It’s certainly the first time he plays himself.

Every one of them will claim to have always been against Trump, their voters will cheer and they’ll stay exactly where they are.

My only real issue with it, and I think this mistake gets made a lot, is the near constant suggestion that anyone who doesn’t agree with her on the Israel-Palestine conflict is doing so not because of a genuine disagreement but because they’re held in thrall by the money of AIPAC or whatever.

Exactly this. nobody’s being forced to watch the show.

An argument could be made for brand confusion over the word “apex”... if that wasn’t a fairly generic word to begin with.

I certainly wouldn’t call it unfeasible, but I would certainly suggest that if that’s what the Democrats are trying to get, they should be demanding single payer, and offering that in the bargaining phase. The public option was in the original draft of the ACA, IIRC, but was bargained away. You don’t start…

Satanists would be offended by the idea of causing harm- in any way- to someone just because of their sexuality. One of their main appeals, really. Their moral code seems very much based on harm caused. Causing harm is only permitted in the form of righteous vengeance.

I’m not sure. I think they finally allowed Franklin Richards to age into a teen after decades of toddlerhood (as well as being aged and de- aged a few times). But how diligently that gets applied seems to vary based on which character you’re talking about anyway.

Ten? That FF comics is way older than that.. Try 44

That’s what always got me... instead of switching crops to something profitable like most farmers would, they lobbied the government into giving them subsidies? WTF? Are you actual farmers or what? You should know how to farm more than one crop.

Umm... I was joking as well. You might want to rethink that.

That means you’re ... hmm 15? I mean you have to have been old enough to notice the GOP’s opinion on these things...

McConnell certainly does. The rest of them likely have someone else in mind.

valid point, but most of the nations you speak of got those labour laws due to union action. The fractured way the US works makes a similar state of affairs difficult, as it would require the federal government over- riding the state governments.

That was my immediate thought. Clinton doesn’t have a dozen or two former employees under investigation and/ or arrest for illegal actions undertaken in relation to a presidential campaign. Trump does.

Would that not require that selling the assets somehow be more valuable than keeping them, even with a small tax? Not only that, you can’t sell assets to nobody- someone has to buy them, which means either the ownership of those assets gets diversified- which seems like a good thing- or ownership eventually lands in…

Here’s my question about the wealthy picking up their money and leaving... so what? Is their money sitting in a US bank, untaxed, doing any good for the rest of us? Does it matter if they move it somewhere else? Right now, they invest their money wherever in the world they want, anyway. That money going untaxed in the…

That works only if you assume everyone is born into the exact same economic bracket in a society entirely devoid pf any kind of prejudice. This assumption has absolutely no evidence to support it, however.

The funny thing is that the Fox News viewers view socialism as unfair because they think only the leaders will live in mansions while everybody else gets a 600 sq/ft apartment, little do they realize that’s exactly the reality capitalism has created.

Buzzfeed doesn’t have much to lose, though. They are hardly anyone’s first choice for hard journalism, and will simply go back to what’s paid their bills all this time: Listicles.