Bwaaaaaahahahaha!!! Well, Trump got his wish to delay his treason trial (the stolen top secret document one, I know, there’s so many it’s impossible to keep track). Smith had requested a Dec 3 2023 start date, Trump requested no trial date but a meeting after the election to see if there will be any trial at all (because he assumes he will be able to just pardon himself) and Trump friendly judge Cannon delayed the trial like Trump requested….to May 20, 2024! Perfect timing for it to be the headlines all summer during the campaign. Good luck running a campaign from the defendants table!
Remember, he said being under investigation is a disqualifier. Expect to see that in ads all summer as he “defends” himself against 7 treason cases (expect defenses like he tried in Carrol’s case….absolutely none.). 😂
He also lost his ploy to transfer his NY criminal cases to federal court…so no escaping those 34 serious felony counts. The federal judge actually said there’s substantial evidence that Trump committed these cover up crimes in NY state trying to hide his payment for sex with porn stars while Melania was pregnant. That case also set for next year! Enjoy!
Also we found out the topics of the upcoming charges for Jan 6…1) conspiracy to commit offenses against or defraud the United States 2) witness tampering 3) deprivation of rights under color of law. All 3 serious legal violations with dozens of felonies included under each topic, each carrying serious prison penalties. Smith is no sucker, if he said these are the topics of the crimes he’s investigating, he already has more than enough evidence to convict. Enjoy another slam dunk case about massive Republican election fraud and an attempted coup in late summer 2024 that also heavily implicates every sitting Republican in congress …coming fall 2024. 😂

Oh….and don’t forget in 2024 there should be something like 7 new seats in the house, all from newly created Democratic or minority led districts from red states like Alabama and Louisiana that have already been”convicted” of having violated the voting rights act to disenfranchise their minority populations and minimize their political power by gerrymandering (and some from NY too) and 32 more redistricting cases from red states like Texas and N Carolina that blatantly violated the federal Voting Rights act by intentionally minimizing and dissolving minority districts as much as possible, but they haven’t lost in court…YET.

This is America WINNING!!

ROTFLMFAHS!!!
So, liberals only have themselves to blame, eh?
Then who are Cons going to blame for the temporary suspension of the filibuster (like they do for Supreme Court nominations so not unprecedented)?
That is quickly becoming the plan, and without the filibuster there are enough votes to codify abortion as a federally protected right (not an amendment but a legal right). Not a slam dunk, but looking extremely likely, (and you should be glad, this issue and the extremist laws surrounding it was going to turn the midterms pure blue.)
Same question for adding 6 new seats to the Supreme Court?
Who you going to blame? Yourselves?!
ROTFLMFAHS!!!!

But that’s the thing....they don’t have to prove his thoughts, nor his intent, only the results....because this isn’t a criminal trial and there are very different standards, they only have to show he didn’t preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, violating his oath and duty, because the only possible sentence is for him to be bared from office. His lack of action during the attack alone far exceeded that bar.

It’s becoming more likely (but still unlikely) they could get the votes because he’s barely putting up a defense. To me it seemed like a mockery of the senate, like they were just proving the point that his defense could be someone standing at the podium shouting “Bababoui, Bababoui, Howard Stern’s penis!” and still he would not be convicted...and I think that’s pissing off some Republican senators....but there are also many who are reading books and unrelated documents among other distractions and clearly not paying attention at all, proving the defense correct, they could say anything and still get him off without presenting any defense. A sad state.
On the contrary, the prosecution’s case is straight forward with video evidence and records of what Trump tweeted and did (or didn’t do like not calling in the national guard) during the attack on top of the horrific personal experiences of the same senators hearing the case....hard to forget a lynch mob looking for you and your family to hang less than a month ago.

Remember, there is no possible prison term here, no fine, nothing but baring him from office, that’s it. There should be a criminal trial for treason IMO, but it wouldn’t be a slam dunk. I think the standard isn’t what he meant, it’s what a reasonable person would think he meant. That’s not prosecuting thought crime, it’s prosecuting speech and actions that it’s plainly foreseeable will incite real crimes.

I barely remember the inauguration riots, the million pussy hat march made more news....Trump’s “biggest crowd ever” nonsense got more airtime, and damages and injuries were fairly minimal so, especially when faced with the fresh scars from 2020, they’re easy to forget. That said, I don’t disagree....by 2022 new scandals and a desire to forget will erase this from many people’s memories.

Nice catch, now slam dunk it back through the prius sun roof it came from.

Also This:

"Initially the band hat contacted me way back in 2014 to produce and record their live debut album. They had a monthly residency at the well known domicil jazz club in Dortmund at the time. Titled “Filou presents…” the band hosted a show with a guest band every third Wednesday of the month, often sharing the stage altogether for one massive jam at the end of the night. The guest bands included well-known German jazz acts but often bands that push the boundaries of jazz in some way or another (Sommerplatte, Cosmo Klein, Xaver Fischer, among others). The monthly residence gave Filou the chance to experiment with unusual stage concepts. As a result, they came up with the idea to dissolve the barrier between stage and audience for the live show.

So instead of going to the studio to create a regular album, Filou wanted to create a live recording capturing all their energy and live show experience as their debut record. The concept of making the audience become part of the stage setting also sparked the idea of abandoning a PA system and providing headphones for the audience instead. It’s a very unique experience for the concert goer and obviously turned out to be a slam dunk for me to ensure the best possible audio quality without the usual PA and monitor trash in the mics

I can't speak for Deathcow, but in my own opinion if you have a significantly smaller population, it is far more likely that people will share a similar outlook on life and how people should live it. In a larger nation with a massive population you begin to notice regional and economical differences (unless the nation is an island, that has a dramatic effect of it's own).

It's obviously not a slam dunk, but it does present a likely reason as to why a nation with a smaller population that has cultural and social ideals shared by most will be able to adhere to standards others would find difficult.

Warren could be good. I'm not 100% sold that she can play the political game particularly well -- the "Pocahontas" thing should have been pretty gracefully manageable, but she kinda fumbled there a bit. Still, if the Democrat primary system can avoid being the train wreck it was leading up to 2016, I think she could go through that and prove that she's got what it takes. So, maybe.

I love Sanders, but he's divisive because of the "Socialist" thing, which is still quite a scary word for Cold War-era people. I think that is surmountable by calmly explaining exactly what his brand of Democratic Socialism means, but there's always going to be that easy Fox News narrative against him. So between that, age, and other factors, he's not a slam dunk.

Obama? I'm assuming you mean Michelle? Name recognition yes. Firsthand political experience, not so much. I don't think I've ever heard her say anything about wanting to get into politics directly.

I concur about Avenatti.

I hope the D's don't screw this up. All of these celebrity / political celebrity candidates seem risky and hit or miss to me. Might be better to go with a relative unknown -- somebody who's been through a hairy campaign or two (because we know Trump will attack and try to rattle) and knows how to walk the line between giving those attacks legitimacy by responding to them and seeming too milquetoasty by ignoring them. (Barack) Obama was quite good at having that calm outer demeanor while also having a quick wit and knowing when to get counter-jabs in. Seems like someone with those kinds of skills could really lure Trump into a bunch of pitfalls.

Anything from his hockey movie Mystery Alaska? If they planned in advance to offer this stuff to Alaskan Blockbusters, that would have been a slam-dunk...

I don't recall him ever saying that he wished Hillary would lose to the Oompa Loompa, they said Hillary was likely to lose to him because she was a weak candidate. Nobody took it seriously of course, because pretty much everyone thought the Orangutrump would lose and this was a slam dunk. To be fair I didn't really think he would win either.
So everybody was pretty much blindsided by this and I think the shock of it all is still coloring people's emotions. But four years from now if the majority of the Left has learned nothing and simply continues the strategy of yelling at people and shaming them into conforming then all I can say is get ready for another shit show.

"slam dunk" is the wrong sport. Ernie jarred it from 160. I wish I could use a 9 from 160... I have to club up 2 times to a 7.

Note that he bets 2010-2020 will be THE hottest decade ever recorded, and not just among the top 10 hottest decades. This is how we know the warming is significant, the more data (ie longer timespan) , the more clear the trend is. Individual years might not be THE warmest, just because they are the latest, but if you measure in decades, this is almost certainly the case. it would be an even more slam-dunk case if you bet with centuries. This is also why deniers sometimes literally use snowballs to prove GW isnt real, because if you go for local weather on a particular day, you can "prove" anything, but the amount of data in your "research" is insignificant.

I got to disagree that they need the Tea Party vote... well they need the Tea Party's great love, Fox News, Rush. and all the other far right nutters, so they try to appeal to the Tea Party more specifically, but I think that's why they've lost the last two elections.

McCain, had he ran as the centralist candidate he has been in the Senate, was very electable. Unfortunately for the party he stepped to the right in his campaign to appeal to what would become the Tea Party. Then he went over the deep end by choosing a VP candidate that was certifiably crazy and too far to the right for the Nation to take seriously. All in an attempt to appeal to the far right.

Then the party mishandles Obamacare. Rather than own up to it, and say "hey, this is the same plan we tried to pass 3 times into federal law. The Democrats wanted a single payer system, Obama was promising a government option, but they in the end took our plan." Instead they try to run the thing into the ground, and build on the far right anger over it, rather than appeal to where the Nation actually was. Obama's re-election was largely because of Obamacare, something the party and it's media machines like Fox don't understand. To be fair in 2008, I don't think anyone could have predicted the rise of Obama, but the fact his message took off so well, should have been a sign to the Republican party the country was trying to move back to the center from the pull to the right of the Bush years.

Romney could have ran with that further, saying how Romneycare is the model for Obamacare and that his state was the one who really started the ball rolling. Romney as he was as governor was far more electable at the national level than the Romney we got during the campaign... and again there is an appeal to the Tea Party with a Washington Insider but solid Tea Party member in Ryan.

The Republican party has a near solid slam dunk if they put up Rubio/Kasich ticket. It's a moderate ticket that has broad appeal to the masses of America without making most liberals/progressives so afraid that they'll show up in droves the way a Trump ticket does (or a Cruz ticket to a slightly smaller extent). The far right would still vote for Rubio/Kasich over Clinton/Sander (or Clinton/Warren, Clinton/Kucinich... she needs a solid, well known progressive to give her the best chance of winning), so the Rubio/Kasich is safe from all sides.

I agree though, a Trump ticket spells doom for the party period. Not only do they loose the Presidential election, the fact so many Republicans fear Trump's near Fascism will mean they might stay home, and the liberals/progressives will show up in greater than normal numbers to insure he doesn't win, which means a possible to likely loss of control of the Senate. Cruz won't scare away the Republican base as much, but still bring out more liberals/progressives than normal, which likely means a loss of the Presidential election, but perhaps not as much of a loss of the Senate. A Rubio/Kasich combo ticket is safe and gives the best broad appeal... or course if they did go Rubio, they'd tie him up with a Tea Party candidate to pull those votes in, as they don't understand they need to really shed those people and let them form their own party... I think they fear that Fox News, Rush and the like will follow the new Tea Party line rather than the mainstream Republican party and they want that attention... they are so wrapped up in the echo chamber now they don't see the nation is far more to the center than they are willing to go. The fact that Obama is far closer to Regan era style Republicans than most anyone in the race today speaks volumes to how disconnected the party is from reality.

Meanwhile, I'll wish for a Sanders/Warren or Sanders/Kucinich ticket... though realistically, he needs a young moderate up coming Democrat to broaden his appeal... and let's face it, odds are it'll be Clinton, whom I fear the Republican's first day of action will be to try an impeach her over the email and Benghazi... I mean we've had what? 3 or 4 times as many hearings on how she handled Benghazi than we had over 9/11, even though there are tons of fishy things going on with that too (without having to go into crazy conspiracy theories). So go... Clinton/Sanders or Clinton/Warren.

206? Ouch.
But my comment was more general: things I think won't make it may skyrocket (HR Giger, scary robot), while others I consider a slam dunk will stutter or tank (Black Sabbeth, Manborg).
Due to The Sift's community size, I suspect a lot of it as more to do with timing than anything else, tho.

@chingalera ahh the "both parties are equally bad" fallacy.

tell me? What's the Democrat equivalent of the denial of same sex marriage?
What's the Democrat equivalent of telling women they must keep their rape babies? What's the Democrat equivalent of trying establish a state religion even though we are a country of many (or no) religions. What's the Democrat equivalent of Republican's persistent denial of this pesky thing called science. What's the Democrat equivalent of the Republican body count due to starting unnecessary wars?

Don't get me wrong. Democrats fuck up all the time. They believed the 2004 election would be a slam dunk. They can often be naive and miscalculate political realities. I'm not convinced they won't fuck up the 2016 election somehow despite the Republicans' current problems. I really don't think Hillary should run. To quote Doctor Who: "Don't you think she looks tired?"

Both parties should be abolished to get away from this political nonsense, but to suggest these are somehow equal to Republican misdeeds is absolute lunacy unless you dare to back your claims up.

Hell, arguing the opposite of my claims is still more rational than this "OMG they're equal" nonsense. If you capable of making a value judgement, one party matches your values better than the other. It's impossible for them to be equal in that regard.