But I will literally die if I don’t get free plagiarized art :(

Fact checking is free.

Ooh, someone’s from a fancy pants big city where the cops went to high school.

Honestly I feel it is so, so optimistic to believe any hardcore Democratic supporter will ever blame Biden if he loses.

Order of blame assigned:

1. The FUCKING LEFTISTS for being critical of him, which means none of them voted for him and also they’re responsible for anyone else that didn’t vote!!
2. Gen Z and/or Millennials, for some reason
3. People who live in areas where their vote counts for less (ie, anyone in a city or a populous state)
4. Oh I guess the Republicans shouldn’t have run Trump and then voted for him

I usually stick to beer, but I love a fruity wheat beer.

Better post about how doomed you are, that’ll fix it.

But for real, some of the communities I’m in have a rule about not posting about negative stories without adding a way to take action, a way to contribute, etc so that it’s not just doom scrolling negativity. Bad news is everywhere and it’s easy to find, anyone can do that.

Taking those bad feelings and channeling them towards something other than wallowing in how bad things are is the important part, not posting and reading. Someone who reads one bad news story a week and calls their representative about it is doing infinitely more than someone who reads every negative story out there to stay “informed”.

Freezer or countertop is the best bet, personally I think the fridge makes it feel too gummy. It also makes it absorb moisture weirdly. Freezer bread is best toasted or grilled, but it’s fine for regular sandwiches too.

Last month while I was walking home I saw a couple of mourning doves at the “mostly walk around but fly if I really have to” fledgling stage, and they were so stinkin cute 🥹

Shit, you’re right, I confused the two terms. Thank you for the correction!

What’s the opposite of eating the onion? When you read something and assume it must be the onion, because it sounds so dumb. Once onion biter, twice shy?

Thanks for clarifying, the ‘real meaning’ part was something I’ve heard people use to minimize what’s currently happening. I agree that Trump is going to be worse if he’s elected, I just don’t think that should stop people from criticizing the current response to it.

If you let your cat outside in the Americas (or anywhere cats haven’t lived for thousands of years) unsupervised I’m going to assume one of the following is true: you don’t care if your cat dies, and/or you don’t care about wildlife. Even if you live in a place with zero predators, why the hell are you trusting a CAT with road safety?

Saying this as someone who grew up with parents that let our cats live (and die, a lot) that way. And as someone who has seen two friends lose cats to coyotes in the past year. And also interrupted an attack on someone’s pet by a coyote. It’s been a bad fucking year here for coyotes.

Oh, I see what you mean now! A factor is 10x more, that’s why I was confused about what you were saying. The figure I saw might have been for people in acute starvation vs severe food insecurity or something like that. I know the situation is fucking dire regardless.

Not sure if you’re saying 10000x more or 10000x less people are starving, but that number seems off too. Half a million is the number I saw in an AP article from around a week ago.

Are you suggesting that half a million people being intentionally starved somehow doesn’t constitute a genocide?

“It only uses 5x as much energy as a regular search! Think of how much energy YOU’RE using with searches!” Okay, so you’re just using 5x as much energy for worse results? And also probably doing it more often than people who just use a normal search engine, because they don’t expect the search engine to talk to them. I’ve never understood how that was supposed to be an exoneration for it, even without taking into account that nobody ever seems to know whether or not that figure includes energy spent on training.

I don’t see the downvotes since I’m on Blahaj, that’s funny though. Sorry for reading the sources I guess? The 60% figure was straight from one of the linked articles!

Propane as a service? PAAS gas, you might say?

I’m not seeing where in those links it says only 48% of registered Democrats voted? If I’m missing it please point it out. The overall turnout was about 60% of eligible voters, so Democrats pulling in less than that and STILL getting more votes would be shocking.

Getting angry at voters for not voting hard enough after turnout increases every election cycle should illustrate that yelling at people to vote harder isn’t a solution, it’s a stopgap. It doesn’t change that it’s an intentionally undemocratic system, and it doesn’t prevent the exact same “the person with less votes wins” result from happening again.

More people (as a percentage of the eligible voting population) voted in 2016 than 2012, and more in 2020 than in 2016.

Finger wagging at people for criticizing the current ruling party (which is sending weapons to a country that is using them to commit genocide) instead of recognizing that we live in an undemocratic system is taking it out on the wrong people. Clinton literally won more votes in the election you’re saying people didn’t vote hard enough in. It’s spitting in the face of everyone whose votes were shat on by the Electoral College to turn around and blame the people who were disenfranchised.