• porcoesphino@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I wasn’t trying to rank them

        There must be 1000s of people that lead a state that aren’t there (given ~200 countries). What makes this guy’s presence so special? Or, perhaps, his presence is also out of place

        • fonix232@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          15 hours ago

          California is 2/3 the size of the UK.

          Farage is an MP of a constituency of 75 thousand, and won the election for that position with 21225 votes. He’s not a minister, he’s not an appointed leader of anything, he’s not even the leader (or any official part) of the official opposition in the UK parliament. Hell he’s not even doing a passable job at being an MP given he’s missed like, 70+% of parliamentary meetings, and hasn’t held any significant surgeries in his constituency either. He’s the literal definition of paid for doing nothing politician, shuffling around Fasc-a-Lago hoping to earn some favours by having his nose so far up Trump’s ass he could diagnose the tangerine tyrant’s appendix…

            • Mike D@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 hours ago

              As a Californian, I really wanted to jump in with the “Fuck Newsom” crowd.

              But California’s economy rivals most countries. Last time I checked there were only five countries with larger economies.

          • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            12 hours ago

            My grammar is admittedly pretty farm boy, so I thought I’d check. You seem like a bit off an ass but someone else reading this might take it as legitimate:

            Some authorities prescribe that restrictive relative clauses (where the relative clause is part of the identification of the noun phrase) should only use that as the introductory pronoun, and non-restrictive relative clauses should only use which or who/whom as the introductory pronoun. In practice, either pronoun is commonly used to introduce a restrictive relative clause, including in edited prose. In contrast, it is not usual in edited written English to use that to introduce a non-restrictive relative clause, though there are occasional rare attestations.

            https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/that

            I saw at least one typo there and figured I’d leave it for you