I don't think it's necessarily being so concerned with integrity as to deliberately self-sabotage, but rather that this was a potentially viable strategy 40-50 years ago, and many of the eldritch horrors in party leadership, Biden included, just haven't gotten the message that the situation has changed in the interim. Part of Biden's campaign pitch was that he's worked in Congress for so long and has the relations that would let him reach out to the other side to get stuff passed, and he just gets taken advantage of when trying to do so. The Republicans have long since moved on to a strategy of "Ram through whatever you can while you're in power, and obstruct, obstruct, obstruct when you aren't." They generally aren't concerned at all with what non-GOP voters think of them and their actions, which lets them just bulldoze their way through the process while racking up points with their base for being effective at advancing the agenda, regardless of how hypocritical/immoral they are in the process. Just see Mitch McConnell when Obama tried appointing a justice to the Supreme Court near the end of his term versus his response to Trump doing the same.
I would also say there's just a fundamentally different level of at least the appearance of integrity necessary on the Democratic side, and Democratic voters are less willing to accept that the ends justifies the means. This is clearly illustrated just by looking at the fallout for pretty much any Republican having a sex scandal, versus it happening to a Democrat. In his initial scandal, Anthony Weiner didn't even engage in a criminal act, having sent a 21-year old woman a sexually explicit photo. In less than a month, Nancy Pelosi had called for an investigation into it and he'd resigned his seat. In contrast, Trump has been found liable for sexual abuse in a civil case and has had heaps of sexual assault and harassment accusations brought against him, yet the party of family values, good, Christian morals, and law and order is still completely behind him.
For some of their more conservative members, they've certainly done so in the past, but I'm pretty sure that @[email protected] is just talking about the self-defeating obsession that Democrats have with appearing non-partisan. Yes, they do need to compromise to an extent to get something through the house at the moment, but they have essentially self-sabotaged in the past when they had the majorities to not need to do so, yet insist on negotiating with the Republicans anyway because they hope moderate Republicans will give them credit for not ramming legislation through in a one-sided fashion.
This really only works when the other party is engaging in negotiations in good faith, which the Republicans do not. As a result, the Democrats give the GOP initiative on steering bills and policies as they like, winding up with compromised legislation that doesn't please their actual base, while also not getting credit from the Republicans they're hoping to sway in some sense.
For an easy example of this, look at talks about eliminating the filibuster earlier in Biden's presidency. Manchin and Sinema made it a dead idea, but even before that, Biden has been opposed because of his obsession with reaching across the aisle in an age where trying to do so only serves to stop his agenda dead in its tracks. Rather than get their elbows out and bully the two hold outs into falling in line (which was supposed to be what Manchin was good for, at least. I kept hearing, "He disrupts things, but he falls in line when it counts," but pretty much never saw evidence of this), they just shrugged and collectively let the agenda die or get neutered, because to do otherwise would not be bipartisan.
There's a lot of racists out there. I feel like if she's at the top of the ticket, she's gonna get dragged down.
This is just preemptive cope to avoid having to reflect on whether the Democratic leadership and its preferred candidates are actually the thing that needs change, and she's not even an actual candidate yet. Kamala's biggest problem is not that she isn't white. Obama was a Black man, but he had heaps of charisma. Kamala has all the charisma of a plate of lutefisk,and people flat out do not like her. She is also irrevocably tied to Biden and his legacy, likely to her detriment amongst the crowds you would most worry about not voting for her because of her not being white.
When it comes to the Democrats and* the left* — from the Biden campaign on down to the activists
What's with calling out the left on this, when the closest they get to a leftist organization they take issue with is a climate advocacy group. The left has been pretty clear that Biden is not the man for the moment since the go, and for our troubles, we've been called everything from stupid and naïve, to privileged white people who don't care about insert minority group here (and ignore that not all leftists are rich, white people, there are plenty of POC active in leftist politics, though critics, often privileged white people themselves, do love to erase their existence in the same breath they claim to be looking out for them), to either useful idiots or fully cognizant agitators working on behalf of enemy states. Centrist Democrats and liberals have been the ones trying to tell anyone who will listen that the same old play will not just be good enough, but is actually our only option to win, and they're trying to leave the left to take the fall for their mistake, yet again.
Some of it is political calculation. If the president steps aside, the logical candidate is Vice-President Kamala Harris, but Harris has struggled in office and her poor poll ratings mirror those of Biden. If the Democratic Party tries to sideline Harris and open the door to other candidates through an open convention, they risk alienating her and her supporters and opening up further wounds in the Democratic coalition.
What, risk all four of her supporters? Oh, darn, there go the chances of winning ever again.
Democrats are not going to win with a staid campaign by the usual corporate boot-licking line of candidates they've relied on up until now. The sooner they accept that and get behind a candidate who is pushing for systemic changes on issues that actually resonate with your average Americans and the problems they face in their daily lives, as opposed what matters only to their donors, the better for them this time around. Heck, if they actually follow through and make some of those changes, even better.
The kid sounded like he had a plan of his own and was working towards it, so it might just be as simple as mom has a car and he doesn't, or it's his first apartment and she knows what to look out for when moving into a new one, which he's never had experience doing. The article doesn't make it sound like he's some totally dependent man-child, but it also doesn't elaborate enough to really say why she went along.
That it only becomes a topic of popular discussion once every two years doesn't mean people are sitting on their hands the rest of the time. I've volunteered on local, state and Congressional campaigns, mostly translating campaign website and literature/fliers into Spanish. I've done this in the lead up to the 2020 presidential elections, state assembly, city council and mayoral races here. If I talk to people about this stuff outside explicitly political gatherings or a presidential election cycle, I'm an annoying leftist who won't shut up about politics. When the rest of the country gets off their collective ass and pretends to care, I get "Why haven't you done anything in between election cycles, you're not serious," from the same people who didn't want to hear about local elections the last few years.
Yeah, it's pretty exhausting having the same liberals disengage between presidential elections and then pretend to be the arbiters of serious politicking once every 4 years to try and punch left and exclude any actual leftist viewpoints. Thanks for doing your part to keep that liberal tradition going strong.
Something like this to produce graded readers is a great idea, but I don't see anything in the ad itself that indicates it's for language learners. If this is for a general audience for native speakers, then it's enabling people to avoid learning to read (and ultimately use) more complex and nuanced language, in favor of infantilizing consumers and spoon feeding them everything.
The only use case I could see this being a positive for when aimed at native speakers would be something like adult literacy programs, or maybe homeschooling for kids with difficulties learning to read who don't have the trained, professional support that one would hope they might have in a more typical school setting. For adults who struggle with illiteracy, I could see this being quite beneficial, though. It's something that people will often be embarrassed about to begin with, and somebody who's feeling self-conscious about this could be demotivated by only being able to read books aimed at children. Even if they say "Screw it, I need to do this," it can be difficult to maintain motivation and interest when the only content you can find at your reading level is written for little kids. If they could have adult materials adapted to a level that's challenging but manageable for them, I could certainly see that being a good thing.
I was under the impression that he was supposed to be handing off the role to Kamala, which was meant to be a shift towards a young(er) leader, woman and person of color that they hoped would check enough boxes for younger voters to make them think she was an actual progressive. That plan seems to have been nixed once they realized she has so little appeal across the board, she could probably lose a popularity contest to any number of infectious diseases, and Kamala 2024 got scrubbed.
They potentially could have found other viable alternatives, but they would have represented an actual shift in party leadership rather than bowing down to the party orthodoxy, so the DNC would never actually support them.
What they really want is another candidate like Obama that is charismatic and can talk in a way that convinces voters who don't feel represented by the current Democratic party to say, "This is the candidate who can deliver on reshaping the party in line with my views," while having no intentions of meaningfully deviating from the party line. I think the experience with Obama is still fresh enough in the minds of these voters that they are on guard against the same sort of deception a second time.
The facility itself might even be open on Sunday, I'm not sure, but they would mail it via USPS, which doesn't deliver on Sunday unless you pay extra for it, and Caremark most certainly did not pay the extra for me.
My personal favorite was my insurance at my last job had my prescription coverage managed by CVS caremark. I have a few prescriptions I probably need to take the rest of my life, and after the initial fill at my local pharmacy, they would refuse to cover it unless I had my doctor resend the script to their mail-order service, and had the gall to claim it was for my convenience. Some of said medication is controlled such that I can only refill it within a few days of my current fill running out, bud will conveniently also cause some rather unpleasant withdrawals if I miss a couple of doses. So, "for my convenience," rather than calling in a refill and walking the two blocks to my local pharmacy, which has my refill ready in 30 minutes for me literally every time, I had to send it off to CVS. Then hope they filled it quick enough and there weren't any Sundays or holidays to mess with it.
The color? No, I'm pretty sure it's a Henna-based dye.
Sure, I was just trying to say that while some people will dislike the flavor of the currently vaunted light roasts, even when properly brewed, I think there is a pretty sizeable number of people who would like them well enough, but just find it too much hassle. Especially outside of the specialty coffee scene, where you see more and darker roasts, in my experience
When Costco or someone puts out a dark roast on the shelves, they generally aren't competing for customers that drink single lot beans from your favorite café, they're looking to get the people who find McDonald's coffee or Dunkin Donut's good enough, but want to save a bit of money by brewing at home.
The mainline SMT games all take place in post-apocalyptic Japan
Almost all, except for the oddball that is Strange Journey, taking place in post-apocalyptic Antarctica, instead. It has a lot of elements that differ from other Mainline entries, but Atlus treated it as such and acknowledged it with the recent Mainline 25th anniversary celebrations. I really enjoyed it and think it's worth a playthrough, but it may not be the best starting point. I also don't know how the remake holds up, I've read complaints about changes online, but SMT fans can be a bit touchy about their favorite games.
SMT 4 is… odd. It starts out looking like a much more generic fantasy setting, but it most assuredly is not. It’s good, but it also very clearly is straining against the limits of the system it’s on. SMT 4 Apocalypse is also extremely good, and I would suggest playing SMT 4 just to play SMT 4 Apocalypse. I won’t say too much about SMT 5 except to note that it’s also good and I recommend it strongly.
I'll disagree on this one and just add that not everyone who enjoyed 4 found Apocalypse to be that good. From what I saw, people that really just love the battle system and doing things like building out the perfect team for tackling boss rushes and insanely challenging super bosses really enjoyed it. If you go in expecting more of SMT IV's world and story, you may well be disappointed by it. I found the characters to be unlikeable, personally, and it seemed like an unnecessary rehashing of the story. I also recall some unavoidable boss rushes in the main story that made certain areas really grindy and killed my enjoyment for a good while.
Otherwise, I would say a pretty decent write up here.
Plus often they’re not especially skillfully made and I’m pretty sure some people are reacting to very thin acidic, sometimes woody and vegetal, cups and assuming that if they don’t like this,
Another possibility is just that light roasts can just be too fiddly for most people to want to bother with. Between the money for equipment and time spent brewing it, it's probably just too great an investment for most people to take something from at least acceptable to them to being great, after a while when you get things dialed in and the stars align.
For native speakers, there is also the level of education and the contexts they use it in that can influence their vocabulary. I know a lot of Spanish speakers, both heritage speakers and those who grew up in Spanish a speaking countries. Heritage speakers often are educated in English and mostly use Spanish at home and in social situations, but are more comfortable in English for other topics. Lots of my coworkers who grew up in Spanish speaking countries have pretty limited formal education. In either case, they often don't know the Spanish terms for technical, scientific or political contexts, and will just use the English word, even in Spanish.
This doesn't mean that English has a richer political or technical vocabulary than Spanish, but it does create a chicken and egg situation in certain contexts. Why bother to learn and use the Spanish term if the English term is already more widely known, especially if it isn't a topic that would lend itself to popular publications and discussions outside of industrial or academic contexts? Even in Spanish speaking countries, the increasing dominance of English internationally can result in highly educated people in these countries being pressured to publish in English, further reducing the number of occasions one might have to use these terms in Spanish.
GM, who just announced a $6 billion stock buy back once they knew tariffs would keep them safe from having to compete with Chinese EVs, that GM?
This sort of stuff is realistically why I have no sympathy for the major US automotive manufacturers. The only reason I don't just say "Screw them, let Chinese EVs drive them out of business," is because it would put so many people out of work in their plants who have no role in these decisions. Barring some fantasy where the Chinese companies establish US plants and offer equivalent or better union contracts for current employees at GM, Ford and Chrysler, these companies should simply be bound hand and foot in terms and conditions whenever something is done by the government to help them. Like, make those protectionist tariffs conditional on them hitting investment targets in relevant technologies, raising worker pay and benefits, reducing cost to the customer and a ban on stock buybacks for the duration of the tariffs being valid.
He can be pretty weird and has had some awful takes in his personal life, but I do respect not only the man's prescience as concerns the path proprietary software would lead us down, but also his commitment to his beliefs in this regard. The man is out there computing on hard mode to live his life as he believes we should.
In my experience, it's not just a lack of reading comprehension, but often some combination of an utter lack of curiosity, laziness and defeatism. Many other things, like video games, have escaped the realm of being reserved only for nerds and gone mainstream, yet computers remain something people just constantly assume are hopelessly complicated.
I know for a fact my mother-in-law can read just fine, as she spends most of her day reading novels and will gladly spend the rest of it telling me about them if I happen to be there. Yet when it comes to her cell phone, if there's any issue at all, she just shuts down. She would just rather not be able to access her online banking in the Citi bank app for weeks or months at a time, until one of us goes and updates it for her, rather than reading the banner that says "The version of this app is too old, please click here to update and continue using it." and clicking the damn button. If anyone points this out to her, though, she just gets worked up in a huff and tells us "I'm too old to understand these things, you can figure it out because you're still young." She will eventually figure these things out and do them for herself if nobody does it for her for a while, but her default for any problem with her phone is to throw her hands up and declare it a lost cause first. I've seen a lot of people have the same sort of reactions, both young and old. No "Hey, let's just see what it says," just straight to deciding it's impossible, so they don't even bother to check what's going on.
My first OS was whatever ran on a Commodore 64. I guess the Commodore kernel and Basic?
My first distro was whatever version of Fedora was current in the fall of 2008. I'd gone to university that year and my laptop crapped out. Couldn't afford a legit Windows license at the time to replace it, and I'm pretty sure I just remembered that Red Hat was a thing and found Fedora that way. One thumb drive and 16 years later, still using linux, so I guess that was about the only good thing to come from my abortive first attempt at higher education.