[News] Post a D&D Picture

Previous incarnations of Cleveland/P&C/D&D have had an image thread, to handle political cartoons and other image-based stuff that doesn't belong in the general post-a-picture threads.

If any of them spawn an extended discussion, please spawn it off into its own thread. Replies to non-picture replies should take the form of a link pointing to a post on a different discussion thread.

And I shouldn't have to say it, but the images still need to abide by the rules.

mudbunny wrote:

And there are also lots of folks who may have voted for Trump, and then realized just how bad Trump was.

I'm not sure it's "lots." More importantly, how many of those individuals do you think will vote for Biden this year?

IMAGE(https://i.redd.it/nj7h2n7ypzjc1.jpeg)

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/NJ8sxUz.jpeg)

Share of people over 50 voting Republican has gone up since 2018, not down, and if you are 50 or older you are more likely to vote Republican than Democrat:

People keep saying Trump, but Trump would be in jail without the support of the Republican party. The question is not if they will / have voted for Trump, it is if they voted for Republicans at all.

Comparing voter turnout in midterms and presidential elections seems off to me. A lot of people never vote in midterms. It’s kind of like attributing anything to 2023 potential voter polling. A lot can happen between now and November.

And I’ll reiterate that I am always uncomfortable when generalizations like this crop up. Slicing voting behavior across any demographic is fraught. People simply do not vote in demographic blocks. Just as there is no “black vote” or “mom vote” or “Latinx vote,” there is no “young vote” or “old vote.”

Did we really just notallboomers? Let’s just be real here of course we know there are exceptions but the reality is that Trump and the Republicans are largely propped up by old white folks….and the rich who know that with the R’s there’s never a shot in hell they will become less rich.

Well, I'm gonna notallboomers every time it comes up, because I feel it is unfair to me personally. "Boomers" have become a convenient punching bag, and it's frustrating to me. I'll counter any time anyone treats any arbitrary demographic voting block as a metaphysical certitude, because it just isn't. This isn't about me taking something personally. For me it's more about intellectual honesty.

I don't come in here saying all Millennials or Zoomers are lazy and don't want to work, because it's nonsense. The same is true of any generalization about Boomers or Gen X. My intuition, arrived at by observing 44 years of elections (not that it makes me an expert or anything), is that voting trends are highly situational, and depend not on age or whatever other slice one cares to look at. Voting depends much more on local politics, peer groups, environmental behavioral effects, and unfortunately, even the news cycle.

Anyway, here's a picture.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/KF6x6tp.png)

Hidden hearing loss is a real thing though, and there's evidence that youngins' are going to see a greater amount of not hidden hearing loss as they age, compared to earlier generations.

BadKen wrote:

I don't come in here saying all Millennials or Zoomers are lazy and don't want to work, because it's nonsense. The same is true of any generalization about Boomers or Gen X.

As my father was fond of saying, "All generalizations are false... including this one"

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Hidden hearing loss is a real thing though, and there's evidence that youngins' are going to see a greater amount of not hidden hearing loss as they age, compared to earlier generations.

I wonder, though, if there are any studies that link subtitle use with mumbling, thick accents, or plain old sound mixes not intended for home viewing.

Obligatory Vox video on the subject:

So many issues. When I showed the image below to a co worker he pointed out that there is an limited number of dependents you can claim.
then we wondered do they all get SSN numbers? But that is for citizens, which got us thinking that citizenship is given for being "born" in the county - they are not born so they are not citizens.
But then all the US who are not citizens should get the same rights/privileges of these embryos. Which opens up a whole host of other legal questions.

IMAGE(https://i.redd.it/pm779ri7e2kc1.jpeg)

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/JNTXREV.jpeg)

I mean, I wash my hands afterwards...

farley3k wrote:

When I showed the image below to a co worker he pointed out that there is an limited number of dependents you can claim.

That's not true. Neither the IRS nor any state that I'm aware of (I believe I've done tax returns for every state except for Oregon and maybe Rhode Island). Just because you run out of lines doesn't mean there's a limit. You can just add a page.

This isn't a federal ruling. The IRS would never allow this and the embryos wouldn't be able to get SSNs or ITINs. Even if Alabama somehow allowed people to claim embryos (don't forget that they love hypocrisy) with some sort of state-issued identification number, Alabama doesn't have a child tax credit. The only benefit you would get is an exemption per embryo. Once your taxable income is $0, there is no further benefit. Additionally, Alabama's tax rate is so low that you would barely be getting anything out of this scheme.

iaintgotnopants wrote:

This isn't a federal ruling. The IRS would never allow this and the embryos wouldn't be able to get SSNs or ITINs.

Which sets up a nice fight between the feds and the states.

Of course the whole stupid thing raises a ton of issues. I guess a newly graduated lawyer might be happy to know there may be litigation to last their whole carrier.

I mean - another issue. if they are children can I stop paying the clinic to house them? or am I required to do so? I have to provide food/clothing/shelter until 18 so when does an unbirthed embryo reach 18? from fertilization date?

And if embroye get fertilzation date as their "birth date" then shouldn't all children get that? So people will be able to stop child care payments in divorces 9 months earlier!

Honestly the more you ponder it the most stupid weird crap pops up.

It's almost as though the Alabama ruling was based entirely on religion/feels in order to punish "those people" without any thought put into the innumerable implications it carried...

The decision was definitely a foundation that they hope they can build anti-abortion laws on but it is so stupid that the every justice who voted for it should be impeached.

more thoughts

IMAGE(https://i.redd.it/v3hlqmex86kc1.jpeg)

Nevin73 wrote:

The decision was definitely a foundation that they hope they can build anti-abortion laws on but it is so stupid that the every justice who voted for it should be impeached.

Yes and any judgement that includes references to god as a reason for the judgement should be thrown out.

Vibes. It's just all vibes now. Let us perish in the morass of vibes.

farley3k wrote:
iaintgotnopants wrote:

This isn't a federal ruling. The IRS would never allow this and the embryos wouldn't be able to get SSNs or ITINs.

Which sets up a nice fight between the feds and the states.

Of course the whole stupid thing raises a ton of issues. I guess a newly graduated lawyer might be happy to know there may be litigation to last their whole carrier.

I mean - another issue. if they are children can I stop paying the clinic to house them? or am I required to do so? I have to provide food/clothing/shelter until 18 so when does an unbirthed embryo reach 18? from fertilization date?

And if embroye get fertilzation date as their "birth date" then shouldn't all children get that? So people will be able to stop child care payments in divorces 9 months earlier!

Honestly the more you ponder it the most stupid weird crap pops up.

Nah it's obvious. They'll just use this conflict of interest as another reason to abolish the IRS.

IMAGE(https://i.redd.it/tiiugmm987kc1.png)

Lol, good luck. Get a passport and move while you still can.

Banned from Xitter in 3...2...1...

The sheer volume of unintended consequences that come from that Alabama ruling are so large and so easily arrived at that I think they horseshoe around to intended consequences.

f*ck you - we don't care.

So google recently released an image AI that didn't like to generate white men, with sometimes humorous results, and it spawned the sorts of reactions you'd expect.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/h5apwX1.png)

But separate from any tech or other issues, it's been wild seeing how angry some people got at the idea of their own race not being the "default". Like, people fuming over stuff like this:

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/anuhvnA.png)

"..but... but.. you know what I meant!!"

I wonder how many of these angry guys have a picture of a white European Jesus in their home.

SallyNasty wrote:

I wonder how many of these angry guys have a picture of a white European Jesus in their home.

Pretty sure it's a picture of a white American Jesus...

Wonder what happened to their extra kids? Kill them Mikey? or are you still paying to keep them frozen?

IMAGE(https://i.redd.it/95coktq33ckc1.jpeg)

fenomas wrote:

So google recently released an image AI that didn't like to generate white men, with sometimes humorous results, and it spawned the sorts of reactions you'd expect.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/h5apwX1.png)

But separate from any tech or other issues, it's been wild seeing how angry some people got at the idea of their own race not being the "default". Like, people fuming over stuff like this:

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/anuhvnA.png)

"..but... but.. you know what I meant!!"

Besides the white fragility it exposed, it does cause problems with inserting diversity where it historically wasn't.
IMAGE(https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/GG70jhtXkAAsYr7-640x1422.jpeg)