Skip to main content

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all Show Posts made by this member. Note that you can only see Show Posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Mav

1
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: Trumpled (Alternative Leading)
Yep. The more I think of it, the more I think Trump will threaten to wreck the place if Republican voters don’t renominate him. And he’ll do it as soon as any other candidate looks like being competitive. He won’t wait until the Convention to unleash the threat. He may even unleash it before the first primary is held. Voters will have to contemplate that voting for DeSantis might end up with the Democratic candidate winning in a walkover. It’s not as though they could be sure it would be an empty threat.

As with most things involving Trump, retaliating by making the same threat would probably backfire on DeSantis. Marco Rubio responded to Trump’s mockery by doing the same back to him. He quickly lost ground. Trying to out-Trump Trump doesn’t seem to work. As the old saying goes, never argue with stupid people as they’ll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
2
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: Trumpled (Alternative Leading)
Remember that Trump may be able to effectively gerrymander the primaries. If he has States he expects to win, he can get his minions to change the rules so they’re winner-take-all States while trying to turn pro-DeSantis States into proportional primaries. He can win even if he loses the popular vote or loses more primaries than he wins.  Being in control of the GOP nationally and at State-level can help him out. And it wouldn’t shock if DeSantis went to the Republican Convention with more delegates than Trump but Trump staged a convention fight amid claims of rigged elections and threats to run as an Independent if DeSantis were to be nominated.

He can also use his lackeys at the GOP to give him a boost during the debates. The chair of the RNC, Ronna McDaniel, is one of his supporters, for example. If Trump engineers a big field onstage (rather than the smaller fish having an undercard debate), neither DeSantis or he would have much time to answer questions about their policies but Trump might benefit by butting in at will and humiliating the other candidates, especially DeSantis. He could even end up with MAGA moderators who allow him to behave as he wants.

Don’t assume Trump will fight fair.
3
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: Trumpled (Alternative Leading)
It’s like déjà vu all over again. After the insurrection, it looked like the GOP would dump Trump. Why would you continue to back a loser? Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy, the GOP leaders in both houses of Congress, condemned Trump and even Senator Lindsay Graham, one of Trump’s lackeys, declared he was done with him. But over time, they all backflipped. Within a week, McCarthy went down to Maralago to kiss the ring and the MAGA crew started to hunt down those who wouldn’t pledge their allegiance to him.

After the midterms, it looked like the GOP would turn against Trump. De Santis did well in Florida and it looked like he might be able to challenge Trump. And there was a lot of anger towards Trump because he saddled the GOP with weak candidates and did little to help them financially or by campaigning with them. The hoped-for red wave became a red ripple and the Dems unexpectedly retained control of the Senate. But now the GOP is going back to its usual submission to Trump, aided by the MAGA fans in Congress and GOP officials.

Unless prosecutors bring him undone, there’s every chance Trump will again be the GOP candidate. Perhaps De Santis might beat him, but there’s every chance Trump will humiliate him out of contention, aided by his MAGA supporters who are able to put their fingers on the scales when settling the rules for the primaries in each state and the debates. And De Santis is really just a less charismatic version of Trump anyway, so if he wins the nomination there’d be little cause for relief.
4
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Baggers, that’s the problem I have with Musk. He’s just addicted to attention. And the best way to garner attention is to act unpredictably without worrying too much about sticking to a guiding philosophy (boring!). There’s nothing better to spark outrage than being a hypocrite. That makes getting to know the man a largely pointless exercise. Sure, he’s for freedom of speech when it suits him but he’ll sack employees on the spot if they speak out. He’ll use his wealth to intimidate corporations to bend to his will but he’ll bleat about Apple bullying him by cutting advertising on Twitter (as many other businesses have done). And how about his stunt of sacking a huge part of Twitter’s staff and then demanding that those who remained needed to work twice as hard, What you’re left with is an entitled twat who enjoys behaving like a wealthy toddler.
5
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Baggers, given the topic is “the mere sight and/or sound of the following people just grinds my gears”, you already know I have no desire to listen to any podcast interview with him. That said, I’d be happy to read any insights you distilled from it.
6
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
I’d throw in Elon Musk. What a wanker. When is this infatuation with Billionaires, particularly Tech Billionaires, going to fade? He and his ilk seem to attract the same obsequiousness as Royals, Lords and other nobility have enjoyed in England. He proved he was an entitled twat with his attempt to insert himself into the Thai Cave rescue and his stupidity is on display as the chief Twit.
7
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
And we don’t know what became of Melissa Caddick. Some things will remain a mystery.

But if you’re a cop who conducted a search, it might behove you to be able to articulate what attracted your suspicion when you get to Court.
8
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
The fact that you might not be able to put your finger on what activates your gut immediately doesn’t mean it will forever remain that way. The subconscious mind may merely be ahead of the conscious mind. Once you realise what put you on edge, you’d be pretty well placed to figure out whether your gut was being smart or just biased.

But that is just one type of intuition or gut feel. Another type of intuition is where there is a lot of information and it isn’t worthwhile to tease out every piece and consciously weight each as if a mathematical equation were involved. You just have to allow it all to swirl around like a soup as you decide whether to take the deal or go out with someone or, if you’re a judge, what penalty to impose. And you’re right that it becomes difficult to say in any particular case whether an inappropriate bias came into play. Perhaps the person who makes the decision might think he or she made an unbiased decision. But there have been analyses of particular Judges’ decisions over time that have revealed biases in favour of, for instance, private school alumni.

Of course, that makes it difficult to prove what has motivated people in particular instances. But trends will become apparent over time. And questions asked by employers and the like that seek information that might lead to discrimination should be banned, no matter how much the interviewer might claim they’d never use that information unlawfully, e.g marital status, sexual orientation, ethnicity or religion.

There have been many stories of applications being submitted with equivalent qualifications but one with an Anglo name and the other with a name that suggested the candidate was black. Surprise, surprise, the Anglo name would be called in for interview while the Black name would be screened out by HR’s gut instinct.
9
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Makes me think of the Front Bar. Radar would be saying “gamble responsibly” while Mick would be saying, “No, it can’t lose: bet your house on it!” If You’d listened to Mick, you’d be a rich man  :P
10
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Kruddler, I don’t agree. I’m talking about sub-conscious observations not sub-conscious biases. In other words, observations that make a person feel that something isn’t right without being something he or she can put his or her finger on immediately. Maybe an alert cop will pick out someone impersonating a cop because of a gun worn on the wrong side or a uniform being a slightly wrong colour. That’s the sort of thing that can lead to a gut feeling that demands further investigation. But it is based on observation or evidence rather than a mindset that all of a particular subset of a population are suspect.
11
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
The actual words were “As I described above” and I was referring to the quote in my last post. I was saying I agreed with you, that we were on the same page.
12
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Oh you talk about sub-conscious and its acceptable.
I say it and its wrong?!  :P
I’ve always included sub-conscious observations as being part of intuition:
To me intuition is the opposite of evidence-free assumptions. It is very useful when the decision-maker is flooded with observations or information, perhaps some of it contradictory, and trying to analyse each piece of information and weigh it formally will lead to decision paralysis. The decision-maker synthesises all of the information in a rational way although he or she might not be able to explain how to an observer. For example, someone might feel that they’ve entered a dangerous environment because they have observed certain things that they might not register on a conscious level or be able to articulate. That’s the classic, “I have a bad feeling about this” moment.
If you think I’ve criticised you for making the same point, direct me to the relevant post and I’ll comment further.
13
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Maybe you heard storm warnings even though you didn’t dwell on them on a conscious level? Or maybe you had some nagging concerns which had nothing to do with the weather but they saved you from it by pure luck?  If not, maybe you are clairvoyant! In which case, send me some numbers for the next Powerball draw!