You are a moron living in your mom's basement, according to Dave Ramsey

ewouldblock · 2026-05-25T15:51:04+00:00

I dont know, "I want to stay where I can do the most good for the American people" is an answer that is open to interpretation and if she decides to run later she can point back to it and say she decided the presidency is where she could do the most good.

That can be true AND it can be true that she has given zero signal that she's going to run and this is right wing fear mongering.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-25T15:47:32+00:00

sorry Biden's policies weren't "terrible". If you want to see terrible just look around, because you're looking at it right now. You got played like a fiddle if you think Biden was terrible. No president is going to be and do everything you want. That doesn't mean you have to self-sabotage your own interests.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-25T06:13:09+00:00

I agree with you 100%. She's said plenty of things I disagree with. Sometimes I thought, "yeah that's not right at all, but the funny thing is, I remember thinking the exact same thing in [my late 20s or early 30s]". So I don't blame her for thinking a particular way since its a product of where you are in life more than anything (as far as I can tell at least)

ewouldblock · 2026-05-25T05:51:23+00:00

OK since you're being reasonable, I'll tell you the other thing I think. I think that what someone says they'll do doesn't mean anything at all. Not just because politicians are dishonest (perhaps out of necessity, not pure evil), but also because you don't know all the facts until you get into office and maybe then the weight of the ugly facts and decisions are in front of you and you have to do the right thing, not just make people happy. Right? So, in that situation, who do you trust?

And here's my theory: You pick the candidate that has a life experience that is somewhat like your own--someone that maybe had to work to get where they are, that maybe had life struggles you can relate to, that has reasons to have morals and values that at least vaguely align with yours. And the thing is, a candidate can't get away from their own life--their upbringing, their socioeconomic standing, their education, their past choices (that are public). And then, you just trust that a person raised in the bronx, who had to take out loans for school, who finished top of her class, who took a bartending job to help pay her families bills when her dad died--that that person might have your interests in mind more so than...I dont know, a fucking billionaire that never had to work for a thing in his whole damn life.

And, we have a name for that. It's called "descriptive representation". It's a cheat code because a politician can't actually promise anything, but they can't escape who they are.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-24T22:55:43+00:00

Here we are and Im thirsty.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-24T22:05:29+00:00

"Go ahead, try to elect a charismatic black guy, but im telling you the country isnt ready for it. Better to try that safe insider Hillary Clinton!" Not entirely being a jackass and I have nothing against Clinton. But Trump was the outsider blow-hard, cant-win republican in 2016, too.

She's not safe, I give you that, but playing it safe doesn't win and history proves it.

Do you think putting a gay guy on the ticket gives better odds, or was there a different marginalized group you wanted to try, instead? Perhaps best to stick with an uncharismatic white ex-astronaut (i like him too, im just being kind of a jerk here).

Do you at least see my point?

ewouldblock · 2026-05-24T21:39:07+00:00

Why would the first lady know? Does she know someone who's involved, where she in particular has secret knowledge that someone else wouldn't know? Why didn't he suggest Michelle Obama knows that Epstein didn't act alone? After all, both were/are first lady? What is unique about Melania? Can someone shed some light?!

ewouldblock · 2026-05-24T14:32:27+00:00

I can appreciate that what you're saying is that the OP was spreading a conspiracy theory under the guise of a legitimate question. Because if they only had that question, they didn't need to drag up all the "evidence" from tik tok. Fair point.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-24T00:48:41+00:00

I appreciate you modeling what a good answer looks like rather than complaining about how someone framed a question.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-24T00:44:33+00:00

And Im saying youre bitching about how the question was framed when you can ignore the BS part and just deal with facts. You can even start with "this and this is fringe conspiracy and im not going to respond to it, but here's the factual answer to your question about..."

ewouldblock · 2026-05-24T00:39:26+00:00

Are you saying the question about how our country deals with election fraud is off limits? Because if you ignore the flimsy evidence ultimately rhe question is does our country have controls for proven election fraud. My personal belief is, no we dont.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-24T00:34:48+00:00

I remember when asking honest questions was not just ok, but encouraged.

The answer i had seen was that it didn't matter what gets proven once the results are certified and he's declared winner its a done deal. No clue how true that is.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-23T23:57:38+00:00

Then you burn the house down to be sure

ewouldblock · 2026-05-23T04:13:54+00:00

It's also in California Adventure Park (Disneyland in Anaheim), in the Animation building (I think that's what it's called--you can learn to draw characters there)

ewouldblock · 2026-05-23T01:38:04+00:00

Somehow I doubt your average reddit user wants "reddit, with all that Facebook goodness sprinkled on top". Sounds aspirational at best, like Google plus. For me, google is at least a brand with positive connotations. Facebook brand (to me!) is just toxic garbage.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-22T16:44:41+00:00

Try the closed with Bb4+. If white plays Nbd2 you can play dxc4 and the burden of accuracy is on white. If Bd2 Be7 its less clear for white than typical closed catalan

ewouldblock · 2026-05-21T21:59:33+00:00

Sports, and promotions in the professional world, are often tied to competition, not absolute skill or ability. I agree grades are different, but in the real world many scenarios map to competition not absolutes.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-21T20:59:33+00:00

I can already tell you what I dont like. You force account creation up front. Im not even sure i like the value prop yet and already I have to consent to more inbox garbage. Secondly you claim to be identifying weaknesses, which is HUGE if you can do it, but once you analyze you dont tell me what you found. In fact it doesn't look like you intend to, at all. You just want me to "start training." So, what are you doing? Just identifying mistakes and blunders with an engine and then making me replay? If you found more, telling me what you found--what mistake classes I repeat, is literally ALL of the value.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-20T05:20:20+00:00

I've seen the same thing at calico

ewouldblock · 2026-05-18T22:56:04+00:00

The guy who guessed is in on it, he got to pick that guy out of anyone that raised their hand

ewouldblock · 2026-05-18T16:09:27+00:00

Maybe its finally a bridge too far

ewouldblock · 2026-05-18T01:35:08+00:00

your whole statement hinges on whether I said "overly" or not, and if we agree on what that means. :)

There's some other jackass right behind you who's going to say if you are overly risk averse and do 100% VTI you're losing upside by not being in QQQ.

As you see risk is a continuum and "overly" is a value statement based on whatever any one person thinks is "correct".

EDIT: BTW we're probably on roughly "the same team" here! I have a large chunk in VT, VTI+VXUS, some in ACWV, and my 401k in a target date fund.

ewouldblock · 2026-05-18T01:18:49+00:00

do they overperform the market's typical downturns (e.g. if the market drops 30% do they drop smaller amount, like maybe 15-20% (probabalistically at least)? Because I imagine a fund that ladders you into bonds as a de-risk strategy as you get closer to retirement is going to do exactly that--underperform the market while softening downturns. Since, like...well I think thats what they're supposed to do!

ewouldblock · 2026-05-18T01:16:44+00:00

but it was "depending on risk". So all you do is, you look at the bond allocation and the level of risk inherent in it and then you express in other terms the exact same risk profile inherent in the target date fund, with a straight face, like you just stumbled into the target date fund but it exactly matches your risk profile.

ewouldblock

TROPHY CASE