Bill Belichick getting toasted by a jury of his girlfriend’s peers
Bill Belichick getting toasted by a jury of his girlfriend’s peers
Precisely....none. Zero.Zip. Nada.
Exactly. This wasn't like 'leaded gasoline' where there was actually a reasonable *alternative* to losing a generation of kids....and we still didn't do it for a very long time
Let's also not forget that to a very large degree extended school closures were *driven by parents*.....
Except that your evidence that they 'made an exception' is a poorly written dishonest article spotlighting the 1-2 most extreme voices it could find. And even THAT article said:
It seems to be helping one helluva lot more people than it's harming. Regardless, I think the point of the thread is that we have no business judging how other people succeed in achieving their weight goals.
I'm using 'traditional dieting' to refer to any attempt to lose weight via changing consumption patterns - including 'promot[ing] healthy sustainable weight loss'. Lots of people can do that, but only a small fraction of those who try actually succeed.
Actually about 20% don't. And that's probably no worse a 'sustain' rate than traditional dieting and exercise regimens The diet that isn't susceptible to bounce-back hasn't been found yet either because humans have a very hard time modifying behaviors over the long term.
Cheddar is woke. Velveeta is chesse.
Long I in horizon so obviously long I in horizontal…
Yeah, but they couldn't blow through *this* one without a whole lot of Dem votes. Hence the dilemma.
Still comes down to getting 217 votes in the House and 67 votes in the Senate.
Would 14 Dem Senators vote to put Mike Johnson a heartbeat away instead of Vance? Would all of the GOP Senators vote to eject him? Now THAT is quite the political dilemma on both sides
There is no mechanism to push Vance out even if he wanted to.
Texas: norm-breaking for explicit partisan gain; decided by 1 party behind closed doors after kidnapping members California: structured to ONLY if Texas' does (ie, to MAINTAIN partisan status quo); decided by the voters in election referendum They literally are NOT consistent-not even comparable
I'm sure Jake Tapper is all over this.....
thanks.....
As one wouldn't....
wait...what's the playlist thing?
I think they mostly did......most of the (few that they have) 'deals' are structured to give Trump some bragging points without actually conceding him much of anything of substance.
A collection of clips from MSNBC of multiple Republicans getting booed at town halls this week.
An unwillingness to swallow the hogwash that is the 'Major Questions Doctrine'? *shrug* who knows?
I'd use 'refused' rather than 'declined', but yeah......
But putting that aside, I think talk of over/undershooting such a vote-maximizing position not only assumes its very existence, but also frames it as a static target *across* elections. Which also doesn't sound right to me.
Just thinking put loud here - I don't think there's ever a vote-max *policy* position even in a single election, because so few voters vote based on policy in the first pace and the *other* factos are in constant churn (think for example of Comey throwing 2016 to Trump with anon-policy announcement)
BBC Breakfast this morning had a long segment about the 30th anniversary of Windows 95. So what vintage computer did they put in the studio as a handy prop? #windows95
....so why would we expect elections held under all of those wildly varying factors to 'converge ' to a static point?
Way out of my depth here, but the very existence of a 'vote-max position' that *can* be over- or under-shot strikes me as an assumption with no foundation. The composition of the electorate, the information available, the salience OF policy and the salience AMONG policies are all *wildly* dynamic..
The moron was literally arguing that the very presence of a policeman does not affect decisions by criminals. Which is a very, very stupid thing to argue REGARDLESS of your position on whether cops are useless thugs.
No, the idiot was *disagreeing* that there is any deterrence value in the mere presence of a cop. Basically HIS claim was that if I'm a homicidal criminal who wants to shoot you I'm just as likely to do it if there's a policeman standing right next to us as if we are alone in an empty field.
None of which has even the slightest relevance to the question being discussed. You're not the brightest bulb even in the illiterate abject moron box, are you? Muting you now - have a nice life. Don't forget to breath every few seconds.
I think people commit fewer crimes in the presence or immediate vicinity of cops than they do if they know there is no risk of being caught. How is that even debatable? Active Prevention? Almost certainly not. Passive Deterrence? Of course.
Both would be ideal. I mean, just to make up examples..... restoring actual journalism at NYT,WaPo and NN is not anymore incompatible with an all out left propaganda machine at MSNBC than it is with an all out right propaganda machine at Fox. That said, restoring LOCAL news is the real #1 task.
Democratic Congressional Candidates: "Yes, please! Nationalize the hell out of these races and put Trump front & center!"
"...until the executive is a Democrat, of course." - John Roberts writing for the The Six To Three Gang
I laughed out loud.....
I’d rather we wait a few years on that….
This one. They're taking it specifically to rule that drawing majority-minority districts is by definition a violation of their bizarro universe alternate versions of the reconstruction amendments:
Sadly, they don't beed to - they're hearing a case in October that will allow them to *force* states to redraw to eliminate majority-minority districts.....
"Allowing citizens to vote on whether to redistrict is plainly unconstitutional - such decisions can only be legitimately made by partisan power brokers in closed racially segregated country club lounges"
We never had the votes to blow up the filibuster and Expand The Court. And even if we had, the GOP would've expanded again in February with *their* trifecta so it would be moot now anyway Let's try to get the votes for 2029.
C'mon man - stop using the incorrect 'deport' language. People are 'deported' to their country of origin. This is straight up 'trafficking'
sadly, have to agree....
But to whatever extent they can imprison you without an actual criminal charge then, they can already do so now. right?
Spoiler: Alito is precisely bent enough to swallow this one.
Don't sleep on the possibility that shipping red state NG troops into blue cities is a dry run for election day interference.....
If there were any news value to "Clinton had ties to Maxwell/Epstein' or if the supporting incident wasn't a decade ago I'd take your point.....but there's literally zero news value to this story in the summer of 2025.
We should be running more Nice Young People, and it's going to be a bit different everywhere. And we should celebrate that, because it's part of what makes the country cool and is opposed to fascist sameism.
Tis old coot would get strongly behind the Nice Young People movement.....
Yeah. Saw a thread elsewhere yesterday about whether Mamdani or Spanberger was the Ghost Of Dem Future on the ballot this November And my thought - after first having a 'neither one has won yet, let's slow down' twinge was 'YES".
'Never' is way too strong, but.....yeah.
Three thoughts: 1) I betcha the 'golf cheat' references get to Trump more than anything else in there. 2) I had no idea Jack was a 'III' 3) Awesome
Proposed policy from five years ago that never had even a remote chance of passing and would've been immediately obliterated by this corrupt Supreme Court even if it had.
Nah, if they had a manager Jeb! would've trounced Trump......
Um, interacting with communities of friends is quite literally the MAIN use case of social media for MOST Americans. I mean, there's a reason Facebook chose the verb 'friend' for the very act of connecting.
I honestly don't think any would be....but I'm very curious to hear what you have in mind. Obviously she was more to the right on foreign policy....but compared to rump it's hard to come yp with anything. Fascinating question though.
Yeah, CU would've DEFINITELY been on the ash heap of history by now. No question. And Rucho (well one if the earlier cases, it wouldn't have lasted to Rucho) would've definitely banned partisan gerrymandering....
I'm old enough to remember when conservatives would get seriously upset -lic=vid even - about governmental 'takings'......
FDR had 69 Senators - when there were only 96 total. Massive, massive supermajority. Just sayin.....
TBF, almost anything can be done when your party has 68 Senators.....
I mean, I suspect the big players will have a lot more tolerance for the legal risk here than BlueSky is willing to gamble on? Especially those with connections to Trump - remember the whole platform of Tik Tok has been illegal since January in the entire US.
Have any other sites been confirmed as dark yet?
Ok, I concede the point fully: bsky.app/profile/dcin...
Meh.....I hear 'unhoused' over 'homeless' and 'food insecurity' over 'hunger' pretty regularly, just to give two example. I'm certainly not endorsing their whole list - some of them are just weird, some are ridiculous and bad. But we Dems love our policy wonks and we tend to talk like policy wonks
I'm perfectly fine with Third Way failing to reach voters by failing to follow their own advice! But the advice here is good - talk to people in their own language and they'll listen to you longer.
Isn't everything cybertruck a joke?
Well tbf most of those roads were designed and built to have that property left there.
Oh damn, pmepm just lost the 'burbs' "We gonna need a bigger driveway"
But only partially, per Barrett! "Just the dick" the Justice wrote.
Yep. And frankly, not in that big a rush to find out what this fresh hell of corruption is about....
Wait, you think a Trump appeal of the actual verdict 'will never happen'? And James has already said she'll appeal the dismissal of the fine.
"the court upheld a lower court’s finding that Trump, his eldest sons and another executive conspired to alter his net worth for tax and insurance benefits. "
Dude, no.
Um dude - the court upheld the conviction.
Every time I say anything here about voters being responsible for their own votes and having agency I get a batch of Listification notifications that I've been blocked. They not only don't want to acknowledge their responsibility, they want to not even hear it.
And.......she blocked me for pointing out that obvious and undisputed fact. Sigh.
Let's also not forget that they went after (top co=conspirator) Rudy's phone in April 2021- just a month after Garland was confirmed:
Let's not forget that the investigation started long, long before TRump's declaration as a candidate forced the appointment of an independent counsel. Hell, Smith himself said:
Because Trump declaring his candidacy made it necessary to move the already-long-running-and-extensive investigation from DoJ to an independent counsel.....
He’s so fine, Doo lang doo lang
As one does…
Allen Iverson gets it back...
We always knew that. They have jobs and careers and mortgages and families - they were never going to be on the lam for 3-4 months. They succeeded in getting CA to fight back - that was always the best outcome.
(Guardian) - Household electricity bills have increased by 10% since Donald Trump re-entered the White House, a new report has found, with its authors highlighting the impact of the president’s datacenter boosterism .. as part of the cause. @theguardian.com www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...
Also Rhino's BEG, SCREAM & SHOUT - BIG OL BOX OF 60's SOUL is another great muti-disc set. In the 'single standalone cd' division I might well choose this one that was based on Peter Guralnick's essential book.
Is it cheating to choose all three of the COMPLETE STAX SOUL SINGLES box sets? Or this box set? (If so, then I nominate the *original* pre-box set 2 lp version of the Atlantic one)
20 GOP Senators ever voting to convict is less realistic than a direct meteor strike on 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.......
Thanks for the explanation!
So essentially the chart is saying - at the risk of oversimplifying - rather than debt it is the non-AI cashflow of the big players in the AI space who have mature profitable businesses - dominating the funding of the AI space?
Dumb question from the layman gallery - what IS 'hyperscaler cash flow'?
Um….42
"THOSE people - who have turned their whole lives upside down for two weeks- aren't doing enough and I'm very, very vocal about saying so! Also, it's very wrong to even ASK if I'M doing anything. Except posting stupid memes and insulting the warriors!" The real 'shitlib' is in your mirror dude.
Changing the subject and simultaneously dodging both the question and the point. And doing so with a completely irrelevant meme instead of actual words expressing actual thoughts Why am I not surprised? Have a nice life.
Have you quit your job to go fight fascism in DC or LA? Or are tou strictly a keyboard warrior?
So, you don't want anyone from the working class in office? Only independently wealthy people who don't need full-time jobs? Or people 100% dependent on lobbyists to pay their mortgage and bills? Sounds like a spectacularly horrible idea to me.
It's a part-time legislature - they all have real jobs and careers and employers aside from the legislature.
They all have actual jobs and families and homes.....how long will *your* employer keep your job open if you just cruise to Illinois indefinitely for something unrelated? It sucks, but quorum deprivation is a publicity strategy, not a legislative strategy. And...it worked. Got CA moving.
