Allow me to offer some commentary on several SCOTUS cases that are NOT the #moab, but which, considered in aggregate, will reveal my impressions on the #TRUMPSMASH #lawOfFunny
We will be INTERVENING in the Texas (plus many other states) case. This is the big one. Our Country needs a victory!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 9, 2020
https://t.co/SZJ1Sw0GxM
WHY would the FBI want to to admit to possessing the #SethRich laptop now? https://t.co/0Jze3s6d88
— \U0001f1e6\U0001f1fa President Elect Mike Spike \u274c (@ZubSpike) December 9, 2020
https://t.co/rw6rSAIysY
#thomists
— the squad (6'3") (@RafasItchyButt) December 9, 2020
barnes, you're good, but I'm 6'3".#freePeregrimmer https://t.co/affQADVFjC pic.twitter.com/vq0zmWF8QE
https://t.co/1Ww7SI3g28
that's actually not what got @peregrimmer axed (he got axed for another thread when the MOAB dropped and he was about to talk about it), but that's a good thread too, is what he'd say if he were still with us.
— the squad (6'3") (@RafasItchyButt) December 10, 2020
https://t.co/zdNrEfmJ1l
#lawOfFunny
See why you want to archive?
More from Trump
This is mostly right but strikes me as it needing said that I don't think the left or the intelligentsia have the slightest idea how low institutional trust in anything coming from a left mouthpiece is now. Except in-network, the best heuristic is "the opposite of what they said"
If you look at the situation from a predictive models perspective instead of the more rigorous and appropriate (under normal circumstances) "prove your case or gtfo" perspective, trusting the opposite of whatever the left side says has an AMAZING track record, as we know it.
Literally, the best heuristic most people have right now, in terms of how often it gets things right versus *completely* wrong, is "whatever CNN, the NYT, public health officials, and the Democrats said... yeah, the opposite." That is, they're wrong WAY outside of statistics.
They're also not just wrong. They're *completely* wrong, backwards, often transparently covering something up that they don't want known or refuse to believe. This isn't just a legitimation crisis because there's a heuristic: whatever the official left narrative is, is wrong.
There are a few reasons why such a heuristic would be more predictive than not. One of those is conspiracy, and another is mass hysteria with ideological capture. We know at least one of those is happening and have rather strong evidence both are. That makes conspiracy reasonable
I read part of the transcript of the Trump call.
— Eric Weinstein (@EricRWeinstein) January 4, 2021
The following strikes me.
A) Trump is a true political outsider & the only one to reach the Presidency with zero government experience.
B) There is an obvious open institutional conspiracy to prevent any outsider gaining power.
If you look at the situation from a predictive models perspective instead of the more rigorous and appropriate (under normal circumstances) "prove your case or gtfo" perspective, trusting the opposite of whatever the left side says has an AMAZING track record, as we know it.
Literally, the best heuristic most people have right now, in terms of how often it gets things right versus *completely* wrong, is "whatever CNN, the NYT, public health officials, and the Democrats said... yeah, the opposite." That is, they're wrong WAY outside of statistics.
They're also not just wrong. They're *completely* wrong, backwards, often transparently covering something up that they don't want known or refuse to believe. This isn't just a legitimation crisis because there's a heuristic: whatever the official left narrative is, is wrong.
There are a few reasons why such a heuristic would be more predictive than not. One of those is conspiracy, and another is mass hysteria with ideological capture. We know at least one of those is happening and have rather strong evidence both are. That makes conspiracy reasonable
1/ In a Trump Tower press conference, held nine days before he took office, Donald Trump described his plan to separate his business from his presidency. Over the last few years, the key pillars of that plan have crumbled. Let’s go through them one-by-one.
2/ Promise 1 of Trump’s ethics plan: “No new foreign deals will be made whatsoever during the duration of President Trump’s presidency,” his attorney said. Trump did at least one new foreign deal anyway.
(See the promise at 31:57 of the video
3/ We know that the president did new a new foreign deal in office because he himself admitted it—on a financial disclosure report filed with federal ethics officials. You can see here that he sold $3.2M of land in the Dominican Republic on Jan. 29, 2018. https://t.co/U7r3VCiJPM
4/ Promise 2 of Trump’s ethics plan: He said he wasn’t going to talk about the business with his sons, Eric and Don Jr., who he put in charge of day-to-day operations. Doesn’t look like he kept that promise either.
(See promise 25:00 into the
5/ Contradicting his father, Eric Trump later told me that he did in fact plan to update his dad on the business. “Yeah, on the bottom line, profitability reports and stuff like that. But you know, that’s about it.”
2/ Promise 1 of Trump’s ethics plan: “No new foreign deals will be made whatsoever during the duration of President Trump’s presidency,” his attorney said. Trump did at least one new foreign deal anyway.
(See the promise at 31:57 of the video
3/ We know that the president did new a new foreign deal in office because he himself admitted it—on a financial disclosure report filed with federal ethics officials. You can see here that he sold $3.2M of land in the Dominican Republic on Jan. 29, 2018. https://t.co/U7r3VCiJPM
4/ Promise 2 of Trump’s ethics plan: He said he wasn’t going to talk about the business with his sons, Eric and Don Jr., who he put in charge of day-to-day operations. Doesn’t look like he kept that promise either.
(See promise 25:00 into the
5/ Contradicting his father, Eric Trump later told me that he did in fact plan to update his dad on the business. “Yeah, on the bottom line, profitability reports and stuff like that. But you know, that’s about it.”
You May Also Like
1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
1/\u201cWhat would need to be true for you to\u2026.X\u201d
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) December 4, 2018
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody: https://t.co/Yo6jHbSit9
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?