Trump and his cult have plowed millions into “47” merch that would suddenly become worthless to them.

No, His followers have plowed millions into it and Trump received those millions.

So while funny, you just have Trump get millions more for his “48” merch.

In support of that viewpoint, if they were ready to vote but just wanted to vote for someone who touted their interests, they’d have been there for a third party candidate, but they just were no where to be found.

Would be interested to see why people sat it out. To the extent it was something utterly mundane like “couldn’t afford to take any time off work to get it done”.

For example, the Ragu ‘Simply’ is only your “other ingredients”. The only sugar in that sauce is innate to the Tomatoes used in the puree.

Sugars exist in all sorts of foods and when it’s incidental to the fruit and/or vegetable content it’s mostly fine.

But it does matter a great deal. The sugars innately in most fruits usually have a low glycemic index, so generally aren’t really that bad for you.

So presenting granulated sugar to represent the innate sugars in a tomato is misleading.

The Ragu one has 0g added sugar, so for that one it’s just the tomato sugar, so it’s misleading.

Problem is in practice, I suspect something is pretty wrong in most teams.

Some common examples come to my mind:

• Management hears “talk about what you’ve done and what you will do” so great time to sit in and take notes for performance review, and it becomes a “make sure management knows you spent all your time and did really impressive stuff” meeting. Also throws a kink in “things I need help with” as there’s always the risk that management decides you aren’t self sufficient enough if they hear you got stuck, so you also need to defend why you got stuck and how it isn’t your fault.
• The people who feel like everyone needs to know the minutia of their trials and tribulations including all the intermediate dead ends they went down on the way to their final result. Related to the above, but there are people who think to do this even without the need to impress management.
• The people who cannot stand to “take it offline” and will stop everything to fully work a problem while everyone is still ostensibly supposed to stay in the meeting despite having nothing to do with the two people talking (sometimes even just one, a guy starts talking to himself as he tries to do something live).
• Groups that are organized but have very little common ground. An “everything must be scrum” company sticks a guy who does stuff like shipping and receiving into a development team and there’s no ‘scrum-like’ interaction to be had and yet, there he is wasting his time and having to talk about stuff no one else on that meeting has a need to hear either.

I’m fully onboard with the “mean people are offended” smokescreen when they produce bad product that also is very visibly “progressive”. It also works because a lot of people do fixate on that when it’s the least of the problems in a reboot/remake.

I’ll say that when people notice the white character is recasted as black, it generally means the source material was absurdly popular and any follow up is likely to be pretty meh. The live action disney adaptations. of their biggest animated properties have been generally bad.

Rinse and repeat for almost any reboot/remake of some iconic movie or show. The chances of getting it at least as right the second time around are slim. Even slimmer than bolted on sequels that generally do poorly even with the benefit of the original creative teams at the helm.

They could have preserved the race of every character and it still would have sucked.

Welcome to my Web page on angelfire!

You are visitor number…

Dial up? Nah I’m driving over to hook up the null modem cable.

There’s a wider context. Trump has declared his intent to have Musk be in charge of “Government Efficiency”.

This suggests he bought his way into a position and considers it a joke, a pretty dumb one too. Also, another stab at trying to make Dogecoin a thing again is highly likely.

So mililons of dollars to buy his way into an administration position that he made up and the end result is a dumb meme… It’s just some rich person bullshit.

He embraced that concept in the same way a lot of people do, as a perceived superpower of being smart. Note he particularly claimed to have Asperger’s nearly a decade after the DSM removed it as a distinct diagnosis. People flocked to Asperger’s as a self diagnosis of “Autism light, I’m an asshole, but it’s ok because I have a condition, but I don’t have any real downsides because it’s not ‘full’ Autism”.

Now with it gone as an official diagnosis, people still embrace high functioning autistic as some sort of badge of honor/superpower and explanation for why they can be assholes. So you continue to have ton of people self-diagnosing to rationalize a more comfortable, lazy interaction with the world. “neurodivergent” is cool because it has the word “divergent” in it, and who would be so lame as to be “neurotypical”, which is used almost as a slur among folks eager to self-diagnose autism.

In short, I’m not particularly inclined to put much stock in anyone’s self-proclamation of autistic. I’ve seen people struggling with it for real and I frankly find it a bit offensive how a lot of internet people have flocked to bragging about their “autism” given how much struggle people have with the condition.

I suspect it’s a complex situation with multiple paths to get there. As it states in that paper “Further research is required”. Based on the paper, I’m not even sure they really had a comprehensive sampling, since it’s a meta-analysis and the source material is generally pretty limited. For example: “It is however noted that the small sample size (n=17) provides only weak evidence to support the finding and as such the results should be taken with caution.”

Just like there are multiple paths to having different vision (genetics, developmental anomalies, illness, environmental, trauma), I suspect there’s enough nuance in gender identity for there to be multiple paths there as well.

I presume there’s potentially a lot of different drivers of gender identity. I wouldn’t be surprised if early childhood abusive pressure to be a “certain brand of man, right now” could be a driver to a feminine gender identity in someone that otherwise might have had a masculine gender identity. Of the trans people who have told me their personal background, many had a somewhat traumatic relationship with a parent in childhood, with a common theme of a parent to be abusive to drive them to be more like a fully grown person while still in elementary school.

It’s not a given and it’s not the only way it works, but I think it is in the realm of possibility that Elon’s bad parenting created the very outcome he sought to suppress.

I mean, was RFK Jr. ever on the rails? Him being off the rails is likely how he got his brain worm in the first place.