Oats. Get organic oats though. Consumer reports found high levels of phthalates in General Mills products like Cheerios for instance.
Improper use of hand signal charge for the middle finger made me chuckle. Two first amendment infringements in one encounter though? This officer needs to learn what the first amendment is and how it works.
There is a large part time worker population in Japan. If you remove part timers the average is around 2000 hours for 2019
I don't think it's a bad thing to throw out more policy goals to measure what the Dem base wants. It sounds like you see it as taking away attention. I see it as battling it out to find better policy sets for the nominee to run on. Battle of ideas is the liberal thing to do in my mind. Besides, what is he taking away attention from? What do you think is more important than figuring out what the Dem base will rally and vote for? On the politico article, he gets 100k out of the known 4.3mil from candidates that donated to republicans in prior elections. That's less than 2.5%. Is that the issue for you? That some people who donated one way are now donating another way? I don't understand that notion. Wouldn't you want to be able to convince people to switch sides? Or are you saying the fact that he's only convinced a mere 2.5% shows he's entirely unconvincing to the purple voters base? Unless I'm missing something the definition you provided on spoiler effect isn't applicable because he won't be on the ballot if he loses the primary.
Rfk is a dem primary candidate, so how can he be a spoiler candidate at this point in the race? Maybe I am the asshat misunderstanding what you mean by spoiler candidate, but that's nonsense to me. You may well be convinced. I'm not, so I wonder what it is that convinced you.
The question just as well could have been an opportunity for people to coherently show just how evil rfk is. I'm not even advocating for rfk. It's strange to me that rather than showing to the world how rfk is a prunicious liar, people choose to argue on the tangential point of a comparison. I think it is good to have a consistent epistemic standard. Be open and honest and let the truth prevail.
Oh, I didn't realize the inflation reduction act of 2022 is working that well for you. July cpi rose 3.2%. Grocery bill is 4.2% higher than last year. I hope you got a better raise than 4.2%. Maybe you are ok with accepting those excuses you are giving for him. I'm not even sure why you would be. It's as though we're saying we can't do any better.
He made a promise and did it through executive action, which failed. To be fair he has time to remedy the situation so we'll see on that front. But are we just gonna blame the republicans for everything? It sounds as if he has no agency and is controlled by the republicans. What would it take for you to think this failure to deliver, if materialized, is on Biden?
I suppose incompetence to deliver a policy that is immune to republican assault is a more generous interpretation of the events than labeling him a liar. I should have asked is he a liar or merely incompetent? Failure to deliver is the same nonetheless.
Ad homenims are great but you should reflect on the failings of Bidens presidency. Inflation, student debt relief, ending child tax credit, no answer on abortion. He is a weak candidate on all fronts of economic, social, and cultural issues. He is metaphorically and physically dying. We need and deserve a better candidate.
I know Biden promised student debt reduction and failed to deliver. Would that make him a liar in your eyes? How do you know rfk is a liar and a grifter?
Sounds like he wants to hold the eviction principle as the federal standard. Isn't that mostly what the dem base wants? An abortion policy that balances fetal viability and choice? Not sure what I'm missing...
I would be pretty mad if this happened where I live. It's like they were trying to set fire to the building...
I think misinformation should be countered on merit of science. Something like Dr Prasad presented is the best way to arrive at an agreement that he is misinformed. The issue is that RFK has a half truth. Yes, CDC suffers from regulatory capture, yes there are a few vaccine out there that have small amounts of ingredients that contain mercury, yes autism spectrum disorder has been on the rise according to CDC (but not because of vaccine!), and yes big pharma enjoys legal protection from "vaccine injuries". Does that warrent his level of vaccine scepticism? In my opinion it doesn't, but I don't think RFK is the audience that needs convincing. His viewers, and those that see the half truth and buy the argument need to be informed. Framing it as a debate sounds adversarial, but a joint effort to discover truth should resonate with everyone. Otherwise it just looks like we are avoiding the discovery of some inconvenient truth. I don't know why you say RFK is acting in bad faith or has no interest in truth, but it seems we could discover whether that is true or not too, so why not?