Jeremy Stangroom

Bad take. While a lot of people are parroting the trope that liberals want the talks to go badly wrong, there’s no evidence of a single person who thinks that way. Think about what it would mean that the talks “go badly wrong”. We get incinerated.

How does any of that make it a bad take? I'd say it makes it an extremely good take!

At best, it’s a test with zero power. But also, mentioning it propagates a bullshit meme.

Well, I've not seen the meme, and anyway don't care it propagates it. And secondly, it's not a test with zero power. It's absolutely explicitly (see the way the second choice is phrased) a test with only very small amount of power. Third, you're taking it way too seriously!

First, I used the word “meme” in its original (Dawkins) meaning, so “I’ve not seen the meme” doesn’t make sense in response to it. The meme here is the idea that liberals want Trump to fail in everything, including diplomacy and peace talks. 1/

Second, it literally is a test with zero power if we agree on what I said previously (to which you at least agreed arguendo, as you responded “how does that make it...”). It has zero probability of rejecting H0 (non-tribal) if H1 (tribal) is true. 2/

My test doesn't have zero power if people are honest with themselves. It's a classic test - low power, high certainty. And you're still taking this way, way, way too seriously! :)

That’s still assuming that there are such people, for which you have no evidence (unless you are one). And given the high concentration of anti-Trump people in cities that are likely nuclear targets, appealing to common human flaws still wouldn’t make their existence likely.