Your use of “almost exclusively” completely loses the concept. You are confusing individual support and majority voting. Just because Trump is president doesn’t mean everyone supports him regardless of his crimes. Many people did, yes. But not even close to everyone.
Yeah, that was easy.
Scarlett Johansson did that once and all that happens is you become a USB hard drive.
Technically there was mention about abusing children sexually as a sin, but they changed it to being gay is a sin. Saying the quiet part out loud.
Quick, someone photoshop “Charlie Kirk” over Meuller’s name in Trump’s tweet.
I’m honestly not even sure what talk about the Epstein files is supposed to accomplish.
Establishing how disgusting it is to defend, hide or support the bad actors in those files…that’s what it is for. Every person named in those files could go away and you are still left with thousands who protected them from consequences and millions who turned a blind eye. This is one of those “never forget” things.
Meanwhile, MAGA voters are agreeing as well because they voted for “definitely won’t do a war, trust me” Donald cranky old fart Trump will upvote, though, also without reflecting on the irony.
After you remove all the C-suite salaries they only have 14 dollars left. Don’t you know that execs need their yachts?
This is specifically why you don’t make fun of someone dressed as a Nazi. They might not actually be a Nazi and you could be upsetting some innocent person who is simply wearing a Nazi uniform for one of the many other reasons.
I assume “she wasn’t president so she doesn’t count” or some other avoidance.
…decided to use chatbots to cut costs. Also, AI doesn’t do it better.
I don’t know if you have ever seen snow before but… this isn’t a full time job.
In their defense… no… they do not have any better options.
I feel like utilizing eye tracking would be used if they were to study this concept more deeply. That data would be more complicated to sift through given how much data and how many variables might come into play. Definitely more telling but also harder to analyze.
I’m not buying that heatmap data.
In the article they note that they participants were shown photos and told to click on areas that caught their attention. The results show that women paid more attention to the periphery. No eye tracking, no long focus.
Yeah, he clearly was inciting. He chose to provoke others to get a video for his online followers. Even had his meta glasses recording - verbally trolling people.
What a piece of shit.
Yeah, the only thing missing from this article is that the title doesn’t end with “, as intended.”
I have known too many Catholics to believe this. Unless they could wipe out these governments with passive aggressive looks.