Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

They will never admit they are wrong.


It's a point of pride to fight tooth and nail arguing a wrong point. I worked with a guy who out right admitted that he will argue with you even if he knows he is wrong. It's not a discussion, its a fight they must win. They will die on their hill of macho pride. THEY MUST DEFEAT YOU.

Smart people admit they are wrong and learn, then move on for the better. The stagnant macho person will never learn anything and just wants status quo in perpetuity, so long as it benefits them.


They might act like it's a macho thing to argue against you, but let's be real, it can be painfully embarrassing to admit you're wrong, especially if you were really dug in already. Since it's about avoiding pain, it's the weak route to take to continue to defend a position you know is wrong.


Embarrassing how? We aren’t in the schoolyard anymore although I guess plenty of people mentally are.


What pain? If you feel pain from being wrong or having someone point it out you have thin skin. It's akin to being called stupid which is such a weak insult.


That's... exactly my point? They put up the defense because they are "thin skinned". It only looks all strong and macho on the surface when they continue to argue back.


Conversations around this administration and the people related or in support of them always bring me back to the Alt-Right Playbook.[1]

Usually I have a specific video in mind that is relevant, but this feels like a good time to link the whole series. It’s a good, informative, and (depressingly) humorous look at the alt-right - and while it doesn’t offer much in solid solutions, I think being able to understand how they operate and where they’re coming from allows us all to have a better chance in mitigating them and stopping the tide of fascism.

[1] https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY7v0VkYRbANnTnz...


Doge was a reward for the tabulator manipulation. See you in another 8 months.


It was a reward for the biggest campaign donation in US political history. Musk didn't rig the election, he's not that competent or powerful. Occam's Razor tells us what happened was the Democrats went with a strategy that has never worked before (changing candidate mid-race), and they ended up predictably losing. That's it.


It's happened once post-ww2. Doesn't seem to be a large enough of a sample to make a point about the strategy.

You're also ignoring the candidates themselves




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: