I’ve been a part of turning several conservatives since 2016 but as of 2024, and under far more convincing circumstances, I haven’t seen one turn. I’m glad others have faith, and I’ve seen some online change, but every single one in my sample is entrenched more than ever. Here’s hoping they’re just the most stubborn or immune to reality

Vital Proteins got bought out by Nestle and almost immediately turned to shit iirc

That song gives me a physical revulsion every time I hear it. It’s more than just disliking a song. This is something that tries to pretend it’s a song, but ultimately isn’t. It’s unsettling. Like if a monkey skinned a person and dressed in that skin and carried on as if it were a person.

My Pal Foot Foot is a monkey wearing a human skin-suit and trying to be a human.

From an old reddit comment about this song. I don’t think it’s that bad, but maybe time has made it grow on me.

From Nate Silver’s write up on this poll:

Yesterday, I complained about how so many pollsters are “herding” by publishing results that are almost an exact tie in a way that is incredibly statistically improbable given the unavoidable sampling error from surveying a small number of voters. I also noted a handful of prominent exceptions — rouge pollsters like the New York Times/Siena College that practically exist in an entirely different universe and imply a much bigger political realignment.

Another such maverick is Ann Selzer of Selzer & Co. (Selzer and NYT/Siena are our two highest-rated pollsters.) As my former colleague Clare Malone wrote in 2016, Selzer — like NYT/Siena — has a long history of bucking the conventional wisdom and being right. In a world where most pollsters have a lot of egg on their faces, she has near-oracular status.

Emphasis mine. While polls were decently off in 2016 and 2020, Selzer’s were not, and reflected a significant underestimate of Trump by nearly every other pollster. This poll suggests Harris is being underestimated. If Selzer is correct, Harris wins very comfortably.

It’s hard to explain how unexpected this result is. Harris proponents like myself were hoping for Trump +8-9 or less, which would correlate to a Harris win in the electoral college. You can still see this on r/fivethirtyeight from the bad site. I’m not optimistic and my best hope was Trump +7. People misread this as Trump +3 and were still celebrating. Headlines aren’t exaggerating here: this is a truly shocking poll. If the real result is even Trump +5, he is likely to have lost handily. If this is as accurate as Selzer has been since 2012, he will have lost in a true landslide. (Let’s not get ahead of ourselves, of course.)

I’ll link again Silver’s article on herding because it makes a strong case that most polls are not currently reliable due to self-preservation. Selzer releasing these results is not a self preserving move and would be a large pockmark on her otherwise “near-oracular” record.

You can scroll through my history and see that I am not an optimistic person. I initially assumed a Harris loss before Biden dropped out because RFK was still polling too well, a traditional indicator of loss when dropping incumbent status. I was pleased with her upward momentum— and still am, she deserves a great deal of credit for an excellent campaign— but she has always been the underdog in my mind. This is the most positive sign I’ve seen all season. It helps that Siena’s most recent PA poll was also quite positive at Harris +4 if I recall.

I’m too worried to be hopeful, but this has made it harder to doom. It’s so unexpected that I take it with a grain of salt, but if she’s even half right, things are a lot better than they feel.

Recorded speech about engaging in crimes is often acceptable evidence. It’s probably the same with written messages.

I guess it’s up to the accused to prevent law enforcement from acquiring what they said, whether it be preventing recording, preventing police from sifting through mail or unsecure communications, or preventing police from acquiring the accused’s copy of potentially illegal communications. Which he is currently attempting.

I don’t blame him for trying, and would agree on a lesser extent that he is right to prevent self incriminating now. But copied communication as acceptable evidence is pretty settled in law by now.

There’s this scene from The Boys S4– so spoilers abound— wherein Homelander spouts the conservative talking points to would-be donors behind closed doors and is told “yeah yeah save the talking points for the rabble.”

Which is great, as S4 is set in the stage where the Trump analogue takes power, but somehow we’re past that point irl. The guys in charge don’t seem to just be saying it for the “rabble” anymore. Sucks how far the right has moved in just a few years without losing significant support.

Yup. It’s easier to blame anti-woke than to admit to poor business decisions. Disney only cares about burning $180 mil + marketing and getting brand damage in exchange. Bloated budgets are the killer of movies, and movies actually make money whereas streaming shows don’t. A movie needs to make 2-2.5x the budget to break even, and when you’re blowing that kind of money without collecting ticket prices…

$180mil is more than the budget of Top Gun: Maverick which made $1.5bil. Inside Out 2 had a slightly larger budget of $200mil and has made over $1.6bil so far. The Acolyte made nothing and didn’t drive sales, so it was a poor investment.

People who really liked the show could try a gofundme for Disney, request merch to buy, or if they’re extremely wealthy give them $200mil to make another season. Looping Acolyte while asleep to pump viewership would’ve helped too, as you basically noted— Velma received a lot more hate but with high viewership and lower budget, it got a second season. In capitalistic America it’s difficult to convince a company to make less profit, much less discard hundreds of millions. Money is all that matters.

Apple needs a toggle for “I’m not a total noob” to disable some of these things. Well, Microsoft does too but for different things.

This will probably be a large net benefit since most users are not, uh, proficient and likely grant permissions a little too often. I guess I’d rather click yes repeatedly if it means depriving some corpo from monetizing user screen content. But if they’re adding it, they may as well make it optional.

Yeah but he had significantly more pessimistic numbers for Biden from model launch to dropping out. Whether 538 was overly optimistic for the dems or Silver was overly pessimistic, it’s good news either way when both agree Harris is up

Nate Silver has similar numbers. I don’t have a great deal of faith in polls or poll aggregators, but both of those put together is a good sign.

The rollout has been masterful. I was a severe doubter due to her 2020 campaign, but I’m entirely on board now. I’m almost allowing myself the slightest bit of hope, which I haven’t really had since two days before the 2016 election.

I guess I just don’t see the relevance of sexuality when no one uses “narcissist” to indicate that. Seems like a complete non sequitur and didn’t yield any results?

I mean maybe, but I assume that by the time it was named, people mainly remembered the staring at oneself until death thing. The story is old enough that it’s been simplified many times, I’ve heard it more without the curse bit than with. The authors aren’t really around to correct the record.

I’m curious, were you more familiar with the particulars of the story than the actual disorder, and just applied it? I’m confused about the point of the orignal comment. It feels like you’re more interested in Greek myths than the actual discussion that was happening.

Which is fine— there’s a place for that, even if that wasn’t the way to introduce the subject. I’d have been (and really, still am) interested in other not-entirely-faithful myth inspired names. But by beginning with an inaccurate take on the contemporary term narcissist, it mostly just led to confusion.

Like others here, I gotta say it’s super weird that this comment is focused on Narcissus the character’s specific death rather than the actual disorder. It’s like getting caught up on Oedipus’s platonic relationships. The disorder references the character but does not demand that every detail of the story is relevant.

NPD is diagnostically defined in the DSM-5 (APA 2013; pages 669-672) as a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy, with interpersonal entitlement, exploitiveness, arrogance, and envy. Five out of nine of these criteria need to be present to meet the diagnosis of NPD.

(The nine can be found online from many sources. None mentions sexuality.)

There’s good reading on sexual selfishness or sexually addictive behavior from narcissists. One from the American Journal of Psychiatry, emphasis mine:

In addition to the grandiose and vulnerable subtypes, there is a healthier group of individuals with narcissistic personality disorder, described as “high-functioning,” “exhibitionistic,” or “autonomous.” These individuals, illustrated by Mr. A, are grandiose, competitive, attention seeking, and sexually provocative, while demonstrating adaptive functioning and using their narcissistic traits to succeed.

For a more contemporary comparison, it’s like seeing the trope of the Starscream and insisting that for the archetype to fit, they must be disintegrated by the guy they backstabbed reborn and renamed. The disorder is named after the self obsessive behavior, not the less important particulars.

just because Trump is a felon does not mean we need a prosecutor

lol what the fresh hell is this take. This has to be the first attempt at this weird rhetoric. Does that mean we need the felon?

has anyone here had to deal with a prosecutor firsthand before?

Actually yeah, I got a ticket for running a red light in a weird non-permanent construction detour thing. I hadn’t expected the light to be there since it was on a highway and was part of an unusual u-turn. The cop was sympathetic and told me to go to the court to fight it, and there the prosecutor dropped the charge. I have seen that same court successfully prosecute traffic tickets even without officer testimony, so I was quite pleased.

Honestly even with how corrupt the justice system can be, I’m not sure you’re gonna find many people who have personally had bad experiences with a prosecutor, much less rational people who would choose someone convicted of 34 felonies over a prosecutor.

It’s legit worth a read, the author clearly loves Hillary Clinton. Truly reminiscent of the 2016 puff pieces. Clinton’s positive press takes a tone like no other politician’s, with lofty adjectives like “mightiest” and unmatched.

The author also notes it’s her turn still:

Then there is the obvious, yet still historic, potential for her to become the country’s first female president — a milestone that unfortunately has still not been met.

As if there aren’t substantially better women from Whitmer to Harris to Michelle Obama to even not quite of age Ocasio-Cortez. None of whom have ever lost to Trump before, which is nice.

Finally, he mentions that “according to a poll released in the wake of Biden’s disastrous debate, Clinton is already favored to take down Trump, 43 percent to 41 percent”. That is not a comforting lead and has a lot of room to go down when voters think “this again??”

Anyway even though the author is serious, the piece only serves as humorous clickbait. Not even the DNC is bold enough to run Clinton again

Thought some of you would find this entertaining. I think I remember The Hill being extremely biased towards Clinton during the 2016 primary, and it’s interesting to see that continue.

I know this post is gonna get downvoted lmao, it’s a pretty garbage and tone-deaf take, but it’s still kind of relevant and I thought it was funny

Site’s still up

Trump had a near 30% chance per their analysis, which is pretty significant

Edit: so yeah a higher chance this time wouldn’t be great

This is a really high quality edit, I’m genuinely impressed. Probably not too much work mechanically but the attention to detail is great and someone who’s never seen it would probably think it was original. If I were a meme edit rater it would rank very high on my list. I don’t know how to make this comment not sound sarcastic or boomer-y but I actually really love this edit and will send it to people. They won’t understand it but that’s fine.

I like the extremely narrow opinion held by whoever took the original screenshot, judging from their use of the agree/disagree buttons. They believe that some form of washing is necessary, but only the exact amount of a bidet— using soap is too much. A very specific middle ground.