God, wouldn't that have been the perfect moment to turn all those tanks to point at the goldfish and minions in their glass bowl and quickly put an end to this mess? (yes I know it would start a new mess but still).
What is the point of posting that then? Are you being paid to suppress opposition to the regime by by fomenting hopelessness or apathy, or is trying to discourage people during a time of crisis in their country just for your own amusement or ego-stroking.
Things lead to more things, and it starts with people coming together, organizing, and protesting. The Trump+Christian Nationalist regime wants us to shut up and sit down, to nip any resistance in the bud. You're helping them.
That's interesting, I'm in a red state, purple location, and it was the other way around. The first 2 protests I went to in April (Hands Off and another one), it seemed like over 80% were (myself included) 50+ yo white people. Then yesterday I was happy to see lots more younger people and more ethnic diversity (though still whiter compared to proportion of the population). I saw more couples with their kids there too, and there were twice as many people overall.
This is a bit OT from the main point of the article, but since they brought it up and used the standard "The worst ratings for any president!!!1! hype [always with qualifying statement like "at this point in their term"| "since some convenient year"]
Trump’s approval in our polling average is 44% today, the worst for any president at this point in their term (except Trump during his first term) going back to 1935.
It's 44% today, 44% yesterday, and 44% tomorrow. It's always in the low-mid forties (40-45%). It's steady as a rock, no matter what happens. Yet I'm continuously seeing articles titled "Trump's ratings nosedive/plummet/crash!" whenever it fluctuates down by a point or two (never "Trump's ratings skyrocket!" when it goes back up a point). It's all for feel-good propaganda.
This is just to say, don't depend on his followers to turn their backs on him--they won't. It's up to the rest of us.
I have a small camera (a little smaller than a phone) that can do photos and videos.
The phone will be powered off before leaving the house and only turned on if absolutely needed to make a call. Hopefully that's enough for no GPS/cell tower tracking, right? Don't need to wrap it in foil?
Yes, he was completely submissive to Musk and his little X brat! I kind of marveled at how he sat there and took shit from them in that office and I knew Musk owned him. I don't really think the Epstein thing is that important. Everyone already knows about it, and his followers won't believe it or won't care. If a crime, I think it would have to be something bigger. Like on the level of the conspiracy theory that Musk was able to rig the election in some states (though I'm not sure even that would be prosecuted). But then Musk would also be incriminated.
I think it's more likely that there was a huge sum of money trump was going to get paid, that Musk had control of until the investigations into Musk and his companies got shut down and all the billions in government contracts to his companies were signed and delivered, then once trump finally got paid for the services rendered, he doesn't need Musk anymore, so he's out.
The thing that was never considered by a lot of people who helped get trump in power for their own gain, both the first time and this time, is that once he's in there he has the full power of the government to go after you if you don't toe the line. He can ruin them financially and even put them in prison now. They forgot, trump never honors a deal. He'll screw you over the minute you no longer have something he needs or can no longer threaten him.
Yes, good point. He was in it for both of those things and probably a bunch of other less obvious stuff. I'd like to see the contracts cancelled and the investigations re-opened.
One good thing to come out of this is if trump cancels Musk's new billions in government contracts that were the main reason Musk bought trump in the first place. 🤞
And by gaslighting the kids, they're teaching them not to trust their own ability to reason, crushing their critical thinking skills. It sets them up to submit to authoritarianism and go along with obvious lies instead of trusting their own senses and questioning authority.
This is bizarre. The info provided in the question was that Marty ate more than Luis, the question was how would that be possible given that Marty ate 4/6 of his while Luis ate 5/6 of his. The answer the kid wrote (Marty's pizza was bigger than Luis') is the only possible correct answer.
The grader is asserting that the information given in the question was wrong and that "actually it was Luis who ate more pizza"--even though it stated as a premise that "Marty ate more". How are you supposed to give a correct answer on a test if you are expected to accept one premise (proportion of pizzas eaten) while disregarding another premise (Marty ate more than Luis)? How do you decide which part to disregard? Would they have accepted the answer, "Luis actually only ate 3/6 of his pizza, not 5/6)"? Wouldn't that be just as valid an answer as "Marty actually didn't eat more than Luis"?
There are so many options. If you're looking for a free and open source wiki-style setup, a couple I haven't seen mentioned in the thread yet are Zim Desktop Wiki and Feather wiki (hmm looks like their web certificate is expired at the moment)
I only know about the existence of villages in NY state because my brother lives in one and had to explain to me what constitutes a village vs. a town--I still don't really get it! - which is why I said the term may have a more specific definition. So yeah, it may not be a commonly used or understood term even in the NE. In any case, I'm sure it's used differently here than in the UK, like many things.
As a non-American, I’m very confused by this. If it’s a town, it’s not rural by definition. Because, you-know, it’s urban.
A rural town is a very small town or populated area within a large rural area. The US is a huge country, with very large swaths of rural areas throughout, especially west of the Mississippi. In these large rural areas are scattered small towns of various sizes (say, less than a hundred to less than a thousand or so people), with long stretches of unpopulated (or very sparsely populated) areas between them. That's why they're called rural towns--no one would call them "urban" by any stretch of the imagination. They may have the things you mentioned (a post office and bar/pub/eatery) but not much more. But even if you're technically in a town, you are still effectively rural, since you're nowhere near a significant population center with anything like hospitals/doctors, shopping, services, etc., and a car is required to reach them (no public transit and much too far to walk or bike). Look at online maps to get the idea.
As for the word "village", that's mostly used in the NE part of the country and tends to have a bit more specific definition. Elsewhere, most of us would just say "town".
leadore @ leadore @lemmy.world Posts 8Comments 778Joined 1 yr. ago
God, wouldn't that have been the perfect moment to turn all those tanks to point at the goldfish and minions in their glass bowl and quickly put an end to this mess? (yes I know it would start a new mess but still).