I should clarify. I’m not saying that most people who distrust the justice system are going to like Trump more after his conviction. I’m also not saying that I think he’s likely to reform the justice system in a way that helps people affected by racial bias.

However, many of Trump’s supporters consider his conviction evidence that he’s genuinely an anti-establishment candidate rather than proof of wrong-doing. (See the variety of “I’m voting for the convicted felon” merchandise.) This attitude requires a distrust of the justice system. We’ve already seen that Trump’s conviction hasn’t hurt his poll numbers very much and that he currently has more black support than he did in '16 or '20 so I’m saying that his conviction might actually lead to a small increase in support for him from black people (the majority of whom are still never going to support him) because more of them distrust the justice system.

No, I’m saying that we know black people are less likely to trust the police than white people are, and so it seems reasonable that they might also trust the courts less too. That doesn’t imply some supervillain-like love of crime.

I wonder if there’s actually some truth to his claim. The experience of blacks with the justice system is quite different than that of whites, so I wouldn’t be surprised if their attitude towards a candidate with felony convictions would also be different. Perhaps they’re more likely to believe the narrative of an unfair prosecution than white people are.

The funny thing is that $15 million dollars is not a lot of money for some people. There are a hundred billionaires living in New York City and if $15 million could “buy an election” then at least a few of them would be doing it all the time. They don’t do that because it doesn’t work.

Bowman lost because he was genuinely unpopular in his own district. Being a leftist celebrity didn’t help him much since most of the people he was popular with weren’t actually eligible to vote for him.

Aren’t souls canonically real in the Marvel universe? I expect that only the piece with the soul regenerates.

I’m not old and I think I might forget some of the words, especially since I would be so anxious.

I don’t know if I would call this ruling a mistake since I’m not an expert in matters of standing, but I regret that the court will not act against a serious threat to free speech. Members of both parties have made statements directed at social media companies which I consider well over the line between a request and a threat.

I had the bottom bunk and there was no monster next to me…

Was I the real monster all along?

Not the same thing, but I still have my old Voodoo 2 3D-accelerator card (not the same thing as a video card back then).

When I bought my Windows 11 laptop a month ago, I was able to set up a local account after turning on airplane mode. (I had entered my wifi password in an earlier step since I thought it was just for installing updates.)

I have no idea why the USA spends money on training international students until they get their PhD and then doesn’t automatically give them permanent residency. One guy I know came from Iran to get his physics PhD and although he has managed to stay in the USA with a work visa, by default the USA would have sent him back to Iran!

Dibs on being the palm tree.

The two poorly-rated “classic” Simpsons episodes are both clip shows (the second and third such episodes):

S06 E03: Another Simpsons Clip Show

S09 E11: All Singing, All Dancing

The first clip show episode, S04 E18, is lower-rated than its neighbors but still gets a 7.0, perhaps because of the IMO hilarious “April Fools” framing narrative.

Also notably unpopular classic episodes:

S08 E24: The Simpsons Spin-Off Showcase (three non-canonical segments that are deliberately bad for the sake of humor)

S09 E02: The Principal and the Pauper (Principal Skinner is revealed to be a fraud)

My impression is that the construction of wind turbines is opposed only in the sorts of place where no one would even consider strip mining - e.g. places where wealthy people live. Aesthetic sensibility is a luxury.

Edit: I’m not saying this to imply that people are wrong to develop aesthetic sensibility once they can afford to. I’m not so wealthy that I can afford to do anything about, say, a building being built that ruins my view, but as a member of the middle class I can participate in collective opposition to something like a nearby strip mine, whereas I wouldn’t if I were so poor that I would welcome working as a miner.

I spent those years in dll hell.

Romans got to determine the terminology that people would use for thousands of years.

Celts got their culture disrespected and forgotten.

…and why do kids these days say ooh-wooh?

$600 less in gas costs over the lifetime of a car? Isn’t that a rather small amount? Less than one tank of gas per year… Are they comparing a 50 mpg car to a modern car or to a hypothetical future car with better gas mileage?

People seem to hold computers to a higher standard than other people when performing the same task.

I don’t think you’re interpreting the phrase correctly. It’s not about harming someone in order to make money vs not harming them at all, but rather about harming someone in order to make money (or attain some other reasonable goal) vs harming them simply because you wanted to. Consider the analogous situation with animals: shooting a deer because you want to eat it vs shooting it because you like killing things. The deer probably won’t like you any better in the first case, but most onlookers will.