I don't know my history. audrey tells me he also killed millions. ~a
paul: I'm fine with mao vs hitler. honestly I think mother teresa vs hitler still fits but only because I keep reading pretty weird stuff about mother teresa. ~a
a: I appreciate the work you put into it. I don't want you to feel like you wasted your time so you can post them if you want. Honestly? I'm fine conceding the point. For one reason I have no desire to defend Trump and for another I'm sure that Trump has been worse. My only contention is HOW much worse. It would be less Mother Teresa vs Hitler and more... Mao vs Hitler? Like neither are great but sure the other guy is worse. -Paul
paul: like, if i come up with more than a few significant authoritarian things that trump has done, significant authoritarian things that biden has not done, will that change anything for you? will it move a needle? ~a
paul: "What significant authoritarian thing has Trump done that Biden didn't do?" i've painstakingly turned this answer into nine 445-character messages. did you want them? but honestly i stopped at nine because i got bored. ~a
a: I read a book (pretty sure it was a Haidt book.... maybe Righteous Mind?) which said that, for example, people named Dennis are slightly more likely to become dentists. I suppose the theory is that they have a positive association with their name and thus to things that sound like it? So it would make sense. I'm not sure P and G are that close in the alphabet.... -Paul
a: "biden is no different from trump?" I probably think they're closer than you do. What significant authoritarian thing has Trump done that Biden didn't do? For all of his bluster, his adminstration tends to follow court orders. Way too many executive orders? Sure. -Paul
"when students are awarded letter-based grades, with ‘a’ as a high grade and ‘c’ as a lower score, nelson and simmons found that students whose names began with ‘c’ or ‘d’ underperformed whilst students who shared the initials of better grades scored higher grade point averages" suck it, dewey. ~a
are people with similar names more likely to date? or more likely to marry? d+d m+m a+a (letters look similar?) p+g t+f m+w (near each-other in the alphabet?) p+n. certainly not everybody we know falls into this category, but there are a lot more than i would assume would happen randomly. maybe i'm finding loose correlations in random data. on the other hand, google has a lot of results saying this is indeed a real world effect. ~a
paul: so, when it comes to authoritarian tendencies and abuse of power: biden is no different from trump? if that's not the case, please disabuse me of that, it's certainly the feeling i'm getting. ~a
a: Oftentimes those things conflict too. Student loan forgiveness might've been the will of the people, but the way Biden tried to do it was also circumventing the constitution. -Paul
a: "illegal (and/or immoral) attempts at circumventing justice, and circumventing the will of the people, and ignoring civil liberties + civil rights + laws and circumventing the constitution in general" Okay, that's a lot of expansive and vague things to try to measure. One person's circumventing the will of the people is another person's protecting the rights of minorities. -Paul
paul: "i find it is too often used to excuse bad behavior by 'your' side" i understand and i agree. "'Yes, I usually think gerrymandering is bad but the other side is doing it worse so it's good when we do it!'" i have never said anything close to this, i'm pretty sure you'd agree. ~a
paul: I wasn't referring to gerrymandering specifically, but instead I was referring to illegal (and/or immoral) attempts at circumventing justice, and circumventing the will of the people, and ignoring civil liberties + civil rights + laws and circumventing the constitution in general. "but to look at the news in 2026" <- I feel from this language you must have realized that, though, right? wasn't I being clear? ~a
a: "Yes, I usually think gerrymandering is bad but the other side is doing it worse so it's good when we do it!" -Paul
a: But the reason I think this score keeping is beside the point and counter productive is because I find it is too often used to excuse bad behavior by "your" side (the royal "your" in this case). -Paul
a: I asked Gemini to summarize gerrymandering attempts in 2026 (is that what we're trying to score keep?) and the result looked like 9 attempts by Republicans and 4 for Democrats. So by that specific metric my 3:2 ratio looks closer than your 803 to 397.81 billion. -Paul
paul: heck, i've seen so many companies adopt starlink for mobile internet connectivity I might participate in a spacex ipo. ~a
paul: as a reminder i always thought starlink was a good service. i use starlink at work extensively. many of my customers use it for lots of stuff and my company uses it for lots of stuff. so ive always known it was a good service. and that has only grown. what has also grown is my insight into their potential revenue: i was wrong about starlink's profitability. very wrong. to the point that I question some things I heard. oops! ~a
paul: yes, i agree. if i thought the score was close to 3:2 or 2:3 then keeping score would be pointless. but to look at the news in 2026 and see a 3:2 or 2:3 feels surprising. ~a
a: https://www.fool.com/podcasts/motley-fool-money/2026-05-21-the-spacex-s-1-the-good-the-bad-the/ The first five minutes of this podcast talks about how it's one of the highlights. -Paul
a: https://aporter.org/msg/?action=prev&prev=174000#174221 Do you still think Starlink is a fraud doomed to failure? I've heard it's one of the more impressive aspects of SpaceX's S-1. -Paul
Xpovos: "Is the slight that Massie’s victorious primary opponent was deep in the APAC pocket" I think that's it. For various reasons, his election kind of became a referendum on Israeli influence over American politicians. -Paul
mig: That's one of the reasons I've always been a little luke-warm on Massie. Sometimes he's a little too trollish for my liking. -Paul
a: "when the "score" is 803 to 397.81 billion" Right, and as I mentioned before, if I had to guess where my score keeping would be it would a ratio closer to 3:2 which is why I don't really care if one side has done something slightly more often. -Paul
mig: I’m not up on the details. Is the slight that Massie’s victorious primary opponent was deep in the APAC pocket, or something? Or was he literally in Israel on Election Day? — Xpovos
https://x.com/acyn/status/2056893033153761415 I like Massie but this is kind of a classless way to sign off. - mig
paul: "Maybe? I don't really care. Like I said, I'm not interested in score-keeping" yeah, agreed. i'm not super into score-keeping either. like if you want me to say that democrats go too far, i'll say it. i did say it, just now. "of course." democrats are so so shitty often. but, like, when the "score" is 803 to 397.81 billion, it stops being "keeping score" i think. the score is "a lot" to "a ridiculously huge astronomical number" ~a
a: My "too far" comments were for both sides. Hell, the first comment was "I think both sides have taken many steps too far for years now". Have the Republicans taken more steps too far? Maybe? I don't really care. Like I said, I'm not interested in score-keeping. When one side does something bad I don't think it matters if some other side did two bad things. All three are bad. -Paul
a: "you don't see any hypocrisy here?" I... still don't think you're understanding me. I'm saying that was bad. What the Republicans did was bad. I'm not excusing it at all. Bad bad bad. But I am also saying it's bad when Democrats do it. I'm being consistent here. It's bad no matter who does it. -Paul
paul: "too far", it blows my mind that you can look at what's going on in the world today and come to the conclusion "damn, those democrats have finally gone too far this time". do i think the democrats sometimes go too far? of course. but jfc, we are swimming in situations where the whitehouse has gone too far and nobody will do anything about it. ~a
"Playing shenanigans with timing to not approve Garland?" you don't see any hypocrisy here? arguing it's "the other side started it" is just blatantly excusing hypocrisy. ~a
a: I think all were bad. I don't think any were justified because "the other side started it". Bad all the way down. -Paul
a: Trying to explicitly gerrymander Texas and whatever other states? Too far. Trying to pack the court? Too far. Playing shenanigans with timing to not approve Garland? Too far. -Paul
a: Trying to reduce the retirement age for VASCOTUS in political retaliation for a decision you don't like? Too far. Trying to explicitly gerrymander a purple state to be almost exclusively blue and overturn an independent system that worked? Too far. -Paul
a: "not, ACTUALLY ignoring the constitution?" I think you misunderstand me. I'm asking YOU what would be a step too far. I think both sides have taken many steps too far for years now. -Paul
mig: "filing articles of impeachment" are you not moving the goal posts? "it rarely rises to the level of 'impeach rhe judges!' or 'we gotta pack the courts!'" is where you started. ~a
https://www.c-span.org/clip/us-house-of-representatives/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-introduce-articles-of-impeachment-against-justices-thomas-and-alito/5123416
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/free-speech-federal-crime-protesters-are-still-marching-conservative-s-rcna78678
a: draw a distinction between mean tweets that end up going nowhere to i dunno, angry mobs showing up at scotus justice’s houses and congrespeople actually filing articles of impeachment. - mig
mig: "it rarely rises to the level of 'impeach rhe judges!'" literally trump, the head of the gop, just over one year ago "[james boasberg], like many of the Crooked Judges' I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!" ~a
mig: did obama erode the independence of the judiciary? ~a
paul: in other news the couple had already left the scene by the time guns were drawn elizabeth soto "was sentenced to 50 years in federal prison; ines’s sentencing is set for 1 july". this seems like a miscarriage of justice. see elizabeth soto on this wikipedia article. ~a
paul: "it could help with the appearance of things too" "Harder for conspiracies of fraud if we pass some of these safeguards". are any of these statements fully and completely true if the downsides of the act (heavily) outweigh the upsides of the act? ~a
paul: some of these quotes are from ai: her organizations "spent only a small fraction of its donations directly on the poor" (roughly 7%). "her hospices provided often unhygienic care" (many died) "theresa (etc) secretly baptized dying individuals of other faiths (hinduism and islam) without their consent" lots of "ties to corrupt figures" types of things. "miracles required for her sainthood were heavily disputed by doctors" ~a
paul: ok, well, then in that case, i don't think it's 3 vs 2 (or mao vs hitler). i can send you those dozens of arguments for "trump is more of an authoritarian than the people running/ran against him" if you still think it's close to 3 vs 2 from an authoratarian perspective. ~a
a: From Gemini: "While Mao is responsible for a larger sheer volume of loss of life, historians draw a distinction in intent: Hitler’s regime focused heavily on the intentional, industrialized extermination of specific ethnic and targeted groups, whereas the majority of the deaths under Mao resulted from monumental policy failures, economic mismanagement, and man-made famine forced upon his own population." -Paul
a: I don't know a ton about the save america act, but it seems like a reasonable idea. I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that there is widespread fraud in elections, but I do think it's fair to take some steps to make sure things are on the up-and-up AND I think it could help with the appearance of things too. Harder for conspiracies of fraud if we pass some of these safeguards. -Paul
a: "is mao vs hitler 2 vs 3" Not sure what you mean. But the idea is that both were bad dudes who killed millions. Which is worse is an interesting thought. I think Mao might actually have the higher body count, but you could make an argument he was less directly responsible for a lot of those. -Paul
a: "I keep reading pretty weird stuff about mother teresa" Interesting. Do tell. -Paul
the official word from the whitehouse communications director about the representative for california's 36th district, ted lieu. he "is a dumbass" and "a bitch" link ~a
on a related note, what are your thoughts on the save america act? ~a
wait is mao vs hitler 2 vs 3? I don't know my history. audrey tells me he also killed millions. ~a
paul: I'm fine with mao vs hitler. honestly I think mother teresa vs hitler still fits but only because I keep reading pretty weird stuff about mother teresa. ~a
a: I appreciate the work you put into it. I don't want you to feel like you wasted your time so you can post them if you want. Honestly? I'm fine conceding the point. For one reason I have no desire to defend Trump and for another I'm sure that Trump has been worse. My only contention is HOW much worse. It would be less Mother Teresa vs Hitler and more... Mao vs Hitler? Like neither are great but sure the other guy is worse. -Paul
paul: like, if i come up with more than a few significant authoritarian things that trump has done, significant authoritarian things that biden has not done, will that change anything for you? will it move a needle? ~a
paul: "What significant authoritarian thing has Trump done that Biden didn't do?" i've painstakingly turned this answer into nine 445-character messages. did you want them? but honestly i stopped at nine because i got bored. ~a
a: I read a book (pretty sure it was a Haidt book.... maybe Righteous Mind?) which said that, for example, people named Dennis are slightly more likely to become dentists. I suppose the theory is that they have a positive association with their name and thus to things that sound like it? So it would make sense. I'm not sure P and G are that close in the alphabet.... -Paul
a: "biden is no different from trump?" I probably think they're closer than you do. What significant authoritarian thing has Trump done that Biden didn't do? For all of his bluster, his adminstration tends to follow court orders. Way too many executive orders? Sure. -Paul
"when students are awarded letter-based grades, with ‘a’ as a high grade and ‘c’ as a lower score, nelson and simmons found that students whose names began with ‘c’ or ‘d’ underperformed whilst students who shared the initials of better grades scored higher grade point averages" suck it, dewey. ~a
are people with similar names more likely to date? or more likely to marry? d+d m+m a+a (letters look similar?) p+g t+f m+w (near each-other in the alphabet?) p+n. certainly not everybody we know falls into this category, but there are a lot more than i would assume would happen randomly. maybe i'm finding loose correlations in random data. on the other hand, google has a lot of results saying this is indeed a real world effect. ~a
paul: so, when it comes to authoritarian tendencies and abuse of power: biden is no different from trump? if that's not the case, please disabuse me of that, it's certainly the feeling i'm getting. ~a
a: Oftentimes those things conflict too. Student loan forgiveness might've been the will of the people, but the way Biden tried to do it was also circumventing the constitution. -Paul
a: "illegal (and/or immoral) attempts at circumventing justice, and circumventing the will of the people, and ignoring civil liberties + civil rights + laws and circumventing the constitution in general" Okay, that's a lot of expansive and vague things to try to measure. One person's circumventing the will of the people is another person's protecting the rights of minorities. -Paul
paul: "i find it is too often used to excuse bad behavior by 'your' side" i understand and i agree. "'Yes, I usually think gerrymandering is bad but the other side is doing it worse so it's good when we do it!'" i have never said anything close to this, i'm pretty sure you'd agree. ~a
paul: I wasn't referring to gerrymandering specifically, but instead I was referring to illegal (and/or immoral) attempts at circumventing justice, and circumventing the will of the people, and ignoring civil liberties + civil rights + laws and circumventing the constitution in general. "but to look at the news in 2026" <- I feel from this language you must have realized that, though, right? wasn't I being clear? ~a
a: "Yes, I usually think gerrymandering is bad but the other side is doing it worse so it's good when we do it!" -Paul
a: But the reason I think this score keeping is beside the point and counter productive is because I find it is too often used to excuse bad behavior by "your" side (the royal "your" in this case). -Paul
a: I asked Gemini to summarize gerrymandering attempts in 2026 (is that what we're trying to score keep?) and the result looked like 9 attempts by Republicans and 4 for Democrats. So by that specific metric my 3:2 ratio looks closer than your 803 to 397.81 billion. -Paul
paul: heck, i've seen so many companies adopt starlink for mobile internet connectivity I might participate in a spacex ipo. ~a
paul: as a reminder i always thought starlink was a good service. i use starlink at work extensively. many of my customers use it for lots of stuff and my company uses it for lots of stuff. so ive always known it was a good service. and that has only grown. what has also grown is my insight into their potential revenue: i was wrong about starlink's profitability. very wrong. to the point that I question some things I heard. oops! ~a
paul: yes, i agree. if i thought the score was close to 3:2 or 2:3 then keeping score would be pointless. but to look at the news in 2026 and see a 3:2 or 2:3 feels surprising. ~a
a: https://www.fool.com/podcasts/motley-fool-money/2026-05-21-the-spacex-s-1-the-good-the-bad-the/ The first five minutes of this podcast talks about how it's one of the highlights. -Paul
a: https://aporter.org/msg/?action=prev&prev=174000#174221 Do you still think Starlink is a fraud doomed to failure? I've heard it's one of the more impressive aspects of SpaceX's S-1. -Paul
Xpovos: "Is the slight that Massie’s victorious primary opponent was deep in the APAC pocket" I think that's it. For various reasons, his election kind of became a referendum on Israeli influence over American politicians. -Paul
mig: That's one of the reasons I've always been a little luke-warm on Massie. Sometimes he's a little too trollish for my liking. -Paul
a: "when the "score" is 803 to 397.81 billion" Right, and as I mentioned before, if I had to guess where my score keeping would be it would a ratio closer to 3:2 which is why I don't really care if one side has done something slightly more often. -Paul
mig: I’m not up on the details. Is the slight that Massie’s victorious primary opponent was deep in the APAC pocket, or something? Or was he literally in Israel on Election Day? — Xpovos
https://x.com/acyn/status/2056893033153761415 I like Massie but this is kind of a classless way to sign off. - mig
paul: "Maybe? I don't really care. Like I said, I'm not interested in score-keeping" yeah, agreed. i'm not super into score-keeping either. like if you want me to say that democrats go too far, i'll say it. i did say it, just now. "of course." democrats are so so shitty often. but, like, when the "score" is 803 to 397.81 billion, it stops being "keeping score" i think. the score is "a lot" to "a ridiculously huge astronomical number" ~a
a: My "too far" comments were for both sides. Hell, the first comment was "I think both sides have taken many steps too far for years now". Have the Republicans taken more steps too far? Maybe? I don't really care. Like I said, I'm not interested in score-keeping. When one side does something bad I don't think it matters if some other side did two bad things. All three are bad. -Paul
a: "you don't see any hypocrisy here?" I... still don't think you're understanding me. I'm saying that was bad. What the Republicans did was bad. I'm not excusing it at all. Bad bad bad. But I am also saying it's bad when Democrats do it. I'm being consistent here. It's bad no matter who does it. -Paul
paul: "too far", it blows my mind that you can look at what's going on in the world today and come to the conclusion "damn, those democrats have finally gone too far this time". do i think the democrats sometimes go too far? of course. but jfc, we are swimming in situations where the whitehouse has gone too far and nobody will do anything about it. ~a
"Playing shenanigans with timing to not approve Garland?" you don't see any hypocrisy here? arguing it's "the other side started it" is just blatantly excusing hypocrisy. ~a
a: I think all were bad. I don't think any were justified because "the other side started it". Bad all the way down. -Paul
a: Trying to explicitly gerrymander Texas and whatever other states? Too far. Trying to pack the court? Too far. Playing shenanigans with timing to not approve Garland? Too far. -Paul
a: Trying to reduce the retirement age for VASCOTUS in political retaliation for a decision you don't like? Too far. Trying to explicitly gerrymander a purple state to be almost exclusively blue and overturn an independent system that worked? Too far. -Paul
a: "not, ACTUALLY ignoring the constitution?" I think you misunderstand me. I'm asking YOU what would be a step too far. I think both sides have taken many steps too far for years now. -Paul
mig: "filing articles of impeachment" are you not moving the goal posts? "it rarely rises to the level of 'impeach rhe judges!' or 'we gotta pack the courts!'" is where you started. ~a
https://www.c-span.org/clip/us-house-of-representatives/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-introduce-articles-of-impeachment-against-justices-thomas-and-alito/5123416
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/free-speech-federal-crime-protesters-are-still-marching-conservative-s-rcna78678
a: draw a distinction between mean tweets that end up going nowhere to i dunno, angry mobs showing up at scotus justice’s houses and congrespeople actually filing articles of impeachment. - mig
mig: "it rarely rises to the level of 'impeach rhe judges!'" literally trump, the head of the gop, just over one year ago "[james boasberg], like many of the Crooked Judges' I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!" ~a
mig: did obama erode the independence of the judiciary? ~a
I don't know my history. audrey tells me he also killed millions. ~a
paul: I'm fine with mao vs hitler. honestly I think mother teresa vs hitler still fits but only because I keep reading pretty weird stuff about mother teresa. ~a
a: I appreciate the work you put into it. I don't want you to feel like you wasted your time so you can post them if you want. Honestly? I'm fine conceding the point. For one reason I have no desire to defend Trump and for another I'm sure that Trump has been worse. My only contention is HOW much worse. It would be less Mother Teresa vs Hitler and more... Mao vs Hitler? Like neither are great but sure the other guy is worse. -Paul
paul: like, if i come up with more than a few significant authoritarian things that trump has done, significant authoritarian things that biden has not done, will that change anything for you? will it move a needle? ~a
paul: "What significant authoritarian thing has Trump done that Biden didn't do?" i've painstakingly turned this answer into nine 445-character messages. did you want them? but honestly i stopped at nine because i got bored. ~a
a: I read a book (pretty sure it was a Haidt book.... maybe Righteous Mind?) which said that, for example, people named Dennis are slightly more likely to become dentists. I suppose the theory is that they have a positive association with their name and thus to things that sound like it? So it would make sense. I'm not sure P and G are that close in the alphabet.... -Paul
a: "biden is no different from trump?" I probably think they're closer than you do. What significant authoritarian thing has Trump done that Biden didn't do? For all of his bluster, his adminstration tends to follow court orders. Way too many executive orders? Sure. -Paul
"when students are awarded letter-based grades, with ‘a’ as a high grade and ‘c’ as a lower score, nelson and simmons found that students whose names began with ‘c’ or ‘d’ underperformed whilst students who shared the initials of better grades scored higher grade point averages" suck it, dewey. ~a
are people with similar names more likely to date? or more likely to marry? d+d m+m a+a (letters look similar?) p+g t+f m+w (near each-other in the alphabet?) p+n. certainly not everybody we know falls into this category, but there are a lot more than i would assume would happen randomly. maybe i'm finding loose correlations in random data. on the other hand, google has a lot of results saying this is indeed a real world effect. ~a
paul: so, when it comes to authoritarian tendencies and abuse of power: biden is no different from trump? if that's not the case, please disabuse me of that, it's certainly the feeling i'm getting. ~a
a: Oftentimes those things conflict too. Student loan forgiveness might've been the will of the people, but the way Biden tried to do it was also circumventing the constitution. -Paul
a: "illegal (and/or immoral) attempts at circumventing justice, and circumventing the will of the people, and ignoring civil liberties + civil rights + laws and circumventing the constitution in general" Okay, that's a lot of expansive and vague things to try to measure. One person's circumventing the will of the people is another person's protecting the rights of minorities. -Paul
paul: "i find it is too often used to excuse bad behavior by 'your' side" i understand and i agree. "'Yes, I usually think gerrymandering is bad but the other side is doing it worse so it's good when we do it!'" i have never said anything close to this, i'm pretty sure you'd agree. ~a
paul: I wasn't referring to gerrymandering specifically, but instead I was referring to illegal (and/or immoral) attempts at circumventing justice, and circumventing the will of the people, and ignoring civil liberties + civil rights + laws and circumventing the constitution in general. "but to look at the news in 2026" <- I feel from this language you must have realized that, though, right? wasn't I being clear? ~a
a: "Yes, I usually think gerrymandering is bad but the other side is doing it worse so it's good when we do it!" -Paul
a: But the reason I think this score keeping is beside the point and counter productive is because I find it is too often used to excuse bad behavior by "your" side (the royal "your" in this case). -Paul
a: I asked Gemini to summarize gerrymandering attempts in 2026 (is that what we're trying to score keep?) and the result looked like 9 attempts by Republicans and 4 for Democrats. So by that specific metric my 3:2 ratio looks closer than your 803 to 397.81 billion. -Paul
paul: heck, i've seen so many companies adopt starlink for mobile internet connectivity I might participate in a spacex ipo. ~a
paul: as a reminder i always thought starlink was a good service. i use starlink at work extensively. many of my customers use it for lots of stuff and my company uses it for lots of stuff. so ive always known it was a good service. and that has only grown. what has also grown is my insight into their potential revenue: i was wrong about starlink's profitability. very wrong. to the point that I question some things I heard. oops! ~a
paul: yes, i agree. if i thought the score was close to 3:2 or 2:3 then keeping score would be pointless. but to look at the news in 2026 and see a 3:2 or 2:3 feels surprising. ~a
a: https://www.fool.com/podcasts/motley-fool-money/2026-05-21-the-spacex-s-1-the-good-the-bad-the/ The first five minutes of this podcast talks about how it's one of the highlights. -Paul
a: https://aporter.org/msg/?action=prev&prev=174000#174221 Do you still think Starlink is a fraud doomed to failure? I've heard it's one of the more impressive aspects of SpaceX's S-1. -Paul
Xpovos: "Is the slight that Massie’s victorious primary opponent was deep in the APAC pocket" I think that's it. For various reasons, his election kind of became a referendum on Israeli influence over American politicians. -Paul
mig: That's one of the reasons I've always been a little luke-warm on Massie. Sometimes he's a little too trollish for my liking. -Paul
a: "when the "score" is 803 to 397.81 billion" Right, and as I mentioned before, if I had to guess where my score keeping would be it would a ratio closer to 3:2 which is why I don't really care if one side has done something slightly more often. -Paul
mig: I’m not up on the details. Is the slight that Massie’s victorious primary opponent was deep in the APAC pocket, or something? Or was he literally in Israel on Election Day? — Xpovos
https://x.com/acyn/status/2056893033153761415 I like Massie but this is kind of a classless way to sign off. - mig
paul: "Maybe? I don't really care. Like I said, I'm not interested in score-keeping" yeah, agreed. i'm not super into score-keeping either. like if you want me to say that democrats go too far, i'll say it. i did say it, just now. "of course." democrats are so so shitty often. but, like, when the "score" is 803 to 397.81 billion, it stops being "keeping score" i think. the score is "a lot" to "a ridiculously huge astronomical number" ~a
a: My "too far" comments were for both sides. Hell, the first comment was "I think both sides have taken many steps too far for years now". Have the Republicans taken more steps too far? Maybe? I don't really care. Like I said, I'm not interested in score-keeping. When one side does something bad I don't think it matters if some other side did two bad things. All three are bad. -Paul
a: "you don't see any hypocrisy here?" I... still don't think you're understanding me. I'm saying that was bad. What the Republicans did was bad. I'm not excusing it at all. Bad bad bad. But I am also saying it's bad when Democrats do it. I'm being consistent here. It's bad no matter who does it. -Paul
paul: "too far", it blows my mind that you can look at what's going on in the world today and come to the conclusion "damn, those democrats have finally gone too far this time". do i think the democrats sometimes go too far? of course. but jfc, we are swimming in situations where the whitehouse has gone too far and nobody will do anything about it. ~a
"Playing shenanigans with timing to not approve Garland?" you don't see any hypocrisy here? arguing it's "the other side started it" is just blatantly excusing hypocrisy. ~a
a: I think all were bad. I don't think any were justified because "the other side started it". Bad all the way down. -Paul
a: Trying to explicitly gerrymander Texas and whatever other states? Too far. Trying to pack the court? Too far. Playing shenanigans with timing to not approve Garland? Too far. -Paul
a: Trying to reduce the retirement age for VASCOTUS in political retaliation for a decision you don't like? Too far. Trying to explicitly gerrymander a purple state to be almost exclusively blue and overturn an independent system that worked? Too far. -Paul
a: "not, ACTUALLY ignoring the constitution?" I think you misunderstand me. I'm asking YOU what would be a step too far. I think both sides have taken many steps too far for years now. -Paul
mig: "filing articles of impeachment" are you not moving the goal posts? "it rarely rises to the level of 'impeach rhe judges!' or 'we gotta pack the courts!'" is where you started. ~a
https://www.c-span.org/clip/us-house-of-representatives/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-introduce-articles-of-impeachment-against-justices-thomas-and-alito/5123416
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/free-speech-federal-crime-protesters-are-still-marching-conservative-s-rcna78678
a: draw a distinction between mean tweets that end up going nowhere to i dunno, angry mobs showing up at scotus justice’s houses and congrespeople actually filing articles of impeachment. - mig
mig: "it rarely rises to the level of 'impeach rhe judges!'" literally trump, the head of the gop, just over one year ago "[james boasberg], like many of the Crooked Judges' I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!" ~a
mig: did obama erode the independence of the judiciary? ~a