Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

The first debate this time.

[TheBiggerFish]

Like, if Sherlock Holmes was doing Sherlock-Holmesian stuff on reddit, every post he made would get downvoted into oblivion.

To be fair, Arthur Conan Doyle doing Sherlock stuff is what got him to back up the Cottingley Fairies or the Spiritualist movement, including seances, mediums, psychics, and spirit photography, on the grounds that "whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."  Soo...

I don't think Doyle applied Holmes' methods to real life, guys.

[mainiac]

IIRC Doyle was keenly interested in real life cutting edge criminology though.

[MarcAFK]

Doyle studied underneath the guy he based Holmes on, but Doyle's personality was dr Watson.

[Culise]

Doyle studied underneath the guy he based Holmes on, but Doyle's personality was dr Watson.

The same person he studied under (Joseph Bell) also said that Doyle was basically Holmes as well, too, so there is some subjective perception involved in it, and it's not like abductive reasoning (what Doyle called deductive reasoning in the Holmes novels) is not a thing outside of fiction; it's just that it worked a bit better in fiction for Holmes than it did in reality for Doyle.  I suddenly regret bringing up Doyle's odder philosophical leanings at all, though; I thought it'd just be a fun little aside for Shadowlord, not a derail in motion.

[Neonivek]

The biggest issue with Hilary Clinton is that she is basically just doing it because of her husband...

Because we live in the early 1900s

OHH WAIT!

I know there are legitimate reasons not to like Hilary Clinton, but I wish 50% of them didn't just amount to sexism... ESPECIALLY against Donald Trump.

[Loud Whispers]

Silly Neonivek, we live in the current year

[PTTG??]

To be fair, if Hillary was Howard Clinton, and was still married to Bill, then I still wouldn't want to elect the spouse of a former president to the same position. Still better than Trump, of course.

[Teneb]

To be fair, if Hillary was Howard Clinton, and was still married to Bill, then I still wouldn't want to elect the spouse of a former president to the same position. Still better than Trump, of course.

Oh, the homophobia jokes waiting to be made with this.

[mainiac]

To be fair, if Hillary was Howard Clinton, and was still married to Bill, then I still wouldn't want to elect the spouse of a former president to the same position. Still better than Trump, of course.

Really?  So if Bernie Sanders married Jimmy Carter, you would immediately consider that a black mark against Bernie?  And let's be honest, Bernie Sanders would LOVE to get in Jimmy Carter's pants.

[TheBiggerFish]

I don't...Huh?

[sirvente]

I could have sworn that progressives were against political dynasties. More fool me.

[mainiac]

Gee and I thought people in modern societies saw wives as independent actors from their husbands, not inheritors like a child to a parent.  More fool me.

But more seriously.  When has name ever been a disqualification in progressive politics?  John Q. Adams?  Franklin Delano Roosevelt?  John F. Kennedy?

[Loud Whispers]

I could have sworn that progressives were against political dynasties. More fool me.

Current year m8

Wait until it's current year +30 when Obama's progeny will become Presidents

[sirvente]

Well at least it'll mix things up to have a third family in the mix. Just having it go alternating rounds of Bushes and Clintons would get boring pretty fast