2
HuggableBear 2 points ago +2 / -0

They turned men believing that they were women into a perfectly normal reality. Did you really think that they were going to stop there?

2
HuggableBear 2 points ago +3 / -1

No, simple human greed caused that.

"Exporting Prosperity" means being the shining city on a hill that demonstrates to the world that our way works better than theirs.

Sadly, that dream died decades ago.

6
HuggableBear 6 points ago +6 / -0

But definitely don't make your own with evaporated milk, karo syrup, and a vitamin supplement

YOU'LL KILL YOUR KIDS NAZI

7
HuggableBear 7 points ago +7 / -0

TIL that reposting tweets and videos someone made and posted specifically for other people to see is a right wing online attack campaign

1
HuggableBear 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is Trump all right?

Trump is being Trump. He has always refused to accept reality if that reality means he's anything less than amazing, really the best, everybody knows it.

So he's trying to turn it around and make it look like putting a raging lib in is actually a yuge victory.

Frankly, it's a little sad. Just take the L, dude. Admit that you didn't read the tenor of the movement correctly.

The worst part about this is that Trump won't learn anything from this because he will convince himself that what he's saying is actually true.

8
HuggableBear 8 points ago +8 / -0

well ackchually "hyper" has a specific meaning in this context so even though every single person reading this tweet knows what it means and can see it happening it doesn't meet the specific technical definition so we rate this tweet "pants on fire"

3
HuggableBear 3 points ago +3 / -0

Be the change you want to see

I want to see them change this cover to someone attractive

273
HuggableBear 273 points ago +273 / -0

She was literally just reading from a script. It had nothing to do with the question. She was completely unprepared and just read something from her script that was about the economy since that's the closest thing she could find in the book of things to say.

For fuck's sake, she didn't even know what the Potato had tweeted.

1
HuggableBear 1 point ago +1 / -0

Salmonella is carried in chicken feces. If you are clean in your processing of raw chicken and cook it properly, salmonella is a non-issue.

Likewise, chicken shit only gets on the outside of the eggs. If you don't touch the inside with the shell, your risk of salmonella is effectively zero.

2
HuggableBear 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trump totally was divisive, though, just not the way people claim.

He was divisive because he shined the spotlight on the political class and how they use the media as their propaganda arm. They reaaaaaally didn't like that and attacked him, so he punched back and brought his army of supporters into the fight with him.

That's very divisive, but not in a bad way. When there's bad shit happening and some people support it and others are trying to stop it, that's extremely divisive and should be.

Think about abortion. It's a very divisive issue to even talk about. Because one side wants to kill babies and the other wants to save them. We shouldn't avoid the topic just because it's divisive.

We should fucking crush them and their idiotic satanic ideology. Trump understood this and didn't shy away from it on any topic.

Bring on the divisiveness IMO.

1
HuggableBear 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because you don't actually get sick from the bacteria. The bacteria produces a toxin as a byproduct, so essentially what is happening is that you get poisoned. In adults, this typically happens when they ingest something where the bacteria was present and the toxin is what harms them.

For babies it's a little different. The bacteria that causes botulism only grows in low oxygen environments. When adults ingest the bacteria spores, our gut flora are vibrant and developed enough that there is no environment in our gut that is anaerobic enough to allow the spores to grow.

Babies, though, haven't yet developed the good bacteria in their digestive tract that help prevent that and process food. It's why they live on milk for a year and then can only have very soft foods and not a lot of them for the next year. If you were to manage to get a bite of steak into a baby's stomach, they would have major digestive problems because it would not be fully processed and would cause a blockage because their intestines don't yet have the bacteria that can break that down.

Those same bacteria are what prevent botulism in adults. Babies don't have them, ergo botulism bacteria can grow in their guts.

Botulism spores are sometimes present in things like corn syrup and honey, especially raw honey, so you generally shouldn't give it to them. However, while it is much more likely for a baby to get botulism from honey or corn syrup, "much more likely" is a relative term. If the odds are normally one in a billion and the odds for corn syrup are one in ten million, that's still a pretty fucking low number, even though it's a hundred times more likely. Consumption of honey also accounts for like 20% of botulism cases in babies. The other 80% just happen because the bacteria live in soil and can become airborne pretty easily. Most cases are from airborne bacteria.

And for some perspective, there are roughly 100 cases reported in the US each year in infants. Yes, you read that right. 100. For a country of 350 million people. And only 20% of those cases are from eating something, and most of those cases are from honey, not corn syrup.

The odds of this happening to your child are simply astronomical.

In a situation like this, where the alternative is fucking starvation, I would say it's worth the risk.

11
HuggableBear 11 points ago +11 / -0

Now for Biden it's back at zero

Be honest, man. It went to zero in 2020, with Trump still in office, because of the stupid fucking virus. It has never been zero in history. They removed interest on bank transfers. That's insane and was a terrible move that just demonstrates how little those "experts" know about actual economics.

The interest rate has been way too low for 20 years and we are seeing the results of that now. It's the reason Blackrock is buying up real estate, it's the reason real estate prices are unrealistically through the roof, it's the reason the stock market is waaaaaaaay overvalued.

If they had any economic sense at all, they would have instead raised the rates during the virus so people could take the money they have and put it somewhere safe rather than having to play around in the stock market or stick it under their bed.

9
HuggableBear 9 points ago +9 / -0

People were getting suspended literally for liking a bunch of tweets from Conservatives. They identified that as "bot behavior" because clearly no real person could ever actually agree with conservative opinions.

5
HuggableBear 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yeah, the point of Twitter at its inception was that if you had a quick thought you could put it out there. It wasn't supposed to be for long public diatribes and threads 30 tweets long. Normal people could interact with that. It only takes a few second to pop out a tweet that's less than 140 characters. When they doubled that and people started using it as a blog was when it went to shit.

12
HuggableBear 12 points ago +12 / -0

Millions may still represent less than 5% though. Remember, they would include every single account that exists on their platform. Shit, I even have one and I have never even posted.

The number that matters isn't user count, it's engagement. There is already data that 10% of the users make up 90% of the posts or something like that. The real question is how many of that 10% are bots or fakers? The answer to that is much higher than 5%.

The number that should matter in any legal filing about this is "What percentage of ads that were paid to be delivered actually went to real people?"

116
HuggableBear 116 points ago +116 / -0

"Racism" = lol

I am very concerned about this because it's a huge problem.

The entirety of the left absolutely hates white people.

But they didn't bother to split that category on the chart.

6
HuggableBear 6 points ago +6 / -0

Hey political science genius, I have a question for you.

You say he changed his positions to get an endorsement.

What if... He's lying?

We don't hate him because we're stupid. You say his job is to represent a platform. We hate him because we don't believe he will do that. We believe he's lying and once he's in office he'll just vote like the leftist he is.

2
HuggableBear 2 points ago +2 / -0

Probably. Just because I am defending him against slander does not mean that I like him. At its root, he is the man who single handedly ended the American Experiment when he refused to allow states to dissolve their contract with the federal government.

He literally did what King George had been doing 100 years earlier and he's lauded as a hero instead of a big-government tyrant.

3
HuggableBear 3 points ago +3 / -0

They

They

THey

They

Who is "they" exactly?

5
HuggableBear 5 points ago +6 / -1

If you view crypto as an "investment" in anything but a safety net for when the dollar collapses, you are playing the wrong game.

If you are into crypto expecting to make a profit, you may as well go to Vegas.

0
HuggableBear 0 points ago +1 / -1

I'd bet just about anything that BTC has already bottomed and will shortly begin its next rally

view more: Next ›