[FRIAM] is it possible that ...

[Marcus Daniels]

I don’t think of Bloomberg as being disguised, though.   He’s a Romney-like option.   At this point, I’m less concerned about enabling Thiel-type people than I am about enabling frothing morons.   At least Nixon cared enough about true and false to adapt his lies around facts, rather than to deny the possibility of facts.   One EvilDoer™ can be contained.   50 million of them is a bigger problem.

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of George Duncan <gtduncan at gmail.com>
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Date: Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 8:42 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] is it possible that ...

I'll rank this way:

1. Bloomberg
2. Buttigieg
3. Klobuchar

George Duncan
Emeritus Professor of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University
georgeduncanart.com<http://georgeduncanart.com/>
See posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
Land: (505) 983-6895
Mobile: (505) 469-4671

My art theme: Dynamic exposition of the tension between matrix order and luminous chaos.

"Attempt what is not certain. Certainty may or may not come later. It may then be a valuable delusion."
From "Notes to myself on beginning a painting" by Richard Diebenkorn.

"It's that knife-edge of uncertainty where we come alive to our truest power." Joanna Macy.


On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 9:36 AM uǝlƃ ☣ <gepropella at gmail.com<mailto:gepropella at gmail.com>> wrote:
Heh, good game, ranking as enablers. From most enabling to least, I'd go with:

1) Buttigieg
2) Klobuchar
3) Warren
4) Sanders

(3) and (4) are really a toss-up. Sanders seems light on specifics and long on rants. And the devil is always in the detail. So Warren might be less enabling than Sanders by using corral fences with fewer unfilled holes. But she seems very Trumpian in her confidence that any of her plans would survive contact with the battlefield. Sanders may well end up with better plans if he turns out to be more adaptive, relaxing *into* the landscape rather than trying to out-think it. In the end, I think it'll be easier for deeper thinking Evildoers(TM) like Thiel to game Warren than Sanders, which is why I'd rank her as more enabling than Sanders. Buttigieg's Moderate Rhetoric looks to me like a red meat buffet, waiting to be gobbled up by the Evildoers ... like so many octogenarian Casino-goers. If he's the nominee, here's hoping that deep down he's a 3D foam of camouflaged steel traps waiting to lop off the fractal tendrils of our squidlike Leviathans.

On 2/13/20 8:13 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> I do wonder about Warren, Klobuchar, Sanders, and Buttigieg and their rhetoric trying to pin blame on the divider-in-chief rather than on those that voted for him.  It seems like crypto-partisanism to me.   They have to be different things to different people, that’s politics.   I would love to have an option, at least in ranked choice voting, who had the basic agenda to finish the culture war by any means necessary and to severely punish bad-faith actors as you describe.


--
☣ uǝlƃ

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200213/d33c47bb/attachment.html>