What about the economy did he improve? Do you have the numbers to support that or is it more of a "feeling"?

Didn't trump have IRS withholding changed to lower the amount going to taxes each paycheck? So the idiots saw an immediate "increase" in their paychecks thinking they got a tax break?

I see what they're doing. You know how in the real world the billionaires make the rules and can flex their power? So can bigger youtube stars. This can lead to youtube losing out a bit in negotiations just like the government will sometimes fuck its people over because some rich twat gets a bug up their ass and tosses some cash around. But what if those bigger youtube stars had less share of the market? Hype likely won't cost youtube itself viewers, but it could shift viewers around redistributing them to less known channels. Now the bigger stars are a little less big and bring a little less to the negotiating table.

Careful. They could issue a demerit. Three of those and you get a citation. Keep pressing your luck and after 5 citations you get a violation...

How so?

You would need to know an original outcome of an event to apply the Novikov self-consistency principle. Otherwise how do you know this wasn't always what happened?

If it starts to make his numbers dip it could trigger them to divert more money to Ohio it hadn't previously meant to. Could have a broader effect.

It's not that they don't have places to go. It's moreso whatever causes them to move likely causes other animals to need to move. It might take a generation or two to settle into a new dynamic between avoiding predators that are also adjusting and finding food and water.

However that doesn't have a major impact on populations. What can have a major impact is being over/under hunted. There needs to be a balance between those extremes. If wolves aren't culled they will hunt the deer population too thin. That heavy predation can lead to population boons of wolves that subsequently suffer due to scarcity of food. This leads to wolves encroaching on human areas and possibly posing a threat. On the other side, if deer have no predators they begin to overpopulate and can also encroach on human areas causing their own issues. With deer, hunting helps keep that population in check. Currently there's nothing keeping the wolf population in check. As others mentioned, the endangered species act was to protect actual endangered species. The goal is to aid the recovery of the population. That's been done. If they continue to receive protection, they'll start causing other problems that will need to be dealt with.

Also his rally crowd sizes are very small. Very.

Add it to the pile.

Beyond that, I'm sure it's embarrassing as hell once they realize they were so thoroughly hoodwinked. No one wants to go back to the groups or boards or forums and say "it didn't work". They're likely to get drowned out by the idiots trying to find any fault in their approach (did you thumbprint in red ink over your wet signature at a 45 angle?).

You hear about them because it's unusual. Someone shot in the pinky toe and surviving is not newsworthy.

Padme stare

It also beautifully displayed how fragile they are. Just push them a tiny bit and they go apoplectic that you don't just swallow their bullshit like their eager sycophants.

https://youtu.be/GMIf8KqOKdA?si=JPoe-NY6LlUqwAgU

Here's another one to add to your watch list.

But she existed menacingly!

Have you not seen how crazy MTG is lately? Jewish space lasers and the gazpacho? Seems on brand.

I believe Bernie qualified for secret service by then and they were supposed to handle liaising with local PD. So Sanders campaign is saying "talk to secret service" and secret service is saying "we didn't ask for loan PD support so we're not paying".

On the one hand, firing a blank in the air is harmless. On the other hand, how fucking close was he that the kid was as injured as he was from the blank?

Vaguely aware of who he is. Is he the type of republican that "accepts" gay people or the type to openly denigrate them?

So their name was successful.

There was literally a republican senator that said he was convinced of all the charges but that he didn't think trump should be removed.

"What a weird thing to say."

It's like you don't even care about kindergarteners and pre-K kids. Have you no shame? Have you no soul?!

A literal change of heart.

Well they'll make bank during the downturn.

Damn OpenAI.

Again a hypothetical is exactly intended to avoid this minutia. What originally started this was when I said there are people that deserve to die. This would necessarily avoid the question of actual guilt vs wrongfully convicted. You've seemingly not balked at that while continuing to run with your "real world" shtick that has no bearing on the underlying ethical question. And again it's perfectly fine if you don't think there is anyone that deserves to die no matter what evil they get up to. The problem is that you will continue to flail and bang your head against the wall if you refuse to understand there are other people in the world who think differently.

So you can't entertain a hypothetical?

The hypothetical doesn't need to exist in reality. It's part of the thought process. It's not meant to be an argument for a realistic applicant of the death penalty. Again... I oppose the death penalty.

Now imagine a society (this can be fictitious) without the resources to house criminals indefinitely. How do you manage using resources, to the detriment of the innocent, to house criminals with a life sentence?

You're too focused on the US. Those are broader hypotheticals.

No. I'm saying unintended effects and the impact to the rest of society needs to be considered. Solitary confinement has been equated with torture. Would you be fine effectively torturing people you want kept alive? If the cost of incarceration left the rest of the society in danger due to lack of resources, would you shoulder that burden?

That's what prisons are for.

What about the other people in the prisons? Is solitary sufficient for you? What about the psychological harm that can do? Does a life sentence of torture work? What amount of resources should we direct to keeping a dangerous person locked up alive and not psychologically tortured? Are there other government functions you'd be fine losing at the cost of housing them? In the US we can manage that, but other countries maybe not.

Protecting people from further harm. Punishment instead of rehabilitation. It's fine if you wouldn't, but understand plenty of people feel differently. Surely you're onboard with some punishment or rehabilitation. There are those who would go further.

As a matter of practice, I oppose the death penalty. But I acknowledge there are people that deserve to die.

By certain people DO deserve death. The problem is making the absolute determination of guilt. Courts and governments get that wrong all the time. For that reason I'm against the death penalty.

Then fire them.

There are dozens of us!

(/s and I don't have Xitter anymore)

I just googled your symptoms and it says you have network connectivity problems.

I think it's more accurate to say they think their offering to pay in full. The cancelation comes if the loan holder doesn't accept their "special deposit" (which now that I typed it out with quotes I can't shake the association with ejaculation).

I think the "special deposit" shudder is part of the whole "the gubmint has an account with millions of dollars tied to your name" shenanigans they try to play.

Watch the documentary Rubber and you'll hate them too.