Devin Rooney

Live ones or gtfo

This also seems like a don't threaten me with a good time situation.

Adding an extra Potemkin Democrat to Florida is arguably better than nothing.

No I'm not.

It doesn't matter how old Collins is if she's not in office next time, and my hypothetical is premised on her losing. King's age is also irrelevant. We're talking about Collins' seat.

Electing a younger person for this seat decreases the odds their age becomes a factor next election.

That's the key issue. It's really dumb to elect someone who should not run again in 6 years.

A Mills win this election means one of two outcomes in 6 years: forfeiting the benefit of incumbency or running someone who could turn 90 in office.

Grok is planning to go as Charles Murray for Halloween, cut it some slack ok? It heard we were very offended by its bare knuckles eugenics, and wants to slip on a kid glove

I'm not a lawyer, but just now reading the actual text of the 22nd, some potential loopholes jumped out, and Dan Coenen wrote a paper about them: digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_artchop/...

I don't know if he's reliable though.

Isn't it mostly the normies that care?

Maine Democratic Senate Candidate Sits at Nexus of Spam PAC Network Jordan Wood and Jake Lipsett have spent their careers in the Mothership vortex

It just sucks that all three leading Democrats in the primary are trash

Platner: chaos goblin with weird fasc-y tendencies

Mills: centrist dinosaur

Wood: www.dropsitenews.com/p/maine-demo...

Age caps on the other hand, should be mandatory for all three branches.

(SCOTUS would get their lifetime appointments but we'd implement one of the workarounds where they can't actually vote or can't hear cases or whatever)

They're the pass through. That's like saying the credit card companies pay merchants. That's part of the process but misses the point.

^(there's no risk. It's 100% sure that I'm gonna go ahead and be a pedant.)

At the risk of being a pedant, onlyfans subscribers* have paid

Apparently it was moreso for the people monitoring the wire:

"[T]he intentional misspelling of both NEW and LEAD – to NU LEDE – served as a kind of alert for news or wire editors working on multiple editions of the newspaper.”

'Lead' vs. ‘lede': Roy Peter Clark has the definitive answer, at last - Poynter From person-to-person coaching and intensive hands-on seminars to interactive online courses and media reporting, Poynter helps journalists sharpen skills and elevate storytelling throughout their car...

"His conclusion was that there was 'no historic basis for the spelling of a lead as 'lede.' ‘Lede’ is an invention of linotype romanticists, not something used in newsrooms of the linotype era.'"

Wait, are you making a joke about the spelling being wrong? I think I'm missing the point

I agree, but there's a whole list of terms like "graf" for paragraph, "nut graf" which is the second paragraph that usually offers context, "hed" for heading, "subhed" for subheading etc that follow the pattern for the same reason

(at least that's what they tell you in intro to newswriting)

That's not why. Journalists spell it lede so it's more obvious that it is not intended for publication.

Basically so that copy editors know on sight to remove it

I just think this style of sculpture should never depict any real people. Case in point: Scary Lucille Ball. They did replace her with a vastly improved (but still slightly creepy) statue later, but the odds these go wrong are too high

I will say, that is objectively a funny joke. It does seem like there's a small possibility this might be a red line for the normies luckily. It's time to rise up

It would be very different if the reporter had asked questions shoring up Source A's perspective, and then later Source B shares info that conclusively shows Source A is a pathological liar, and then the guardian published a clarification, but that's not at all what happened here

If the story is developing, the expectation is that the scope is limited, not that the information presented as factual is subject to fundamental revision simply because the journalist didn't feel like doing their due diligence.

Because the "new information" that prompted the correction was something the journalist should have asked as one of the very first questions. They should have asked others at the school at the time if they recalled the two together. The editor should have verified the answer to those questions.

YouTube video by Sir Mix-A-Lot Rare Music When George Bush THREW UP In Japan 🇯🇵🤯

Just googled the Trump hand IV theory, and learned that during a state dinner in 1992, George HW Bush keeled over in his seat and vomited into the lap of the Japanese prime minister. Yes there is video. Yes I'm including it here.

Listen, any chance I have to deploy "beggars belief" in a dunk, I'm taking it.

That's not why it appeals to Trump. Come on MJ

And your half-hearted dodge claiming Taylor's post is hyperbole is a) wrong b) so obviously wrong it hammers home that you don't have anything meaningful to say about this

Her main metric is that multiple people at the inauguration wore masks. That is equally true of the NYC DSA meeting (which you can clearly see if you look at very short clips or pics of the event.)

So even by her own inane logic the comparison fails.

I will say, I think the stone terrace in the rose garden looks better than the grass did