Are you saying its essentially a thing Republicans don’t know about or understand? I have to assume every democrat has heard the word, and it has simple explanations too.

I was under the impression republicans knee but defended it but it could be an ignorance thing, thats a fair point.

I think the part people leave out is that not everyone has the same goal. Most describe it as being “happy”, but never consider whether thats even possible to be happy nearly all the time.

The flaw there as I see it is that humans seem to always return to some sort of baseline emotional state, but this state is not happiness. Happiness is the spikes up while sadness are the spikes down, but given enough time it always comes back to baseline.

Thats why you can find really extreme examples of happiness. Some of the time I spent in jail were truly happy times, which really confused me at the time. On the other side you might see people become depressed during or after achieving their goals.

In my opinion, having the wrong expectations for how you should feel and for how long, can turn small curable problems into consuming destructive problems.

It should be: time plus perspective heals all wounds.

Its not prefacing it with a summary, its letting them know you have a point at the end they should wait for.

I actually prefer the type of conversation that goes back and forth and tangents, but there is a place for more long form cohesive ideas, and you should wait to hear it all before speaking.

If you are going to make a long winded statement, its not crazy to preface it with something.

Just a caveat, seeking therapy for ADHD is improving mental fortitude. Nothing wrong with that, and some people might need chemical assistance. Hard to say, its such a young field.

Statistics are an average, not to be applied to a single person as prophecy. Surely you can reason that out?

If everyone knows gerrymandering is bad, why is it still allowed to happen?

I’d argue they focus too little on the first 8 and too much on the last 2. Both would be an error in analysis of course.

Also it runs the risk of people applying statistics to individual cases, or groups too small to be statistically relevant.

I don’t think this makes trump look good either way, I’m not defending him.

Either he’s an idiot who got tricked into posting something he should have known not to, or he’s an idiot who has idiot friends who sent him something and he posted it.

I thought she was going to sue him for it.

Never said I was defending what trump did. Just said he could have been duped into it. I actually thought shed sue him over it but I guess the endorsement works.

Sure that could happen, but then you never had those voters. At some point you have to lay the blame at the people who voted like this, if it happens.

This is like saying that getting a question wrong on a test can be the difference between pass and fail, and then picking a question at random and deciding to focus on that instead of the whole test.

You are right it could be enough people to match the difference in votes, but thats not the same as saying its essential we get that voter block no matter what. Theres a ton of things that make a difference, but its the collection of them that makes a candidate.

Did he prompt it himself or did someone send it to him?

Just gotta find a weak spot in the pipeline of bullshit that goes to Trump.

The point I’m making is the art could have come from anyone. Why not a troll or shitposters? 4chan has done stuff like this for literal decades.

You have a source that says Donald trump made the images with his own prompts? Why wouldnt he be sued for that. Reposting someone else’s images was already risky enough.

I’ll believe it though if you know where I can read about that.

Not a conspiracy theory by the way, was just saying ai art from the internet could come from anyone, and shitposters and trolls exist. Theres even a professional board for it called 4chan.

So let’s say I made the AI images. And posted them on republican forums knowing they would eat them up. Keep sending them to bigger and bigger names, make a not farm to make the posts visible.

Finally I get the big cheetoh to repost it. Boom, I a democrat, have instigated Taylor Swift into endorsing the Democrats.

I’m pointing out why its hard to disprove the stuff trump says, not defending them. You can’t say dogs and cats aren’t being eaten because you can’t prove that, you can say that a reputable source said its not happening.

The debate is about the candidates, if they want to lie and make fools out of themselves they can. I do like that they were able to fact check the Springfield stuff because it sounds like the rumors are causing racism and violence. Hopefully the fact check helped a bit.

I’m willing to change my opinion though. What were some other things they could have fact checked but didnt?

I guess north america?

Framing this as only a small group of voters in swing states is stupid. No candidate can win with just a few million votes scattered across a handful of states.

You are taking something very minor and turning it into a major problem. Its like saying Hilary would have won if not for the last minute news reports about her emails or whatever it was, when she lost because she didnt appeal widely enough to the american people, and carried an awful attitude while doing it.

You are assuming physicians have to be smart or compassionate or understanding.