Walz v. Vance VP Debate - Post-Game Thread | Vance now says Trump won in 2020

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 628
  • Views: 12K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
I would not say he's obviously Yale educated. He's obviously educated at law school, sure. But he's at least two notches below typical Yale Law grads (who aren't all that great to begin with, Yale being the most overrated law school in existence).
Click to expand...
Yale’s overratedness was a factor in that comment. It was meant to connote that he’s a pompous asshole who’s smart, but not as smart as he thinks he is.
 
UNCBAdookJD said:
Yale’s overratedness was a factor in that comment. It was meant to connote that he’s a pompous asshole who’s smart, but not as smart as he thinks he is.
Click to expand...
Well that puts him a clear step ahead of some of the trolls here... pompous assholes who are not smart, but for some odd reason are convinced they are.
 
Macksbrownies said:
I’m trying to wrap my head around how someone could be considered a “winner” of a debate when all they did was was misconstrue and lie about everything. Being able to speak well shouldn’t negate that fact that what you are speaking are lies. Does not compute.
Click to expand...
It's easy to debate when you dont have a spine and change who you are and what you believe.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
OCS is a bit more subtle. That post had a BankerMatt or mgholdings level of irrational anger to it.
Click to expand...
Based on the username, it appears it may be the same poster formerly known as IAmBuckwheat, StageCoachDriver, and JumpCatchDunk. Three words put together, with a capitalization at the beginning of each one.
 
superrific said:
I would not say he's obviously Yale educated. He's obviously educated at law school, sure. But he's at least two notches below typical Yale Law grads (who aren't all that great to begin with, Yale being the most overrated law school in existence).
Click to expand...
I dunno. My friend that went to Yale Law has written a lot of stuff. When I read his books, I have to use the internet dictionary every page or so to understand a word he used. It is almost like he knows a totally different English language than I do.
 
Calheel said:
I dunno. My friend that went to Yale Law has written a lot of stuff. When I read his books, I have to use the internet dictionary every page or so to understand a word he used. It is almost like he knows a totally different English language than I do.
Click to expand...
or Latin :p
 
Calheel said:
I dunno. My friend that went to Yale Law has written a lot of stuff. When I read his books, I have to use the internet dictionary every page or so to understand a word he used. It is almost like he knows a totally different English language than I do.
Click to expand...
One of my former law partners is a Yale Law grad. He may be the sharpest person I know. He is also easily one of the best lawyers I have ever known. He so good, in fact, that at the age of 51, he is about to retire.
 
Calheel said:
I dunno. My friend that went to Yale Law has written a lot of stuff. When I read his books, I have to use the internet dictionary every page or so to understand a word he used. It is almost like he knows a totally different English language than I do.
Click to expand...
Obviously there are plenty of really, really smart people at Yale. But Mike Lee also came from Yale.

There's just not a yawning gap between Yale and places like G'Town, NYU, Columbia, and even U of M. That exists more in public perception than real life.
 
Icky Mettle said:
One of my former law partners is a Yale Law grad. He may be the sharpest person I know. He is also easily one of the best lawyers I have ever known. He so good, in fact, that at the age of 51, he is about to retire.
Click to expand...
How many Harvard Law grads do you know? Or Columbia or NYU or Berkeley?

I mean, you can't get into Yale unless you have great grades in college, excellent LSAT scores, and if you don't have other accomplishments (e.g. Rhodes Scholar, etc), it's a crapshoot to get in. I did not get accepted to Yale, even with my LSAT. That was fine because it functioned weirdly as a safety school of sorts. I wanted to go to school in Boston, New York, Philly or DC (this was before I realized I hated DC). If I didn't get into the top 10 law schools in those places, I didn't really want to go to law school -- but I thought I'd make an exception for the #1 rated law school. Not that it was likely I'd be accepted there and not elsewhere (the reality was completely opposite; I got in everywhere but Yale), but they waved the application fee so why the hell not?

So obviously there is a certain threshold of academic excellence to get in (unless the standards are lowered, as they likely were for Vance). And a lot of excellence comes out. But every school has duds and weirdos. Yale produces more of the latter than the former, but on occasion there are grads who are both. I think the difference in intelligence, law ability, or any other metric you care to use between the average Yale student and the average Harvard, Columbia, NYU, Stanford student (etc) is close to zero.

Well, that's my experience at least. I worked at WLRK and then the appellate practice at Jones Day and then taught law, so for decades most of my colleagues came from those schools (and also I attended a Top 5 law school), so I have a pretty rich experience.

One thing that always bugged me about Yale grads was their tendency to conflate the sentences "not all X are Y" and "all X are not Y." Yes, that logical error shows up countless times in law review articles, judicial opinions and the like. I find it hard to believe that Yale is teaching that. My guess is that a) the prevalence is about the same, but I first saw that from a Yalie and then primacy bias took over or b) I've been exposed to a sample that skews that way. If there are an infinite number of traits, even a purely random sample will exhibit some of those traits disproportionately. But anyway, in my experience, Yale Law grads are particularly susceptible to that illogic and I really don't understand how or why.
 
ZenMode said:
Some see it that way. I see it as not settling, voting out of fear, voting for the lesser of two evils, etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah, nobody fucking cares whether you settle or not. You're not that special nor that important. There are 150 million of us who vote. None of us really make any difference individually, but you especially make no difference if you vote for a rando, a third party, or don't vote. It's your right and you can do what you want. Just don't pretend that it makes you superior in any way. It just means you have a weird proclivity for wasting your time.
 
superrific said:
Yeah, nobody fucking cares whether you settle or not. You're not that special nor that important. There are 150 million of us who vote. None of us really make any difference individually, but you especially make no difference if you vote for a rando, a third party, or don't vote. It's your right and you can do what you want. Just don't pretend that it makes you superior in any way. It just means you have a weird proclivity for wasting your time.
Click to expand...
I've beaten this drum for a while. Yeah, theoretically, an abstention is better than a Trump vote, but it is such an immature thing to do.

Elections are a binary choice: Democrat or Republican. If you do not vote for either, then you are basically saying that the candidates are exactly the same. And the only people who think that are either weirdos or uneducated voters.

You vote for the least bad candidate of the two major parties. Anything else in our current political system is abdication.

If you think Trump is the worse candidate, then vote for Harris. If you think Harris is the worse candidate, then vote for Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top