https://duckduckgo.com/?q=2016+Clinton+pied+Piper+strategy

https://youtu.be/GqeJ38DThVc

This was originally a spring song.

twoastronauts.jpg

No.

thatsthejoke.jpg

This is also why you vote in the primary of the party with the candidates you like least.

If you view any candidate in party A as better than every candidate in party B, you need to vote in party B’s primary so the best candidate for you will make it to the general election. Then even if party A loses the general election you still get the candidate you like most from party B.

This was a key strategy for black people in the south to get the least racist Democrats into office. It’s basically ad hoc ranked choice voting and it reduces the power of extremists.

Datumi

This one doesn’t even call her “Hawk Tuah girl”.

I’m gonna copy my unedited response to this when someone posted this study as a Psypost link because I can’t be arsed to change it and it’s the exact same problem.

I like the overall lack of bullshit psypost articles on Lemmy and would like to keep it that way.

If you see a psypost article you should be suspicious.

If you see a psypost article about a paper with a conclusion that you agree with you should be extra suspicious.

EDIT: And now I’ve bothered to read the abstract of the paper and the first bit of the psypost article and they don’t say the same fucking thing.

The journal article is saying they identified brain regions associated with fundamentalism by looking at brain lesions. There may be a seemingly obvious connection to say that the brain lesions caused the fundamentalism, but I don’t see them actually say that after skimming the full text. They focus on what regions are associated with fundamentalism using lesions as a tool to find them.

The psypost article says in the first sentence the damage changes the likelihood of fundamentalism.

I couldn’t find any definition of geometric shape that uses that criterion, including Wikipedia which also has a 5-pointed star shown with 5 line segments labelled as a shape: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape.

The meme is wrong because squares are polygons by definition, which by definition are made of line segments, but this thing has curved sections.

No you leave it on in the shower.

Basically. They’re ambush hunters that pop up and snatch/vacuum prey into their maws. I recall the tassels are also attractive to fish that look for food in the sand, but don’t quote me on that.

https://youtu.be/mbv2DhcKAh4?si=HbeUT1T-3haR9DOX

Least annoying video I could find in a few seconds.

I bet the horse one has a quarter of the sugar though.

Weird. I found one in seconds on Google and it’s about whether you can use the way, not the rules governing turn order while driving.

https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/use-public-rights-of-way

Did you look it up before making that comment?

Looks like someone looked up their state definition and was annoyed at being wrong 😉

Dictionaries list common usage - even if incorrect. Look up the definition of right of way for your state or other government and I’m certain it will be the thing on which you travel or the right to create and manage it, not your “rights” while traveling on it.

I couldn’t find a list of all definitions by state but the three states I checked all use that.

It would be weird if they didn’t, since that’s been the term since before automobiles existed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_way

Misunderstanding “right of way” is half the problem.

Right of way is ability to make a road, or the road itself by extension. You can’t have the right of way - it’s usually the government’s - and you can’t give it away. This is why wording is consistently who must yield the right of way, and not who has the right of way.

If it’s a driver’s turn to act, they are obligated to act. It’s not their option or right to act.

Do you like 40k lore?

No.

Coolsothisonetimetherewasanorkcaptain.

This will come as an absolute shock to you. You can vote for someone you criticize…

Which party was it that dogpiles on anyone that dares criticize their shitty candidates again?

The point of saying it before the election is that the expectations are set.

Yes. Exactly! The reason people keep bitching about Harris and genocide is because they hope something might actually happen about it.

Biden was an absolutely terrible candidate (that I was going to vote for) and probably the only person who could lose against Trump. Because people constantly bitched about how bad he was they changed the candidate.

Harris doesn’t get to use Trump as a not-as-bad-as screen, and given that we don’t have the option of not voting for her, everyone should be applying every other available form of pressure to discourage her from enabling genocide or otherwise maintaining the status quo.