Reputator

4 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

The daily wire is compromised of a surprising number of failed actors who feel slighted. It’s no coincidence they think Hollywood is woke. 

Seinfeld voice: "Not that there's anything wrong with that"

Oh awesome. So they screwed over The Wild Robot too, sounds like.

16 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

Oh, they're not even waiting until after the election to start the lawsuits:

 

The Republican National Committee sues Michigan over the state's voter rolls

WWW.NBCNEWS.COM

---

The move claiming that Michigan's voter rolls are inflated comes as Trump allies have moved into leadership positions at the RNC ahead.

 

 

"Let’s call this what it is: a PR campaign masquerading as a meritless lawsuit filled with baseless accusations that seek to diminish people’s faith in the security of our elections. Shame on anyone who abuses the legal process to sow seeds of doubt in our democracy," Benson added.

But... that is the play. That's their entire game right there.

This would mean hiring more employees or cutting operating hours. Let's watch as companies line up to implement this.

Yeah I'm not into it.

My installation of Windows has a similar problem. It can do smaller updates but any time it tries to update to version 21H2 it gets a 0x800700c1 error. Same with updating .NET framework.

I tried every suggestion online but I'm just gonna have to do a reinstall at some point. I've just been too lazy.

4 hours ago, marioandsonic said:

Also I  don't think anyone else posted this somewhere, so...

 

 

It was posted in the Performing Arts forum in the John Oliver thread, but yes, very eye-opening. And he (and his team) do a tremendous job elucidating everything.

7 minutes ago, Brian said:

illegals not just stealing your money but also the election lololololol

Again, they're literally using the word here to describe their ethnicity combined with the assumption that they aren't here legally. How is this NOT a racist term at this point?

I forget where I heard it but they weren't given much freedom to flesh out Peach's backstory, so maybe they'll get the slack to do that this time.

2 minutes ago, SuperSpreader said:

 

I'm Mexican and have known plenty of illegal Mexicans in and out of my family. Arguing over what words to use is only going to confuse people and send mixed messages. "Undocumented" "illegal" who cares. Liberals tend to get caught up in academic pedantry and it makes zero progress in bridging the gap for people who don't get why they should care about illegals/undocumented/whatever.

What's confusing about it? Don't use racist codewords to demean specific groups of minorities. Seems pretty cut-and-dry to me.

How does it help progress? Well, maybe by humanizing undocumented immigrants with inclusive language (words influence perception, look it up), we can change the public's willingness to understand and accept them.

Or we could just continue to demonize them.

48 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

Nothing wrong with calling someone here illegally, an illegal in my opinion.  Especially someone who allegedly murdered someone.

It's derogatory. It's not used for anyone except undocumented people from our southern border. A white Canadian here without a passport never hears the word. A white British person that snuck on a plane to get here doesn't hear it. Hell anyone else that breaks the law and could be called "an illegal" is rather called a criminal, or some other variation. It's used so specifically that hearing the phrase can only conjure up the image of a brown-skinned Spanish-speaking person, which makes it a handy code word for racist politicians that want a thin veneer of cover for targeting them.

A reminder that Romney is still your bog standard Republican, even if he isn't a MAGA cultist.

You know before Biden said Laken Riley's name, he should have told Marjorie Taylor Greene to say the names of the children killed in this country last year from assault rifles.

18 minutes ago, best3444 said:

He definitely came off angry and mentioned his "predecessor" too much. 

You realize his "predecessor" is also his political rival, right? And that that election takes place this year?

Ah damn! He left such an indelible mark on my childhood. This is a big loss.

Well crap, that looks fantastic.

1 hour ago, Jason said:

Even if you somehow think Republicans will only try stuff after Democrats have been allowed to do it, I don't see why you'd think the Republicans won't take the attempt, even though shot down, as permission for why they now have to do it in retaliation. 

And how does making it even easier for them to do so help in any way whatsoever?

Just now, marioandsonic said:

I'm too pessimistic to believe otherwise 

Well it's getting old.

ohhh my gooood

6 minutes ago, marioandsonic said:

We're fucked in November 2024 regardless

No we're not.

1 hour ago, Jwheel86 said:

So if States can't enforce the requirements for Federal Office does this mean those who don't qualify (not over 35 years old for example) get ballot access? 

 

Trump wins 2024 -> States unable to block him from the ballot in 2024 for a 3rd term-> Trump wins -> is SCOTUS or Congress at certification going to "overthrow the will of the people"? 

There IS a difference between blocking a candidate based on a basic numeric requirement like age or the number of terms already served, and the still ongoing litigation that Trump is responsible for the January 6 insurrection (however obvious it is to us that he is). This ruling really seems narrowly confined to Section 3 of the 14th amendment and nothing else.

This will eat Trump up inside though. He can't claim to have a sweeping victory anymore, and he will fixate on this one defeat.

1 hour ago, mclumber1 said:

I'm not surprised and I'm not even upset.  This was the only tenable decision, even if I really wanted him to be ineligible because he is an insurrectionist. 

 

I always saw it as a long shot anyway, and it's definitely something red states would have used and abused if it was affirmed. So in the end I'm not upset either.