...That does not, in fact, make it any better.

That makes it even more terrorism.

People that are registered Republicans, consistently vote Republican, or hold Republican views make up a little under half of the overall population, current population in the US is around 340M (last time I checked, it's been a minute), so 140M is a fairly conservative (ha!) guess at how many people would more-or-less be Republican, or lean Republican.

Oh, and the flip side of that is that there are a larger number of people that are registered as Democratic voters, consistently vote Democratic, or tend to lean Democratic in their views, even if they don't vote/don't vote consistently.

I'm in the US, and I can't. I fucked my shoulder (probably a labral tear; still waiting on the MRI results), and it was two weeks to get in to see someone. If I'm actively dying from something, I would need to go to an ER or an urgent care center of some kind.

...It's not even close to the majority of people in the GOP. It's not even a particularly large minority

Jesus fucking christ.

Even if it was 100 people every single day that were being, caught, arrested, or convicted for CSAM or sexual misconduct of some kind with a minor, and every single one of them was in the GOP, that's still 365,000 out of about 140,000,000, which is .2%, on an annual basis. Two tenths of one percent is about fifty percent away from being a majority.

Not a war crime; terrorism. Hezbollah is a political organization.

After all its not hard to make a corporation in the US

...A US corporation is subject to US laws.

ByteDance is subject to Chinese laws.

If TikTok wants to do everything that it's currently doing, but under US law and under US scrutiny, they're more than welcome to do so. But they're currently evading any serious scrutiny. Hence the reason to shut them down if they refuse gov't oversight.

National security interests are the interests of the people though.

The fundamental issue is that, assuming I'm not leaking national security information, I can say nearly anything I want on Facebook, Twitter, etc. (as long as I'm not in violation of their terms of service). The US largely does not censor people using the power of the gov't. If I am an authoritarian communist, I'm more than welcome to spread these views on any American social network that I choose without gov't interference. I can spread anti-vax and Q nonsense if I wish, and the worst-case scenario is that my neighbors will stop talking to me. I can attack the very foundation of the country if I want, as long as I'm not spreading military secrets.

This is not the case in China. Spreading pro-capitalism and pro-democracy messages can quickly get you arrested. Trying to share accurate information about what really happened in Tianamen Square in 1989 can result in you disappearing. Words and phrases are actively censored by the gov't on social media. The Chinese gov't takes a direct role in shaping social media by what it promotes, and what it forbids. Anything that's perceived as an attack on the political system of the country, the party, or any of the leaders (remember the internationally famous tennis player that abruptly disappeared when she accused a local party leader of sexual assault?) will put you at risk.

This isn't a case of, "oh, both sides are the same".

The Constitution doesn’t only protect American citizens, it protects everyone

Uh, no. It doesn't protect everyone, not by a long shot. The US constitution doesn't guarantee Chinese citizens, living in China, the right to freedom of the press.

...And this isn't about which speech they're allowing. This is about who controls the platform, and how they respond to gov't inquiries. If TikTok is divested from ByteDance, so that they're no longer based in China and subject to China's laws and interference, then there's no problem. There are two fundamental issues; first, TikTok appears to be a tool of the Chinese gov't (this is the best guess, considering that large parts of the intelligence about it are highly classified), and may be currently being used to amplify Chinese-state propaganda as well as increase political division, and second, what ByteDance is doing with the enormous amounts of data it's collection, esp. from people that may be in sensitive or classified locations.

As I stated, if TikTok is sold off so that they're no longer connected to China, then they're more than welcome to continue to operate. ByteDance is refusing to do that.

One of the worst films I've ever seen. It's especially bad because of the amount of raw talent that they have in it; had it been as bad as it is but with actors appearing in their first performance ever, it would be understandable. But to somehow be this bad, with people that have been in contention for Academy Awards, is simply unconscionable.

It's so bad that it feels like someone tried The Producers scam IRL; this must be some scheme to launder cartel money.

Until it doesn’t.

...And that point is often what we call "genocide", when you've killed so many people that there simply aren't enough left to effectively resist, and then you forcibly assimilate the remainder into your culture.

Eh, trying everything they can to make a policy stick isn't that far different in my mind to things like John Yoo's pro-torture memos; they're trying to warp the law in order to do what they want to do, rather than trying to work well within the boundaries of the law. I've seen plenty of Dems that say Republicans opened the door, and so it would be foolish of Dems to not walk through, but I'd argue that Dems should be trying to close the door. I'm generally opposed to a strong executive, since I'm broadly anti-authoritarian.

And yes, I recognize that there's no way in hell Biden gets the student loan debt relief passed by the current congress, and yes, that's shitty.

Are you okay with losing the majority of battles and having x10 the casualties?

The thing is that having 10x the casualties tends to create more fighters.

This is why Israel needs to commit total genocide in order to "win" in Gaza and the West Bank. Every time they kill a legitimate Palestinian fighter--versus an uninvolved civilian--they're killing someone that had a family, and friends, people that knew the person, people that loved the person, had probably heard about the injustices (real or perceived; mostly real in the case of Palestinians) from them, and knew why they were taking up arms. These people don't end up being cowed by the violence. Then you add in the people who have their whole families killed by indiscriminate bombing, and no longer feel like they have anything to lose except their shackles.

We know this already. We've known this since WWII. The Axis and Allies both through that bombing civilian population centers--London for the Axis, Dresden for the Allies--would break the will of the people, but instead it hardened them. The concept of total war and mass casualties simply Does. Not. Work.

You can't win wars like this through military force alone, unless you're willing to commit total genocide.

and your relying on sympathetic locals

This would also be true of a guerilla civil war in the US though. You'd be relying on locals--people that had probably had friends and families killed by gov't military operations and indiscriminate bombing--to help you root out insurrectionists.

Would a large number of 2A supporters be in favor of tyranny as long at it had an (R) next to it? Sure. Certainly not all of us though.

Huh?

Are you suuuuuure about that?

I'm pretty sure that most coups involve the military.

As far as civil wars go, oh, there's at least one going on right now in Myanmar, and the gov't def. has an air force there.

Calculators also say that dividing by 0 is an error, but logic says that the answer is infinite. (If i recall, it's more correctly 'undefined', but I'm years out of math classes now.)

That is, as you divide a number by a smaller and smaller number, the product increases. 1/.1=10, 1/.01=100, 1/.001=1000, etc. As the denominator approaches 0, the product approaches infinity. But you can't quantify infinity per se, which results in an undefined error.

If someone that's a mathematician wants to explain this correctly, I'm all ears.

But the tree never makes a sound.

That depends on how you define 'sound'. If it's only perception and interpretation that creates sound, then sure, a tree falling with nothing to hear or perceive it makes no sound. But if you label sound as the vibration created independent of the perception of the phenomena, then sound happens regardless of whether it's perceived or not. Since we label some sounds as imperceptible, or outside of human hearing ranges, my interpretation would be that the phenomena is the sound, rather than the perception of it.

TBH, Dems have absolutely done the same thing before. A super-easy example is Biden's policies to forgive student loans (which, BTW, I'm fully in favor of; it was just done in such a way that it wasn't legal). There's currently a case underway right now regarding the Lloyd Austin throwing out plea agreements with Guantanamo Bay detainees; there's a pretty solid argument that he doesn't have that legal right.

My point is that Bush et al. pushed the limits of what was legal, and in general stopped doing those things when courts told them that they weren't allowed to. OTOH, Trump has absolutely, 100%, flagrantly violated the law and court orders many, many times.

Ah! Got it.

I can't say for certain that it will be hotter than regular hair, but it seems likely, because there's a 'cap' built into them that the hair is tied to. Many wigs are also made with synthetic materials that can absorb and retain more heat than human hair. He best bet is likely going to be finding someone that specializes in wigs made of human hair, and talking to them about it. Be warned that wigs made from human hair costs quite a bit more than fashion items; they can easily be several hundred dollars each.

I have a lot more freedom in this area because of my gender; it's socially acceptable for me to simply shave my head. If you mom doesn't like the appearance of patchy or thinning hair, would she consider that option?

Most people don't split their ticket when they vote; if someone votes Democratic for president, it's likely that they end up voting Democratic in most other races on the ballot as well. That's especially true if they're actively voting against Trump, and the other candidates are endorsed by Trump. So, if I was a Republican trying to take control of the Senate and retain control of the House, that would be a risky strategy.

As far as the other possibilities go, IDK. It doesn't seem likely because...

...Many of the Republicans currently endorsing Harris are been vocally anti-Trump for a long time now. It's not new that they're anti-Trump, but it is new that they're actively endorsing a Democrat. I don't think that they're trying to actively work to get Trump elected by some subversive means, and it seems like the numbers of people that would work on--versus the number of Reagan-era Republicans that would take it at face value--seems very marginal.

Staffers are basically just office personel.

Staffers are usually True Believers. They want to work for an administration because they believe in the person, and believe in the policy. That, BTW, was why Trump had such ferocious turnover; people become disillusioned at a blistering rate.

That's such a fucking stupid take from someone that doesn't even have a grade-school understanding of politics.

The Republicans endorsing Harris don't like her, and they don't agree with any of her policies. They probably do agree with much of the bullshit that comes out of Trump. On the other hand, the Republicans endorsing Harris genuinely believe in America, and in the idea of democracy. They clearly see that Trump is an enormous threat to democracy in the US, and that he's doing everything in his power to break the system that they believe in, even if his specific policies are things they agree with.

Whether I like Bush Jr., or Cheney (either one, really), or George Will, or any other Republican endorsing her, or not, they are still people that believe in the rule of law. Trump does not believe in the rule of law. These Republicans largely believe in letting voters decide, even if they'll jerrymander the shit out of districts. Trump does not. These Republicans don't believe that this country can survive a second Trump presidency, and they would rather lose the Presidency, the House, the Senate, and possibly a few seats on SCOTUS, than watch our democracy die.

Any covering on the head is going to hold heat to one degree or another. If she wants to minimize that, then something like a shemagh or a keffiyeh is likely her best bet (although a keffiyeh is considered menswear). They're both fairly light weaves, almost gauzy, and should allow air to circulate.

Hair in general is just hot, and the more you have, the hotter it is. If you've every gotten a crew cut or shaved your head in the summer, you'll know that the difference is stark.

Why does she need a wig or hat though? Is this a religious issue, where she's not allowed to show her own hair?

If only because there's only half as many to get... ;)

I would ask what kind of douchenozzle would attempt to use all of it, but I guess that the Venn diagram of "people that want to use every bit of torque and horsepower their car has" and "people that buy Cybertrucks" is a circle.

Very, very few people need as much traction as their tires can give them on a daily basis. I have a VW GTI, and I put the longest lasting tires on it that I could find, because--even living in the mountains--I'm simply not getting even remotely close to the limits.

What I'm saying is that sacrificing grip for longevity makes sense for most people.

Hmmm, simple majority vote. Interesting. So if we somehow got a Democratic house with a Trump presidency, they could just refuse to confirm any VP at all, which would make the speaker of the House 2nd in line for the presidency.

Okay, so, the curb weight of a Ford F-250 is 7400#, while the curb weight of of Tesla Cybertruck is 6900#. That's a 500# difference, with the Ford being heavier. If it's the weight alone, then the Tesla should have better tire life than the Ford, and I strongly suspect that's not the case. Perhaps Tesla is spec'ing a softer compound tire in order to actually use the enormous amounts of torque that is available to it?

I know that off-road tires tend to die fairly quickly when used on the road--softer compound + less contact patch at any given time--but it doesn't appear that they're using off-road tires on the Teslas.

So what's going on here? Why are they burning through expensive tires so fast?

I'm not entirely sure that the president can simply appoint a new VP once they're in office, since VP is an elected position.

It's a fascinating question, and I hope that there's never any reason to see it answered.

I'm not so sure that he can be. He was nominated by Trump, and the party as a whole voted on both Trump and Vance, together. Would they need a new convention in order to select a new VP? I don't know. I don't think that anything like that has ever happened before, so it would be uncharted territory. Much like if the VP died in office.

First: I don't disagree with you.

Second: England is just too small relative to the overall population to really have places that would be considered "Nowheresville" in the US. For instance, I'm looking at moving to the desert, so I can get away from people. One of the towns I'm looking at has a population of 400 (people, total), and is about 60 miles from any city over 5000 people.

You get “compensated for you time” not paid

That's what they say, but that's not what actually happens. If the phlebotomist fucks up the draw, and your flow rate is so poor that they can't get what they need, you don't get paid. (Ask me how i know this.)

And yeah, IIRC most of the plasma goes to create clotting agents for people with hemophilia.

Blatantly false. "MSM [men who have sex with men] accounted for 67% (21,400) of the 31,800 estimated new HIV infections in 2022 and 87% of estimated infections among all males."

When you consider that gay and bisexual men make up a small percentage of the overall population--under 5%--the fact that gay and bisexual men account for 87% of all HIV infections in men tells you just how alarming this is.

EDIT: For the people downvoting this - do you have statistics that you consider to be better, or more up-to-date? Do you want to refute them? Then post something and prove the CDC wrong. Downvoting because you don't like things that are factually correct isn't doing anything except making you look like a petulant child.

PS - wear a goddamn condom if you and your partner aren't 100% monogamous. Yeah, no one likes them, I get it. But that's a lot better than getting infected with HIV and needing to pay for expensive anti-retrovirals for the rest of your life.

My first thought when I hears that was, oh, that's not bad, that's about what I get out of a set of Pirelli Angel STs. ...Except that's a sport touring motorcycle tire. I usually go through at least one set of tires each year on my motorcycle, but it's been three years or so for the tires on my car.

I agree with you. Unfortunately, the law does not. The law privileges religion as though it was inherent and immutable.

When you're talking about 'richest people', that's total wealth, not just liquid money. The Rockefellers and Rothschilds may be wealthy as families, but no individual within them even comes close to having the amount of overall wealth that Musk and Bezos have.

This is not a good thing, BTW.

According to Forbes, he's the richest.

Simply require ALL electric powered two wheel vehicles that aren't motorcycles--whether nominally assistive or not--to comply with the same regulations as scooters. Easy, done.

Will is conservative, but also believes in America, and in Democracy. He knows that Trump is terrible for both of those things. So even though he's going to disagree with Harris on damn near every policy position that she has, he recognizes that she's the far, far better option for the country.

Musk is the richest person in the world, AFAIK. I believe he's rapidly approaching trillionaire status.

"Nowheresville" in England is very, very relative.