video is so fake.
why? physics.
(to take off and accelerate from a red light that fast, he'd need a much steeper forward angle, and the "pilot" would have to lean hard and bend his knees to even possibly keep balance, not nonchalantly stand vertical like it shows)

Realized I should perhaps clarify - the song being "sketchy as hell" has nothing to do with "There I Ruined It" making an edit, and everything to do with Steven Tyler being a creep. Damned talented rocker yes, but his personal history leaves much to be desired. This song and a handful of others from Aerosmith's catalog really lean into the "sweet young thing" theme, which... ewwww....

Not sure what you point is.

Media is mess largely because of GE buying NBC. Before this news was a public service paid for from other program profits. News was not a money maker. When GE bought NBC GE argued that news should also a money making show.
News slowly morphed into the mess we have today.

And to you comments. FOX is 1 right leaning VS 6+ all late night + all Hollywood left pushing media. So who did this hurt most?

Let's say they actually get the votes, I still think it's a waste of time. They bar him from being elected again, but nothing can stop him from naming an 'heir'.

If you think about it, that is even worse than him running again. If he runs, he will still unite every liberal leaning person and most fence sitters against him. If he designates a person for his supporters to align behind, they will get the almost half of voters that voted for him AND a lot of the middle who might be sick of Biden/Dems by 2024.

A victory here is, at best, a moral one. It won't stop a future President of Trump's nature from trying the same thing because that is the way a person like him acts. It does nothing but provide a feel good moment while wasting more of my tax money.

I must disagree.

First, it's precession, not procession, paired with the "caster effect" and static friction. It's a self correcting system that only works when in forward motion.
This nonsense with counter rotating wheels countering the gyroscopic effect ignores the fact that only the forward rotating wheels are using friction to direct the path of the bicycle based on their angles. It's not JUST the gyroscopic effect, that only determines the resistance to angular change, it's friction directed by gyroscopic precession and the self correcting caster effect. Come on.

Nobody knows how we ride bikes?! (A different claim from we don't know why they can remain upright when ghost ridden) Nonsense, it's balance plain and simple. If you don't keep the center of gravity exactly above the contact points with the ground, you tilt. When the centrifugal force exceeds static friction of the tires you slide out or when gravity exceeds the opposing centrifugal force caused by turning, you fall. Try turning your bike but staying exactly upright, no lean. Now, when you heal, try leaning without turning, lock the wheel straight, you'll fall again. It's multiple forces in concert.

I think a decent physics teacher would wipe the floor with this. It ignores so much to make these "we just don't know" claims.

Can you imagine a Republican leaning lawyer would argue and present the talking points as such? I can't imagine.

Perhaps, but that absolutely did not happen.
When you get almost 8 million more votes you don't need to steal. You won.
How many more votes did Trump get in ANY election? A: zero, he's never won one, ever.

No one was disenfranchised, all 74 million republican votes counted, just like all 82 million Democratic votes. In fact, all verified attempts to disenfranchise voters were republican scams like illegal voter roll purges only in democrat leaning counties, double voting, attempted disenfranchisement of tens of millions of legal votes, uncertainty over mail in votes while trying to get Republicans to do it by sending them all ballots while claiming publicly that doing so creates vote fraud.

How many Democrats violently attacked the capitol after the electoral college negated the vote and handed power to the loser, disenfranchising nearly 66 million A: zero.

When 82 million voters watch months of attempted election theft and attempted disenfranchisement of the biggest voting block ever seen in this country, they get pissed, then they take control....you better hope they don't follow Republican methodology or next comes revenge.

I've never seen #14 (the claw marks in the gas chamber), but it should be required viewing for every human on the face of the earth.
#43 (Anne Frank) is incorrect: a photo of her leaning out of the window of what became known as The Anne Frank House was taken shortly before she and her family were arrested and killed.
#48 (Hirsoshima): the actual amount of Plutonium that achieved pure fission was smaller than a grain of rice.
#54 (Spam): Well, there goes any illusion that this was anything but click-bait.

Thing is, any American - be it Republican or Democrat-leaning - think that powerful countries/block of concern (i.e. the EU, Russia or then USSR, China, Japan, etc.) DON'T want to influence US presidential politics is a bloody fool. The US *IS* the #1 meddler of world politics by far, both overtly and covertly. And the US is not shy of using any means necessary: military, economic, culturally, sanctions, covert-ops. So what right does the US have to ask those countries NOT to do the same?

External meddling should be EXPECTED. Is foolish not to. To say there's no external meddling is to lie to its people.

To focus on external meddling is to lose focus. So it's up to the parties to work their political messages to counteract those noise. That how you win elections.

I've said it before and I will say it again. Regardless of death bed wishes and/or the election, the sitting President has the right to nominate a SCOTUS pick. Note, I said nominate, not confirm. That is the job of the Senate.

Even if (likely when, it seems) Trump loses, until the end of his term he is able to nominate a SCOTUS pick. Obama was allowed to pick Merrick Garland, but the Senate was Republican. They chose to not confirm him. Even after Trump was elected, Obama could have picked a person for SCOTUS. The Senate would have made the confirmation decision.

In this case, the Senate leans Republican, so the pick will likely be confirmed. It might not be what some people want, but it is legal.

This has nothing to do with her capability. It never has been. It has to do with people pissed because there is a nominee during this time.

News flash, it doesn't matter if Trump wins or loses. He can nominate someone even after he loses. Until he is replaced, he is THE President of the United States.

No judge is required to have a photographic memory of the Constitution. I bet you could ask SITTING judges on the Supreme Court and have them miss a question. That is what clerks and research people are for.

What this comes down to is two basic things.

1. Merrick Garland never made it onto the court. People are still bitterly pissed off that he didn't. But what they forget is that he WAS nominated and did not get through the process due to a Republican majority. It was perfectly legal and was allowed. It sucks if you wanted him, but that is the way the game works.

2. People are STILL scared that Roe v Wade is going to go bye bye or the ACA is going to get kneecapped. News flash, SCOTUS has been majority Conservative leaning judges for YEARS. When Gorsuch was picked, all I recall hearing was OMG OMG, THE SKY IS FALLING, ROE V WADE IS DEAD! Same thing as when Kavanaugh was picked; although they were pissed about his supposed rape as well, every news site was repeating the mantra about Roe V Wade now dead.

It isn't going to happen. Not at a Federal level. It would be suicide for years. Conservatives, by and large, do not give a fuck about abortion. It's only the squirrelly ultra right wing pricks that care and Republicans sadly have to cater to them verbally to keep their votes. States, yeah, some will pass laws and then those will get turned away from SCOTUS like they have been for a while. The appellate courts will set the precedent on those rulings and they solidly rule for Roe v Wade.

Same thing for the ACA, although personally I wish that would die a fucking quick death. As I've said before many times, that little gem has fucked the value of my family insurance from work into the ground. I didn't get to keep my doctor unless I wanted to pay 2k+ per person per year, because he and a shit ton of other doctors went to Concierge fees to cover the money they were losing under the ACA. Now I have to go to either:

A. Doctor's who have horrible ratings for their practice, ie ones that suck or just don't care.

B. A clinic setup where I 'technically' have a 'family doctor' but in reality I can be bumped to others on staff or, most likely, a PA. There is no feeling that I know my doctor because, even if I do get to see him, they just run me through as fast as possible so they can get another patient in.

I have pre-existing conditions, so I empathize with those who are on the ACA. But the act itself is fucked up beyond repair. It needs to die and get replaced with a true national insurance. If not that, something that lets me go back to feeling like I have a real doctor and not just whoever is johnny on the spot at that moment.

It isn't going to be killed at SCOTUS though, they don't want to legislate. They will let it survive and if you think otherwise you are drinking the liberal koolaid that they are serving to round up voters.

I like the Youtuber and do agree with his other videos. I do not agree with this. I can diagnose a Macbook Pro right now if I had to, even after being away from Apple for around 8 years. But I might need to pull up a damn schematic or reference manual to know how much resistance I should be looking for on the PPbus if it isn't present when trying to power the thing on. If I and everyone else had photographic memories, we wouldn't have reference material. Wikipedia wouldn't exist. This is simply a nitpick because people are worried and still pissed.

this should have been biden's second term
so tap down the 'woe we got joe' smack.

the dnc is loaded w/good candidates
any and all are better than the psychosis goldfish
but have to find the center to get what's left of the sane right.

geez.

the less-that-great pumpkin still draws 42%.

it's like half the population are 'not sees'.

they don't see his face, his hair, his bulk, his laziness, vileness, stupidity, carelessness, his micheal jackson lean-over-the-shoes posture, his every.f.n.day missteps and muck-ups.

they don't see the crimes he commits. the ineptitude. his band of bland. the sycophantic snails. the ooze of corruption. they don't see the devastation he is wreaking. or see they are the reason that spineless senators keep their daggers sheathed.

how is that? there are voluminous amounts of data available that show - imperial evidence - that don is a yugo of a president.

they don't see.

they are 'not sees'.

The court was leaning 1 way and now can swing back the other way and you think its madness?

It sounds like our Constitution is working just fine.

President nominate/Senate approve process is the check and balance.

The fact that a President can get 3 partisan judges in one term to the SCOTUS is madness. No matter the leaning.

Take the selection power away from the President. Why should a SCOTUS judge be a Presidential pick in the first place? It should belong to the people.

I think a fair minded party SHOULD pack the court to fix the system. However, the method need to be different than the President nominate/Senate approve process currently in place. Use a lottery type of system is an option. House/Senate Republicans and Democrats each gets to choose the same amount of nominations (vetted by both sides) and then the selection is done by lottery. That'll ensure some form of randomized fairness, and the judges aren't so overly partisan.