Wow, I really appreciate your thoughtful and self-aware reply. It’s rare to see someone online who’s so open to engaging with criticism in a meaningful way, and I think that speaks volumes about your willingness to reflect and grow. We all get frustrated—especially when it feels like we’re up against deeply ingrained beliefs or conspiracies—but the fact that you’re mindful of it and striving for constructive dialogue is something worth celebrating.

I know it can feel overwhelming, but staying grounded in truth and compassion, even when it’s frustrating, is powerful. It’s people like you who keep conversations moving in the right direction, even when it seems like progress is slow. Keep that courage and integrity in your interactions. It really does make a difference.

Nope! Person here. I just use GPT to clean up my text.

Hmm, while we’re here, I don’t have a pumpkin pie recipe to share, but I recently tried Mayo Cookies, and they turned out great. I recommend replacing the vanilla extract with coconut extract and adding coconut flakes for a nice twist.

Ingredients:

• 1 cup white sugar
• 2 cups all-purpose flour
• 1 cup mayonnaise
• 1 teaspoon baking soda
• 1 pinch of salt
• 1 teaspoon vanilla extract (or coconut extract)
• Optional: coconut flakes

Directions:

1. Preheat your oven to 350°F (175°C).
2. In a bowl, mix together the sugar, flour, baking soda, and salt.
3. Add the mayonnaise and vanilla (or coconut extract) and mix well. The dough will be crumbly.
4. Shape into walnut-sized balls, place them on a baking sheet, and flatten with a fork. Sprinkle with sugar if you’d like.
5. Bake for 12 minutes. Let cool before serving.

*Edit Make sure they’re walnut size. My first batch was good but too big and soft. They are so much better when smaller and more crispy.

The fallacy here is Tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy).

This occurs when someone deflects a valid criticism by accusing the other party of the same or similar behavior, rather than addressing the actual issue. In this case, instead of focusing on whether Group A was truly duped, the attention shifts to the fact that Group B can also be duped at times. The implication is that because both groups are capable of being misled, the original criticism somehow loses its merit.

Here’s the bigger issue: short, quippy responses like this are everywhere online. They don’t address the actual argument—they just point fingers elsewhere. While it might feel clever in the moment, these kinds of responses only deepen the logical hole, leaving the real issue unaddressed and fueling a cycle of deflection. Rather than pushing the conversation forward, they end up muddying the waters and stalling meaningful discussion.

Ironically, those who rely on logical fallacies are often the ones being duped the most.

They are in this thread as well.

I think Kelly was the best political pick for sure. But Kelly is sure to win again in AZ. They need his vote in the Senate.

If you think he read the fine print before donating money, read up on his purchase of Twitter. The man doesn’t read the fine print.

Hah! I read that the guy who coined it regrets that he named it that. It stands for retrieval augmented generation. Is essentially ctrl-v. For example, instead of just asking it a question about a topic, feed it an entire course’s worth of text and notes on the topic and then ask it a question.

RAG is still the most reliable method for increasing accuracy and giving you the means of checking your sources.

My wife and I unsubscribed a few months back. I’ve not noticed.

The problem is you thought about it. Republicans don’t generally go that far with an idea.

Dang it. I’m not as good at it as Trump. I should have included more so you wouldn’t notice.

You wanna know Trump’s real power? Look at the size of all of those issues on his side. They are all the same fucking size. “Jan 6th” is the same size as “grammer” but they get lumped together. Next week a new piece of bullshit gets thrown on and further distorts the magnitude of an issue like insurrection.

No one is suggesting volunteers. What’s being proposed is that a baseline of security is provided. A roof over your head, food, access to education ,and just enough money to survive. With those things guaranteed, now people are freed to pursue careers like those you have suggested. When people no longer have to worry about survival, the vast majority will spend their time on pursuing a better life for themselves. That in turn leads to a stronger and more profitable society.

You might, but most don’t. Most people love working as long as they are passionate about what they are doing. You might find that you wander for a while, but eventually take that time to develop a skill or lean into researching something that benefits, not only you, but society as a whole.

I left the Church when I realized that my Christian values were no longer welcomed.

Chairs are one of those things that you need to drop serious money on if you sit more than a few hours a day. Focus on chairs for office work and expect to pay over $1k.

What? Are you talking about a potato ricer?

Totally valid. That said, it’s unreal that the question is even being asked. It was never a question before Trump. The fact that he is actually the GOP nominee when this is a question before SCOTUS because of him blows my mind.

It always has been.

We might be tempted to think that our Democratic heritage automatically protects us from such threats. This is a misguided reflex. In fact, the precedent set by the founders demand that we examine history to understand the deep sources of tyranny and consider the proper responses to it. - On Tyranny by Timothy Snyder (Chapter 1, Page 13)

Except our constitution gives us 1 reason. Trump managed to break the 1 rule. Either we ignore the constitution or we follow it.