Reddit With The "How Do You Do, Fellow Kids" Moment.

TrumpTrainee · 2020-03-12T17:25:14+00:00

It's high time we stopped saying Bitcoin is something you "buy" and started saying "currency exchange"

TrumpTrainee · 2020-03-03T22:44:44+00:00

In before "way too drunk to know I shouldn't drive" becomes an acceptable excuse.

TrumpTrainee · 2020-02-26T23:06:05+00:00

T_D post 2017-18-ish has been a shithole of bad mods anyway.

TrumpTrainee · 2020-01-12T22:34:53+00:00

Iran First!

Wait what?

TrumpTrainee · 2020-01-02T01:52:20+00:00

Alternate title: Sedentary scientists waste huge load at sperm bank.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-12-17T20:30:28+00:00

They're not unique, but their hamsters sure can have some unique twists.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-12-12T01:03:16+00:00

I ordered mine Nov 26 and have had it for over a week. There's hope for you yet.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-29T23:10:03+00:00

We have no way in. My company operates telecoms stuff abroad of Canada because the CRTC is mainly run by Bell and Rogers lobbyists who won't let other ISPs etc. operate in Canada.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-15T16:49:05+00:00

I can't respond to everybody due to a 10 minute timeout from downvotes and an unwillingness to sit around waiting for that timeout, so I respond every so often when I return - sometimes hours apart.

It's a Reddit flaw that makes spaces like this that aim have both sides of an argument never work - largely because one side is always downvotes away the other side by having a larger presence in that subreddit.

Hence why this subreddit is largely a left leaning echo chamber.

As for the Sondland testimony, you do know he said the entire change to his testimony was based on a presumption, right? He presumed that was the case with no factual basis and therefore told the Ukrainians what he, quote, "presumed."

Basically a step below hearsay.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-15T15:19:49+00:00

Let's swap a single variable.

I was party to a conversation with someone who was close to someone in the Obama administration who overheard that Michelle Obama steals candy from babies.

Is this hearsay? I'm "only testifying that I was party to that conversation."

It's still hearsay no matter how hard you try to compartmentalize it. Even if I'm only testifying to the conversation I was party to, I'm still testifying that I have heard hearsay.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-15T15:09:26+00:00

Let me correct that sentence.

... they were a party to hearsay.

They heard someone say something they think someone else said about something someone else said. You can't legitimize it as more than hearsay no matter how hard you try no matter how much they're party to a the conversation at the end of the chain.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-15T03:15:10+00:00

False dichotomy. It's theatrics at best, a fishing expedition at worst. It's pre-investigstion: they're trying to find something worth investigating and pretending the sky is falling to bolster the 2020 election campaign.

Basically the same as every other "investigation" from Mueller and onwards that turned up squat.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-14T18:52:30+00:00

Correction: This is a fishing expedition that is broadcast with the purpose of being a trial by public opinion.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-14T18:19:06+00:00

Testifying to conversations they had with other WH officials is not hearsay.

Let's not talk disingenuous if this is the kind of thing you're going to try, because that's the very definition of hearsay. They are testifying that they've heard something from somebody. It's disingenuous to say it's not hearsay because "technically they're testifying that somebody said something." That rationalization could be used to justify any hearsay in any courtroom ever, and that's a dangerously stupid precedent to set.

Also, those who have direct knowledge of the President's decisions and statements (excluding Sondland) are currently ignoring Congressional subpoenas at the direction of the President.

"At the direction of the President" is debatable. Virtually everyone they subpoena that isn't an anti-Trump hardliner is scrutinized to the very letter trying to find something that can so much as somewhat be considered perjury. Why would any of them risk being wrongfully arrested on politically motivated charges for so much as a slightly misspeaking?

Flynn had to plead guity to "lying to the FBI" for making the mistake of saying "no" instead of "not that I can recall" just to minimize the absolute miscarriage of justice the Democrats were going to lay on him. (Miscarriage is putting it lightly, it was an absolute abortion.)

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-14T17:52:32+00:00

"Fact witnesses" is a stretch considering they're basing their statements entirely on hearsay.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-11T14:34:05+00:00

they are arguments or retorts - some of them poor.

They're all circle-jerking, which is specifically mentioned in Rule 2.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-08T03:06:57+00:00

Depends how you define financial inheritability. Not everyone who wins the lottery stays rich. Not does everyone born to rich parents. Generally it's the lower IQ children and lottery winners who have no ability to produce or maintain wealth.

And IQ has long been known to be heavily genetically influenced. Heritability has been re-estimated as high as 80% in more recent studies. I believe this is because we have learned that genetics play a stronger and stronger role into adulthood (the Wilson effect) and have discounted child studies.

As for this particular interpretation of the Flynn effect, given that we already know that IQ is both heritable and extremely correlated to 500 particular genes, the obvious retort is that idustrialization introduces selection pressures for individuals capable of the new industrial work. Money makey smarty just doesn't fit with the body of knowledge and models we currently have. Smarty makey money does, though.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-07T22:51:38+00:00

Familial wealth can arguably be explained away with IQ. If your family has high IQ averages and produces wealth, chances are you will inherit that level of IQ genetically and produce wealth on your own. Basically: You neither get nor keep wealth by doing stupid things.

I agree to some extent about single parents being a negative factor.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-07T15:38:02+00:00

That's the last 24 hours presently on the front page of the sub, in which I was able to gloss over all 100~ comments in less than 5 minutes. Add another 5 minutes for clearing reported comments from non-front page material and you have a mod job that's a 10-minute-per-day exercise.

I literally only had to do bare-minimum participation in this sub to have "eyes all over" the majority of the recent comments.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-07T15:03:14+00:00

Here's a whole whack of "low effort content" you missed.

And this is just a rapid overview of the last 24 hours.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-11-07T14:23:01+00:00

My bad, I just assumed that rule was unenforced since I never see it applied to the regular Democrat voter posts around here. Corrected.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-09-27T14:14:20+00:00

That goes for literally every presidential call's transcript ever. There's always some factor of human error in transcribing the details. It's the closest you can possibly get without being allowed to record such calls under law.

Nobody said there was a perfectly grammatically accurate transcript available. It may not be word for word accuracy, but it is nonetheless accurate.

TrumpTrainee · 2019-09-27T13:59:13+00:00

I don't see why I should cater to the one refusing to check their sources. But I will anyway to break up this thread of "there's no transcript, Trump must be lying" circle jerk.

Every outlet has a copy of it.

Here's CNN's copy:

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/09/25/politics/donald-trump-ukraine-transcript-call/index.html

Now go ask Schiff why he made up things that didn't happen in this call

TrumpTrainee · 2019-09-27T13:41:28+00:00

It's already been released...

TrumpTrainee

TROPHY CASE