Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Sagebrush posted:

it's dumb that people act like electric cars are somehow a bigger fire hazard than regular cars, which carry around a tank of gasoline under the rear seats and run it with little metal pipes all over the vehicle

anything that has a self-contained source of energy can probably be induced to release that energy in a rapid, uncontrolled manner and if it's the sort of levels required to drive a car around it's gonna be a mess

yeah but gasoline doesn't become violently combustible unless it's aerosolized unlike what the movies would have you believe, the plastics and vinyl in the car would burn more vigorously if they caught fire somehow

whereas the batteries can and do explode and burn violently when damaged

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
all this discussion of tap water is heartening since hopefully it means yosposters are starting to drink water instead of fizzy drinks all day long to satisfy their babypalates, so good on ya yospos

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

haveblue posted:

I like my women like I like my coffee

cream with two sugars

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
i think it bears stating that millennials are woefully undereducated compared to previous generations, and it's only getting worse

a portion of it can be chalked up to public school budgets being slashed by gen x childfrees/conservatives who don't understand why they should fund other people's kids, but it's mainly a pervasive attitude of incuriousness fueled by not needing to know things because of the internet

basically the death of expertise is directly leading to the death of education and it's truly scary to see

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
yep, and getting wronger all the time

no reason to learn anything if you can just pull up a patently false web page on your phone any time you need to

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

you are thinking of the generation after millenials, namaste

nope, i'm definitely thinking of millennials, their kids are an entirely different kettle of fish

millennials are the product of the ravaging of public education and the rise of the internet eradicating both modern education and journalism which makes them the perfect implement for gen x to wreck the government and society

baby boomers handed gen x a economy rich with wealth and opportunity and they're busy hoarding it while shunting the blame onto boomers for the failures gen x engineered

to be fair, gen x is and remains the real problem, but millennials are still dangerously uneducated which doesn't bode will for the generations following

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

The next generation isn't the kids of millennials except the very oldest. They're millennials younger cousins or siblings. Their parents are mostly gen x

oh cool thanks for this distinction without a difference, really clears things up

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
most everyone in yospos is gen x or millennial and get super defensive if you don't toe the line about "boomers wrecking everything"

that talking point falls apart pretty quickly when you figure out that the most backwards conservatives in congress, at both the state and federal level, are solidly gen x with a whole crop of millennials waiting in the wings to out-wingnut them

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

lol what are you even talking about

if youtube removed garbage bullshit only morons would want to watch they'd have about 99% of the site banned

fishmech you should edit this post it's straying dangerously close to criticizing google

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

H.P. Hovercraft posted:

that reminds me paranoia got a new edition

trust Friend Computer

i bought it a while back and haven't read through it yet

i'm doing a poor job of brand maintenance

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
acknowledging them as anything other than cat tits is treason, Citizen

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
mods please rename everyone in yospos "jimbo" or some variation thereof tia

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

H.P. Hovercraft posted:

i hope this made the news hard enough for his long-suffering gf to finally dump him

why?

google is going to quietly give him his job back and he'll be on wingnut welfare the rest of his life, they're set

lol if you think she's still with him for any reason other than financial ones

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
they'll rehire him because they only fired him for pr reasons not because they think he did anything wrong, if anything they'll rehire him as a consultant on how to better conceal their white supremacy

it's also pretty tremendously sexist to suggest his girlfriend is staying with him because she's somehow fooled or otherwise coerced by him, give her some credit, she's probably smart enough to know a gravy train when she sees one

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Sapozhnik posted:

hahaha yeah women are whores amirite :xd:

i dunno, maybe i just don't see anything wrong with her profiting from his wingnut windfall and then punching out when she's had enough

i guess she's just a poor innocent naif who needs the wisdom of us nice guysprogressives for her to see the light, fool that she is

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
one thing's for sure, she needs a man to sit her down and tell her the folly of her ways since she very clearly doesn't understand and can't be trusted to make her own decisions

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
well we know one thing: it couldn't possibly be for money, because women who care about money are like unto prostitutes

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
well, again we can't assume that she might have the savvy to want to wring him for all the alt-right cash coming his way before dumping him because that would make her basically a sex worker

i suppose her actual reasons are inscrutable but we can definitively say that they are wrong and we are right and she should know better (note: i am not arguing this, the previous was ironic)

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
still, let us not lose sight of the real victim here: google

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

infernal machines posted:

guys, guys! hold up with the equality, rockstar 10x chuds are starting to feel marginalized in the workplace!

https://twitter.com/JamesADamore/status/967065451338649600

already developing his chops as a consultant for google when all their 10x white supremacist programmers get agitated

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

what gave the election to trump was long term campaigns of voter disenfranchisement in many swing states, which gave all their electoral college votes to trump despite very thin and shaky margins as the electoral college is a tire fire.

yep all those disenfranchised voters choosing not to vote for a candidate who didn't bother to set foot in their state because her campaign was so poorly run

political dynasties suck, fishmech and the clinton dynasty especially

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

sure is weird how the supposed worst candidate ever was able to easily beat the supposed people's hero, maple grandpa, who had a platform 99.9% identical to hers.

i don't think you're giving the dnc enough credit for how hard they worked to collude and then fail to conceal their collusion

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
it's kind of sad to see fishmech just being another hilary deadender rather than having a novel take on the situation

oh well, you'll get another bite at the apple in 2020 and then at least trump will be term limited

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
personally i'd love to have seen hilary win just to see the tortured mental gymnastics required by liberals to justify going to war in syria and north korea simultaneously

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
see? it's already started and hildawg lost the election and is gearing up to lose another

just meddlin' in any ol' country because we must project us power at all times in all places

my only greater wish would have been to see gore supporters justifying invading afghanistan and iraq

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
who said i supported bernie?

i just acknowledge that hilary is a bloodthirsty tool of capitalism and colluded with the dnc to secure the nomination and so it was always hilary who was going to lose to trump, bernie doesn't enter the equation

i know it's a favorite tactic of hilary deadenders to focus on bernie but he always was a distraction

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
see? when hilary's honor is impugned even in the slightest the hilary deadender desperately tries to shift the conversation

literally the only person who brought up someone other than hilary was fishmech because the evidence of her collusion and her campaign's incompetence are plain to see

the outcome would have been the same if the nation caught chaffee fever or something

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
once again fishmech is right for the wrong reasons, the primary was decided for hilary before there was another candidate (doesn't matter who) that gained some momentum and their preexisting agreements ensured her nomination

bernie didn't lose to trump, hilary lost to trump and will lose to trump again in 2020, don't lose sight of that fact

though to be fair, hilary would have lost to whoever the republican nominee turned out to be, it just happened to be the raw unfettered id of the right wing, rather than hilary's more nuanced ego

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

so you admit hillary is good, got it.

yep, she's the best at losing elections, nobody does it better

also fantastic at refusing to quit in the face of overwhelming evidence

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

so good at losing elections, yet somehow all her senate opponents lost to her, and bernie lost to her, and trump lost to her outside of the known undemocratic electoral college. hmmmm

obama even just barely beat her.

yeah i imagine that her getting losing to obama by the superdelegates was what led to her deal with the dnc for 2016 so that wouldn't happen again

still batting .000 when it comes to presidential elections, though and on track to extend that record in 2020

ate all the Oreos posted:

my favorite part of this whole 3 year long election that is still happening and will never end has been watching fishmech whip back and forth between complaining that people aren't left enough and defending hillary clinton, the most left person

it's the fate of the modern liberal to pay lip service to progressive policy but to be ardently in favor of candidates that would be considered staunchly conservative by any objective measure

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
i want to verify something here real quick: fishmech, what do you think is the most likely outcome of the mueller investigation?

not what you want the outcome to be, what you think the most likely outcome will be?

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

This didn't happen. She was just enough out that all the super delegates wouldn't be enough


Hundreds of arrests and convictions.

yeah, she wanted to suppress votes too to ensure the superdelegates weren't an issue for anyone but her so thanks for confirming

as for arrests, specifically who? like not necessarily everybody, but who do you think will be the most likely highest-profile arrests? manafort? flynn? gates? kushner? trump?

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

bump_fn posted:



there are literal huge academic fields about how to best teach children but sure let some silcion valley fucktards do whatever

just remember whenever someone says "disruption" what is meant is "elimination"

as in, they want to "disrupt" public education

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
can't wait for gen x and millennials to make us pine for the days of "conservative" boomer politics

even the most conservative boomers weren't literal nazis

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
nope, the kkk dwindled as their largely "greatest generation"/silent generation base died off

they were virtually gone during the height of boomer politics in the 80s and 90s but lo and behold are on the upswing with gen x coming into power and rising as millennials join their ranks

basically any time you are inclined to blame boomers for something, you are actually thinking of gen x because gen x is roughly in the same age bracket as you think boomers are

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
like, literally every ultra-conservative politician that came out of the tea party movement are gen x

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

fishmech posted:

in the 80s the boomers were still largely in the pre-voting ages under 35. hope this helps.

only the absolutely youngest that still qualify as baby boomers, the vast majority were 40+ through that period which means they had the largest share of the vote

they were in power throughout some of the most prosperous economic times since the end of wwii and saw that prosperity dwindle and shatter when gen x came into power and oversaw the financial crisis of the mid 00s and are directly responsible for the rise of ultra-conservative politics we see today

the reason this isn't obvious to yosposters is that they are, by and large, gen x or millennials and are in denial

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

ate all the Oreos posted:

so gen-x is responsible for the late-60's early-70's college students who were actively trying to murder black kids when my mom was in school, ok sure

no, that was mostly those in the "greatest generation" or the following silent generation, who were largely monstrous shits (and are frequently mistaken for boomers)

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
no, they were of college age at the time or skewing slightly later since a lot of those generations didn't go to college until later in life on the gi bill after korea/vietnam

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Stymie
Jan 9, 2001

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

President Beep posted:

idk. didn’t college enrollment take off because of that sweet, sweet draft deferment?

yes and many of those who joined college late in the war to protest involvement were boomers and therefore would not have been participating in racial attacks

basically any time you think of old-timey racists you're thinking of the "greatest generation" or the silent generation

any time you think of modern day racists/ultra-conservatives you're thinking of gen x

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply