"und"? Neue rechte Christfluencer? USA schwappt rüber?
SomeOneWithA_PC
joined 2 years ago
Portugal 134 Stimmen, Österreich 131, Deutschland 104 /193 Mitgliedsstaaten.
2/3tel Mehrheit wurde benötigt (gerundet auf 3 Stellen hinterm Komma):
- 131÷193=0,679
- 134÷193=0,694
- 2÷3=0,667
- 104÷193=0,539
Ja aber echt hey, besonders diese 770 Linken, total gruselig im Vergleich mit den niedlichen ~5160~ "besorgten Bürgern"! /s Siehe Bericht verlinkt in https://feddit.org/post/30695386/13297472
by not casting vote do you disagree with both or agree with the one who won?
In my you clearly agree with who wins. My point was that if you disagree with all, you go vote but in a way it is registered as "mistake/error/wrong" vote. That way you don't vote for one, as you don't like any and your vote still gets counted. No one can tell anyone that if a big percentage voted "wrong/erroneous" that all those were not able to vote. That does not happen, only if (at least the majority) did show with this that they did not want to vote for anyone. They wanted to vote and therefor gave their vote, but in a way it gets counted without giving the vote to anyone. If you stay away from voting, you are ok with whoever wins. Either way it's already something wrong if you have to think about this situation.
Everyone who did not go to vote, accepted and is ok with him. I think voting in a way that makes your vote not count is a better statement. If majority of non-voters are really against it, you would see it if 20+% would vote but in a way it doesn't count. For non-voters, i assume they voted for the winner. Nothing else makes sense for me. Also it still showed that more cared for him vs people caring for someone else.
Kann natürlich noch höher werden die Anzahl. Quasi DDOS Angriff auf die Gerichte?
Ja und welches schlimmer ist als was ich zunächst geschrieben und gedacht habe. Also nicht auf dich bezogen schlimm, sondern auf diese plausible aber halt schlimme Möglichkeit.
Forschungsreaktor erzeugt doch keine Atomkraft?
Warte mal, da fällt mir ein, das gab es schon. Früher wurden Wissenschaftler und Künstler auch durch Könige/Kaiser und andere Überreiche "gefördert". Bzw deine Sicht ist wahrscheinlich noch schlimmer, dass die Allgemeinheit dann nur noch für Sonderwünsche der Überreichen arbeiten darf.
oder noch besser, alles von Maschinen gesteuert die nicht streiken können.
view more: next ›
"In hospitals, where a screaming [Person] that threatens the nurses constantly, yelling and getting in the way of staff, gets the attention on his friend with a mild fever while an innocent dies of blood loss in the same room." would be better stated.
There does not exist a "them" also no "they". "distinction between them and everyone else is" -> there is no distinction. Rules are for all no matter who someone thinks they "belong to". I also know nurses and i know a lot of people do stupid thing similar and it doesn't matter who they are but what rules are there and who are breaking them. It's never a whole group of people that do not even know each other. To talk about individual, no matter how many they are, and stating all of them would do x or behave like y is racism imho. Talking about the groups does not help the goal but talking about rules, which matter, which need to change etc. and talking about actions and how they can be prevented without misjudging on a general group that can discriminate would be much better. Should we prevent a whole family going into care if one needs help or should we only ban someone who is arbitrary example over 1,73m or has only 100 freckles?