Hardball Questions For The Next Debate

A comedy set-piece: absurdist 'hardball questions' for the 2016 GOP primary field. Carson and the possible consciousness of a hemispherectomy's severed half; Fiorina, the Ottoman millet system, and 'weren't you a crappy CEO?'; Bush and the regression-to-the-mean genetics of presidential fitness; Cruz as a near-superintelligent persuader whose supporters should precommit to ignore him; Rubio and an elaborate Sword-of-Chang / Spear-of-Destiny / Prescott-Bush conspiracy; Trump and 'WHY DIDN'T YOU CALL IT THE TRUMP CARD?'. Erudite, intricately built humor that smuggles in a couple of real ideas (the outside-view-on-rhetoric bit; regression to the mean).

Quality 50 · Solid. Clever, densely constructed, genuinely funny, with a few smart embedded ideas - but topical 2016-primary comedy with little lasting significance. Solid, lower end.

Claude’s paradigm shift 15 · None. Ephemeral election humor; its one real idea (precommit to ignore a superhuman persuader) is borrowed from the rationalist canon, not new. None, edging slight.

Real-world impact 1 · Negligible. A densely-built topical 2016-primary comedy set-piece with a few smart embedded ideas; intricate humor with little lasting significance or material-world reach → RWI 1.

Humor 3/5 · Scissor Statement. Dedicated #humor piece: fake 'hardball' 2016-debate questions, each an erudite straight-faced buildup to an absurd punchline (Bush's regression-to-the-mean genetics, Cruz's superintelligence-persuasion precommitment, the elaborate Rubio 'Sword of Chang'/Holy Lance/Antichrist conspiracy, Trump's 'WHY DIDN'T YOU CALL IT THE TRUMP CARD?!'). Consistently lands → solidly funny 3.