I know what the point was, but Biden is included as if he is part of some political dynasty. He was VP. A very normal situation, 19 out of 49 have run for president. It’s like being promoted through the ranks until you get to the top. Isn’t that kinda normal in most careers?

So why is it “insanely improbable” for Biden, someone who qualified for the job over decades, to be “chosen” as opposed to anyone else.

We aren’t talking here about how much cash it requires to become president which raises the bar above most people’s head.we are taking about political dynasties.

So I say again, including Biden as if it is some statistical anomaly or stranglehold on politics is disingenuous, especially if you exclude Harris.

Her situation of running for president after serving as vice president is EXACTLY the same as Biden unless you want to split hairs and say he served 2 terms and her only 1. So if you want to say Biden was given a silver spoon, so was she.

Biden is not a dynasty. But if you insist he is, so is Harris, and that makes the original premise flawed.

I don’t think it’s really fair to include “Biden” alongside “Bush” and “Clinton” and NOT include “Harris”, just to make a point. The point is the Bush and Clinton represent two people each, a dynasty as it were. Biden is just one person. You might as well add then Harris since she has served as VP just like Biden, or Trump but I get the feeling this is intended to somehow make the statement that Harris represents a new breed of politics, a break from the old. That may or may not be true, but it doesn’t hinge on this meaningless metric.

“since 1981 there has never been an election without a Bush, Clinton, Biden, Trump or Harris.”

I love to see free speech absolutism being so unshakable.

They wanted the IP not the staff.

How do you know they are wrong?

Just kidding

Just because you don’t like her music doesn’t mean it’s mediocre or that you are somehow more evolved. When it comes to personal taste, how do you decide who’s opinion is the right one - like you have taken it upon yourself to do and gate keep ‘good’ music. Her music is undeniably popular and all of those people who like it would disagree with you about it being mediocre. So what makes you right and them wrong? There is no objectivity when it comes to things like music, only subjectivity.

Before you jump on me and label be a Taylor Swift fan, the big reveal is, I’m not. I have no problem with you saying “I think her music is mediocre” but that is different to saying " her music is mediocre" the former is an opinion, the latter is trying to paint an opinion as a fact.

This comment will probably not be received well simply because so many people seem to dislike Taylor Swift on here and will miss my point. Taylor Swift is irrelevant to my point, sub in any band or artist if you need to understand that.

He did a follow up study in 1998 co-authored by some people he met at a bus stop which confirmed these results. hoo cha

My train of thought…

“How is that going to fit on your wrist? I mean I guess it could but would be really heavy and uncomfortable. Oh wait, those are headphones so it’s even bigger than I thought. Ah wait, ‘watch’ not ‘watch’. Dumbass”

Because you are a kid and you don’t know but are pretending to be an adult. Nice try!

Even then you can still have someone read the source and write a spec for a second programmer to write a library. The programmer never saw the source code but it was still useful. Still legal to do this. If someone dumped original source into the projector could be similarly checked for duplication without breaking the law.

It’s Val Kilmer’s superhero name. His super villain name is “Kill more”.

On the religion side the last picture should be the same as the first.

I happen to have seen a documentary that says having 100 is not only possible, it gives you superpowers https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Cqd-_fHdTyA

Brit

As a non American, where I am from, we call them toasties. Cheese toasties, cheese and tomato toasties, etc.

I don’t know of any puritans who argue about what a true toastie is, but I may have lived a sheltered life. People will argue about anything.

Ask yourself what winning the game gains for you and what losing costs you. Then ask yourself what behaving like an ass when you win or lose might gain you or cost you. No one will remember you won that particular game in a month except maybe you. It is not going to be something that other people findly remember about you when you aren’t around. However if you act like a ass, they definitely will remember and what you will gain if you repeatedly behave like that is a reputation, and not a good one. Nobody else really cares if you win or lose. It says literally nothing useful about you in day to day life.

What do you prefer to win, a board game or a lasting relationship.

Now that’s said, when you are in the midst of losing and you can feel the tension. Remind yourself what is really at stake as above.

If you start losing and winning graciously you will hopefully come to realise the above naturally.

1: “… and then we’ll be able to stop terrorist attacks. Simple”.

2: “ok but if you put a back door into encryption, won’t others be able to find it?"

1: "no we’ll be the only ones with the key. Great huh?“

2: “and you don’t think the key will be leaked or be hacked?”

1: “I said we’ll be the only ones with the key.”

2: “so what’s your plan to make sure the key stays secure”

1: “…”

2: “what’s your contingency plan if the key *is * hacked or leaked?”

1:“…”

1: "I SAID WE’LL BE THE ONLY ONES WITH THE KEY. "

2: “…”

1: “don’t you want to protect our children ??”

First No elected official is allowed to take money or goods in excess of 50% of the median salary for all workers in the country in total for the entirety of their time in office from any organization or unrelated individual nor sit on the board of any company following office. Any payments to said official totalling over 50% median salary in the 5 years prior to their election and 20 years after leaving office from a single entity must be declared. The state will provide a generous pension to ensure future employment is not a financial necessity.

These measures are intended to allow elected officials to be free from influence.

Second Any change in leadership of a political party immediately triggers a general election. Change in leadership generally means a failure of the manifesto and/or a change in the policies which were presented to the public when the leadership was elected.

Third No advisory referendum shall be conducted without the intention to act upon the outcome and therefore any referenda should only be acted upon with a super majority of 66%. Prior to action following a referendum, the winning side must demonstrate how the result will be acted upon and where negotiation with outside interests is necessary, since the outcome cannot be known at the time of the first referendum the public should be offered a second referendum to decide whether to accept the outcome.

Fourth Politicians shall be held to account for any lies or dishonesty. Burden of proof lies with the politician accused of misconduct to provide evidence for their claims which are in dispute. Therefore evidence provision at the time of any claims is encouraged and can be published to a publicly accessible repository. Punishments can range from fines to removal from office depending on the severity and frequency of misinformation.

Fifth Proportional representation she’ll be enacted to eliminate tactical voting. In addition any changes to the electoral district are subject to scrutiny by a randomly selected jury of 1000 residents in each of the affected areas. Voting by, and identity if the jurors shall be anonymous. The public may request redistricting at any time with a 2 year cool off via a petition meeting a minimum number of 100,000 signatures.

Here it would be “wurk”

I bet you are fun at parties.