yeah their point is that, as seen in the 2022 changes, the invasion of ukraine has made “maintain status quo forever” the most popular option—and made “status quo first and move towards independence” and “decide later” (which is leaving open the possibility of moving towards independence) trend downwards. nobody is disagreeing that unification has always been unpopular

it’s worthy of note that 33.5% against 23% means the latter (status quo and move towards independence) is still a substantially popular opinion, but the person you’re replying to is correct that maintain status quo indefinitely has an incredible plurality

relevant domestic opinion polls: https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/PageDoc/Detail?fid=7801&id=6963

it’s clear that the non-US services are just spokes and not hubs, though. like news about the subway that brings NJ people to Manhattan would be reported as NJ news, not NY news

without further explanation, looking at the mod’s modlog posted above makes me inclined to go ask PTB…

Newsweek has always been a questionable source since its purchase by the notorious IBT. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Newsweek_(2013-present)

Alternative theory: Western news’s emphasis on this made more people (on Polymarket, the poll in question) aware that Orbán was actually being challenged. I’m not sure if that holds true for voting Hungarians.

tl;dr: the BBC article removed this sentence from the quote they used and this blogger noticed it

“together with” (not “together, with… instituted”) means ze wants both to be done away with, not the former replaced with the latter

we do, though? fossil fuel prices soaring is real and something fossil fuels from Russia could fix EDIT: i replied before you edited and i now see that your edit addresses this, nevermind

i agree with your point that most of the west had nothing to do with starting the Iran bombings though

the US and Israel do not represent the entire West. this is Israel and Trump’s war and nothing more

it’s also wrong™, but i think attraction is a complicated thing and unlikely to be extrinsically changed after it forms. not that the process of said formation is free from bigotry exposed to, but shaming people for certain attractions instead of, say, focusing on improving representation, inclusivity, and normalization in the environment is more likely to make them fodder and supporters for bigotry. though attraction biases are a symptom of bigotry, this is one of those cases imo where it’s much better to treat the cause over the symptom.

i know it’s satire. i’m wondering how genderqueer people would react to people sincerely saying that irl

sorry if this is an offensive question by any chance, but how would you react to someone irl saying “There’s no poetry in a body that hasn’t been a site of transformation and reclamation. I find the unaltered, cisgender body to be lacking a certain history.”?

not me thinking this was serious and an interesting valid perspective 😭

Raising animals already depletes a lot more resources than just farming