Yahoo
[yah-hoo, yey-, yah-hoo] Spell Syllables noun, plural Yahoos. 1. (in Swift's Gulliver's Travels) one of a race of brutes, having the form and all the vices of humans, who are subject to the Houyhnhnms. 2. (lowercase) an uncultivated or boorish person; lout; philistine; yokel. 3. (lowercase) a coarse or brutish person.
Cyclical. I'm depressed because I stare at my phone; which makes me want to stare at my phone because I'm depressed. Only the Chinese can save me by taking out our satellites.
I don't know about this study, but I've seen articles in the past linking the light from monitors being bad for sleep.
Supposedly, the theory goes that bluish lights are associated with the brain with early morning, and waking up. (light from the sun has more blue reaching us in the morning). Light in the evening has more red/yellow in it.
Light from monitors, phones, tablets, etc supposedly contains more light in the blue light than is conducive to our brains thinking it is night time.
That's the theory; whether it is really the cause, I don't know.
Historically, Republicans have been for free trade. (in the last two or three decades Democrats have been increasingly for it too, common sense winning them over).
It is very anti-traditional Republican ideals to place tariffs on goods. There again, I think Hillary is more a traditional Republican nominee than Trump is.
You mean car manufacturers will have incentive to make things locally?
Heavens!
What will the car manufactures do without overseas workers?
There is something called economy of scale. The US, whereas a large market is small compared to the rest of the world. Industrially, it becomes cheaper to make things per unit, the more of them you make. Car manufacturers would sill use giant mega-factories like they do today, they just won't be based in the US. They'll swallow the tariff coming into the US rather than on cars leaving the US to a larger market.
Jobs will leave and price of cars will go up. There is a reason most of the world has been embracing free trade agreements for the last number of decades. It helps.
He's wanting to put tariffs on imported goods. Car manufacturers rely on imported goods. Detroit is about to get a whole lot poorer. Even if more parts were made domestically, retaliatory tariffs will make American made cars unattractive overseas. America could potentially lose most or all of its car industry. I suspect the design of cars will still be done by well trained engineers in the US, but the whole product will be assembled elsewhere to avoid extra retaliatory tariffs in the rest of the world.
(we did this whole tariff thing in the 1800's and early 1900's; abolishing it is what led to people getting wealthier)
I highly doubt the man that used to pay protection money to the Mafia in the 1970's and 1980's is going to be the man to remove "corruption" from government. I could be wrong, Hillary wouldn't have ended corruption either.
Trump is no different than Hillary- he is only where he is because of corruption in the first place- probably more so.
Yeah, I don't think the party name should even show up on the ballot (and screw straight-party voting... I voted an equal number of republican, democrat, and third party candidates- exactly equal by coincidence, didn't plan it)
You can't avoid political parties, but it should be on the ballot. If you haven't done enough research to know a person's party, you haven't done enough research to warrant a vote for them- it's anti democratic to vote based on party alone.
I think Hillary probably leaked more votes to Johnson than Trump did. Personal experience doesn't count for much but, I actually know quite a few Johnson voters and all the ones I've discussed it with say they would have picked Hillary over Trump.
How representative is my small sample size of friends? I don't know. But I do know that on polls that compared 2 way votes to 4 way votes, Clinton lost more % points in the 4 way than Trump did. Polls were wrong though about a lot of things.
There was probably a lot of people who voted for Hillary BECAUSE she was a woman. There was probably a lot of people who DIDN'T vote for Hillary BECAUSE she was a woman.
Impossible to know which group was larger. I suspect they're probably about even.
Don't lets forget. Trump, and all the other elected officials, got elected with the current system.
Why would anyone want to reform how elections occur if they won using that system. The only candidates who stand for electoral reform are those that the system squeezed out.
I do agree though, that the nature of our country and how it favours a two party system tends to create politicians who are at the crazy-end of each side. It's difficult to be moderate and win your party nomination. You have to appeal to the base, not the middle.
To be fair, Bernie was probably unelectable himself. He was too far to the left for most of America to ever accept. The right would have torn him to shreds. Hillary, in many ways, is to the right of Trump fiscally.
I was one of the Democrats who voted for Trump during the primary to sabotage the GOP. Screw game theory. Elections are too important to not vote your conscience.
To be fair, by all projections any of the other Republican candidates would have trounced Hillary by a larger amount. The Republicans don't like Trump, and he doesn't like the rest of the republicans. I see a strained relationship between the two. Almost as if two different parties.
Trump may have more difficulty getting anything accomplished than a less mad Republican candidate would have had.
Slashdot Mirror
Spinal cord got broken from people spanking the monkey
They can't conquer the world if they're paralyzed. It's the non paralyzed monkeys, or rather non-human apes, that you don't want to talk.
Yahoo
[yah-hoo, yey-, yah-hoo]
Spell Syllables
noun, plural Yahoos.
1.
(in Swift's Gulliver's Travels) one of a race of brutes, having the form and all the vices of humans, who are subject to the Houyhnhnms.
2.
(lowercase) an uncultivated or boorish person; lout; philistine; yokel.
3.
(lowercase) a coarse or brutish person.
Accurate.
Cyclical. I'm depressed because I stare at my phone; which makes me want to stare at my phone because I'm depressed. Only the Chinese can save me by taking out our satellites.
I don't know about this study, but I've seen articles in the past linking the light from monitors being bad for sleep.
Supposedly, the theory goes that bluish lights are associated with the brain with early morning, and waking up. (light from the sun has more blue reaching us in the morning). Light in the evening has more red/yellow in it.
Light from monitors, phones, tablets, etc supposedly contains more light in the blue light than is conducive to our brains thinking it is night time.
That's the theory; whether it is really the cause, I don't know.
Poor sleep has been scientifically linked to increased creativity. There again, it's also linked to shorter lifespan.
Write bad code, get some sleep. (if you can)
Who wants a smartphone that's been in a 'gina anyway?
Regarding California, after it seceeds, where will they get water?
They will a pipeline to the US and get the US to pay for it.
I'd rather have California as an option to emigrate to than cold-as-fuck Canada.
Historically, Republicans have been for free trade. (in the last two or three decades Democrats have been increasingly for it too, common sense winning them over).
It is very anti-traditional Republican ideals to place tariffs on goods. There again, I think Hillary is more a traditional Republican nominee than Trump is.
You mean car manufacturers will have incentive to make things locally?
Heavens!
What will the car manufactures do without overseas workers?
There is something called economy of scale. The US, whereas a large market is small compared to the rest of the world. Industrially, it becomes cheaper to make things per unit, the more of them you make. Car manufacturers would sill use giant mega-factories like they do today, they just won't be based in the US. They'll swallow the tariff coming into the US rather than on cars leaving the US to a larger market.
Jobs will leave and price of cars will go up. There is a reason most of the world has been embracing free trade agreements for the last number of decades. It helps.
Great Feature! I expect a few dozen people around the world will use this.
He's wanting to put tariffs on imported goods. Car manufacturers rely on imported goods. Detroit is about to get a whole lot poorer. Even if more parts were made domestically, retaliatory tariffs will make American made cars unattractive overseas. America could potentially lose most or all of its car industry. I suspect the design of cars will still be done by well trained engineers in the US, but the whole product will be assembled elsewhere to avoid extra retaliatory tariffs in the rest of the world.
(we did this whole tariff thing in the 1800's and early 1900's; abolishing it is what led to people getting wealthier)
I've lived in multiple countries during my life. Currently the US.
I'm too old to be likely to be drafted for war, but I have a son who will be old enough towards the end of Trump's first 4 year stint.
I don't want my son to die because someone insulted Trump on twitter.
I highly doubt the man that used to pay protection money to the Mafia in the 1970's and 1980's is going to be the man to remove "corruption" from government. I could be wrong, Hillary wouldn't have ended corruption either.
Trump is no different than Hillary- he is only where he is because of corruption in the first place- probably more so.
There will be an election, but Trump will be the only candidate.
Yeah, I don't think the party name should even show up on the ballot (and screw straight-party voting... I voted an equal number of republican, democrat, and third party candidates- exactly equal by coincidence, didn't plan it)
You can't avoid political parties, but it should be on the ballot. If you haven't done enough research to know a person's party, you haven't done enough research to warrant a vote for them- it's anti democratic to vote based on party alone.
I think Hillary probably leaked more votes to Johnson than Trump did. Personal experience doesn't count for much but, I actually know quite a few Johnson voters and all the ones I've discussed it with say they would have picked Hillary over Trump.
How representative is my small sample size of friends? I don't know. But I do know that on polls that compared 2 way votes to 4 way votes, Clinton lost more % points in the 4 way than Trump did. Polls were wrong though about a lot of things.
I think this election has demonstrated that policies are irrelevant.
It's all about catch phrases and quick insults now.
I'm surprised Trump didn't end his speech with "Hillary, you're fired!"
There was probably a lot of people who voted for Hillary BECAUSE she was a woman.
There was probably a lot of people who DIDN'T vote for Hillary BECAUSE she was a woman.
Impossible to know which group was larger. I suspect they're probably about even.
Don't lets forget. Trump, and all the other elected officials, got elected with the current system.
Why would anyone want to reform how elections occur if they won using that system. The only candidates who stand for electoral reform are those that the system squeezed out.
I do agree though, that the nature of our country and how it favours a two party system tends to create politicians who are at the crazy-end of each side. It's difficult to be moderate and win your party nomination. You have to appeal to the base, not the middle.
To be fair, Bernie was probably unelectable himself. He was too far to the left for most of America to ever accept. The right would have torn him to shreds. Hillary, in many ways, is to the right of Trump fiscally.
I was one of the Democrats who voted for Trump during the primary to sabotage the GOP. Screw game theory. Elections are too important to not vote your conscience.
To be fair, by all projections any of the other Republican candidates would have trounced Hillary by a larger amount. The Republicans don't like Trump, and he doesn't like the rest of the republicans. I see a strained relationship between the two. Almost as if two different parties.
Trump may have more difficulty getting anything accomplished than a less mad Republican candidate would have had.
My name is Earl. I'm very disappointed about this.