Honestly I think your first point is just a subset of something larger and even more basic - “we’ve always done it this way. Change is scawwy. Different bad. Are you implying I was wrong before?” Etc.

deleted by creator

Pretty sure it’s a war crime to subject that many civilians to a naked Trump. Put him in one of these instead

He actually has been touring as well

Another article from Ohio

That makes a fair bit more sense, thank you. At that point I would be more “on average bear, with some minor variance under specific edge cases”.

For what it’s worth, I wasn’t trying to add irrelevant information; I just admittedly have a bit of a tendency to overanalyze in general and my immediate response when this was initially making the rounds was to try and use ALL the information provided.

In hindsight, I think if it had been “a bear alone in the woods or a strange man alone on an otherwise abandoned street” I’d have clocked it a lot easier.

I admit my username is misleading but I am a woman.

I kind of hate this question because I keep feeling like something is wrong with me for picking the man. The biggest threat is neither the man nor the bear, it’s the forest. If you’re lost in the woods dying of exposure is the biggest danger. As a bear lives in the woods and men by and large do not, encountering a bear would be neutral (as you’re kind of in the bear’s house) and a man positive if you’re lost because a. He’s statistically likely to be part of a search party and b. Even if he’s not, hell, even if he’s the biggest asshole who ever lived, it means you’re within walking distance of a way out.

I promise I’m not trying to be a smartass, I genuinely don’t get it. I do suspect I may be autistic though…am I just being too literal?

*At first you think

Cruella is the devil

But after time has worn

Away the shock

You come to realize

You’ve seen her kind of eyes

Watching you from underneath A rock!

This vampire bat

This inhuman beast

She ought to be locked up

And never released

The world was such A wholesome place until

Cruella, Cruella Noem*

A number of House Republicans hit Walz over his comments last month referring to federal law enforcement agents carrying out Trump’s immigration crackdown as the “modern-day Gestapo.”

Good on Walz for straight up saying it.

Spinal injuries, diabetes, an assortment of neurological conditions. Honestly whatever else he’s got going on, given he’s essentially worn heels every day for decades while also obese, I’d put good money that his back and knees are absolutely fucked.

Autocomplete with delusions of grandeur

Honestly for Philly cheesesteak your best option might be to marinate some portobello mushrooms in olive oil, vegan worcestershire sauce, a bit of soy sauce, and garlic, then slice very thin and fry for the “steak”. Worcestershire and soy sauce together do an excellent job if you want to add a beefy flavor to something.

Honestly at this point I’m kind of thinking it’s both - it started out as a planned distraction but being the pair of thin skinned narcissistic man children they are, they both just lost the fucking plot.

I miss stumbleupon. Was a great way to find random niche stuff like that back in the day.

Honestly I’m pretty sure he was already in decline back then. If you dig up old interviews with him from the 80s/90s, he was still an egomaniacal dumbfuck but he was at least somewhat articulate. If you can stomach enough of the fucker to watch all 3 in a row you can pretty much watch his brain turn to soup.

I genuinely suspect he was diagnosed with dementia around the time of that “man, person, woman, camera” incident. Usually when neuropsychological testing like that is done, they do several tests, not just one. One test that is typically given along with is the clock drawing test, which can be highly indicative of dementia. Given the everything about his personality, if he did not brag about drawing the best clock they’d ever seen…I would guess he had some pretty damn concerning results on that bit.