Yes, I’m more intrigued now than ever. I can’t shake the feeling that it will not eclipse the first one and will, in all likelihood, be a disappointment. It has polarizing written all over it.
Yes, I’m more intrigued now than ever. I can’t shake the feeling that it will not eclipse the first one and will, in all likelihood, be a disappointment. It has polarizing written all over it.
“some modifications.”
jesus fucking christ. dig his grave and dump these hot takes in it.
say it with me, everyone! “vaporware! vaporware! vaporware!”
i just threw up a little bit in my mouth.
ugh, the poors. the indignity of it all.
THAT HORRIBLE STRIPE. makes it look like a striped bass.
short story long - and this theory isn’t novel [see Mark Noll’s work], but the empirics are new - you can’t understand development of coherence between political identities without simultaneously looking at religious-racial sorting.
build it. build it. please, build it.
just finished revisions to a journal article on political identity sorting, and you oughta see how religion boosts that shit for white people. black people score higher in religiosity (composite of: attendance, fundamentalism, belief in god) than white people, but don’t leverage it in the same way as whites. in turn…
shoutout to everyone who took that comment literally and not sarcastically.
underappreciated comment.
the ensuing conversation on this initial point has been fucking fascinating. seriously.
real talk tho: i’d probably just throw the ear-muffs on the kid and drag him outside. “i mean, hunny, if he’s up, then might as well just see what’s goin’ on...”
i have a young child. if this happens in my neighborhood later than 9 pm, then i cannot guarantee the safety of the individuals participating in these sorts of shenanigans. may god have mercy on their souls.
fam, the first paragraph is great. the second one? eh, baby steps.
that was a powerful essay on a number of levels.
excellent choice of .gif, i am sad i did not think of it first. full marks awarded.
Actually, survey-based research *is* science. What CR does, however, is violate basic tenets of sample construction in that their data is convenience-based. They solicit responses from their readers, who are an unrepresentative slice of owners, regarding cars that are unevenly distributed among those owners, about…