Good to know that I, too, have the body of an action movie star.

… said the prosecutor reading the defendent’s online statements to the court.

I don’t really want to discuss this IRL since I’m a bit paranoid of mass surveillance and getting my voice recorded saying anything anti-establishment could put a target on my back

Wait till you find out the CIA can read…

I like that “fostering a healthy and supportive work environment” translated to “CULL THE WEAK!”

deleted by creator

Also incidently everyone remaining is extremely stressed about feeling stressed and getting laid off. Good luck, yall.

So as always, it depends and there is a spectrum. The scum of the scum are slum lords, i.e. landlords who buy property, do not fix up or maintain it, fill it with any old tenant that is desperate enough to take it, will evict someone at the drop of a hat, and constantly charge exorbitant amounts on property the own outright because the property value went up this year. It doesn’t necessarily have to be that bad, but people that buy property simply as an “investment”, i.e. get passive income from people with less money than them to buy property, are leeching off the less fortunate. There are certainly scales of badness to that, but that idea is simply immoral.

But there are other situations where one may be a “landlord” and it’s not really a moral problem. For example, a cousin of mine had to work overseas for a bit over a year and was put up in a hotel during that time. He didn’t want to sell his home, as he would be returning to it later, but also didn’t want it to sit empty. He ended up signing a year long lease over to a couple students, charged them little more than the mortgage (enough to cover the mortgage, taxes and any minor repairs that may be needed after they left) and returned home to a house that was still in decent shape, hadn’t had any break ins, infestations, or damage from the elements, and the students got some inexpensive housing for the year. No one was taken advantage of and he wasn’t just milking poor people for profit. Everyone won. That is clearly different.

What we really need is for people to be way more distracted and absorbed into media at all times of the day than they already are AND for there to be no detectable way to know they are distracted to everyone around them. The frustration of being constantly ignored combined with the urge to constantly have information or entertainment streaming straight into your cortex will mean that everyone is even more isolated and lonely than they have ever been before and are therefore easier to radicalized! Can’t wait for the new techno-pocalypse!

Cool. Now add Artificer.

No that’s not how LinkedIn works. If a job lists specific qualification tags like that, it marks those tags with symbols and colors them red or green to indicate if your LinkedIn profile has those qualifications listed. Those can be education requirements, certifications, skills, etc. That tag shows that their profile doesn’t have a bachelor’s degree listed.

Good for you?

Imagine if you weren’t allowed to watch your favorite movies from the 80’s or earlier unless you managed to have a still working VCR and VHS copy from your childhood. No Goonies, no Godfather, no Star Wars original trilogy. They decided to wipe these films from the face of the earth so that you could no longer enjoy them and had to go buy their new movies, exclusively, if you wanted entertainment from a film. That’s what games publishers are trying to do, so they don’t have to compete for you attention with older classics.

Sort of. But they were still kings and queens of England, just also other kingdoms too.

There is no Easter Bunny. There is no Tooth Fairy. There is no Once and Future King of England!

Honestly, I would be very surprised if he were disallowed. Not only because, as you said, it is unclear if the 12th amendment eligibility conditions apply to conditions added after the 12th amendment and make no reference to modifying it. But also because the 22nd amendment does not, in fact, specify that someone who has served two terms is ineligible to be President. Rather it is very specifically a condition about being elected to president. If we’re interpreting the constitution strictly literally, the 22nd amendment doesn’t make a new condition for eligibility to be President, only for being elected president. So the 12th amendment would not apply. That may not have been the intent, but if anyone thinks the same Supreme Court that ruled that the President has absolute immunity on the use of his presidential powers isn’t going to let Trump slide right through that loophole… well, you could probably convince them it was raining as you piss on their leg.

The two term limit was set by the 22nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The language in it is that no person may be elected to the office of President for more than two terms. It does not specify any criteria about consecutive terms, meaning it doesn’t matter. They simply can’t be elected more than twice to the office President under any conditions. It also specifies that if they served more than two years as President when they weren’t elected to that office (such as when a VP assumes the office after the President dies), they can’t be elected to the office of President more than once. In other words, a 2+ year term of a president after succeeding the previous president whose term ends early, counts as a full term in regard to this 2 term limit.

In other words, this SHOULD be his last term. There are two legal loopholes, however. 1) If he somehow managed to coerce a skip or elimination of the next election, he could assume another term without defying the constitution. There is currently no mechanism to do that, but an act of a partisan Congress upheld by the partisan Supreme Court could make such a thing possible. 2) if he ran as VP for another person, which is constitutionally allowed, he could be elected as VP and then the elected President could resign, die, or be removed from office and Trump would be President again. Also, a new amendment to the constitution could be passed to negate or modify the 22nd amendments’ term limit. Though that would require a lot of Democrats also voting for it.

I for one blame the misinformation machine, the radicalizing echo chambers, and the reactionary and inflamatory nature of social media that the internet has propogated over the last couple decades.

Can’t get 5 adults that REALLY want to play DnD together to play DnD.

Leftist memes did not lose dems the election. Voter apathy and the sheer popularity of fascism did.

I’m not necessarily attributing blame here, but I’m pretty sure that OP is suggesting that leftist memes helped lead to this apathy. Say what you will, Trump voters were excited for their candidate… somehow, despite the list of reasons not to being far too long to be listed here. But many on the left either were just lukewarm on her, just considered her the lesser of two evils, or were protest voting third party or abstaining for one reason or another, mostly over Palestine. And there were memes galore to make clear to everyone what the general mood was. It doesn’t exactly inspire enthusiasm to those that need that a lot of enthusiasm to even bother (those people are frustrating, btw). I don’t know how much it actually contributed to or propogated the apathy versus how much it just reflected the apathy already there, but a case could be made either way.

412… and a half?