The Daily Poor
04.05.202500:07
Oh no. What are major Urban centers going to do without top meteorologists?
02.05.202516:51
Closing out commentary on that incident for now. Those of you who feel similarly, the least we can do is pray that she be helped in handling this as well as possible. That's my final word for now.
02.05.202515:24
Don't give an unhinged single Mom $1M, you retarded niggers
02.05.202513:54
02.05.202507:15
Without looking it up, guess which popular rightoid said this about Ms. Shiloh: "Listen anon as I'm about to redpill you on the future of the White race. This, right here, is a top female specimen, our reproductive elite."
02.05.202503:52
Got Snow? 331.4 inches for season and 24 inches on ground as average at the Calumet/Tamarack weather station. 4.30.25
Expecting the last 1 inch to melt sometime around the middle of May.
02.05.202520:35
Dear reader,
You find yourself in a court of old, where the sovereign’s whim is law, and the machinery of power grinds with the cold precision of a medieval gibbet. You, a lowly subject—perhaps a thief, a heretic, or merely a man who unwisely gazed too long at the king’s prized falcon—have been cast into the dungeon and sentenced to a swift execution. But this ruler, with magnanimity that proves he has the divine right of kings, offers you a reprieve: a game, a riddle, a test of wits that might spare you from the executioner’s blade.
The sovereign presents you with 100 marbles—50 white, 50 black—and two urns. Your task is to distribute these marbles between the urns, adhering to the king’s edicts: First, every marble must find a home. Second, neither urn may stand empty. Third, The urns will be shaken, their contents scrambled like the thoughts of a Jacobin in the face of true order—ensuring a randomized marble selection.
Now, the king’s procedure is as follows, and mark it well, for it is the fulcrum of your survival. He will select an urn at random—each urn has an equal chance of being chosen. From that urn, he will draw a single marble, both urns having been shaken and randomized. If the marble is white, you shall live, perhaps to gaze at the King's beautiful falcon once more. If it is black, you will be torn asunder on the rack before meeting the blade.
A simpleton, or perhaps a man of populist sentiment and intellectual tendency, might propose the obvious: place all 50 white marbles in one urn, all 50 black in the other. The king picks an urn—fifty-fifty—and your survival hinges on his choice. A 50% chance to live, a 50% chance to die. A simple coin toss, a strategy as uninspired as the worst of the English Dissent. But you, dear reader, are no such fool. You are a man of reason, a student of history, a seeker of the truth. You know there is a better way—a way to tilt the odds in your favor.
What, then, is the best way to distribute the marbles? How might you arrange these 100 tokens to maximize your probability of survival? And what, precisely, is that probability? I leave this puzzle to you, my astute reader.
You find yourself in a court of old, where the sovereign’s whim is law, and the machinery of power grinds with the cold precision of a medieval gibbet. You, a lowly subject—perhaps a thief, a heretic, or merely a man who unwisely gazed too long at the king’s prized falcon—have been cast into the dungeon and sentenced to a swift execution. But this ruler, with magnanimity that proves he has the divine right of kings, offers you a reprieve: a game, a riddle, a test of wits that might spare you from the executioner’s blade.
The sovereign presents you with 100 marbles—50 white, 50 black—and two urns. Your task is to distribute these marbles between the urns, adhering to the king’s edicts: First, every marble must find a home. Second, neither urn may stand empty. Third, The urns will be shaken, their contents scrambled like the thoughts of a Jacobin in the face of true order—ensuring a randomized marble selection.
Now, the king’s procedure is as follows, and mark it well, for it is the fulcrum of your survival. He will select an urn at random—each urn has an equal chance of being chosen. From that urn, he will draw a single marble, both urns having been shaken and randomized. If the marble is white, you shall live, perhaps to gaze at the King's beautiful falcon once more. If it is black, you will be torn asunder on the rack before meeting the blade.
A simpleton, or perhaps a man of populist sentiment and intellectual tendency, might propose the obvious: place all 50 white marbles in one urn, all 50 black in the other. The king picks an urn—fifty-fifty—and your survival hinges on his choice. A 50% chance to live, a 50% chance to die. A simple coin toss, a strategy as uninspired as the worst of the English Dissent. But you, dear reader, are no such fool. You are a man of reason, a student of history, a seeker of the truth. You know there is a better way—a way to tilt the odds in your favor.
What, then, is the best way to distribute the marbles? How might you arrange these 100 tokens to maximize your probability of survival? And what, precisely, is that probability? I leave this puzzle to you, my astute reader.
02.05.202516:43
This isn't how it works. They were able to do that stuff because they already had power. Violent protests are a victory celebration, not a way to win. If you try them as the losing team, your guys get Jan 6thed.
02.05.202513:35
Another confirmation that I am near retarded. I thought "tractor trailer" actually involved a tractor until like 30 seconds ago.
02.05.202506:36
Let's contemplate a hypothetical scenario: My brother is an on again, off again drug addict. He maintains a modestly remunerative job that is sufficient to sustain himself and provide for his two children. However, his behavior is often erratic; he's impulsive and prone to speaking without a filter. These behavioral tendencies contribute to periodic relapses which endanger both himself and his family. Compounding this, he has a documented history of compulsive gambling, squandering tens of thousands at casinos, and has a history both of making exorbitant purchases and involving himself in pyramid schemes, precipitating recurring fiscal instability.
Now let's imagine this brother of mine has a misadventure: He's at the park with his kids when a little black boy starts riffling through and tampering with his belongings. In a lapse of judgment, exacerbated by his addiction-fueled volatility, he verbally berates the child, calling him a "nigger." A nearby individual at the park, a Somalian with a history of sex crimes against children, records the altercation and confronts my brother, who doubles down, calling this man a "nigger" as well. The video is disseminated online, igniting a firestorm of outrage. Progressive activists, inflamed by the footage of my brother calling this child sex predator a "nigger," orchestrate a campaign to ostracize my brother; they go as far as to threaten his children’s safety and contact his boss to attempt to terminate his employment.
In an effort to help, given his unreliable nature, I begin a fundraising campaign on his behalf. Sympathetic donors, those generous online racists, contribute an astonishing $5m. The question arises: Should I (1) disburse the entire lump sum to my brother immediately, or (2) assume stewardship of the funds to safeguard them from his demonstrably reckless proclivities?
The answer is obvious: entrusting such a sum to an individual with my brother’s documented history of irresponsibility would be utterly indefensible, a horrendous and indefensible crime.
Now, let us pivot away from this thought experiment and back to the real world. A woman finds herself ensnared in a strikingly similar predicament, vilified by progressives for directing "the nigger word" at a Somalian child sex predator who was patrolling a park teeming with children. She's got an unhinged look about her that screams "drugs." She has a sleeve of tattoos. She accosted a small child in public, calling him a "nigger." She's a single mother. Her kids look like they could have Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Though her circumstances are less extreme than my brother’s, her conduct radiates a comparable aura of irresponsibility. The notion of bestowing upon her a sum of $210,000—likely to surpass her $250,000 fundraising goal, with potential for further increases—is simply imprudent.
Remove the emotional context of someone being attacked for using a word you like from your mind and ask yourself whether you would normally trust someone with her disposition with such a sum. If you knew she were to receive it, would you expect it to be put to good or poor use? Given your answers to these questions, does it make sense to provide this money to her? Is it likely to help, or likely to make things worse?
Now let's imagine this brother of mine has a misadventure: He's at the park with his kids when a little black boy starts riffling through and tampering with his belongings. In a lapse of judgment, exacerbated by his addiction-fueled volatility, he verbally berates the child, calling him a "nigger." A nearby individual at the park, a Somalian with a history of sex crimes against children, records the altercation and confronts my brother, who doubles down, calling this man a "nigger" as well. The video is disseminated online, igniting a firestorm of outrage. Progressive activists, inflamed by the footage of my brother calling this child sex predator a "nigger," orchestrate a campaign to ostracize my brother; they go as far as to threaten his children’s safety and contact his boss to attempt to terminate his employment.
In an effort to help, given his unreliable nature, I begin a fundraising campaign on his behalf. Sympathetic donors, those generous online racists, contribute an astonishing $5m. The question arises: Should I (1) disburse the entire lump sum to my brother immediately, or (2) assume stewardship of the funds to safeguard them from his demonstrably reckless proclivities?
The answer is obvious: entrusting such a sum to an individual with my brother’s documented history of irresponsibility would be utterly indefensible, a horrendous and indefensible crime.
Now, let us pivot away from this thought experiment and back to the real world. A woman finds herself ensnared in a strikingly similar predicament, vilified by progressives for directing "the nigger word" at a Somalian child sex predator who was patrolling a park teeming with children. She's got an unhinged look about her that screams "drugs." She has a sleeve of tattoos. She accosted a small child in public, calling him a "nigger." She's a single mother. Her kids look like they could have Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Though her circumstances are less extreme than my brother’s, her conduct radiates a comparable aura of irresponsibility. The notion of bestowing upon her a sum of $210,000—likely to surpass her $250,000 fundraising goal, with potential for further increases—is simply imprudent.
Remove the emotional context of someone being attacked for using a word you like from your mind and ask yourself whether you would normally trust someone with her disposition with such a sum. If you knew she were to receive it, would you expect it to be put to good or poor use? Given your answers to these questions, does it make sense to provide this money to her? Is it likely to help, or likely to make things worse?
02.05.202500:29
NEWSFLASH: everyone was already tired of nigger behavior long before any of us was alive. We get bombarded with these stories for a different reason
02.05.202518:10
News of the day: two doubles in a row.
02.05.202515:12
She needs $1m now. $250k is not enough.
02.05.202513:23
"Ngl, I saw that and hoped to be wrong, so I said nothing."
"Me too."
"Me too."
02.05.202504:40
Right wing politics 101
01.05.202523:39
Deleted02.05.202517:49
02.05.202515:29
which one of Shiloh's new meme coins are you guys going to buy?
02.05.202515:10
Does the self-awareness make it better or worse?
02.05.202507:53
Rare good take from Peterson.
02.05.202504:24
She raised the goal after receiving the first $100k...
(At least she removed her kids' faces this time.)
Not a good showing for the right today.
(At least she removed her kids' faces this time.)
Not a good showing for the right today.
01.05.202520:56
Shown 1 - 24 of 772
Log in to unlock more functionality.