They didn’t lose the election for Harris.
Right... I don't think there are enough Arab- and Muslim-Americans in PA to swing it, and she needed that to win the election, even if she had won MI. I suspect it was her failed messaging on the economy that made the difference. But we don't have final numbers yet so it's hard to tell.
The article is a lot more nuanced than the headline. Arab- and Muslim-Americans knew that neither candidate cared about them, and the article explains various ways that affected their thinking.
Before you can use it, you need to solve a Captcha.
Unpopular opinion: Kamala was a solid candidate.
Biden was headed to a humiliating defeat. Another couple debates, and maybe he loses NY and CA and we have a Dukakis- or Mondale-level annhilation. Kamala stepped in and ran a solid campaign on very short notice. Trump didn't even have time to come up with a good nickname for her! She kicked his ass in their only debate, and he was literally too scared to do it again.
In the end, she lost by a couple hundred thousand votes in 3 states. She was wrong about Gaza and the economy, but PA, MI, and WI are credibly winnable in future elections. Kamala was not a garbage candidate.
banned me from the store “for life”
Awesome! I hope you refused to honor it unless he put a poster on the front door with a picture of you and a ghostbusters-style "no" sign around it.
Hmmm... "A Passage to India" takes place during the Raj (which is when the Crown took over from the East India Company) but a lot of the attitudes and issues are the same
Similarly, "Conduct Unbecoming" takes place right after the Crown takeover. But hey, it's free on youtube:
Finally, you could look here:
It's like calling tech support and having them say "works for me! try reading up on the problem" and hanging up.
Unpopular opinion: blaming the voters is counterproductive. It's important to understand why they voted (or abstained) the way they did.
Yes, some percentage of voters are indeed racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. But hypothetically, another percentage are people who were unhappy because of economic reasons and felt they were presented with two bad options:
Is this hypothesis correct? I don't know, but just assuming the voters are ignorant, or just saying that leopards will eat their faces, isn't productive.
Hmm... I've dealt with elderly relatives, and it can be hard to tell when someone's no longer capable of doing something... so I have a bit of sympathy for him there. It's possible that a year ago Biden was up to the job and really was the best chance at defeating Trump. And he gets credit for stepping down when he did. However I'm a little more skeptical of his sticking VP Harris with the job of solving the border crisis, which is a notoriously unsolvable problem.
I suspect that given 3 months to jump-start a campaign, NOBODY could have won this election against Trump. Biden was headed towards Dukakis and Mondale levels of defeat, and Harris at least brought it to a couple hundred thousand in 3 states. (I wish I could post my argument to "unpopular opinion", but apparently they prohibit political posts.)
I mean this respectfully. The character Everett True is known as someone who tells the truth even when it's not popular.
Variously translated as "The Angel of Hearth and Home" or "The Fireside Angel", subtitled: "The Triumph of Surrealism."
Ernst painted The Triumph of Surrealism shortly after the defeat of the Spanish Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. In this conflict, Spanish fascist leaders were supported by Germany and Italy in their victory. Ernst's goal was to depict the chaos that he saw spreading over Europe and the ruin that fascism brings to countries.
...
retitled by Ernst in 1938 as The Triumph of Surrealism, "a despairing reference to the fact that the surrealists with their Communist ideas had been unable to do anything to resist fascism."
See higher-res versions on Wikipedia.
No. 4.– The picture represents the Vicious State, or State of Destruction. Ages may have passed since the scene of glory – though the decline of nations is generally more rapid than their rise. Luxury has weakened and debased. A savage enemy has entered the city. A fierce tempest is raging. Walls and colonnades have been thrown down. Temples and palaces are burning. An arch of the bridge, over which the triumphal procession was passing in the former scene, has been battered down, and the broken pillars, and ruins of war engines, and the temporary bridge that has been thrown over, indicate that this has been the scene of fierce contention. Now there is a mingled multitude battling on the narrow bridge, whose insecurity makes the conflict doubly fearful. Horses and men are precipitated into the foaming waters beneath; war galleys are contending: one vessel is in flames, and another is sinking beneath the prow of a superior foe. In the more distant part of the harbor, the contending vessels are dashed by the furious waves, and some are burning. Along the battlements, among the ruined Caryatides, the contention is fierce; and the combatants fight amid the smoke and flame of prostrate edifices. In the fore-ground are several dead and dying; some bodies have fallen in the basin of a fountain, tinging the waters with their blood. A female is seen sitting in mute despair over the dead body of her son, and a young woman is escaping from the ruffian grasp of a soldier, by leaping over the battlement; another soldier drags a woman by the hair down the steps that form part of the pedestal of a mutilated colossal statue, whose shattered head lies on the pavement below. A barbarous and destroying enemy conquers and sacks the city. Description of this picture is perhaps needless; carnage and destruction are its elements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Course_of_Empire_(paintings)
Not a GREAT movie, but I think it's fun, and the idea is solid.
"the truth is, there's more than enough. no-one has to die before their time."
cross-posted from !fullmoviesonyoutube@lemm.ee
In Time is a 2011 American science fiction action film written, produced, and directed by Andrew Niccol.
Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried star as inhabitants of a society that uses time from one's lifespan as its primary currency, with each individual possessing a clock on their arm that counts down how long they have to live. Cillian Murphy, Vincent Kartheiser, Olivia Wilde, Matt Bomer, Johnny Galecki, and Alex Pettyfer also star.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Time
We will be using Amazon dollars by then. Prices never go up... in Amazon dollars!