Seems like there’s moderate risk of aggression for everyone getting around, given all the road rage about.

If you’re attacked on the bus, at least other people can defend you. The survivability of crazies on the bus vs the road seems very nebulous to me otherwise.

It sucks that music replacement is almost expected. A track was popular once, they’ll ask for 30x royalties on the next go.

Since everyone’s posting their anecdotes:

I tried out Bazzite, a distro intended for gaming. Much of it was great, but often after coming back from sleep mode, the whole desktop would be suffering from graphical corruption; something I’d largely chalk up to bad drivers.

And, somewhat ironically, I’m also a cyclist, who needs to plan out winter trips when it’s often going to be dark and people are drunk.

Decentralization is a bit like showing people “Here’s how to make friends. I won’t actually introduce you to anyone, though.” I kind of want to at least get a starting point off a general topic.

I agree; and I personally believe that the fault is with all the voters. All the voters need to do better next time.

There is potential to put yourself in an unmovable situation when you deny the capacity for individuals to find fault in, and correct, themselves. When they’re all “special snowflakes incapable of fault, for whom the horrible and evil politicians must serve to attain their vote” you may set yourself up for either a failing relationship, or lies. Contrary to what one might expect, saying “I’ve heard the opinions of others, and I think I was wrong about X” is not a social death sentence. I’ve said it online before, and others need to be ready to do the same.

Maybe JFK expressed that thought better than I can.

I agree that right now, our economists have a terrible way of defining a “good economy”. They have praise for a set of numbers such as the stock market rates, which have almost no connection to the well-being of common people.

We need more medians and fewer averages; not to measure wealth when it’s spread among the extremes.

This statement implies popularity = good, universally.

In the 1800s, slavery was popular. Hence, should a candidate have run on preserving slavery?

“Jill made bad choices. I blame Bob because he didn’t convince Jill to make a good choice.”

This is such circular fucking reasoning. Apparently it’s literally impossible for a voter to make a stupid decision, because all blame will circle back to the candidate for “Not being convincing enough”.

Being right doesn’t automatically make you popular.

Source: Pretty much every episode of It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia (and, of course, real life)

Silly, but sitcom silly:

All week, Hank had been receiving hints from his wife that he was going to get “the roast of his life”. Finally, at the end of the week, he’s attending a community gala with all their neighbors and friends. Hank, worried that all his darkest secrets are going to be exposed, decides to take the chance to get ahead of his wife’s belittling, and takes the stage to mock her for her terrible spending habits and overpoweringly obnoxious perfume.

His wife, mortified, leaves the room in tears and the room turns against him; but he simply deflects the hecklers by stating she was going to do the same to him - that she’d give him the roast of his life. Finally, he gets an inkling of what he’s done wrong. While his wife goes out for drinks with her friends to console her, he and his friend rush to his home. There, this scene plays.

I’m also curious if there’s any risk of the Japanese government finally cracking down on those places and setting stricter laws on gambling. Maybe not in the next few years, but sometime in the future.

Or, it says a lot about the intentions of each and every person that either voted for him, or didn’t vote.

“It’s Alice’s fault for not reminding Bob to pay the heating bill”. And I do mean reminding - as in an extremely obvious thing.

Down the street, a guy’s house burned down. Of course, we all blame him for it - and his failure to find a message that resonated with the firefighters, to motivate them to come save the building.

I’m still not sure why there’s a trend of scaling down the experience. Half-Life: Alyx felt shorter than a Half-Life game, and had MUCH fewer weapons.

At best, these games are slightly extensive tech demos.

Excuse me. They’re called bats.

So is no one here in comments calling her a bad candidate? Are you just citing external favorability? The label of “least worst option” came from a commenter, not a nameless poll statistic. I’d question whether that’s really an external reference, and not a personal attack on her character.

To me it wasn’t even close because there was nothing outwardly negative about Kamala. So, I’m looking to identify specific thoughts that lead to that unfavorability.

And, be warned, in the lack of anything else, the thoughts “She’s a woman” and “She’s black” come up as the reason for it; indicating that the derived stance of the person above is “The democratic party should never run with minorities.”

I’ll continue to deny claims that Kamala was “least worst”. She seemed like a pretty good option to me, and the only criticisms I’ve heard of her were that she was not quite perfect on every issue they cared about.

“Imagined” is perhaps the right word considering he wanted to raise taxes for low income people, and lower taxes for rich people.

Reminded of the time a recruiter asks Porky Pig to give his name. He can’t hear it through the stuttering, so he has him write it out. Porky continues, writing out his stutters.