I try my best Michelle, but I am literally not allowed to vote in US elections.

The ones I am allowed to participate in however do benefit in fucking over US-Politicians at least somewhat.

“Return of the Obra Dinn” is the best Detective-type game I have ever played. Pure inductive, yet always logical reasoning. The setting of an Victorian ship, the 1-Bit artystyle, excellent ost and memorable story really elevate this recommendation to a must-play.

On something from this decade, Balatro is great if you like cards and rouge-likes. But it’s been so popular I don’t think anyone interested hasn’t heard of it yet.

Oh, and as others have pointed out and I’d hate myself for not mentioning it, Tunic is great as well. It’s a love-letter to the instruction book, and makes one really feel like playing an old game and relying on an instruction book, while not being all that great at reading, like some may remember from their childhood. But with modern game design and what others call Dark-soul mechanics (idk, I have never played a Fromsoft game).

“Sheen, this is the 7th week in a row you’ve shown CRISPR modifications to the mosquito genome to curb malaria in class”

Comments are all the same as when they made mosquitos infertile, unable to spread malaria or wingless too.

Maybe he’s into crazy girls and it was a compliment? 😏

As implied in my first comment, I’m luckily not a US citizen. So asking where my line would be is a bit weird.

But when there is a better option with any chance of winning, they would have my vote. But since the Palestinian Genocide is happening either way I’d vote this election, Dems it is to reduce the suffering inside the USA. Support is, to me, something different, and I don’t think I would support the dems right now.

The Democrats and Republicans are both 99% Hitler, ergo voting for either is voting for the greater evil.

If you are a woman, POC or queer, it is usually really easy to choose a lesser evil here (or idk, a neo-nazi, as I framed this as why a non-voter might also help the democrats). Most people can choose a lesser evil, and they help the greater one by not voting/voting 3rd party. If you literally can’t see a difference, that’s fine, but this is the reason why most people are better of not voting 3rd party right now.

If the Democrats lose left wing voters by pushing rightward and lose, are they going to go even further right?

Yup, they can make that decision. Maybe they think appealing to the block of Republicans is easier, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they do considering that’s where their money is and how much they need to change to appeal to the left.

(…) may shift leftward to regain lost votes. Unconditionally supporting the Democrats only furthers their genocidal tendencies.

So, you don’t know how it would help. Either the Democrats stay in Power and won’t change, or the Republicans gain power and nothing will change until 2028 (or later, depending how project 2025 comes along). Hoping that they may change on Palestine is foolish. You are correct about the support, it should never be unconditional.

By your logic, Libertarians and Non-Voters are also helping Trump.

Whomever they think is the bigger evil, they help by not voting for the lesser evil. For why, see my first comment.

Depends on where they lost their votes from.

Disagree.

Kamala and Trump are united on Gaza, voting for either will only result in more death and destruction.

And voting for neither will also result in more death and destruction. You are refusing to explain how your choice would help, and I can make some damning assumptions why.

Leftists hate the dems and the reps, but now you are saying they help Trump by voting for their interests.

Correct. You seem to know all about the voting system, I don’t need to explain to you why that is.

If the Dems lose votes to Leftists, and they wish to regain those votes, they have to move leftward. They won’t ever be Socialist, correct, but they move to where they lose votes.

They will move in the direction they think they can get more votes. The past has shown that even when they lose, they prefer to move “center” rather than left.

No, voting for genocide is not the best for Palestinian Genocide, unless you support the Genocide.

Please explain how voting for your alternative 3rd party candidate, sitting at 0.3% at the polls if I’m not mistaken, will help.

The part of them fiercely fighting any 3rd party was a good point though. Still, the Momentum isn’t there.

Voting 3rd party is not and will not lead to revolution.

Nothing I said implies Democrats are entitled to any votes, just basic statements about options and their outcomes.

Because of the terrible voting system, all those voting for Jill Stein will not affect the outcome. Voting 3rd party is barely better than not voting at all. If they would have otherwise preferred the Democrats, this helps Trump.

I also don’t think voting 3rd party will make Democrats adopt more leftist policies, as that risks losing centrist voters and their big business sponsors they rely on.

It’s a shame, but the best vote is one for Harris. Even when it comes to the Palestinian Genocide. If you want more 3rd party options, try to win a local election first and build momentum from there, don’t start with nothing 6 months before and try to win the federal election from there.

Really not that complicated. If a person who would otherwise vote Democrat instead votes 3rd party, it helps the Republicans. So the Democrat politician says it to that person. Likewise, the Republican says it to those that would otherwise vote Republican. Both parties now claim that it helps the other, but whom it really helps depends on who would otherwise be voted for.

From my outside, proportional representative having-position, 3rd party voting only becomes viable if it is discussed outside of the 6 months before an election. And not in the general “3rd party” term, but with an actual party name attached.

Never understood those circumstances, but I choose to believe that all even numbers summed are -2/12 and all odd numbers therefore 1/12.

Me and my 4 tribesmen making meters of twine by funnelling fibers through a mamoth femur: “Isn’t technology amazing?”

1500 years later in Mesopotamia: “Your feedback is highly appreciated, please listen to our lyremen as you wait in line”

But your vehicle would itself “curve” “downwards” due to gravity, surely a straight line means that you can point a laser, or a hypothetical 0 mass particle beam, uninterrupted from your starting point to your destination.

Yeah, but you have to imagine it, and some people have Aphantasia. Have a watch ready for when you suddenly can’t form mental images any more and also get lost somewhere.

Can’t do that with a digital display, can you?

“Who here plans on driving their car today? Show of hands!” … “I recommend getting to know these people, because you are far more likely to die in an car accident caused by a stranger than by someone you know. But also don’t upset them, as you are far more likely to be murdered by someone you know rather than a stranger.”

“Mr Tourguide, aren’t you supposed to talk about sharks?”

Buddy, if they won’t talk to you after you mentioned your toxic tulips, fear is not the reason.

Even if you added “for it’s meat” at the end there, I have killed and eaten fish.

But the way you said it, who hasn’t swatted a fly or mosquito? Not to mention the skin mites and fruit flies you consume daily.

99% of humans have the complete opposite reaction when the animal in question is a mosquito.

I never said that. What I meant is that a behaviour, which benefits a species as a whole but reduces one individual’s fitness, is not evolutionary competitive. It’s evolutionary game theory, like the prisoners dilemma from normal game theory.

And to determine if some behaviour is such a dilemma, you have to consider costs and benefits of it, which is not at all clear in natural situations. That’s why I said it needs to be studied.

But I must concede, I sort of assumed what exactly you called an evolutionary advantage. Common homosexuality in penguins or not discriminating against homosexual individuals in penguins have very different analysis here.