Disco Elysium has entered the chat
Disco Elysium has entered the chat
Turns out they were basically bounty hunters for Catholic priests during Elizabeth I’s reign.
“Really? How about dying for it?”
A vote saying they won’t support the Dem ticket in November without a big change still means something, even if the race has already been called.
Everyone already knew Biden would win handily since the first primary. That’s why they voted uncommitted instead of for an alternative.
What’s the old lingers?
Real moderates are mostly just low information voters who don’t spend much time thinking about politics to develop an ideology or world view.
The generally accepted political narrative is that these sorts of voters mostly just care about the economy.
Lots of people call themselves moderates but consistently vote Democrat or Republican and just differ from their party on a couple issues.
*Edited my language to be a little fairer about that second group
Maybe no one should see it?
There’s pretty widely documented evidence that slaughterhouse work is also harmful to mental health.
(Link is to sagepub)
If French troops were sent into Ukraine and were then hit by Russia, would that then trigger NATO agreements?
Article 6 says:
"For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France 2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer; on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer."
Aware this might be a situation where the spirit of the agreement ends up being more important than the legalese.
The problem with the Senate is that it gives land more power than people. The weight given to a Senate voter in a less populated state like Montana is like 40x that of a voter in a state like California. Abolishing the Senate would move the power of each voter closer to equality. Anti-gerrymandering measures would get you the rest of the way there.
I think taxes on financial shenanigans like carried interest, inheritance, and capital gains would probably be more effective than taxing luxury goods. Most rich people don’t actually spend the majority of their money on physical things. Mostly they just shuffle it around into various instruments to avoid taxes and maximize returns.
Nah, it’ll find food no problem. The legal liabilities are the real kicker.
The community’s called work reform.
Imagine being this much of a jerk over a webcomic
To play devil’s advocate here, I suspect many rural voters would probably just say they’d like to be left alone more than anything else.
They really buy into that Reagan line about “I’m from the government and I’m here to help” being the 9 most terrifying words in the English language. They haven’t seen government programs working effectively around them.
I’m not sure promising more government assistance for rural areas is a winning message, is my point.
We might be able to point out the class divide between republican voters and their representatives, though. That, and highlighting the donors those representatives are really working for.
Conservative philosophy has had generations to settle in these areas, so any messaging to the contrary is going to be an uphill climb.
Explaining a joke never makes it funny.
Also, you’re calling a joke low-brow while also admitting you didn’t understand it.
Do you also need me to explain why that’s a self-own?
Make them open and close in a circular pattern like a camera aperture and I’m in
"In rode the Lord of the Nazgûl. A great black shape against the fires beyond he loomed up, grown to a vast menace of despair. In rode the Lord of the Nazgûl, under the archway that no enemy ever yet had passed, and all fled before his face.
All save one. There waiting, silent and still in the space before the Gate, sat Gandalf upon Shadowfax: Shadowfax who alone among the free horses of the earth endured the terror, unmoving, steadfast as a graven image in Rath Dínen.
‘You cannot enter here,’ said Gandalf, and the huge shadow halted. ‘Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back! Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your Master. Go!’
The Black Rider flung back his hood, and behold! he had a kingly crown; and yet upon no head visible was it set. The red fires shone between it and the mantled shoulders vast and dark. From a mouth unseen there came a deadly laughter.
‘Old fool!’ he said. ‘Old fool! This is my hour. Do you not know Death when you see it? Die now and curse in vain!’ And with that he lifted high his sword and flames ran down the blade.
And in that very moment, away behind in some courtyard of the city, a cock crowed. Shrill and clear he crowed, recking nothing of war nor of wizardry, welcoming only the morning that in the sky far above the shadows of death was coming with the dawn.
And as if in answer there came from far away another note. Horns, horns, horns, in dark Mindolluin’s sides they dimly echoed. Great horns of the north wildly blowing. Rohan had come at last."
-J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
I hear you. Hope the administration hears you too, for all our sakes.
I agree there’s a problem, and I agree about supporting progressive candidates when available.
I think this is being taken as the only option mostly because a lot of strong progressive voices sat out this primary.
Fair enough, to your point about people on Lemmy planning to make mistakes in November. I suspect those people aren’t the same ones voting uncommitted in the primary, though.
I mostly see those as motivated progressives trying to raise an alarm so Dems can course correct here. If Dems listened, they might give us more ammo to persuade those Lemmy users who aren’t on board.
Just to be clear, did she recommend that specific clinic? I’m not a fan of her past work but I think it’s a stretch to blame something like this directly on her.
The beauty and skincare industries have tons of claims flying around that are less-than-validated but going to a facility that uses basic precautions is probably still a good idea.
As an additional data point here, the American Academy of Dermatology Association still has a page up with more info about the procedure. It makes it clear that it’s unproven but it’s supposed to be your own blood that’s used for the procedure. It ends with a recommendation to talk to your dermatologist to decide if it’s right for you, much the same as any medical advice found online.
From their page:
"Few studies conducted in people
All these benefits have created high demand for a procedure that has little evidence to back it up.
Few studies have been conducted because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) doesn’t require the large, complex studies necessary for new drugs. Since PRP uses needles and a centrifuge, the FDA classifies PRP as a medical device. The rules for medical devices are less demanding."