TehPers

I’m more worried about fraud at the elector level, not at the voter level. If the survey covered that, I’d say that there will absolutely be (another) attempt this year.

That makes more sense. Thanks for sharing.

Of course, in context it’s a lot different. Conceptually, it’s interesting, but only taken without the context that the goal is clearly to subvert the balance of powers between the different branches of government and turn it into an authoritarian government.

If anyone reasonable were to suggest it, it wouldn’t be so terrible though. It’s just that we know how Trump would abuse that office to push his own agenda.

An office to consult with could have helped pushed some of Biden’s things, especially regarding student loan forgiveness. It’s not always clear what is and isn’t legal, and ideally a president would try to push the boundaries as much as they can to accomplish what they believe is best for the country.

Trump is just a uniquely bad dude. Give him a hammer and he’ll turn it into a weapon before he builds anything productive with it.

Taken wholly out of context, a legal office to work with the president to ensure their orders are legally sound and hard to challenge sounds like a good thing. Does that not already exist?

The rest of this nonsense can cease along with his whole campaign, and the world would be better because of it.

Biden gets a rousing tribute from Democrats as he passes

I knew he was sick, but holy crap.

the torch to Harris in 2024 DNC speech

Oh, phew

What’s wrong with putting tampons in the men’s restrooms at schools? Won’t they come in handy if there is a shooting?

Anyway, this reads to me like free advertising for Walz.

(Disclaimer: do not try to use a tampon to patch a bullet wound)

If Biden wants the immunity amendment to pass, he needs to show people what the decision means, guns blazing (okay maybe not that extreme). Otherwise, these would never pass. They make too much sense.

In Philadelphia, PA, Trump warned that if Democrats win, “you will never see oil again,”

Say no more.

MLK Jr. got shot. Anyone who makes a lot of enemies is more likely to have this happen. Trump certainly made a lot of them.

And while I’d love for them to take gun control seriously, it’s more likely they’ll argue that everyone at the rally having a gun would have prevented it somehow.

Honestly the biggest issue in the US is the 2-party system, which means whoever has the most representation of the two basically runs the country uncontested.

Does this mean the SCOTUS is giving Biden free reign to free up some seats?

I felt like neither side really answered the question about how they planned to address addictions in the US. They both talked about the US-Mexico border and trying to catch more imported drugs, but failed to address domestic production, and more importantly, failed to answer how they plan to address addiction in the US (as in current and future addicts).

Also, the whole question about physical ability diverted so off topic that I lost what they were even talking about. Biden seemed to try to answer it, but then it took a sharp turn towards weight and golfing skills?

Edit: I should also add that yes, Biden tended to stay on topic more. Trump always seemed to be answering a different/previous question instead.

The debate covered important questions of national significance, including whether Trump had intercourse with a porn star, who was better at golf, each of their physical health conditions (including Trump’s height and weight and apparently cognitive ability), and even featured a modern use of the word “malarchy”. They might as well make a short, catchy intro for it, break it up into episodes, and advertise it as a sitcom.

The debate was completely useless. The only thing I got from it was that Biden’s brain still works but his body doesn’t, and Trump’s body still works but his brain doesn’t. There were some slight mentions of hot topics and each of their positions on the subject, but there was so much jumping around and avoiding questions that it was not very helpful.

Honestly, I think one of the things Biden said should just be applied to both candidates when determining who to vote for: “Just take a look at what he says he is, and take a look at what he is.” (I believe this was used in context of Trump’s weight… lol) Both of them have served 4 years in office, and both have done stuff outside of the oval office. It’s easy to see how each of them would spend their terms based on what they already have done.

I’ve seen this in a few places on desktop, and I have no clue why it’s even a feature. I’m not aware of anyone using it anywhere (although to be fair I haven’t thought to ask).

As for why it’s enabled by default, probably for visibility. The easiest way to get people to use a feature is to make them use it and make them explicitly disable it (if even an option). For AI training, they could theoretically just capture typing data and messages regardless of if the feature is enabled/disabled anyway.

“Thieves break into a car in SF” is somehow less surprising than “the grass is green in SF”.

See, it’s democratic as long as people vote for their candidate of choice. Only one candidate? Well, you voted for them at least.

Also, I’m curious why this hasn’t been an issue in the past. Is it Ohio changing the deadline, or the DNC being moved later in the year?

Free federal? Even if your state doesn’t have income tax? Now that sounds quite nice.

Anecdotally, I’ve been hearing from someone who works there that they’ve been doing some blatently illegal things with regards to RTO enforcement and reasons for dismissal in general, including threatening employees who take time off for not “badgeing in” while on vacation. I’m hoping we see some huge fines in the near future on them, as employees raise complaints and even sue them for their practices.

Every single partner I’ve had as well, which is only one, but it happened twice on separate occasions (once outside the US though)…