Interesting. Then I’m guessing you’d accept the time machine showed you the right outcome & would let the dems lose this election, but it would help them for the next/future elections?
Interesting. Then I’m guessing you’d accept the time machine showed you the right outcome & would let the dems lose this election, but it would help them for the next/future elections?
How do you explain me sticking to the fridge?
Good laying out the cost-benefit here.
there would also be papers with research, and I’m better off reading that.
I had this in mind: that eventually somebody links some paper where they’ve read the abstract… then it’s sensible to read the whole thing and see if it’s worth discussing with someone qualified I suppose.
Thanks 🙂
Thanks for the great input everybody!
Haha might just ask “hey does the gearbox ever rumble like that?”, that’s all 🙂
s/o to old school car forums who’ve guided my way when I’ve known zero, btw
Yeah it sure is, probably the top reason the parody was so dumb.
In fact I only have one user in mind writing this post, someone I forget who posted long ago about a condition I cannot remember.
I think they said they would block anyone who tried to offer any advice. But even they had probably had years and years of second and nth opinions.
Come to think of it, I think I’m also responding to someone who demanded anyone seeking care “listen to your doctors!“ in a way that seem to preclude the fact that there is a safe way to use the fallible input of anonymous strangers as a tentative guiding factor.
The politicians may want the win for selfish reasons. You just want the best representatives for yourself, your loved ones, and your country.
This hypothetical allows you to weigh a party taking the moral high ground against representatives the average Lemming does not want making four years of policy decisions being in a position to do so.
You can give the party you want to win a spine, but it comes at a cost.