S O C K S

It's Super Effective!

Premature Exclamation of victory.... Yup, that tracks

¿Porque no los dos?

A sea bass? No, wait - it's at least a C+!

https://github.com/osqzss/gps-sdr-sim and one of the linked SDR boards is a start

That means you are capable of shame, though, and could never be a Republican.

I find it funny they list "Trump with handcuffs" as a possibility, but only if Trump wins and Democrats control part of Congress. Seems to me that Trump would be in handcuffs even if Harris wins.

Sorry, I thought it was obvious that Trump's campaign is getting all sorts of foreign help, including state-level actors that might object to organizations that keep evidence the campaign is trying to stuff down the memory hole ...

Wouldn't you be pissed, too, if you had to deal with New Jersey traffic to get to your home games?

Some of those posts have since been deleted from LaCivita’s feed, but CNN was able to review them on the Internet Archive WayBack Machine, which archives internet webpages.

That's interesting, since the Internet Archive has been the subject of a few hacks in the last few weeks....

Yes, I know that will require a constitutional amendment. Yes, I know that will be extraordinarily difficult, some might say impossible

There's a shortcut

States have the ultimate say over how their electors for President represent the will of the people. The NPV movement asks states to assign EC votes based on the result of the National Popular Vote. Several states have passed laws mandating this once enough states pass it to constitute an EC majority.

It has been passed in states making up 209 electors, and proposed in states making up 50 more. If those states passed it, and they get 11 more electors (perhaps Arizona?), then they will have the 270 votes necessary to guarantee the EC will vote in line with the popular vote. Still a hard problem, but now the problem has been confined to a handful of states.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact

I was a big pusher of the idea that Biden should drop out after the first debate, and that Harris would be the only possible replacement, since she had already won on a ticket with Biden and, as VP, was his understudy anyway.

There was a lot of pushback from people then, but a handful of people argued against it because they claimed that the heartland of America was simply too sexist to vote for a woman. It explained what happened in 2016, and they said it would happen again.

I'm wondering if they were right. And the difference between 2020 and 2024 is that enough people in the wrong EC states will simply never vote for a woman as President.

I read this entire article, and it made me sad. Because the guy's probably going to win. The people who need to read this article simply won't, and they will continue to believe what he tells them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

I can understand it, though, I would find dealing with those two exhausting

Or, they suspect ratfuckery in more than a few states and want to make sure they don't ignore TX, because if they can shift it for Harris then it won't matter how much GA is ratfucked.

Do not underestimate how much some people (even in Texas) hate Ted Cruz. I can totally see a ticket split there.

I mean, if Beto "Psychedelic Warlord" O'Rourke can almost win there after threatening to grab everyone's guns, then there must be a lot of people looking for any alternative to Cruz.

Or maybe Trump was born in a strange, foreign land (also known as Queens, NYC)

Watch him blame the woke autocorrect on his phone