jflb96.bsky.social
From Exeter. Trying my best.
He/him
229 posts
113 followers
394 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I don’t know, I think having enough shoulder to wedge yourself slightly might be enough of an advantage on the descent to make up for it being a PITA on the way up
comment in response to
post
‘The government cannot spend as effectively as a single person’ - the words of someone who has never heard of buying wholesale
comment in response to
post
I knew it was still said the same, so I guessed that it was the formerly-Spanish Dutch spelling, but, on looking it up, Wikipedia points the finger at the Spanish rewriting the Latin ‘maiorca’ to have the letters that they’d usually pronounce that way
comment in response to
post
It got the point across perfectly well, it just also derailed my train of thought to consider shepherd’s cottage pies of various mixtures and the possible culinary reasons for them not working. Might have to do some experiments.
comment in response to
post
Well, now I’m wondering what the ratio is where it stops being a lamb cottage pie and becomes a beef shepherd's pie
comment in response to
post
Possibly an argument that they’re less likely to be properly sharp, since the blade is often riveted in place and a pig to get at with a whetstone
comment in response to
post
So, they’re betting the farm on being von Papen rather than von Schleicher
comment in response to
post
If anything, that’s *too* metric
comment in response to
post
Yeah, mostly just silly comments, and then you telling someone off for joining in on the anti-rabbit conversation with recipes. If I was ‘bossy’ and ‘mansplaining’, it was only to the same degree as your fine example.
comment in response to
post
90 is still bigger than 77, isn’t it?
Seems like someone doesn’t know what ‘most’ means.
comment in response to
post
Yeah, you did a bit.
What I was trying to say is that the party strategists who convinced her that the path to victory is to pal around with the Cheneys and promise nothing better than a continuation of the status quo clearly either don’t know how or don’t want to win.
comment in response to
post
How does not voting for something not correlate to not wanting it?
Also, how would you hold Harris’ feet to the fire when you’ve already given up your one lever for influencing her behaviour i.e. your vote?
comment in response to
post
The Democrats?
comment in response to
post
Maybe because the DNC and the USA are two different groups of people. A generally-popular candidate warping their election strategy to fit with an out-of-touch subset is exactly what went wrong for Harris, down to the specific subset.
comment in response to
post
No, because that’s leaving out the 36% of voters who voted for neither, which is what I said
comment in response to
post
The majority voter block voted against both Project 2025 and the lacklustre ‘Just Have Project 2029 Instead’ alternative offered by the Democrats
comment in response to
post
Very much not the result of my choice, thanks.
Can’t say that I appreciate the infantilisation of people that don’t fall in line whenever the ‘lesser evil’ puts out the call, either.
comment in response to
post
Yeah, you’re going to have to explain that one, because it looks like you’re just fully losing the plot. Shall I call you an Aliceulance?
comment in response to
post
No it isn’t.
What makes it ‘right’?
comment in response to
post
What would Harris have done to ‘close the door on Trumpism forever’?
comment in response to
post
1) Why English rather than Latin or French?
2) We only have a Prime Minister because of a family of immigrants that only spoke German; why are we cracking down now?
comment in response to
post
Sure. Let the Democrats off the hook for tanking Harris’ campaign to try to convince ‘moderate Republicans’ to switch sides and thereby alienating the left-wing. You’ll just end up having the same argument in 2028.
comment in response to
post
Maybe it’s because I understand the basics of classical conditioning and know that you don’t get the behaviour that you do want (left-wing policies) by rewarding (voting for) the behaviour that you don’t want (right-wing policies)?
comment in response to
post
How is it ‘adjacent to antisemitism’ to take note of the similarities between the Democrats and the Republicans? Are you saying that the only thing that they have in common is that they contain Jews?
comment in response to
post
Because the candidate is the one making the case. They’re the one who’s meant to be convincing the voters to vote for them. If the voters don’t vote for them, that means that the candidate didn’t present a convincing case for why they should.
comment in response to
post
When would you say it stops being invasive?
That’s very rude, and seemingly not founded on much more than me telling you that you were the one butting in.
comment in response to
post
Yes, the only reason that someone could have for looking at US history and thinking ‘Wow, both of those parties serve the interests of big business over those of the people’ is if they think it’s an antisemitic conspiracy. You’re definitely not clutching at straws and flinging random accusations.
comment in response to
post
If you go to the Palaeontology Gallery in Paris, they have a sample from the right strata.
(Yes, every time I see this picture I have to re-remember why I took it.)
comment in response to
post
1) No I’m not
2) What on Earth made you think that?
3) Rabbits only became endemic in the UK less than 1000 years ago. We should be treating them the way the Australians do, and freeing up the niche for native fauna.
comment in response to
post
Yes, the fundamentalists are the people who change their minds depending on the evidence, not the people who keep placing their faith in the less-far-right wing of the Yank monoparty despite it having never worked.
comment in response to
post
So, you have no examples of when voting for the ‘lesser’ evil did anything except agree with half of the ‘greater’ evil’s points and let it get stronger and more evil for later. What’s the endgame there? When do you stop Voting Blue No Matter Who? If there, why not at the genocide supporter?
comment in response to
post
The latest version of "What's wrong with the Cass Review" now includes the peer-reviewed version of the Noone et al. article on critically appraising the Cass Review. I have also made some minor edits to the introduction, e.g. adding the fact that the Cass Review cost £3 million to undertake.
comment in response to
post
That doesn’t seem like an example of when the lesser evil wasn’t evil
comment in response to
post
No, I’m judging the suitability of prospective elected officials for their desired office, a case in which it is somewhat more important to disqualify those found wanting
comment in response to
post
If saying ‘The lesser evil is still evil, and I will not vote for it’ makes someone an idiot, surely you have an example of when it didn’t result in manifesting evil? Something to show that it can work out for good?
comment in response to
post
The job of the voter is to vote for what they want. The job of the politician is to make the voter want to vote for them.
If the politician makes a bad offer, it’s not the voter’s fault when they don’t vote for them.
comment in response to
post
There’s a difference between voting for what you want and voting against what you don’t. One might not get you want you want this time, but the other ensures that you’ll never even be offered it in the future.
comment in response to
post
Correct. Saying ‘I do not approve of any of these options’ and voting for none is a choice to which all voters are entitled, and an option which they should exercise when they don’t want to vote for any of the candidates offered.