Immunocompromised, I'm glad you took it but I'm really thinking of not taking Paxlovid next time unless there has been an update to the recommended dosage/length. I took it and basically got Covid twice in a row because I had a rebound after testing negative for 3 days.
I definitely stopped getting worse almost immediately after taking it but that was just so long in quarantine.
Two of them are still in the current legislature, it is accurate to say they are among the 536 people running the country.
And swore a Pickleball Court Oath to rival anything ever done at a tennis court.
I do not understand how this can happen.
Like obviously polls can be wrong but did the far right not win the first round of voting?
The three countries were already in ECOWAS, they got suspended because each of their governments were overtaken by coups, this agreement is between leaders who overthrew the previous government by force.
The coup leaders are choosing to secede from a larger confederation of states, together. Better than the worst case scenario but hardly a real win in context.
It's all a hypothetical, feel free to just decide you are that type of person. No harm in it.
In real life though, if money is no object, the difference between a 2017 normal car and a 2025 luxury car is literally just "do you want extra features and a bigger screen on a car that will last longer?" It just doesn't make sense to get the cheaper version, unless you are giving up something else because you only have a limited amount of money.
Only insofar as you would say they destroy money supply when a loan is repaid. They just create a credit and a debit that cancel out.
Sherbet and Smarties exist in the US but we call them different things and have other things we call Sherbet and Smarties.
Finally we can put these homeless people under a solid roof with their own bed where the government will pay for all their meals and ensure they have time for recreation and socializing.
As long as it's prison.
She was polling worse than him until the debate so that kind of makes sense.
I don't get why people are getting so incensed with this answer. It's an election, it's not fully in his control. If he thinks he's the best candidate to beat Trump, and he runs his campaign the best way possible, and he still loses, then that is democracy and the will of the people has spoken and there was nothing he could have done.
It IS about saving democracy, and bodily autonomy, and the Supreme Court appointments, and he isn't saying that it isn't. He's just saying all he can do is run the best campaign he can, and if the people still vote Trump then he accepts that decision.
You can quibble with his assumptions here, he might not be the best candidate to beat Trump anymore, but that's the right answer.
From a historical lens, it is obviously not the same teachings Jesus taught or even James his successor or Paul who created the first layer of orthodoxy that won out eventually (eg, Christians don't have to be Jews).
But you can't argue that it isn't correct because it's not historically the same, they're just arguing that it is religiously true. That's like arguing that a 3-sided shape isn't a square because it's blue, you're right but not making the right argument.