Lorewarn

Great win, especially with adversity late in the second half caught on our heels.

Good thoughts all around. "the undermining of scientific inquiry is perhaps the bigger danger" I would agree this certainly is a bigger danger, but I don't know that I've seen much efficacy in our rudimentary attempts to combat it. I think a fairly justified big stroke worry is that in the age of dis and misinformation everywhere, with the erosion of gatekeepers stamping and approving content (which has great and terrible consequences), there's a bit of an absolutist, ends-justify-the-means attitude with the undermining of scientific inquiry being the thing which ought to be protected most, and thus we need to shut down any... scientific inquiry which undermines scientific inquiry.

Not to mention what an absolute train wreck it would be infrastructure wise for Lincoln to host the President on top of a 'gameday'.

The genuine trouble in this case is how much of the scientific community not just disagreed, but vehemently insisted and threw their weight around through bureaucratic and media influence that the lab leak theory was entirely and utterly false, fake, conspiratorial and dangerous. The "trust the science" brigade of our populace spent a good long while shouting down and scapegoating anyone who had even the most basic curiosity and questions about it. Like, how hard is it to imagine a 2021 knapplc post along the lines of, "The science is clear, and your questions echoing right wing talking points couldn't be any more revealing."

What is this obsession with Obama? He's not interested, and the country wouldn't be either.

Obama has shown absolutely zero that would indicate he is at all interested in anything like another Presidential term.

They got the basketball court 100% right, well done Troy. Now it's not too late to reimagine the football turf.

There are some. The Lindsay Lohan The Parent Trap is great, and honestly beyond stunning with its cinematography in a way it has no business being. Guillermo Del Toro's Pinocchio was excellent. Ocean's 11, Dune, True Grit, The Departed, Scarface, The Wizard of Oz and others could all easily be classified as remakes.

They ended up spending dozens of millions of dollars on reshoots, because their first plan that they shot most all of included 7 real actors but they were normal sized folks, and then people were pissed at the stupid decision, and then they decided to go with dwarfs but make them CGI and reshoot it all, which... kudos for making just about everybody mad.

unironically me

I look through the replies to something like this, and I wonder how many of these folks have simply always been racist a$$h@!es, and how many have had their convictions grow and change through the normalization and emboldening of racist a$$h@!ery, and how many are russian bots or trolls proliferating a trash platform. "This is the result of DEI, social justice initiatives. No one believes she got there on merit." "See? That’s the problem right there. We can’t even tell any more." "Bet your parents weren’t born here. Bet it all." "C’mon. We all know what an American is." - @NWordBiden "You are clearly a dei hire." "you are not american" "Zero chance you don’t have the silly accent" "What was your SAT score and which college did you go to? These need to be compared to white individuals who posted better scores" "Still not and never will be American." "So when you go out of your way to hire indian staff, we should ignore it and pretend you are "making more Americans"? We dont care about your words. Show us you are different from the other anchor babies who still see indians as "their own"." "No, you’re not. You just invaded our country." "You have a piece of paper with the word "citizenship" on it. You are not, and never will be an American." "Your whole life is a joke. You view the world through the perverted lens of an affirmative action/DEI female and think you have competed on merit. Repeal the 19th amendment and sign up all women for selective service. Dumb c***." "We all know this is DEI" "You’re not and we both know you’re not. The whole reason your here is because one of your ancestors was tired of the other ancestors s#!tting in streets and thought “I wonder what it would be like to have running water and not rape farm animals”

Good thoughts and I'm of a similar mind. I'm not "progressives or bust!" by any stretch. My larger imagination is that any healthy system or organization needs a diverse coalition of voices that create tension. We need compelling voices pulling us along forward, as well as ones that are slow and hesitant to do away with things that have seemed to work pretty well, as well as ones that build bridges and translate amongst the others. Right now, there is no sane conservative voice, a massive overabundance of weak, entrenched, bought & paid for democrats only marginally left of Reagan, and very few populists and/or progressives that the DNC has only begrudgingly accepted and been more than happy to sideline and throw under the bus. There's no one-size-fits-all strategy that makes any sense, but hoping that the power players leave the AOC's and Bernie's of the world out in the cold is certainly just as much a losing one if the end goal is actual progress moreso than just acquiring power. Somewhere we're finding common ground, but I'd say this in response. Bernie and AOC aren't attractive because of their progressive agenda as much as they're attractive because they're the only ones around who seem to actually have any amount of balls at all (at least to me personally). Democrats will inevitably be painted as extreme left regardless of their actual policy alignment as long as they continue to be feckless and their strategy in regards to 'conviction' is to not have any conviction at all. Just as one example amongst plenty, take Kamala's campaign and the attack ads and jabs from Trump about how she supports taxpayers paying for trans prisoners to transition. Her camp did the best they could being silent, dancing around it, or responding with vague and/or empathetic platitudes, and it made her look weak and more left-wing instead of anything even remotely in the lane of, "Look, first of all, only two people ever have gotten gender affirming surgery in prison and both went through several year long legal battles to end there. We can disagree on this, but the Supreme Court decided that prisons have to give necessary medical care to prisoners, and to not do so is unconstitutional, and federal and state courts like in California have decided that gender affirming care is included in that. I agree with and am glad for those decisions, and if you disagree with me, fine, but whether or not trans people get gender affirming care isn't up to me or to Trump, it's up to the courts, and the courts have made that decision. Just like Trump's administration also accepted the legal mandate to provide gender care in prisons when he was President, so will mine, because I respect and follow the law." Bill Clinton, the pragmatic centrist and expert level triangulator that he was, probably said it best in 2002. "When people feel uncertain, they'd rather have someone strong and wrong than weak and right". Where's the echoes of the trenchant strong and wrong proverb in the DNC? Even Gavin Newsom is backslapping with the likes of Charlie Kirk these days.

As I alluded to somewhere else, I dont think the necessity of the moment isn't so much progressive/centrist, but populism vs. elitism. Just so happens the progressives are the only ones around Washington with any tiny sliver of populist effort. Something like single payer healthcare isn't and shouldn't be considered progressive at all when the majority of folks support it and it's an idea successfully proliferated all over the developed world, but it's certainly nothing more than a pipe dream as long as we're glad to keep ourselves in the hands of the entrenched status quo.

Personally, jettisoning any of the folks with actual bona fide passion & commitment towards any actual progressive goals, and being content with the best we can do being a status quo finger in the dam of corporatocracy/oligarchy/plutocracy just doesn't cut it for me. Sounds like your ideal for your party is that they just become the Republicans of a few decades ago for the sake of acquiring and holding onto power and riding out an eternity of underwhelming patches and band-aids to increasingly broken and eroded systems. It's all hypothetical and fancy wishful thinking now regardless, but if the Dems are ever back in the driver's seat without any of the progressive crowd in the conversation, what's there to actually have any optimism towards beyond "well, we're gonna be less bad and promise to slow down the bad"? Who else but the folks you want to disappear is currently serving us first and foremost, rather than corporate and wealthy masters? Tangential friendly reminder that Bernie polled significantly better against Trump than Hillary did.

Using political power for what?

There is no cap on NIL, that cap is for revenue sharing. NIL is still hypothetically unlimited as long as it passes the vague standards of the clearinghouse, which schools (by way of their collectives) will continuously find creative loopholes for.

"After receiving the Waltz text related to the “Houthi PC small group,” I consulted a number of colleagues. We discussed the possibility that these texts were part of a disinformation campaign, initiated by either a foreign intelligence service or, more likely, a media-gadfly organization, the sort of group that attempts, and sometimes succeeds, to place journalists in embarrassing positions. I had very strong doubts that this text group was real, because I could not believe that the national-security leadership of the United States would communicate on Signal about imminent war plans. I also could not believe that the national security adviser to the president would be so reckless as to include the editor in chief of The Atlantic in such discussions with senior U.S. officials, up to and including the vice president. ... At 11:44 a.m., the account labeled “Pete Hegseth” posted in Signal a “TEAM UPDATE.” I will not quote from this update, or from certain other subsequent texts. The information contained in them, if they had been read by an adversary of the United States, could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing. The only person to reply to the update from Hegseth was the person identified as the vice president. “I will say a prayer for victory,” Vance wrote. (Two other users subsequently added prayer emoji.) "

Sorry, AI is a confusing sometimes-strict and sometimes-broad term that I shouldn't have used. Should've said 'engineered'. It's easy for someone with a savvy skillset, by hand, to create something like this that isn't technically AI produced but still in the realm of 'not real', which I think this is. If you listen to it with the lens of, "What would opponents of Vance/Musk/Trump hope this would entail", it checks every single box of a wet dream hot mic moment, and comes across to me as too clean.

"Leaked audio" that sounds distinctly like AI

Confusing how the liberals are so well organized to infiltrate and organize and dominate every town hall across the country while simultaneously being so inept at actual campaigning and winning elections.

Having personally witnessed at least 6 different 65+ year old folks in my life get scammed online into giving their bank or card information to online predators, my anecdotal hunch is that it happens more often than you think.

The main thing I think is that we as Americans need to start working on a better comprehension of a two axis political spectrum instead of just left-right. Authoritarian and Libertarian concepts aren't left or right but an entire different thing. Actually, at this point we might even want to consider a third axis of corporatism. Harris/Walz lost because (assuming and acknowledging the baseline effects of misogyny/racism/etc.) Kamala was a politician that people didn't like, and every chance she had to be strong she instead was condescending with the spin. Because people felt her sentimental speeches rang hollow and reeked of being a politician when she's spending billions on Beyoncé and campaigning with Liz Cheney and was the 'chosen one' of the scrambling DNC who people have memory of repealing Glass-Steagal, bailing out the banks, kicking Bernie to the curb, and so often glorifying racial and multicultural identities in word while doing little to actually reform the systems that make those folks lives harder. To be clear, I'm not saying all of this is true, but it feels true to enough of the electorate. Conservatives (and most independents, because, people are stupid), don't take Trump literally, but they do take him seriously, whereas Liberals take him literally and not seriously, and get confused when their language doesn't resonate with the electorate. To his credit, Biden actually by and large ended with a pretty decent resumé of actual foundational renovation/reform instead of just never-ending patch work, and maybe Kamala would've continued that work well (I think she would have been fine and whelming). I'm not really concerned with progressive/centrist, i'm more concerned with actual coherent initiatives towards fixing source causes instead of occasionally treating symptoms mollify us just enough that we'll keep voting blue. Other than the electoral success (succeeding in gaining power), what will that look like in terms of success for Americans?

It's really no use trying to convince someone with multiple years of consistency refusing or being incapable of reading between any lines, and committed to zero care in regards to the effects of laws/policies as long as the letter of the law 'sounds' 'constitutional'. It's a predictable dance where they'll find room to dig in as long as the GOP doesn't blatantly title their initiatives as, "We're explicitly trying to screw people over in a bad way for our own gain in the following ways" It's like trying to argue with someone in the 60's who refuses to acknowledge Jim Crow laws were racist.

The dem purse strings base isn't, and therein lies the problem.