Haole means white. There’s history and original translations that have different meanings, but in modern usage I’ve only ever heard it meaning white. It’s definitely not used for “not family” and it’s not really applied to other races unless it’s to describe them as being like stereotypical white people. Uncle/auntie is just an informal honorific for anyone older than you (no race or family restrictions). I’d be described as a haole and referred to as uncle by people younger than me with no implications about where I’m from. There are plenty of white people born in Hawaii that wouldn’t think twice about being labeled haole, even some with Native Hawaiian ancestry.

It’s not necessarily a slur though, that depends on context, but in the context of threatening or beating the shit out of someone it’s kind of hard to argue they were just using it neutrally. Like it’s not impossible, but you’re really starting at a disadvantage.

All of these descriptors aptly describe Steven Cheung. I don’t know why anyone contacts him for anything. He just produces substanceless verbal diarrhea. You can just not talk to a “communications director” as a journalist.

We can’t simultaneously be in a society where productivity goes up faster than wages and AI is going to provide labor for free and one that is worried we won’t have enough resources to support the elderly in some indeterminate future.

The retired have already had a lifetime of wages stolen from them to pad capitalists’ bank accounts. The excess productivity is there, it’s just not available to the broad tax base. Take that back and there’s plenty to go around.

There are proactive steps that separate a forced conscript and a bomb dropper.

Oh look, more fake election results. You need to stop saying things until you can recognize when a “factoid” isn’t even remotely close to believable reality.

This applies to the intolerant trying to gain power to inflict their intolerance on the wider society, not performing odious acts within their own families. It doesn’t make sense here at all. We shouldn’t tolerate murders because they’re murders, not because we’re going to end up with a surprise caliphate.

A) My student government certainly didn’t have a budget worthy of boycotting anything.

B) Do it anyway. Boycotts are speech, you’re in California, and students aren’t obligated to do anything because the school would prefer it. Hell, do it because they told you not to.

C) Don’t boycott a specific country. Boycott all countries found to be plausibly engaging in genocide. Or all countries currently occupying extraterritorial land. Or all countries currently engaged in large scale offensive military operations. Give an exception for the US of A because you’re so patriotic. Israel is in a small club of rogue nations and we don’t generally do business with them.

The leading edge of the Nazi thought machine is already saying it.

https://bsky.app/profile/elnorterecuerda.bsky.social/post/3lsyrlsj3wc2x

How come our centrists become household names for all the times they fuck the party over while their’s are people I’ve never heard of before?

And this is the issue that was worth having a meltdown over. Not any of the kidnapping, not Trump’s tariffs and market manipulation, not Adams’ corruption or Cuomo’s COVID scandals. Their utter silence on everything else makes their current freak out transparently hollow. None of them are worried about NYC, they’re worried about the idea of the uberwealthy getting taxed to make life better for everyone else catching on.

Holy crap, zero percent?? There was some iffy “not enough black support” conversations going on during 2020 that were warped by just how much black support Biden was getting, but you really should be getting more than zero.

It’s shocking how much we had all just internalized seeing plastic bag litter. Our ban really did have a noticeable effect on the trash lying around. It’s not just an invisible benefit “for the planet”.

There’s no real solution for selection bias if you don’t have other respondents of that group. With something like race or education, you have their demographics and can upsample those that do respond. But it the group is specifically defined by not wanting to respond to polls and that comes with biases to the poll questions, you don’t have anything to upsample.

Now whether such a group is really a distinct entity out there that can’t be kind of approximated by people who share other traits is the question. If white conservatives have a spectrum of trust in pollsters and the non-responders would just answer questions the same you’re fine. But it those with low trust are also more anti-vax or some sort of distinct population like an insular community, you couldn’t just approximate them with people who did respond.

I do wonder whether the story here is that the non-voting population largely mirrors the popular vote. This was the first time in their survey the Republican won the popular vote and the first time their non-voting respondents went toward the Republican candidate.

Which isn’t entirely surprising, as both that’s probably driving the vibes and many non-voters are not apolitical, but just don’t vote because their elections are not competitive.

Swing voters are not really the sole political deciders. They matter extra because they effectively count as two votes, but base turnout is often a larger effect than the actual swing voters.

About 15% of Biden’s voters did not vote, 5% switched to Trump and 1% voted for someone else. That’s compared to 11% of 2020 Trump voters, who sat it out, 3% who switched to Harris and 1% who went for someone else.

So of 2020 voters, Harris lost a net 4% to the couch and 2% to switching. You can count the switchers twice because they were a lost vote for Harris and a gained vote for Trump, so that’s basically a wash. Trump then won a net 1% of people who didn’t vote in 2020 (which coincidentally is roughly the same size as an individual candidate’s 2020 voters). So doing better with any of those groups could have swung the election.

The study you reference was created by a market research firm who didn’t share their data and paid for by plastic lobbyists. They measured projected use only into the first year of implementation when people were understandably buying reusable bags to comply. They took that surge in buying reusable bags as indication of long term demand and then assumed 90% of bags don’t get reused, which contradicts other research done by real researchers.

https://whyy.org/articles/new-jersey-plastic-bag-ban-study-misinformation/

I’m in one of these bagless wastelands. We use bags from the groceries themselves. Many of the products we buy are also in some form of closeable plastic and just get put into a second piece of plastic for the short trip home.

There’s a reason I only commented on the “carry bags throughout the store?!? not me” position. That’s the one that outs you as unusually unwilling accept even the most trivial of inconveniences. That you even include that in your justification speaks volumes about your personality.

I dunno not being willing to even carry bags, things that are literally made for carrying, kinda seems like a you problem rather than a first world problem. Like there’s the regular biases toward convenience we all have and there’s Jesus fucking Christ how are you this incapable of tolerating the most minor of tasks.

You know how you handle the onerous task of carrying a bag while shopping? You put the bags in the basket with everything else, put the food in the bags themselves, or just loop the handle over your shoulder.

Nah, only snitch cops are good cops, and the responding officer just quietly filed the notification to ICE. He could have said right then “FYI, I had to notify ICE because they have an active warrant out for you” or if he was an especially good cop “forget” to, but he just quietly followed orders and reported the victim to the gestapo.