President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
Sorry I edited wrong in my last post but after looking into it, it's not a criminal offence in Italy just to merely express sympathy for a cause or group. It needs to be connected to a concrete crime or else fall under incitement. So you can express mere sympathy with any proscribed group long as you don't follow through with something that can be seen as criminal.
The cassazione said that pro Hamas posts on social media are a crime
Although they determined they don't prove belonging to the terrorist group itself (so you can't prosecute for terrorism, only for incitement)
The vibe of your answer is definitely not in line with how you expressed it in your original sentence.
Bad faith much
In theory... is not the same as you made it sound earlier.
I tell you it's a crime in italy. You and corpus insist it isn't. I keep saying it is.
You and corpus insist it isn't. I then explain why it feels like it isn't, because of lack of enforcement (with exceptions).
I mean in the USA in several states having anal sex was a crime for a long time. Doesn't change anything the fact that it wasn't almost never prosecuted. It was still a crime.
Now I linked a cassazione ruling on "yes talking pro Hamas and celebrating 7 10 on social media is a crime in Italy".
Let's see if that's enough for you troll or if you will insist no, it isn't a crime.
Thank goodness Bezos got a big tax break. He definitely needs a couple gold toilets for his yacht more than 8 million people need health insurance.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 8.2 million people who get ACA insurance now will become uninsured due to the expiration of the enhanced tax credits along with other changes the Trump administration and Congress have made to the marketplaces through regulations and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
The capitulation by CBS is both alarming and sickening. Another weakening of freedom of the press.
Damn. He fails to realize that he is where he is primarily BECAUSE of Murdoch.
He's on a roll of biting the hands that lift him up.
I tell you it's a crime in italy. You and corpus insist it isn't. I keep saying it is.You and corpus insist it isn't. I then explain why it feels like it isn't, because of lack of enforcement (with exceptions).I mean in the USA in several states having anal sex was a crime for a long time. Doesn't change anything the fact that it wasn't almost never prosecuted. It was still a c
Celebration of October 7th would arguably fall under incitement. That's not the same as expressing sympathy with a cause.
Yet he posts proficiently about how government should work in a country with a diverse population.
he simply is dramatically less racist and less misogynist than the median american adult was 100 years ago.
Is this observation supposed to be some sort of endorsement of Trump? This has to be a joke.
usually a poll about approval only requires a fairly small sample to be of good quality, because that's how it works for a yes or nor question.
but then if you slice it up further by education or whatever, you are going to encounter sample problems fairly quickly, which is why it ande sense to include CI sizes there, so I don't understand your objection
I would guess that less than 3% of the readership of the WSJ could properly define what a confidence interval is. And when you are reporting data at a 95% confidence interval, it probably isn't important whether the reader knows what a confidence interval is. But when you are presenting data at a 50% confidence interval, I think that explaining the point becomes quite a bit more important. As I'm sure you know, presenting data at a 50% confidence interval isn't exactly standard.
I am not confused about how extrapolating from samples works.
The vibe of your answer is definitely not in line with how you expressed it in your original sentence.Bad faith muchIn theory... is not the same as you made it sound earlier.
I tell you it's a crime in italy. You and corpus insist it isn't. I keep saying it is.You and corpus insist it isn't. I then explain why it feels like it isn't, because of lack of enforcement (with exceptio
I don't recall having ever said it's not a crime.
My theory is that this is just another rhetorical technique to blur lines between truth and lie. The bullshit factor
Damn. He fails to realize that he is where he is primarily BECAUSE of Murdoch.
He's on a roll of biting the hands that lift him up.
Murdoch is infinitely more calculated than Elon but I think Trump is the most powerful person in the world by a large margin and could probably make Murdochs life a living hell for the foreseeable future
Prob a contract thing. Bet they lose way more in overall salary/ad commits than the 16M they paid Trump if they just cancel it without proper notice.
Non-zero chance it gets pulled sooner if Colbert really goes off the rails. Similar thing happened with Conan and the Tonight Show.
In my opinion >50% chance Colbert is gone by the end of the year.
Thank goodness Bezos got a big tax break. He definitely needs a couple gold toilets for his yacht more than 8 million people need health insurance.
The snowball of socialized healthcare has already started its way down the hill in America. Dumping 8 million more people into the uninsured category only gives it more momentum.
Young people have more power than they realize, and we're going to see a massive change in attitude toward things like this.
People might be pissing away entirely too much money on things they don't need, but they're not going to stop. People are financing Chipotle delivery right now. We're not dealing with disciplined financial geniuses here. If the healthcare industry is left holding the bag because a bunch of deadbeats who think they'll never own a home anyway choose to simply light their credit report on fire, that'll add to the pressure on government to sort things out.
Couple that with the massive wave of people being dumped onto Medicare as they age anyway, and what incentive do we have to maintain the status quo in terms of private health insurance?
Though, I'm more worried about the lack of new healthcare workers than I am about who will pay the final bill when it's time for me to be a frequent user of the system.
I'm not a chess expert, but I don't see what a perfect information strategy game has to do with seeing patterns.
There are certain recurring position types that are essentially patterns. That is, there are particular recurring arrangements of the chess pieces on the board that suggest strategic and tactical considerations applicable to that type of position. For example, one pattern called "the vulnerable back rank" in which the king is in a corner square with a row of pawns in front of him. The king is trapped on that row by his own pawns, and is vulnerable to getting checkmated by a rook or queen moving to that back row. That's just one of a gazillion examples.
Anyone very intelligent wouldn't even bother trying to figure out a system for craps or roulette.
You'd be surprised. If you read a book on the history of gambling, you'll see 'smart people' inventing all sorts of systems to beat those games.
I continue to wake up every day wondering how the hell this could happen
Because democrat namecalling came in the form of stuff like "Nazi" and "Deplorable" instead of cool things like Lyin' Ted, Crooked Hillary, and Sleepy Joe.
Though, you can mostly blame this entirely on the stranglehold the Clintons had on the DNC in 2016.
Because democrat namecalling came in the form of stuff like "Nazi" and "Deplorable" instead of cool things like Lyin' Ted, Crooked Hillary, and Sleepy Joe.
Though, you can mostly blame this entirely on the stranglehold the Clintons had on the DNC in 2016.
No.
It's because "we" are a racist mysoginistic stupid gullible people.
Because democrat namecalling came in the form of stuff like "Nazi" and "Deplorable" instead of cool things like Lyin' Ted, Crooked Hillary, and Sleepy Joe.
Though, you can mostly blame this entirely on the stranglehold the Clintons had on the DNC in 2016.
So your theory is that the "**** your feelings" crowd who calls trans people child molesters and attacks minorities relentlessly got their little feelers hurt by meanie pies saying mean thingies?
There are certain recurring position types that are essentially patterns. That is, there are particular recurring arrangements of the chess pieces on the board that suggest strategic and tactical considerations applicable to that type of position. For example, one pattern called "the vulnerable back rank" in which the king is in a corner square with a row of pawns in front of
Yeah, pattern recognition is big in chess but because there are actual patterns to be recognized and this is why its dominated by rainman like autistic savants and not psychopathic cranks (fischer is the exception here)
Selling a system isn't meant to make people rich using the system, its meant to make the author rich selling bullshit. Its pretty smart stuff in a deplorable way
I was speaking more to the charisma of the candidates and how the campaigns were run, but your theory is just as valid.
Though, I would posit that "attacks minorities" should also include whatever the **** the Democrats have been doing to their loyal base of non-white voters for the last half century. That has not worked out so well for those minorities, and the voting patterns are finally reflecting that.
