I know of a major gameplay innovation in the past 5 years, though it’s incredibly unpopular to many.

AI2U features NPCs that are run by Azure AI. The goal is to make the ChatGPT NPC do what you want so you can solve the escape room.

This gameplay feature hasn’t really caught on, but I’ve only seen it be used recently.

Not officially. At least in Illinois, civil servants can get in deep shit with the Ethics Act if they start advocating for a political party in their capacity as a civil servant.

Back in 8th grade, me and my classmates were learning material for the Constitution Test. It would be fun to see what my teacher back in those days would think about this. “Not even the president is above the law”, lol.

We still lack verification on right-handed neutrinos and the exact wave function for helium.

I view the Democrats as a pathetic party that never hits back. And when a Democrat DOES try to hit back, the other Democrats try to sink that person’s campaign for being disruptive.

So yeah, I’m upset with the Dems for always trying to appease or doing some halfhearted “Oh no we wanna do something but we just can’t ughhh” nonsense.

When you’re a rich person, there’s no such thing as too much money.

I kinda want to see Trump go on a Twitter rant explaining why the Weak Force is part of a Democrat plot to destroy the entire universe:

Particles all support the radical left, or me, you know? And then there’s that weak force. You know, they call it weak because only the radical left will give it the time of day. Only the radical left. All particles that vote for Trump wouldn’t bother. That’s why those particle collider people can’t find neutrinos that vote for Trump. They always try to use the weak force to find neutrinos, but good people know that only radical left neutrinos would let themselves be seen, because they like weak things.

In 2015, I saw Trump as the key to causing more chaos than the establishment can handle. If Hillary won (maybe in that timeline, Trump was sunk by the RNC coronating Jeb Bush as nominee, and then Bush lost the general), the rich would only get stronger, and their rise would be much more subtle than it is now. In our world, Trump doesn’t hide the massive corruption he and his rich buddies are doing. In Hillary’s world, the more under-the-hood corruption of the 2000s and early 2010s would have continued without anyone trying to stop them.

This may come off as a stretch, but I claim that Mamdani (nor anyone like him) wouldn’t have been able to become NYC mayor in Hillary’s world. He wouldn’t have the support, since people in Hillary’s world are even bigger sheep than the ones in ours.

On the other hand, certain policies pre-2015 might have survived. I think Roe v Wade would still be with us in Hillary’s world.

If a woman performs a progressive Tea Party style takeover of the DNC, I can see her having a good shot at winning the general election.

You might look at certain Spanish products differently.

Japan has you covered on that one. The correct spelling for the sound of a blow job is ちゅぱちゅぱ, which in English sounds like “chupa chupa”.

I’m a Latino? How exciting!

Correct, if you define victory as benefiting the people of the country.

But if you define victory as helping yourself while pretending to help the people of the country, then the DNC strategy is unbeatable.

When you lose your job in the US, you lose your health insurance. You’re screwed if you need an operation done when you’re unemployed. And people in a union tend to be the first to go for talking back.

Darkseid is taking notes.

Maybe, but actually moving left wouldn’t assure a victory either. If it became clear that Kamala was moving left, the DNC and the rich people in power would help Trump win through lots of propaganda on the news.

Kamala only wins via the progressive route if she gets lucky at countering both Republican and Democrat propaganda, like Mamdani.

Maybe Dick Durbin will talk about how releasing the Epstein Files is an invasion of privacy, and that we should be the bigger man by forgetting they ever existed.

“Vote for the lesser evil”

But why vote for the lesser evil if the lesser evil will vote with the greater evil anyway?