I think I had someone ask why I was necroing something because I had responded to something that had been posted earlier that or the night before. Maybe it was older than 24 hours, but regardless it was a weird experience.
WalrusDragonOnABike
joined 6 months ago
But if you would have also not voted because of issue Y or Z are also dealbreakers, then you'd be a multi-issue voter. If candidate A believes Y and Z, but not X, candidate B believed in X and Y, but not Z, and candidate C that believes in X and Z, but not Y, so you just didn't vote, it would be clear its 3 different issues that you care about, but for each candidate, it would be a single issue why you aren't voting for them. Would that just mean you are a single-issue voter for 3 different issues?
But if candidate A believes in Y and Z, candidate B believes in Z, and candidate C doesn't believe in any of them in a particular election, in that case X alone would mean not voting for any of them.
If you're not going to vote for someone you otherwise would because of a single issue, you're a single issue voter.
I thought it was you decided who to vote on based on a single issue. If you care about multiple issues, and any one of them is a deal breaker, then wouldn't you be a multi-issue voter?
edit: "can can" -> "care"
On a 27" monitor, it makes a huge deal for things like web-browsing, spreadsheets, etc. For video games, its not something I generally notice the difference in with a notable exception being Terraria. Having smaller UI (but still clear) to give more usable space is the main benefits imo.
Why would wearing sunglasses outdoors make someone look like an asshole?
at that point, a 2x4 is 2 inches by 4 inches.
From my understanding, as tools have gotten more precise, the raw boards have gotten slightly smaller to reach the same standard size with less waste. So, 2x4 doesn't even refer to modern unprocessed 2x4s, but rather a hypothetical unprocessed 2x4 at some point in the past.
Because you’re comparing a wild animal that can easily kill you with a single swipe, with a random normal person?
Can easily kill is different than likely to. Plus, the same is true of any human, but they're also much more likely to have outcomes far worse than quickly being just being killed. Its a random person in the woods, not just a *normal *person (whatever "normal" is supposed to mean). But honestly, I don't think I'd put it past many "normal" humans (men and women) to commit at least minor SV in the "right" circumstances.
I can, with 10,000,000,000% certainty tell you that way more people have vastly more ordinary, totally safe experiences with random men in their normal lives than with bears.
Sure, but I'm just as certain that women have far more experiences with SV from humans than any violence from bears. Even if they're actual survivors of bear attacks, they're likely the victim of far more SV by men.
Why wouldn't a reasonable person pick the bear? Plenty of people have just ordinary, totally safe experiences with bears in their normal lives. Meanwhile, they have ordinary SV committed against them by men in their normal lives. Why shouldn't they pick the group that hasn't been a constant threat to them? Its not asking you to try to pick a fight with the bear.
"Bear" is a sex?