Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/18/20 in all areas

  1. Vort

    Trump 2024?

    Financial? Maybe. Legal? Unless the Democrats want to provoke a never-ending war of administrative retribution, they would do well to let their efforts go no further than the type of inflammatory rhetoric used by Trump.
    3 points
  2. Yes... because she is human... Humans tend to default to our assumptions being true and simply do not process things that do not fit those assumptions. She expected a bigger picture... your telling her there was not one did not get past her barrier to change that expectation. For example have you ever looked for something only to later find it right in front of you? It was right there every time you looked but your brain simply did not register it until later. The same idea with communication. We generally have to open ourselves up to changing our defaults and until we do we can miss what is right in front of us. Thus this exercise shows that you can't just say words and expect understanding.... You have to verify understanding is taking place as well.
    2 points
  3. If we are talking media bias then I would like to show this Studio C video... Its recent... its about a President... and it is generally silly and funny. The only real politics about it is whatever you take into it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4Ezcsb2qFk No real polices or agenda being put forth, just humor. Now look just below the video to where YouTube is trying to "Fact Check", and counter "Fake News" In this box it states "The AP has called the Presidential race for Joe Biden." This is a true statement. The Associated Press has called the race. But there is a problem. Where in any of our Rule of Laws do we give the AP the power to select the president? The answer is no where. The Electoral Collage what makes that call. Now the AP is making a prediction of what the vote will be, and it has reasonable reasons to expect that to happen. But what happens if the challenges are successful? What happens is the Rule of Law runs its course and decides that Trump wins? People will feel betrayed, fooled, tricked... But they will not turn on the people who got it wrong aka the AP aka the media... They will turn on the people that got it right. aka the Judges and judicial system. When the media is setting up to turn the population away from the rule of law we have serious problems.
    2 points
  4. Traveler

    Trump 2024?

    I know for a fact that electron fraud is ramped - 50 years ago I observed such blatant fraud in the Republican Party that I left that party and tried to become a Democrat only to find things much worse there. The great excuse is that there is never enough fraud to alter the results. This excuse should offend anyone with an IQ above room temperature. In a presidential elections there are trillions of dollars at stake as well as the most powerful position in the world at stake - the incentives are too high and the consequence too low - the RIO beats anything - with perhaps the exception of dealing drugs. The election system begs for corruption. I believe that campaign and voter corruption is the #1 problem with American politics and that our election process is at the center and connected to just about every problem - not just in Washington DC but every election in every state. A person running for office - even a county or city office can become a millionaire over night in thousands of different ways - even if they lose the election. The Traveler
    2 points
  5. Just_A_Guy

    Trump 2024?

    I was just going to say the same thing. I saw a story today saying that Biden is telling his staff to lay off of Trump, prosecutions-wise; but Biden can’t control the New York State AG. Trump may be spending his retirement overseas.
    2 points
  6. Hidden assumptions: - Everything smart wants to continue - Everything smart values existence - Everything smart understands cause and effect, action and consequence - Lucifer kept his memory of the pre-existence with God, therefore, having all the facts at his disposal, Lucifer 'gets it'
    1 point
  7. You are a concrete thinker. You deal in reality. You understand highly creative concepts as a collection of understandable, digestible primitives. You naturally seek to understand things by decomposing them to their constituent elements and then inferring or assigning relationships between those elements. So what? you might ask. Everyone does this. Well, yes, everyone does do it, but most people aren't really aware that they're doing this. So when someone carefully and explicitly follows this paradigm, especially when they start pretty much in the middle with the assumption that the other person is going to understand what they're saying or doing, the other person is likely to be left behind. tl;dr—The ugly truth is that most people aren't as smart as you, so even if you carefully explain to them what you're doing and why you're doing it, they won't get it. This has immense relevance to religious discussions, by the way.
    1 point
  8. Here's the deal: Communication starts with a pure concept a sender wishes to send. Then it gets dipped into one person's psyche, emotions, tragic back story, worldview, political bias, and current mood. Then it gets flung out the sender's window, crashing partially into it on it's way out so all the body language/facial expressions/tone of voice/pheremones rub on to it. (Some of this can be controlled, some can't). Then the message flies through some medium, where the sun shines on it and burns it, the air pollution makes it smell differently, and the fog dims the message. Then it crashes through the receiver's window, gets dipped in the receiver's psyche/emotions/etc, and then finally decoded by the receiver. Sounds like part of her 'dip' included some preconceived notions of what you were trying to communicate. Poor lady did her best to make your message fit that mold, but when it wasn't a good fit, the response wasn't to examine the dip for incorrect assumptions, it was to judge you for sending it wrong. In short, the deal was "this is how humans communicate". I'm always amazed we manage to get anything across to each other.
    1 point
  9. Expectations can limit communication.
    1 point
  10. Grunt

    Trump 2024?

    It's much worse than that, now. They are actually openly trying to shape public opinion (not even touching on the whole existence of CFR). Yesterday, on public record, a sitting US Senator questioned public platform owners about why conservative voices weren't banned from their platforms. They don't even try to hide it anymore.
    1 point
  11. prisonchaplain

    Trump 2024?

    I understand that several former South Korean presidents and political leaders ended up in jail. The nation believes that this shows the maturity and nobility of their system--that the powerful must answer for their crimes. I'm not sure which route is wiser. I suspect that political bluster about "lock 'em up!'" sans actual retribution is the wiser course.
    1 point
  12. Vort

    The election

    I don't disagree, but you appear to be neglecting two important points: 1. How do you know the information is false? Just because it isn't what CNN et alia are reporting? If there is one thing that everyone should agree the mainstream media has taught us, it is that we cannot take anything they say at face value. 2. Even assuming you're right, so what? How can you possibly codify such a thing without violating the First Amendment? I grew up being taught and believing that the cure for false information was true information. Today the political Left openly pushes for (what they call) misinformation to be suppressed by force of law. Surely no clear-thinking lover of liberty, whatever his or her political stripe, can possibly agree with this.
    1 point
  13. JohnsonJones

    Trump 2024?

    I think it's two parallel things that occurred. 1. I think with mail in voting it allows for more people to actually vote. This is why we had record voting numbers this year (Trump had more people vote for him than any other election...except he was beaten by Biden who had even more). Many people who previously could not vote absentee because they theoretically did not qualify for it, but could not get to the polls were able to vote via mail this election. The requirements to mail in vote were relaxed in some areas allowing more people to vote when they wanted to rather than trying to make time on a specific day. 2. However, I think mail in voting allows FAR too much ability for people who are dead or do not exist or moved out of state to vote. By this, I mean they are not actually the ones voting, but others see these blank ballots mailed to these addresses and use these ballots to vote for people who no longer live there or are anywhere around that location. I think this happens a LOT more than people think. I think there are also other activities (marking ballots that are unclear by counters who are party biased...etc) that occur with mail in ballots that allow a LOT of area to tamper with actual election numbers. I will be Happy with a Biden win (it's no secret that I am not a fan of Trump) but I think that there was a LOT of cheating this election. I think stricter rules regarding mail in votes and validation of those votes need to occur. Many who favor Biden do NOT think about the future. If cheating occurred, even if it favored their candidate this election, it could always favor the other candidate the next as sides gear up to cheat better and more efficiently. Instead, we should try to stamp out ways to cheat on elections as it is beneficial for both sides. My opinion on how to do this is ABSOLUTELY unpopular with Liberals, but I think it would stem a LOT of this cheating. 1. Require a current State ID to vote. You don't have to register even, but you have to present a current and valid State ID (that can also be later validated against the state database if there are recounts or questions regarding the election later) that is put on your ballot as well (the drivers license number or state ID number). State ID's are available, even to those who do not have driver's licenses. It is NOT hard to get. You do not have to pass a driver's test to get a state picture ID, but you normally do need some form of verification of address and birth. This is NOT going to discriminate against those who are minorities or poor as ANYONE can get these types of ID's with minimal effort. If one wants to vote, getting a State ID or some form of picture ID from the state they live in is less of an effort than voting in most instances. I fully support the idea of requiring a valid government issued ID to vote. 2. In conjunction with the above, you MUST vote in person. I understand the problems in regards to the current pandemic and why the methods for mail in voting were taken and I actually agree (as people cannot seem to actually take safety precautions that worked in other nations that have lower numbers than the US)...BUT...the mail in voting methods we have done seem to open it up to be easily cheated. Make people vote in person and when coming in they need to present a valid government issued Photo ID. There won't even be a need to register. By having a valid state ID that's your registration right there. You can just go in and vote as long as you present the ID, but you can only vote once, and you need to have it recorded on your ballot (ballots and names would remain anonymous, sure you could look up who it was by their ID number, but I think generally that would not be considered. You only use the number to verify each individual only got ONE vote and for verification of validity of ID in case of recounts..etc). Do this, and I think cheating will be decreased tremendously. As it is, I think there were many cheats (probably on both sides) in this most recent election. PS: in answer to the question of Trump in 2024...I hope not. I do not Favor Trump at ALL. I actually wonder if he will be facing trials and jail time in the interim between now and 2024. That doesn't exclude a run by him, but it could definitely hamper any efforts on his part to do so.
    1 point
  14. Vort

    The election

    Of course it would. AOC is a national politician. Her rantings must be reported so that people can see exactly how big a liar she is—or, if she's telling the truth, so that we can correct whatever evil she's exposing. I can think of no situation where the media would be justified in refusing en masse to report the news.
    1 point
  15. prisonchaplain

    Trump 2024?

    If the GOP keeps the senate job #1 will be to reject the most unpopular and radical Democratic proposals--packing SCOTUS, Green New Deal, and other grand socialism-like schemes. I suspect that Biden is not big on those anyway, thus my theorizing that he could potentially do a lot in his moderate lane. Without a GOP president, the senate won't have a long to-do list, just a do-not one.
    1 point
  16. NeuroTypical

    The election

    Just a reminder of the site rules, to which we all agreed in order to create an account here. Especially site rule #3 and 4.
    1 point
  17. Just_A_Guy

    Trump 2024?

    If the GOP keeps the Senate, McConnell can keep bills he *really* doesn’t like from even coming to the vote. Biden is certainly a major part of deciding what legislation gets passed, but there’s also a big question mark about whether the GOP post-Trump retains its populist flavor or whether it reverts to a more conventionally ideological brand of conservatism. That may determine the ultimate fate of Biden proposals regarding—say—criminal justice reform, or fiscal policy.
    1 point
  18. prisonchaplain

    Trump 2024?

    I'm wondering if the "Trump 2024" theory is something put out there to appease his hardcore supporters. Neither the current President, nor the VP, will end up the nominee in 2024, imho. If they do, as @Midwest LDS says, they will lose. I hope it does not take that loss for the GOP to shake itself loose. On the other hand, so much good was accomplished in the past 4-years. Reagan will always be my style-and-speech hero, but DJT did get the business done.
    1 point
  19. MrShorty

    More BSA misery

    As an Eagle Scout, I am overall grateful for what I got out of BSA. I am sad to see them struggle, I will be sad if BSA substantially disappears. I wish things could have been different. I wish that BSA leadership would have had the foresight to take youth protection more seriously sooner to try to prevent this outcome. It is what it is -- I cannot say that the outcome ought to be different. But I am still saddened, and will be saddened by the outcome.
    1 point
  20. NeedleinA

    The election

    If you are into patterns, engineering, artificial intelligence, graphs, computer programming here is a study by Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD They have been doing some analysis of the Michigan votes. He and others are seeing a repeating trend across multiple counties. The higher the population of Republicans the less they voted for Trump. What they say they are seeing could only be the result of manipulation by a computer 'algorithm' across these counties. Dr.SHIVA LIVE: MIT PhD Analysis of Michigan Votes Reveals Unfortunate Truth of U.S. Voting Systems. Video 24:00 time marker skips to the start. The perfect repeating line (below) across several counties is the issue. They also see counties where they believe the algorithm was "turned off".
    1 point
  21. The best thing you can do to prepare in my opinion is build up your food, water storage (also take an inventory and get an idea of what you have as you can forget what you already have in your storage) and have a decent first aid kit. Listening to the Holy Spirit on what you should do for other preparations that you need to do is essential. Exercise as well and do what you can to keep your body in decent physical condition.
    1 point
  22. Just_A_Guy

    More BSA misery

    We’ve talked about the potential that BEA would file for bankruptcy. Turns out they went ahead with a Chapter 11 filing back in February, and today was the deadline for all potential claimants to file their “proofs of claim” with the bankruptcy court. Apparently, over 92,000 proofs of claim have been received as of this afternoon; the vast majority, apparently, from self-reported sex abuse victims. Let’s assume that only half of these are accepted by the court, and that each victim receives the absurdly low figure of $100K (a recent verdict in Oregon granted the victim $20 million). Forty-six thousand claims at $100,000 per claim is $4.6 billion. BSA National apparently has $1.4 billion in assets (many already mortgaged) with the councils holding $3.3 billion more (assuming council resources can be tapped, which is debatable). That means in a best case scenario they have $4.7 billion to pay off at least $4.6 billion in sex abuse claims, plus whatever other debts the BSA has racked up. The bankruptcy is nominally a “reorganization”, but it’s looking an awful lot like the BSA’s corporate existence itself is in existential danger. Random thoughts: —The LDS/BSA divorce didn’t come a moment too soon; —A $120 billion “rainy day” fund doesn’t seem as extravagant as it used to.
    0 points
  23. I don't know if someone can help explain what I just experienced. I was part of a "communications exercise." We're broken up into pairs with someone we don't know all that well. One party was supposed to be silent. No hand signing or language. We could offer facial expressions an overall body postures, etc. The other party described a picture in their minds without saying the big picture like "the Mona Lisa." I looked around at how much people got wrong. I even listened to the descriptions vs the drawings. When it was my turn, my line of thinking would be to not choose anything that had complex stuff to describe that had tons of nuance to it. Instead, I chose simple, common, geometric shapes that everyone knows and understands. I started my description by saying,"What I'm about to describe has no big picture or any general idea. These are just a bunch of simple geometric shapes. That's all. Nothing else. So, don't try to picture anything other than what I literally describe." She nodded. Draw a square, 2" on a side. She gave me a furrowed brow of confusion. You know what a square is? You know what an inch is? You know then that all four sides of the square would be 2 inches? Each time she gave me a look of "duh.." So, draw it. She did. I went on to an equilateral triangle. Same furrow, explanation, and look of exasperation. This went on until the time was up. When she showed what was on her paper, we compared it to my paper. Of course it was a perfect match. But she offered some sense of how wrong it was. She just didn't "get it." What was it supposed to be? She even said,"At least my picture was of some scene that I could describe. Yours was just a bunch of weird shapes. I had to explain to her what I said at the beginning. THERE IS NO BIG PICTURE. It is JUST A BUNCH OF COMMON SHAPES. She said there was something wrong with that. It's supposed to be a big picture of SOMEthing. No, I said it at the very beginning. There was none. So, what was happening here? I made the objective something that I knew we would have common knowledge of. I clearly explained my objective. I clearly described how to get there using common referents. She eventually succeeded in achieving the objective. She still objected. What was the deal?
    0 points
  24. Yeah, another source of ambiguity is the existence of homonyms.
    0 points
  25. What exactly do you mean by that?
    0 points
  26. My son will be home in a week...
    0 points
  27. You really know how to butter up a guy. My daughter is still going on a mission.
    0 points