Zack

Not exactly anonymous, but not quite nonymous either. Retweets will likely be part of future class slides.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@Peachorino @ReubenR80027912 If Texas is R+14, Abbott and Paxton are both winning, even in a D+7 year. Talarico's chances are premised on a narrower baseline rather than a 15% overperformance. If R+14 is right & Abbott wins by almost 10, Talarico is cooked.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@austinjpark Logic fail. If >100k → Not college town =/= If not >100k → College town.

It seems perfectly reasonable to say neither Madison nor Palto Alto is a college town. Madison (IMO) is more like Raleigh, Fayetteville (AR), or Boulder than Morgantown or Tuscaloosa.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@RWPUSA @Forbes It seems like one clear way they put their finger on the scale was to limit the professor responses to no more than 3 minutes of writing.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@SellersCounsel @TheRedNed11482 This is basically endorsing the OP's position: dinner is the only thing they have time for. Sure, you're using that time for a family dinner instead of something fancy, but it's still at the sacrifice of the other 21 hours of your day.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@derektmuller The USNWR part seems to rely overmuch on USC's fall to #26 (so CA has only 3 in the T25), and the top 50 number seems wrong: UCD is still in the T50 at #50.

Consistency seems like the bigger takeaway (outside of TAMU, Santa Clara, and the ones that closed).

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@atlanticesque @BatesLine @Empty_America Even if it's not the state flagship, opportunities will be there for the genius's talent to emerge, be identified, and employed.

The idea that bright students are identified and directed to "a" useful purpose doesn't mean there's an equal pipeline to elite undergrad enrollment.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@atlanticesque @BatesLine @Empty_America I think this falls into the category of a response that "seem[s] to feel there should be a level of 'something' other than what actually happens." In your example, the 1500 student is pushed to the state school (likely with financial assistance).

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@dilanesper This is right. You can use a compelling pathos frame to put the judge in the passenger sit, looking for a way to reach the destination you want to go to. Or you can overwhelm with logos to strap the judge to the roof and drag him where he doesn't want to go.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@Unlearned_Hand @ClarenceMaximus "We argue" is much worse than "I think," but for both, its more about teaching clean rules to neophytes. Research says "um" and "uh" can create authenticity and rapport, but still, the stammering 1L who can't get through a sentence without half a dozen is just told "don't do it."

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@EarthOne_13 @jmhorp It's AI

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar No way are the PETA+ groups that would ban meat larger or more well-resourced than the religious right, but I'll concede the point on levers of power. Also, I don't think you can throw Europe and America in the same "Western" bag here. Again, look at GMOs, nuclear, mad cow, etc.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar Ultimately, this is core of the disagreement. I think you overestimate the power of meat banners. As long as there's consumer demand, I doubt they'll have more luck than the even larger, fanatical, paleo-religious banners of alcohol, MJ, and gambling.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar Admittedly, I appreciate the lack of second hand smoke in restaurants and airplanes, but there's substantially more evidence of harm w/cigarettes. Banning lab meat seems more like banning GMOs or nuclear based on the precautionary principle.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar It's all theoretical, but I think the medium term pain is the most likely. CA will have access to a product that is banned in AL, consumer choice is limited. Potential long term gains if "the gov't did it to you for your own good" turns out to be right for once.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar My bad for assuming your intent by "bad argument." I still don't see the inconsistency. Punching myself in the face is bad, but a month from now, my black eye will be a memory. It's bad now, but ultimately won't make a difference. Doesn't mean I should punch myself in the face.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar It's banning something that doesn't exist. It has zero impact now. It potentially causes pain in the shortER term because it limits consumer choice initially without actually preventing development. If development is successful, popularity could eventually overcome the ban.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar I still think it's a threshold question w/limited marginal gain for increased market size. If lab meat is viable, red state bans are unlikely to be sufficient to strangle development in the crib. At best, it slightly delays development. So short term pain with no long term gain

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar I buy this as a potential counter-argument. Red state lab bans might help preserve real-meat market in face of (theoretical) blue state bans. Doesn't mean the original argument is illogical.

[Zack @Z_Smoke7]

@cruelsardaukar Only if you posit that substantial consumer demand or research supply is located in red states. Seems likely that we have a bifurcated economy where demand from CA et al is functionally sufficient to drive demand w/o adding AL/MS market demand.