Fun is also what fuels exploration and learning. I think the overall point here is that there are people who have fun with different experiences that may be at odds with each other. Some people like struggling with something until they achieve success, and others just want to relax and have a good time.

Personally, I’ve had my fun with hard games in the past, but I’m turned off from the idea of getting stuck behind a skill barrier because I’m older now and have less time to spend on games.

I blame First Past the Post voting. In that system, the two parties have to become big tent parties and cater to the “average” voter that they want to capture.

What is your opinion of the idea that this position may make you indistinguishable from a Trump supporter?

Almost! Kamarades. Kamalades?

Does celebate mean virgin? I thought it just meant not having sex.

I like to think that being called weird isn’t an insult. But it is being taken as an insult when used on people who call others weird as an insult themselves.

Can’t it be fixed?

I have a theory that the anger issues could lead to cognitive decline. Anger and rage has a tendency to kick off the fight or flight response. With that comes survival mode, lizard brain thinking, and irrational decision making. There’s a lot of viral videos of people in this situation where the anger is causing them to make bad decisions. The experience might even be traumatic for them, kicking off their mental defense mechanisms.

Afterward, they post-hoc try to justify what happened in those moments to hold onto the idea that they are still a good person. Occasionally they realize they have a problem that needs to be fixed, but many times they will dig into their irrational positions with new emotional attachments to it. It can take a lot of therapy to get past it, which still has a lot of stigma with testosterone-types, so they don’t and the irrational “logic” builds up over time. Therefore, cognitive decline.

Are there more substantiated studies on the effects of anger, especially there we see this pattern? I think I am seeing it over and over, but I can’t be sure of the prevalence of the behavior since there is a bias in the media I see.

I didn’t think the term limits are arbitrary. It also includes a system that spaces out appointments so that new judges are selected every two years so that the cycle of new judges is more consistent. It avoids a situation like Trump’s presidency where he got to appoint more than his share of judges.

He’ll probably blame rigged elections for his loss. In his mind, he wants to avoid the idea he ever made a bad choice.

It seems like it is useful to try to speak to the median voter and (supposed) undecideds who would be affected by this. There are lots of other publications with different perspectives. Is it bad necessarily that this one exists and operates this way?

People often segregate themselves into bubbles separated from others they oppose. I can say since the political affiliation is known from past elections, that has become a stronger factor when I am deliberating on which places I would want to live. I’m sure this is adding to the polarization, where people are gravitating to communities that more often reinforce their beliefs and give them fewer opportunities to challenge them.

How can we counter this polarizing force?

Probably shouldn’t say that

There were a lot of rumors and speculation about this possibility last week that I think did take a lot of attention away from the Republican convention.

Biden defeated himself, it has nothing to do with Trump

Third parties under the First Past the Post voting system are literally the threat to the power structure that will just keep them pushed down by the major parties.

The major parties may be afraid of sharing power now, but they are also seeing the threat of losing power completely when they can’t keep their coalitions together.

We see Democrats making a major move today with Biden stepping down from the race in order to placate parts of the party that are very unsatisfied. The threat is already more real today than it has ever been.

I think that people will realize that we are all in alignment about reforming the election system being better for the country, even to preserve a large part of the current power structure.

Then are you more aligned with the Republicans or the Democrats? Like it or not, the election system only supports two parties. That’s what we should be pushing towards changing rather than hurting ourselves.

I think that Kamala is the most obvious replacement especially because she has access to the Biden/Harris campaign funds. If that’s agreed upon by the delegates, then the selection is just for VP, which I think can be more streamlined.

The Democratic candidate is chosen at the convention, which hasn’t happened yet. What would a legal contest even be based on?

From the article you linked to:

Election law expert Richard Hasen wrote that there is “no credence” to the notion that the Democratic Party could not legally replace Biden on the ticket, as he is not the nominee yet – the nominating process generally takes place during the Democratic National Convention.