Carr continued: “The purpose of the rule is to avoid exactly this type of biased and partisan conduct — a licensed broadcaster using the public airwaves to exert its influence for one candidate on the eve of an election. Unless the broadcaster offered Equal Time to other qualifying campaigns.”

Waiting for Fox News to be called out…

Bezos probably does give a shit about using WaPo as influence though, so whilst he might not be losing money, he’s certainly losing influence (however small that may be).

And it’s not necessarily influence over the election, but influence over Amazon’s presentation in WaPo to its readers.

If 10% of WaPo’s subscribers aren’t reading WaPo anymore, as is the implication with cancelling their subscription, then Bezos loses that influence, however small, with those people.

Can’t be. Dude’s not mellow, chill, or cool.

Same here, still on Windows 10 though it’s desperately trying to reinstall it’s crapware removed from the image with NTLite.

Will be switching to some flavour of Linux at some point (we also use this PC for some Steam games), so I’ll check SteamOS out!

The other important thing to consider: polls are a snapshot in time.

They are not a predictor. The only poll that matters is election day.

Donald Trump had a full-blown meltdown

How many more meltdowns before he becomes an angry puddle of orange faeces?

Imagine the rioting from the GOP if Obama had worn a tan suit for that speech…

A new poll shows 56% of Floridians plan to vote for Amendment 4, but unless the measure to enshrine a right to abortion in the state Constitution wins 60% of the vote in November, the state will continue to live under a six-week ban.

The bottom line is, the city is suffering, and Donald Trump is still holding fundraisers, many of them themed on the assassination attempt — the reason the road is closed in the first place.

Perhaps one silver lining of Trumps scandal-after-scandal aura: the assassination attempt was just over a month ago, and it seems that almost everyone has forgotten about it.

Teflon Don perhaps works both ways.

It’s kind of already happened. Three hundred and fifty-odd free evaluations!

I wish we had that level of care. /s

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-mental-state-impeachment-psychiatrist-petition-congress-a9232386.html

So assuming Harris and Walz are going to be more difficult for Netanyahu to negotiate with, does this increase chances of a ceasefire in Gaza?

What’s the context?

It’s worth actually diving into the details. The reporting is burying key details that are often not quoted, making Kamala sound worse than she is.

I’ll say this: people are complicated. Reasonable people are capable of change within themselves.

A lot of people suggest that past actions are indicative of future behaviours. People who assert this are flat out wrong. Look at what Trump promised prior to his election in 2016, then compare it to what he actually did. The same is true of anyone else. What someone did, or didn’t do, in the past doesn’t exactly prescribe what they will do in future.

People are complicated, and reasonable people are capable of change.

I’ve read into the Kamala Harris denying surgery for a trans prisoner story a bit. It’s worth noting that her role as the attorney general at the time is supposed to represent the state, and is not able to pick and choose battles, irrespective of her beliefs.

She took full responsibility for her actions [out.com article cited above]. Trump has never done this, as far as I can tell.

What is not being quoted above, an omission that makes Kamala look bad on trans issues, is that she actually worked with the relevant departments to change the rules [https://www.washingtonblade.com/2019/01/21/harris-takes-full-responsibility-for-briefs-against-surgery-for-trans-inmates/].

Sure, she might have a spotty record though look at her more recent actions. She co-sponsored the Equality Act when she was elected to the U.S Senate.

Even if she was ‘against’ trans rights, those actions above suggest there’s not an ‘against’ slant now.

Don’t take my word for it. Dig out as many articles as you can find, or even transcripts of her debates and speeches.

People are complicated. You can help shape their views. Get involved. Vote. Read deeper into the news, don’t take news at face value. It is often spun, and misquoted, to portray a particular point of view whether right or wrong.

(For what it’s worth, I’m a gay trans person though I have no horse in the U.S Presidential election as I don’t live in the U.S. That said, having witnessed how awful the media have twisted issues and facts in my own country, especially over LGBT issues, I wanted to point out that this whole ‘she’s spotty on trans rights’ is not the whole picture. It’s not your fault though, we’re constantly fed bullshit to try sway narratives, or to convince people to stay home, which is disastrous in a first-past-the-post voting system).

Trump vs. Ramp.

https://youtu.be/ign_vZupjno?si=VEWD1CsxZh3WiI_T

Surprisingly catchy!

Question for those in the U.S…

Would this news, highlighting the ‘forgotten’ stuff again, deaden the probable ‘electoral boost’ he’ll get from the attempted assassination?

Seems like bad news when the case was all but stalled with no news about it in the media… Now it’ll probably get more news traction as it’s appealed over the coming months.

Wishful thinking?

I’ve been thinking about this a bit, I’m not sure it’s been considered and I may be going out on a random tangent…

Isn’t this whole ‘immunity’ decision just another power grab, or rather further cementing of their power, by SCOTUS? Think about it. They’re essentially the arbiter of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ now, as there’s no further avenue of appeal save for amending the U.S. Constitution.

Put aside the vagueness of ‘official’ vs. ‘unofficial’ acts for a moment.

• Trump did something definitely illegal, and Trump argues was ‘official’, like his classified records case. Immune.

• Biden did something questionably legal yet unofficial, such as forgetfully retaining classified documents after his tenure as VP (which he immediately returned). Supreme Court decides ‘not immune’, and some idiot decides to prosecute.

Trump might end up as a king, but the conservative majority of SCOTUS are the kingmakers and protectors.

Diesel burns slowly, though petrol makes diesel easier to ignite.

We mix them 3:1 Diesel/Petrol (called ‘driptorch’ fuel, used in ‘driptorches’) to safely put fire to the ground when we need to.

Source: am firefighter.

Yes, but only for one term. He is eligible again after sitting out for one term, unless of course they manage to change their Constitution.

https://ballotpedia.org/Governor_of_Florida

Or remaining seated whilst the judge leaves the court.

Problem lies in the ‘first-past-the-post’, aka ‘winner-takes-all’ system. There are others, like the electoral college, but I digress.

Third party candidates only ever bleed votes from another in FPTP. Assuming RFK is going after Democratic/‘swing’ voters he’ll potentially end up costing the Democrats votes in key states which, at the margins we’re currently seeing, would potentially allow Republicans to win, holding slightly more votes to be ‘first-past-the-post’ at the end of ballot counting even though a majority of people would’ve preferred a Democrat representative anyway.

Under the FPTP system, voting for RFK as a protest vote, at his 10% margin, becomes a wasted vote because of how FPTP works.

The only true way to fix this is ‘single transferrable vote’, or ‘ranked choice’ voting. Voters simply rank their preference from most desired (1) to least desired (n) on a single ballot.

If the first round of counting doesn’t yield a winner (usually 50% of ballots + 1 ballot in a candidate’s pile), the candidate with the least amount of ballots is eliminated. Ballots are then redistributed from the eliminated candidate, according to the voters next preference on their ballot, amongst those candidates who remain.

Process continues until a candidate has 50% of ballots + 1 ballot in their pile.

The best version of this is ‘full’ preferential voting (every candidate must be numbered), rather than ‘optional’ (number at least one candidate; better versions of this are ‘number at least n candidates’). Optional preferential votes ‘exhaust’, potentially becoming wasted, if the voter didn’t number all the boxes.

This will allow people to protest vote, without actually wasting their vote.