The Donald vs Big Tech

[Caomhaoin]

They have to say black woman so they can break that 'glass ceiling'.

Apparently defence lawyers in California would high five each other if Kamala was the opposing prosecutor. Ha ha.

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

Is there more or less evidence for that claim than the claim that Trump wears adult nappies because he regularly shits himself? 

Meanwhile, verbatim transcript from North Carolina yesterday:

When I say insane asylums, and then I say, Doctor Hannibal Lecter, does anybody know? They go crazy. They say, oh, he brings up these names out of— Well, that's genius. Right. Doctor Hannibal Lecter. There's nobody worse than him. Silence of the Lambs. Who the hell else would even remember that? I have a great memory, but they always hit me. I don't bring it up too much because they have to take such a— he brought up Hannibal Lecter. What does that have to do with this? What is it? It has everything to do with it, right? He was... So I've done something for you for you that I haven't done in 20 speeches. I brought up Doctor Hannibal Lecter and we're allowing him, you watch, you watch these fake people will say again, he brought up Hannibal Lecter has absolutely nothing to do. You know I do the weave, right? The weave. It's genius. You bring up Hannibal Lecter, you mention insane asylum. Hannibal Lecter. You go out, no. There'll be a time in life where the weave won't finish properly at the bottom and then we can talk. But right now it's pure genius. Hey, I have an uncle, my uncle, Uncle John, my father's brother, 41 years at MIT, longest serving professor has so many degrees, he didn't know what the hell to do with them all in the most complicated. I understand a lot of this stuff, you know, I believe in that. Like, I mean, Jack Nicklaus is not gonna produce a bad golfer. Right. You know, that's the way it works. It's just one of those things and it's in the family and it's whatever.

That slogan again, real simple: DNC bad, MAGA worse. Harris bad, Trump worse. Unless you're being cynical or have torpedoed your brain, I don't see where there is any objective disagreement to be had.

[Caomhaoin]

Your attitude is symptomatic of the modern left - anyone who disagrees with me is x, y or z.

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

In other words, you don't see where there is any objective disagreement to be had either?

[Caomhaoin]

That Harris is worse than Trump? Or vice versa? There is no objective.

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

Ye were making a big deal about Harris' poor answers in her recent CNN interview. Grand. Now show me where she has objectively expressed herself worse, less coherently, than the above passage from Trump (which is only one example among many)? Passing off Trump's cognitively worrying nonsense as "just him bullshitting" won't cut it, because that's giving him a get out of jail free card where you don't give her similar. I'm not giving Harris any get out of jail free cards. Fair enough I'm not going in for nonsense like questioning the ethnicity of her Jamaican father, but that shite is only revelatory of your propaganda sensitivities not mine (and is also typical of the kind of thing that distinguishes between MAGA and the GOP of yore, like when McCain rebuked Trump for questioning Obama's birth certificate back in the day, etc.).

[astfgyl]

Him being shit doesn't do anything to make her any better.

She's a joke of a candidate.
He's a joke of a candidate.

His jokes are funnier than hers.
She doesn't have any jokes. 

That's about the strength of it, if the objective is calling them out for talking shite.

You haven't a leg to stand on by saying she is objectively better in any way other than I suppose I'd give her the jump quicker than I would him, but even that's closer ran than it should be

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

I think he's objectively worse in much the same way that someone who shits themself is objectively worse to have to deal with than someone who pisses themself 

Throw up a verbatim transcript of the most incoherent thing she's ever come out with there and we can ask a text analyzer to compare.

[astfgyl]

I think he's objectively worse in much the same way that someone who shits themself is objectively worse to have to deal with than someone who pisses themself 

Throw up a verbatim transcript of the most incoherent thing she's ever come out with there and we can ask a text analyzer to compare.

Ah lad, you're on a hiding to nothing with this one. There are so many to choose from.

Here, have this for starters while I go get more:

I love Venn diagrams. I really do, I love Venn diagrams. It's just something about those three circles and the analysis about where there is the intersection, right?

[astfgyl]

The governor and I, we were all doing a tour of the library here and talking about the significance of the passage of time, right, the significance of the passage of time. So, when you think about it, there is great significance to the passage of time in terms of what we need to do to lay these wires. What we need to do to create these jobs. And there is such great significance to the passage of time when we think about a day in the life of our children

There's an endless amount of it. Let me know if you want any more but seriously you've picked the most incoherent candidate since Biden to throw your weight behind. 

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

Okay, if there's an endless amount of it then it needs to be a passage of speech comparable to the one from Trump above, i.e. similar in length and also a single block, not various fragments pieced together.

I'll give you the analysis of Trump's passage from yesterday as a spoiler:

Question: Can you evaluate the coherency of the following passage of text?

Answer: This passage is quite disjointed and lacks clear coherence. Here are some points to consider:

Topic Shifts: The speaker jumps between topics without clear transitions. They start with insane asylums and Hannibal Lecter, then shift to personal anecdotes about their uncle and Jack Nicklaus without connecting these ideas.

Repetition: There are several instances of repetition, such as "I brought up Doctor Hannibal Lecter" and "you watch, you watch these fake people."

Incomplete Thoughts: Some sentences trail off or are incomplete, making it hard to follow the speaker's train of thought.

Lack of Clear Argument: The passage doesn't present a clear argument or point. It feels more like a stream of consciousness than a structured speech or essay.

Overall, the passage would benefit from clearer transitions, more focused content, and a stronger structure to improve coherence.


Question: If you had to rate its coherency out of 10, what would you give it?

Answer: I'd give it a 3 out of 10. The passage is quite disjointed, with abrupt topic shifts and incomplete thoughts, making it hard to follow. It lacks a clear argument or structure, which significantly impacts its coherence.

Question: If we assume a person who spoke this passage was aiming to be coherent, might its lack of actual coherence give us any clues about their cognitive state?

Answer: Absolutely. If someone intended to be coherent but produced a passage like this, it could suggest several things about their cognitive state:

Stress or Anxiety: High stress levels can cause disjointed thinking and difficulty maintaining a coherent train of thought.

Fatigue: Being overly tired can impair cognitive function, leading to rambling or incoherent speech.

Neurological Issues: Conditions like dementia, ADHD, or even a mild cognitive impairment can affect one's ability to organize thoughts coherently.

Substance Influence: The influence of alcohol or drugs can also lead to disorganized speech patterns.

Of course, these are just possibilities and not definitive conclusions.

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

One I found as an example of something derided in the MAGA media (New York Post, etc.) as a "word salad" is this passage from September this year (https://nypost.com/2024/09/14/us-news/kamala-harris-served-word-salad-in-abc-interview-critics/), but feel free to provide your own (analysis below):

Well, I'll start with this. I grew up a middle-class kid. My mother raised my sister and me. She worked very hard. She was able to finally save up enough money to buy our first house when I was a teenager. I grew up in a community of hardworking people, you know, construction workers and nurses and teachers, and I try to explain to some people who may not have had the same experience, you know, if -- but a lot of people will relate to this. You know, I grew up in a neighborhood of folks who were very proud of their lawn, you know, and -- and I was raised to believe and to know that all people deserve dignity and that we, as Americans, have a beautiful character. You know, we have ambitions and aspirations and dreams, but not everyone necessarily has access to the resources that can help them fuel those dreams and ambitions. So, when I talk about building an opportunity economy, it is very much with the mind of investing in the ambitions and aspirations and the -- and the incredible work ethic of the American people and creating opportunity for people, for example, to start a small business. My mother, you know, worked long hours, and our neighbor helped raise us. We used to call her -- I still call her our second mother. She was a small business owner. I love our small business owners. I learned who they are from my childhood. And she was a community leader. She hired locally. She mentored. Our small businesses are so much a part of the fabric of our communities, not to mention, really, I think the backbone of America's economy. So, my opportunity economy plan includes giving startups a $50,000 tax deduction to start their small business. It used to be $5,000. Nobody can start a small business with $5,000. But investing in people's innovative ideas and giving them the ability to go for it. Opportunity economy means, look, we don't have enough housing in America. We have a housing supply shortage. And what that means, in particular, for so many younger Americans, the American dream is elusive. It's just actually not attainable. So, part of my plan is to work with the private sector and housing developers to give them a tax credit to be able to partner with us as the government to build, and my goal is 3 million new homes by the end of my first term. In addition, to help people who just want to get their foot in the door literally. And so, giving first-time homebuyers a $25,000 down payment assistance to be able to just get in the door, and then they will do the work that they need to do to save and to pay that mortgage and to build wealth for themselves and their family. These are some examples of what I mean when I talk about an opportunity economy, and a lot of it has to do with just the community I was raised in and the people that I -- you know, I admired who work hard, you know, and deserve to have, you know, their dreams fulfilled because they're prepared to work for it.

Analysis:

Question: Can you evaluate the coherency of the following passage of text?

Answer:
Topic Shifts: The speaker maintains a consistent theme throughout the passage, focusing on their personal background, the concept of an opportunity economy, and specific policy proposals. The transitions between personal anecdotes and policy points are smooth and logical.

Repetition: There is some repetition, particularly with phrases like "you know" and "opportunity economy." However, this repetition serves to emphasize key points and maintain a conversational tone, rather than detracting from coherence.

Clear Argument: The passage presents a clear argument. The speaker connects their personal experiences with broader policy proposals, explaining how their background informs their views on economic opportunity and small business support. The argument is well-structured and easy to follow.

Question: If you had to rate its coherency out of 10, what would you give it?

Answer: I'd rate this passage a 7 out of 10 for coherency. It effectively communicates the speaker's message, though it could benefit from slightly less repetition and more varied phrasing.

Question: If we assume a person who spoke this passage was aiming to be coherent, might its lack of actual coherence give us any clues about their cognitive state?

Answer: If the speaker intended to be coherent, the passage suggests a well-organized and focused cognitive state. The clear structure and logical flow indicate that the speaker is articulate and capable of connecting personal experiences with broader policy ideas. The repetition of certain phrases might indicate a conversational style rather than cognitive impairment.

[astfgyl]

Sweet fucking Jesus you just picked an entirely different quote to either of the two I've posted and ran with that instead of just accepting the fact she is a constant shit talker.

Why don't I go find examples of the other lad being coherent and run those through the analysis like? That's ridiculous.

What did you make of the CNN piece where Harris is running different ads with different stances on Israel and Palestine depending on how many Muslims live in one state or the other? So not only is she talking absolute ring constantly, but it's two faced ring at the same time. CNN, no less!!

And you can find all the examples in the world of the other lad being a two faced cunt it still won't make her good

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

I did first try to find fuller passages that include either of the two examples you gave, but came up with nothing. And I invited you to find and share a similar length passage of speech from her of your choosing. While I was waiting, I went with the first long passage I could find which had been described as a "word salad" by Trump's supporters.

[Ollkiller]

Why don't I go find examples of the other lad being coherent and run those through the analysis like?

Good luck finding his coherent examples.