Hi op, how has the journey been going? Are you still trying to lose weight?

Good. I don’t know why they picked someone as likable as Walz if not to get him doing media appearances.

While cringey, Trump’s appearances on podcasts or with young YouTubers is likely a part of his grip on young men. The left doesn’t reach out to them much and demographics don’t like feeling ignored.

Walz is an excellent communicator and should be on TV and such as often as he can. Hell, get him on Rogan. That moron seems so malleable that Walz will have him nodding along in the first 30 seconds.

Recorded speech about engaging in crimes is often acceptable evidence. It’s probably the same with written messages.

I guess it’s up to the accused to prevent law enforcement from acquiring what they said, whether it be preventing recording, preventing police from sifting through mail or unsecure communications, or preventing police from acquiring the accused’s copy of potentially illegal communications. Which he is currently attempting.

I don’t blame him for trying, and would agree on a lesser extent that he is right to prevent self incriminating now. But copied communication as acceptable evidence is pretty settled in law by now.

This comic gets the collective despair across so well.

??? reread it

Edit: I feel like this has a hostile tone when it was not meant to. If it helps, read it as “??? reread it :)”

There’s this scene from The Boys S4– so spoilers abound— wherein Homelander spouts the conservative talking points to would-be donors behind closed doors and is told “yeah yeah save the talking points for the rabble.”

Which is great, as S4 is set in the stage where the Trump analogue takes power, but somehow we’re past that point irl. The guys in charge don’t seem to just be saying it for the “rabble” anymore. Sucks how far the right has moved in just a few years without losing significant support.

While I don’t care much about the subject, I do actually care about ineffective communication and how it presents. Indeed, I have made a few comments like that— specifically putting the reason a comment failed to communicate— in the hopes that at least one person will avoid that particular pitfall next time. I don’t do it as much as I’d like to because sometimes it’s hard to condense why a comment failed, but this one was pretty easy.

For the sake of argument though, making quips would still be better than worthless comments like your original one even if they didn’t communicate something. Among every form of discourse, quips are vastly better liked than “not true but I can’t prove it” to everyone but the guy being called out.

Nah don’t care, that subject itself doesn’t affect or interest me. Just saying that you convinced no one and that your comment provided no value besides a few upvotes for me, which don’t even matter on this site. I also intended it more for others who might be inclined to do the same thing rather than you yourself.

If you actually ever want to change minds or prevent the spread of misinformation (which I’m still not convinced it is because again, you provided no evidence and I still don’t care), it’s a good idea to actually elaborate instead of just saying “not true”. The only people convinced by empty comments like yours will be convinced the other way by the next evidence-free claim.

Btw I genuinely don’t see how the info would change my life for the better so if you are gonna start trying now, just edit it into your og comment or something, I probably won’t be back in this thread again

I bet “that’s not what happened” with zero elaboration has a single digit success rate

I don’t think it’s a bad day situation, that would be if she made mistakes. The moves were clearly deliberate.

I was never going to beat these girls on what they do best, the dynamic and the power moves, so I wanted to move differently, be artistic and creative because how many chances do you get in a lifetime to do that on an international stage?

I was always the underdog and wanted to make my mark in a different way.

And y’know what, if it doesn’t negatively impact her career from here, power to her. It was memorable and entertaining, even if it was at her own expense. As long as her opponents didn’t feel disrespected (I don’t know enough about the breaking culture to say), I think it was worthwhile. Wouldn’t most of us say we benefitted from watching it?

I meant like Alien Blue and Apollo where if you swipe on the comment and not on the edges, Apollo had a full half centimeter of edge space for front and back while AB was more like RDX (which imo is better really)

No worries if you don’t want to though, just thought I’d ask

Hi, thanks again for making this app. Any chance of swipe to collapse? I find it takes less effort than double tapping

Intriguing, my first reaction is that this must be some accident. On iOS it’s marked as not collecting data, and the privacy policy is a single line.

I’m sure the dev will swing by shortly, I’m just expressing my surprise at seeing that

Apple needs a toggle for “I’m not a total noob” to disable some of these things. Well, Microsoft does too but for different things.

This will probably be a large net benefit since most users are not, uh, proficient and likely grant permissions a little too often. I guess I’d rather click yes repeatedly if it means depriving some corpo from monetizing user screen content. But if they’re adding it, they may as well make it optional.

I think if my opponent removed the head of their last challenger and still had an arm left, I’d back out of that fight. I imagine next in line would too

Last I recall, Google was trying (they obviously want the money) but was receiving pushback from legacy ISPs and the local governments they have agreements with. Is that not the case?

I have to say I am too. She’s had a few incidents of odd speech patterns; if not this, the poor soundbites like weirdly explaining things (“Russia is a country” or “do not come”). Trump’s word salad is so normalized that he won’t be scrutinized for it. There will probably be sexist comments on it as well.

I hope she gets new speechwriters and a bit of training on what to say instead. It’s probably a lot to hope that she can quickly override this pattern, given it’s likely something she’s done all her life, but her duties as VP are relatively minimal and the campaign can afford speech training. She’s better than Trump either way, but being consistently on point would be useful

Yeah me too, I actually skimmed their profile to verify haha.

I have long trusted, alongside polls, Professor Allan Lichtman’s system of keys to the White House. The system uses thirteen true/false questions and asserts that American voters vote for president based on the governing performance of the incumbent party. It has been right 11 times in a row, if you believe that the Supreme Court allowed Bush to win even if recounts were going to turn it in Gore’s favor. It correctly predicted Trump’s 2016 victory along a number of other upsets.

Per this system, Harris has a less lenient board but is still probably favored at this point. She has lost incumbency and unfortunately does not bring charisma (defined as broad appeal past their party). Nonetheless, if the remaining undecided keys fall as they stand now, she would win in October.

In my opinion, her candidacy could be better than Biden’s if this allows Biden to focus on securing a ceasefire in Gaza instead of campaigning. This would allow a foreign military success, making up for the loss of incumbency. She may also hurt RFK’s campaign if there are a good deal of protest voters who are simply tired of two elderly men (and thus picked a slightly younger elderly man).

Because of this system, I was very very worried about Harris replacing Biden. Professor Lichtman’s streak is unparalleled and he has little skin in the game since he is not a pollster doing this for a living. Thus it’s difficult to see it as pure luck. Lichtman himself believes it’s still winnable though, and that has been relieving to hear.

Outside of the system, I can see how Harris could win. She polls better. She’s younger and can be a reasonably decent speaker. She’s certainly more exciting than Biden, and has more energy and time to campaign. With the media focused on her now, she could get her message out quickly and powerfully. I can see her winning by a significant margin.

If I’m honest, I’m not totally optimistic, but there are many factors in her favor. I would’ve felt better if she had the charismatic appeal of Kelly or Whitmer. It’s fine though. Her strengths of being a coherent non-fascist that has never been found legally liable for rape should help separate her from her opponent, and she’ll demolish him in a debate if he develops the courage to show up.

Everyone knows a coup is when a candidate steps down and endorses their VP. Biden is still POTUS, with the immense powers of a President, but he has of course been overthrown.