Don't get your news from twitter or Trump. Neither is credible.

So far, allegations are all that's surfaced, not any evidence of wrongdoing....and most allegations have proven to be assumptions at best. Election officials have found no serious violations, nor are there any allegations in the lawsuits that could possibly swing the results.

That which can be asserted without evidence can be discarded without evidence against it. To date, there's been no evidence produced of these or other allegations.

Edit: And those allegations have now been recanted by the person who alleged them, admitting he made it up. D'oh

Sorry sugar, newsmax isn't being honest with you.

Almost every challenge has already been tossed out of court or ruled against Trump. Those remaining deal with a miniscule number of votes that may have arrived (not mailed) late thanks to the USPS acting as a part of the Trump campaign and slowing deliveries, and ignoring court orders to "sweep" mail rooms for missing ballots. When forced, one single Houston mail room found over 800....most for Biden. The vote fraud that's been found are all Republican frauds, again, and the numbers aren't large enough to swing the election for Trump in any states. Some might turn blue if all legal votes were delivered.

Most lawsuits were asking to stop vote counting, and were tossed in the trash. Some were about observers, but have zero effect on the counts. The rest are based on pure assumptions, not evidence, of things like late votes being counted, or normal processes like ballot "curing" which is filling out the circle/box when the vote intent was clear but the box not totally blacked out. They're even trying g to disqualify ballots that only had a vote for president...as if that was abnormal or illegal.

Even his case for a recount in Georgia is highly unlikely to proceed, since the margin is over .25% the team requesting a recount must pay for it, and the Trump team is too broke to even hire real lawyers, forget paying up front for a statewide recount.

There aren't even enough votes being questioned by Trump's campaign to swing any states...so there aren't enough to cast doubt even if every one being questioned is fraudulent...and so far there aren't many if any verified fraudulent votes, and my bet is the few found are double votes for Trump anyway.

Sorry sunshine. You lost, and are just stewing in your sour grapes. Just another never Bidener. There's a decent chance you'll lose the Senate too when Georgia is through.
Red tsunami 2020!

Edit: if you donated to the legal defense fund, I hope you read the fine print, because at least half is going to pay pre-existing debts from the campaign, and still more goes directly into Trump's pocket for using his donation portal. Not much is going towards his legal battles, battles he knows are lost causes (most already lost in court). Don't be surprised if you also signed up for monthly donations too, watch your credit card bill, his campaign has repeatedly suckered donors into agreeing to that by hiding it in the fine print, now that his presidency is done he has no reason to not be a pure con man/thief again. Russia won't extradite him, so he's going to grab every penny of your money he can before he flees the country.

Judges...makes me wonder. Has Amy Coney Barrett--do you think she has had "the talk" with her two adopted black children about how they should respond to, approach, expect to interact with police?

It's amazing what the assumption of privilege provides as armor for someone in interacting with someone armed with a gun...

„Nothing racist about this statement“...really?

Then tell me what thoughts led to this conclusion? „Bad People“ is not a absolute Term; how does he determine who qualifies as bad?

Just because he tries to skip over his racist assumptions by NOT referencing skin color, he cannot legitimately define who is „bad people“.

Case in point: a non-racist claim focuses on the individual crimes, whereas a racist will always see a group of people as the default criminals.

Instance(s) vs group

He is an ignorant asshat unqualified for service in public safety.

https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data is one of the more complete and user friendly sites ive come across regarding climate

and...

Being the fastest growing city isn't directly related to the number of deaths or the temperature in the city. He's the one who made that assumption not bloomburg. I believe that's called a straw-man argument.

As far as deaths from extreme temps are concerned, it's telling that he didnt take the time to isolate extreme temperatures from the natural disasters chart. Here, let me isolate it for you using the same source. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/number-of-deaths-from-natural-disasters?time=1936..2018&country=~Extreme%20temperature


Or, again using that same source: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/natural-disasters-by-type focus on ONLY the extreme temperatures and it's clear that the natural disasters of that type are on an upward trend.

The benefits are mostly in reverse. You wear a mask because it better protects others from you - you should always assume you're infected, if you're truly being safe.

If you can get a medical-grade mask, then it can have additional benefits, but that's not really the point here. Everyone can and should wear a mask, and then everyone has an improved chance of preventing the spread.

It's not a psychological thing. Every time I go to the store and see someone without a mask, they are a greater risk to me and my health. I don't know if they are infected, and quite possibly, neither do they. That's the problem with this disease, the incubation and spread can be done entirely without awareness of infection. Blind assumptions are absolutely awful.

You can catch this disease today, and spread it without knowing you're infected, completely without symptoms. That's why we quarantine, contact trace, and above all, always assume you're infected and therefore wear a mask to protect others.

Now as for whether a simple bandana mask is worth it or not, hell -- we can talk, but I'm going to push everyone to do something rather than nothing. If I could get a medical grade protections I'd do it, but the point is when you have to have a worldwide effort, if this helps 20-50% more than nothing, I'll take it. Everyone should. To the point of this video -- there's no reason not to, the science has spoken loud and clear on these points.

We have already established your experience differs from this in that there was no impact causing the roll.

citation for maximum/force time being a primary factor in vehicular CSI .

You're also making the assumption that the roll doesn't send you roof first into oncoming traffic, telephone pole, tree, parked car, building or whatever.

We saw a rollover on here recently that was the result of a pit maneuver where the driver died. Guess that wasn't an easy flop for him.

Yes, but my understanding is that the point isn't to starve the virus for hosts until it's dead, it's to slow the spread enough that hospitals aren't overrun. When they are, death rates explode, logically from 3-3.5% up to 15-20%. Of course, this plan relies on the hope that immunity is relatively full and permanent, something we don't know yet.

If people weren't morons, I would agree about parks and beaches....but they are. Even those smart enough to try and social distance in public often forget and hug goodbye, and most aren't being that smart.

The problem with sending people back is we don't have a single study on immunity. We don't know if you have full immunity after recovering from being infected, or if so how long it might last. Many other coronaviruses mutate enough that immunity is for one season at best. We need to study the virus in detail before making assumptions on life and death issues, and it's smart to err on one side of caution with stakes this high until we know. Opening up before we know is a pure gamble....the odds might be good, but the stakes are sky high.

In a near worst case scenario, it's possible that Covid19 is going to remain as dangerous as it is today for some time with reinfection possible, and that any future vaccines will need yearly changes and booster shots to be effective, like the flu shot but hopefully more effective. In that case, the best we can really do is be prepared for a constant flow of large numbers of patients and deaths. That's going to require a complete retooling and expansion of the medical system, but silver lining, it's hundreds of thousands of good paying jobs that robots can't do...yet.

Many aspects of quantum mechanics are observational evidence (not proof) of somewhere outside our observable "universe". I gave an example. Matter springing out of nothing, and returning to nowhere are indicators of "somewhere" else....conservation of mass demands it.

Yes, that's one definition of the word, (edit: The Universe (Latin: universus) is all of space and time and their contents, including planets, stars, galaxies, and all other forms of matter and energy. There may be more than spacetime, or something that's not matter or energy, or something outside the limits of our expanding but finite "universe" .) ...that doesn't make the concept correct anymore than saying "God is omniscient" makes it true or proves God's existence.

If there is a universe, it contains all. That statement doesn't prove there is one, neither does our inability to prove it one way or the other....yet. "Universe" might turn out to be a narcissistic concept born of ignorance...we just don't know. Your opinion/best guess/assumption stated as unassailable fact shows me you aren't (being) particularly scientifically minded. You may be correct, but there's no way to know with our current understanding of physics.

Don't forget, his whole plan is based on the mistaken assumption that it's only dangerous to old people.

This from the same group that lost their minds over the fallacy that universal health care would include creating "death panels" that would decide if grandma was worth giving medical care.

Or his defensive reaction is just based on his improper assumption that someone is telling him how to play his music.

The idea that his reaction (guy in video) is based on race, says more about someone who thinks that, then the guy in the video.

That's disappointing. I thought/hoped you were being clever, playing off the misdirection of the video, but no, you were just being nasty.
Q: what makes you assume his assumption/reaction is racist and not ageist or sexist?
Edit:
Q2: why should we not assume your vitriolic reaction based on an assumption you made based purely on someone's race makes you a racist jackass deserving of the same reaction?

Did I say HE is a MAGA moron?
No, I did not, you inferred it, although it would be a relatively safe assumption based on his ignorant racist interruption and self centered disrespect paired with the inane irrationality of his question and blatantly racist comments.
Now who's making slanderous assumptions?

Your messiah slanders without (it's one word, Bob, not two) knowing daily. A bit hypocritical to denounce that when you so often applaud it, don't you think?

And my what is no better than the guy?
Your: possessive- belonging to you- "Your assumption is based in ignorance."
You're: conjunction- You are- "You're in desperate need of a better education because your English would fail a 3rd grade English class."

I might just WHAT another douchebag? You forgot the verb. You get an F for the day, Bobski. Nigerian princes have better English skills, and terrible English is an intentional part of their scam. (Or were you channeling Yoda but forgot the punctuation? As in "Look in the mirror, you might. Just another douchebag looking back.")

You need to watch some more school house rock and learn English better, then you might understand complex statements better and not jump to mistaken conclusions so often. Might I suggest starting with conjunction junction?

Also, I wrote MAGA, not MEGA, aside from MEGA making zero sense, I wouldn't ever insult MegaMan by conflating him with idiots like this guy. Besides an education, you seem to need glasses. Maybe that's why you can't see any of Trump's infinite character flaws?
Sad.

So he is a MEGA man?

How can anyone slander with out knowing?
You made an assumption just like the guy did.

Your no better than the guy.

Look in the mirror you might just another douchebag looking back.