pingveno

I used to work for a company that was originally called UT (Union Transport). Somewhere along the way, the head honchos decided they needed another letter in the acronym, so they tacked on an i that didn't stand for anything. And that is how it became UTi.

Even Reddit's /r/conservative was trashing this one. Trump may have actually managed to have gone too far.

I'm not sure it was ever about respectability. I think he just didn't have his shit together to actually be president. Campaigns usually start making transition plans long ahead of the election.

The other thing was that he didn't have as much of a stranglehold on the Republican Party in 2016. It was still very possible to be a politician in open opposition to Donald Trump. So when it came time to pick someone, he couldn't pick and choose proven loyalists. He just had to choose from among ranks of people who may or may not be hostile.

I'm not sure if this goes in "The Onion" or "Not The Onion".

From what I hear, one of the most important guardrails last time was the 5S system: smile, say sure, subsequently shred. Trump lacks focus and follow through for anything except his core interests, so some of the people close to him apparently got away with simply not carrying out some of his more boneheaded demands.

I'd like to see Idiocracy cited a lot less often, given that a good chunk of the plot boils down to eugenics from wealth (poor people had lots of kids, rich people stopped having kids).

Sex strikes have been used more recently as well to end gang conflicts, wars, and other violence.

Joe didn’t deliver, and Kamala didn’t promise anything new.

Joe delivered the Inflation Reduction Act. It invests hundreds of billions of dollars into various climate initiatives over 10 years. That includes renewable generation, grid storage, EV, and nuclear generation. Then there's infrastructure investment, which included much needed investments in transit and intercity rail.

44% children, 26% women, 30% men. Gaza is about half under 18, so that's nearly randomly killing people. That said, these are only confirmed fatalities, so presumably susceptible to bias.

The report is here

So based on your 38 days, that would be March 12th (2020-02-03 + 38 days), no? And Biden was indeed declared the winner on a March 12th, but that was in 2024. It took until April 8, 2020 for Bernie to decide to drop out.

Bernie Sanders won 3 out of 5 primaries that occurred before the DNC called it for Biden in 2020 with Buttigeg picking up 1 other.

I'm not sure how to parse what you're saying. As far as DNC rules are concerned, they "call" it once all primary races are held.

In 2016 Sanders won 23 races and was at 43% of the popular vote despite extreme pushback by the DNC. He was democratically supported cause he had people voting for him. Democratically.

The Democratic primary uses proportional representation, so candidates don't win states, they win delegates. Hillary Clinton got 55% of the popular vote, Bernie Sanders got 43%. There are no two ways to slice it, Bernie lost that election by the rules of a democratic election by a sizeable margin. Meanwhile, Hillary was dealing with getting hacked and Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi. And you're forgetting the often adoring coverage that was played to audiences on the left about Sanders.

The selling point for Kamala wasn't anything in particular about her. She's the VP and was the only obvious choice. There was no appetite for a contested convention, which was the alternative. It was always going to be an uphill battle, so in a sense she's also a sacrificial lamb.

If you're referencing Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020, he wasn't "democratically popular" in either race. That simply is not supported by polling or election results. He was well behind Clinton by all metrics. Then in 2020, he was briefly "winning" because several similar candidates were splitting the center-left lane. The moment the center-left lane narrowed, Sanders' lead evaporated.

It's SOP for candidates to more or less clear the field for an incumbent president. This is partially because of a perceived effect from a strong primary challenger weakening an incumbent. So Democrats were just doing what both parties have been doing for the last half century.

The change from Biden was in response to clear reactions from the US electorate. The electorate saw Biden's debate performance and was not impressed. There wasn't time to run a process, so Kamala was the obvious choice given a non-ideal situation. But the electorate got what it wanted in terms of an option that wasn't elderly.