I don’t often stick my head in the sand, but I’ve been mostly sticking my head in the sand with regards to Biden. I don’t really have a choice. I hate the guy, but I have to vote for him. If he gets credibly accused of sexually harassing 20+ women, comes out in favor of expanding family detention or letting old/sick people die for the Dow, let me know. Otherwise, the choice is clear.
1 Like
If that’s on Biden’s website in November I won’t vote for him. I’m in NY so doesn’t matter, but I refuse to knowingly pull the lever for someone who puts something so absurdly racist as a key issue on their website.
3 Likes
That is pretty awful language. Hopefully that gets revised quickly.
About significant things? Uh, ya, by a lot.
But everyone that ever got dealt aces had aces and you can’t change that just because they happen to be a maniac.
This is not the relevant probability. The relevant one is closer to
P(A | B&C)
where A is making a false rape allegation, B is being a fabulist, and C is having made a rape allegation at all.
If you want to take the abstract view, the relevant question is “what percentage of rape allegations made by fabulists are true?” and the poker analogy is “what percentage of 3bets made by a LAG/maniac are legit premiums?”
ETA: I should stress that the analogy is imperfect, because we know the answer to the poker question for a fact will be less than 50%. But idk that there’s enough info on rape allegations made by fabulists (against their former bosses who are now running for President of the United States) to even get a ballpark percentage.
Man. That’s absolutely awful.
1 Like
I don’t really follow this because I don’t know what A and B are supposed to represent in your second sentence.
Just to illustrate this with some real numbers, let’s say for the sake of argument that any given woman has a probability P of reporting a genuine rape. Let’s say that non-fabulist women never make up false accusations, but that fabulists (let’s say 1 in 20 women) are equally as likely (probability P) to make up a false story. I don’t care if these numbers are remotely accurate or not, I’m making a point. The rate of false stories there is 1 in 21. However, given the information that the woman telling the story is a fabulist, the rate of false stories rises to 1 in 2.
Note that unless Biden is a Weinstein level rapist, which seems unlikely given we only have one accuser, the probability that any given woman will have a genuine rape story to tell about him is very low. So the probability of any given fabulist making up a story about him doesn’t have to be very high at all to become significant. Another way of saying this is that the pool of fabulists who might make up a false story is always much larger than any realistic estimate of the number of people who might have genuine stories to report.
I can’t believe I’m having to delve into probability to defend the proposition that a person’s past behaviour is relevant when considering how they might behave in the present day.
Is it possible to draw conclusions from unrevised language, iyo? Because I don’t think changing the language will tell us anything new about a Biden presidency’s attitude to Israel/Palestine. Another item for the ‘Nothing Much To Choose’ pile.
Wow at anyone the least bit surprised by this. This all absolutely went without saying.
2 Likes
Well, that’s what happens when you victim blame
Let’s see the math on a serial grabass’s likelihood to have committed assault.
1 Like
Just teach her to stay the fuck out of America.
1 Like
South Africa
Botswana
Sweden
All have considerably worse rape rates than the US. A handful of Central American and European countries worse. Aussieland, too.
What did I miss that Tara Reade is considered a fabulist?
Why do you feel the need to lie about what other posters said?
plus the rent too damn high
I never knew there were these things walking about that look like women, but are in fact fabulists. Interesting, are they from the planet Fabula? Should be more written about them, imo.