jerryskids

I was going to say "not 100%", but then you basically did in your next post.

I dunno... in 2016 the leftie pseuds who run the party thought they lost because half of the country is racist misogynist nazis. Eight years later, I'm confident they think the same thing. They seem incapable of introspection, unable to understand why everyone doesn't sign up for the party of high inflation, transing kids, boys in girls sports, wide open borders, muslim terrorists, and free stuff instead of meaningful jobs. Hopefully they prove me wrong. On the Right, obviously it will be viewed as validation -- victory always is. I wonder what will happen in 4 years. My fear is that our candidate will be somebody basically appointed by Trump, who will try to be Trumpian, not realizing that only Trump can be Trump. Someone like Desantis, Haley, Gabbard would be great. Vance I think would govern less MAGA-ish, but we'll see how the next 4 years go. Also he is quite young.

Good morning all! Did I miss anything?

Yeah, they talked about obscure AZ counties. Seemed weird, as a resident here.

MSNBC isn't crying yet. Close, tho...

Free Press drinking game: take a sip whenever a state is called or a swing state is mentioned (this latter could be bad). Finish your drink if a Senate seat swings. I don't usually drink during the week, but I figure this is basically a holiday, so I made an old fashioned.

That was why the amendment was enacted. Prior to that, going back to... well, the Roman Empire, you had to be 21 to vote (and to serve in the military). The reasoning back in Rome was that you had to carry a bunch of armor and weapons, and 19 yr old boys weren't physically able to do it. Honestly, that hasn't changed much, for those soldiers in the field. But from WWII thru Vietnam, we needed bodies, so we changed the military age to 18 for the draft. Obviously it's still 18, but we haven't had a draft in 50 years. I'd be more than open to let 18 yr olds in the military vote. But just being old enough, in a liberal arts college studying 19th century French Lit, isn't really a good reason to vote IMO.

I'm bouncing between CNN and the Free Press broadcast on Youtube (or X). Blond chick on CNN is a wood.

Also ridiculous that we let college-age children vote, who have zero life experience upon which to base their decisions. Luckily they have China telling them what to do on Tik Tok, whee!

I know right? Kamala is so charismatic, how can I possibly miss it?

Well, he's no Kamala Harris, your party's top choice.

I don't think it's that simple. I view abortion somewhat like entitlements (welfare, SNAP, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, etc.) -- they only work in a society when it's members don't want them, and they are used as a last resort. As Bill Clinton said about abortion: safe, legal, and RARE. That wasn't all that long ago. But here we are, not only telling women it's no big deal if you use abortion as a replacement of birth control, but we'll make it as easy as possible including covering the cost. IMO, a society which doesn't value it's unborn children is not long for this world. We are already beginning to see the impacts of below-replacement birth rates -- bring in more illegal aliens$#@! Birth control was supposed to be the great equalizer, allowing women to have sexual freedom like men. But then that became too much of an onus... Yes. Arizona has Prop 139 (my guess is it will pass) which allows abortion until birth, and makes it a constitutional right. So no future legislation can change it. Here is the summary: https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Proposition_139,_Right_to_Abortion_Initiative_(2024) So... a woman can't just go into an abortion clinic at 32 weeks and get an abortion. But if she tells her therapist (a health care professional) that she is super stressed and doesn't know if she can handle it, that therapist can approve it, and nobody can stop it. Also, the actual wording says "pregnant individual" and to my knowledge does not exclude children, so since this would be a fundamental right, parental involvement would likely be eliminated. I believe that Florida has a similar amendment on their ballot.

I would argue that naivete is using "both sides do it" to obfuscate from the fact that the MSDNC does it to the right the vast majority of the time. I'm sure you can go find some times Fox did it, and say "it's the same!"

I'm generally the same, but my wife has mentioned that she wants to stream election coverage from the Honestly podcast/Free Press. I've pimped their articles and pods here many times. They are pretty down the middle, so the MSDNC thinks they are ultra MAGA. BTW, when I say "MSDNC," I don't mean MSNBC. I mean the entire mainstream media which is an apparatchik to the DNC.

I guess you chose not to heed my advice.

If Trump wins, there is a decent chance that Alito and/or Thomas retire (they are both in their 70s IIRC), and Trump could assign one or two shiny new conservative justices.

Why do you conclude this? Factcheck is not impartial, they get a leans left from allsides. And they don't mention the PES, which would seem like a fact worth including in their analysis.

Sorry, i meant the part i quoted. The PES.

Your link seems to differ from the census' own post-enumeration survey. I'm shocked that an objective site like factcheck would find a site which agrees with its partisan leanings. Also, if illegal aliens count towards electors, that is pathetic.

Sorry I missed this initially. The answer to your first two questions is in the first paragraph of the link I provided.

Interesting, thanks. This seems like the crux: I'm not a lawyer, but the NPR being a hack Leftist propaganda media outlet that my tax dollars subsidize, I'd say their interpretation of the amendment is... lacking. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/14th-amendment#:~:text=No State shall make or,Section 2. It's clear from Section 1 that the "whole number of persons" in section two refers to slaves, not illegal immigrants. That being said, if illegal immigrants count in the census, that is pretty close to letting them vote, given our electoral college system.

A hack HuffPost article which references another HuffPost article about astrologers picking Kamala? Perhaps your brain is in retrograde, Rusty.

Holy fock! That was amazing; it knocked out everyone in the vicinity as well. Very tragic. I think back to some stupid things I've done in lightning storms, particularly staying on the golf course longer than a rational person should.

Never go full ratard.