zaperberry

Hey I don't have cats so it might be a bit different, but I've had a few dogs over the years and I figure it would be similar. Your cats probably associate the carriers with going to the vet which it sounds like they're not a fan of. Their thought process is probably carrier = vet = no thank you.

Have you tried to put them into the carrier without actually taking them to the vet? Drop some treats in there, let them explore it at their own pace, close it for a minute or two, and then either reward or praise them after release? Keep progressing to the point that treats are no longer required to lure them and they enter on their own, but still reward them on release. Rinse and repeat (and repeat and repeat and repeat). Over time they may change their attitude towards the carrier their mindset may turn into carrier = treats and praise.

If they're not food motivated you may have to use alternate bait such as toys or nip.

It's certainly possible and even likely that there were people marching who just didn't give a fuck or were purposefully marching like shit, but as somebody who's served and marched plenty, you'd be surprised how quickly things get messy. It's easy, sure, but it can get out of hand quickly.

If one person goes out of step, especially with no cadence cues, those behind follow the one who's fucking up either consciously or subconsciously. Then the one who's leading the out of step march shuffles to get back in sync, forcing everybody behind them to have scramble to shuffle back into step. It's a domino effect.

Like I said, I won't say it's not possible that you're right, but if you were to watch any marching group you'd see people out of step in almost every case. Regardless of if they wanted to sabotage Trump's parade in this case, most of the people I served with wouldn't want to intentionally make their unit look like a bag of hammers - which sloppy marching does.

I think a lot of people are over analyzing this but like I said, it's still possible that what you believe is true.

I would pay a premium ticket price to get a lay down seat at the back of the plane and have no food service in that zone. That gets rid of the food sales loss, for which I have never paid for anyway, as I'd be paying a higher ticket price. I guess at that point there is still a concern regarding a mess, since I can bring my own snacks, but it's not like I would be getting some memory foam mattress with Egyptian cotton sheets with the way airlines would implement this anyway. I'd get a long ~~pleather~~ vinyl cushion with maybe a standard pillow.

It would be worse than what I got in the Navy, slightly, but still better than any shit airplane seat I've sat in.

The article mentions that the weather was affecting flights home for workers, not affecting the ability to vote. In this case, there's no need to delay the vote. The workers could've kept working and should've been offered accommodations due to a delayed flight home.

Waiting for the storm to pass would've included polling stations opening, remaining opening until voting closed, and accommodating workers who wouldn't have been able to leave on a plane as scheduled. Denying Canadians the ability to vote on election day so that the workers could ensure they made it home as scheduled to not be inconvenienced is unacceptable.

Edit: I was partially wrong, accessing locations was part of the article: "In several cases, it was not possible to recruit local teams. In other cases, harsh weather conditions have prevented access to communities."

Anti-Conservative sentiment in Quebec. The Bloc is never going to hold a majority, so strategically at this time the Liberals were the obvious choice to keep the Conservatives out of power. Among other things.

I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion.

How is it allowed? That's the American way, baby!

How is it possible? People buying Apple products. Their walled garden seems to be a point of pride amongst many users. Not many people actually need Apple products, it's a choice.

Yeah I was definitely a bit snarky but these days, at least from me, you get the effort you give :) no hard feelings, honestly. Before going further, I just want to mention that I am outside of the US so this is more of an outside view - although the problem isn't isolated to the US.

I appreciate you expanding your point, and I do agree with the general premise of your thoughts, however I believe there is a time and a place. I don't believe it was really constructive in the context of this article. This action by Booker was probably the most action we've seen out of the Democrats in the US. It came across as letting perfection become the enemy of good.

Those who are left leaning within the US absolutely need to do better and be more aggressive in their messaging, but they're up against a behemoth. Democrats (overall) and Republicans both, have, and are, acting against the best interest of their citizens. This isn't meant to be a both sides argument, because they're on different levels, but the rightward shift does not seem like an accident.

The road ahead is a tough one. Progressives obviously can't rely on traditional media to cover their fight, and complaining about not getting coverage doesn't really provide anything new. It is known that progressives are shut out by both parties within the US in favour of the status quo, moreso by the right wingers but also very much by the left wingers (I'd say liberals, but for simplicity's sake used left wing). Nobody wants to give up their comfort despite the system which is providing them that comfort slowly yanking it out, or not resisting those who are, from under them.

We're in a technological world but those who "control" that world are part of the problem. Social media kind of acts as a pressure release valve for all the anger, which though it can be helpful in spreading a message, or preventing anarchy, seems to prevent meaningful action as well. It's a tough spot to be in.

Rather than spreading the message online to build up support in numbers that can meaningfully mobilize, it seems that progressives are in a spot where they need those mobilization numbers before even spreading the message lest they want to be shut out by liberals and conservatives alike. I do believe that the numbers are there, but apathy and fear are total bitches and I can understand why people have felt their efforts would be worthless.

At this point I'm just going off on a tangent so I'll leave it here for now. My final point is this: what Booker did, although not immediately effective in preventing this downfall, was at the least extremely admirable, impressive in terms of will, and hopefully something that starts to get the wheels turning a little bit faster. It's not an action to be looked at in isolation. Your explained point is correct in that there needs to be more than just celebration of this event, but let's not put those who DO celebrate it down.

Based on your other responses I assume that the subtext here is that this didn't actually achieve anything other than allowing for a democrat to hold the floor and talk for over a day? It's performative and all it achieves is online discourse vs. what you'd consider to be action? Did I get that right? Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not a mind reader and you haven't been very direct, so that's my interpretation.

How about you just say what you mean? Hiding behind these sorts of bad faith engagements is childish snowflake behaviour.

I think you need to watch a video where someone breaks down how to ask a question.

What do you not understand?

Do you not understand what the words mean? Do you not understand the purpose? Do you not understand the context? I don't understand what you don't understand.

If you're going to rail on about how people need to do more to educate others instead of telling you to do some basic reading then you can at the very least put some effort into your inquiry.

Most people would see it that way, yes.

You can see the AI's process though. It split the query into two parts: [a red ball balancing on] a [white ball with a blue ball on top]. So it threw a blue ball onto a white ball, then balanced a red on top. I'm guessing sentence formatting would help.