I mean, you can argue even her name is self-inflicted. Its definitely the fault of the DNC, since its entirely predictable how the right would respond to her nomination. They thought that was a feature, not a bug.

[comment voluntarily redacted for meanness]

There are accounts if election workers in MI and WI BEGGING the campaign to come back and focus efforts on their states. I think it's a Slate article, but don't the hold me to that.

She was a weak candidate.

Actually, on second thought, here's a worrisome question- how many the Dem base would say the GOP is a greater threat than the Russians?

Massively depressing upvote.

I wonder how stressful it really is for him. I mean, undoubtedly more so than firing people, putting his name on gaudy fraudulent shit, and declaring bankruptcy every so often, but compared to the stress even a halfway competent president would endure?

There is zero chance of resignation. Zero. His ego and delusion would never allow that to happen.

Let the students be political. You show what the politicians are doing, and let them argue over the merits.

I'm still not convinced that there's going to be anything to come from it at all. Not that I don't think shady shit went down-I just have my doubts that any of it will be so unspinnably bad that a completely GOP controlled government is going to do anything about it.

Which makes it all the more vital to increase yields in any way possible. If we're going to get back into rotation farming, those fields will need to produce all the more food.

To illustrate my main point more succinctly: if you're worried about glyphosate residue on your food, then the label you should be looking for is "Please wash thoroughly," not "GMO".

Ok.

Glyphosate is a carcinogen at the same level as working in a barbershop.

"People have a right to know"? You know that sounds like chemtrail-level conspiracy talk, right? I don't think you're going there with it, but I do want to point that out.

I don't really like that argument. I think it should be up to detractors to prove their claims of things being unsafe.

Neither does blanket rejection of GMOs. As discussed elsewhere in this thread, there's a lot of issues to consider, from politics to morality, but most people don't even have the education on the subject to know what they're rejecting. They just hear "GMO" and think "Frankenfood."

This is making a little more sense now. Most of those gyro/burger/dog places also sell polish sausages, which most certainly do get sauerkraut on them. I don't know what the banana peppers would go on, but I could imagine a bin of them there too.

There's not a whole lot of choice in that either at the moment, which is it's own problem. "Organic" is a massive business, with plenty of disingenuous arguments of its own. Unless you're literally getting your food from the farmer's hand, it's very difficult to sort through all the provenance of it.

It is, no question. But that's only one small part of what can be labeled genetic modification. Some people have a problem with GMOs not even for the modification process but because it allows use of proprietary pesticides (ie Monsanto).