would_be_appreciated

joined 10 months ago
[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

We both know the reasonable way to interpret your post, and the way nearly everybody would interpret it, is that that's the current or final count. It's also outdated to say 74 million fewer people voted for Harris, but at one point, that was in fact the count. But it's more than outdated - it's misleading to the point of being factually inaccurate to any observer.

I can't believe instead of being like "oh shit, I made a mistake, my bad, I better think for a second about this in the future" you're going to try to justify it. Whatever, that's social media at this point I guess. Surely I'm not the problem, says everybody feeding misinformation in a giant circle. I thought Lemmy might be better, but it's just not. Thank you for convincing me to finally give all social media up.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 28 points 7 months ago (7 children)

15 million of them. That is a staggering number.

It's also not an accurate number. The official count for Biden in 2020 was about 81.3 million (found many places online, but the official one is a good choice) and the unofficial count for Harris by AP so far is about 74.3 million. That's about 7 million, which is less than half of what you claimed.

People have got to stop just posting straight up false information. If you don't know, don't post.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

The entire business would be such a trivial government operation, and we wouldn't have to lose money to corporate greed.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

Confusingly, British English actually does treat nouns like "data" and "government" as plural where American English does not. Even more confusingly, they're a little inconsistent with it, so you can find published examples of both.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

Heritage Foundation has been running Republican policy for decades. That's not obvious to anybody who hasn't read a significant amount about recent history, but there was no doubt about it for people that have.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 67 points 7 months ago

What a roundabout way to say they've just been stealing people's money with no oversight or consequences.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

Have to disagree with you here. I'm not a journalist, but I read easily digestible headlines all day. I had to go back and carefully parse this sentence one word at a time. It's just a bad headline.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 15 points 7 months ago

Boy, I'm not a lawyer, but that sure feels like being forced to incriminate yourself.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

My household is in the top few percentile, we're fine. I just think everybody else should also have the luxury of not having to choose between relationships and shelter.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 7 points 7 months ago (3 children)

People say this kind of thing a lot, but I don't really understand if they don't have any family or friends, don't care about their family and friends, or just think it's reasonable to have to choose between your relationships and living in an affordable house.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

It was a really bad year for California props, people just took a hard right turn.

No to: raise the minimum wage, provide housing, abolish slavery

Yes to: harsher sentencing and some weird vendetta a rich guy has against an AIDS nonprofit

Motherfuckers complain about homeless population nonstop and then refuse to pass anything to fix it.

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 67 points 7 months ago (6 children)

I assume the people freaking out about how dumb python is didn't bother to read the code and have never coded in python in their life, because the behavior here is totally reasonable. Python doesn't parse comments normally, which is what you'd expect, but if you tell it to read the raw source code and then parse the raw source code for the comments specifically, of course it does.

You would never, ever accidentally do this.

...you'd also never, ever do it on purpose.

view more: next ›