example, Donald Trump was born to wealth. If you think that's what he wants, does that make him smart? If he had had a twin brother whose life differed only in wanting passionately to end malaria, does that make him smarter than his brother?

It's not inane at all. GGG raised Sarah Palin. She's a perfect example. I'd say she's pretty fucking dumb, because, well... I'd never want to talk to her.

But that's my opinion.

Suppose (and I highly doubt this, but play along) she realized she was badly spoken, not terribly bright, but had just enough intelligence to reach the conclusion, If I keep talking the way I talk and saying the things I say, unapologetically, I'll leap forward in my career, wouldn't she be "smart"?

Another example would be something I experienced first hand. I tried a case a bunch of years ago against lawyer whose writing was awful, whose vocabulary was terrible, but who (surprise here) connected with juries in a way I simply cannot do. He beat me, like a gong. When we polled the jury, I was advised I looked like a bullshitter and tried to carve around issues, and I looked like someone who didn't believe his client (I didn't - my client was sleazy). The kid who whacked me connected with the jury, but he wasn't and never will be terribly smart in the way I'd measure a person to whom I was speaking socially. But in that room, who was smart? I think I was the dumb guy and he was pretty smart, even if he didn't know it. The jury found his blue collar directness far more honest than my dressed up horseshit.

If most things are becoming automated, and they are, and the value of what's traditionally considered "smart" is losing value, and it is, aren't we moving toward a world where "smart" and "effective" become synonyms, rather than opposed, as they have often been historically?