VakAttack

Possibly. Not likely, though, if none of the major possible nominees run against her, though.

They are essentially required to vote for the person who won the primary, unless that person drops out, in which case they can vote for whomever they want. This is the system for both major parties, to my knowledge.

To accrue party delegates to cast their votes for the nominee.

There are pluses and minuses to all options at this point. Harris makes the most sense from a political logistics perspective. There are rumors that some of the other popular figures (like Whitmer and Newsom) have indicated they're not interested. I would guess it will be her.

Biden is not, formally, the nominee until the party convention. We literally just watched Donald Trump become the nominee like 3 days ago despite campaigning for the last year.

What kind of shows are your favorite?

The storyline was way too jumbled that they weren't able to give enough time to any of the potentially interesting stories, and the actress in the main role was kind of bad. Lee Jung-Jae and Manny Jacinto were great! However, given the jumbled up nature of the storyline, and again, the focus on the Mae-Osha story without an actress who was able to hold the center; this gave short shrift to the potentially good storylines. Really, though, this series, to it's credit, did have some of the best Star Wars action sequences of all time. The fights were awesome. Mainly, this show suffered from what most of Disney+ shows suffer from: they try to do too much. I disagree with this being the worst show of all time, though, it's not even the worst Star Wars show of all time. Book of Boba Fett was worse, IMO, unless you just give it credit for basically being Mandalorian season 2.5 in the second half.

Yes. The definition is the right of citizens to political and social freedom and equality, equality being the key here; all women everywhere should have complete control over their bodies.

So yesterday @Paul158 had asked me a question about comparing marijuana laws to abortion laws and @PortaJohn had asked me to address it. I just typed out a whole long reply, but then the thread seems to have been deleted while I was typing, so that sucks. I'll give you the gist of my answer here: The change in marijuana laws reflects the will of the people in individual states which has prompted a federal reconsideration. It's still federally illegal, but essentially the feds have kind of let states do their thing while they investigate, look into rescheduling, etc. It's a topic that was voted on by many different states. It's an ongoing discussion and while it's being figured out, people in States where it is legal aren't being prosecuted as long as they abide by their individual states. The change in abortion access is related to an opinion written by 6 people after 50 years of it existing, which has led to immediate loss of access to the abortion services in many areas, despite when it has been voted on, it has been approved of by individual states, many of them red like Kansas and Ohio. The women in many states lost access to these services based on the opinion of 6 people, not the will of the people in their states prompting a reconsideration at federal level. They're completely different scenarios.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/16/sen-bob-menendez-found-guilty-in-corruption-trial-00168659 Bye Bob!

Maybe that's true, but what this guy put on Twitter is not the definitive proof he's representing it as. Nothing he posted shows that the 69 year old Crooks was the one that made the donation. It just shows he exists. ETA: reading further, it seems pretty clear that it was him (or, I guess, someone in his name).

I agree.

According to the local DA, the man jumped on his daughter or wife. A heroic move, if I'm remembering the statement correctly.

Not that it matters, but I was under the impression the deceased rally-goer was a man?

3) It was staged 4) there were multiple people involved in the plan with this kid. 5) an external enemy used a local That's three other options off the top of my head. Clearly I think it's a version of your second option.

No, wtf are you talking about? A conversation started about the motives of would-be assassin, I was pointing out we don't have enough information at this point to make even a real educated guess as to his motives. There is nothing that is going to make this less heinous unless it comes out the whole thing was a set up that Trump was involved with, which I want to be clear, I do not believe even a little bit. I believe this was a legitimate attempt on Trump's life that he's very fortunate to have survived, and I'm glad he didn't die.

Again we're acting as if this opinion is a fact based off a $15 donation. We don't know anything yet other than two specific facts: he donated $15 one time 3 years ago, and he later registered as a Republican.

Ok this made me laugh.

The constant need to immediately jump to conspiracies is one of many things leading to the downfall of this country, and more specifically the political discourse. The Reverse Occam's Razor.

It's way too early right now. A $15 donation 3 years ago doesn't mean anything, nor necessarily does his voter registration after that. We should really wait to get more evidence towards motive. He could have been a liberal who hates Trump, a super radical Never Trump Republican, a QANON person who saw some of the reports.about Trump's name in the Epsteinnfiles, just a person looking to be famous, some combination. We just don't know yet.

The BBC interview is in-***ducking**-sane.

Let's hope nobody was hit. ETA: He appears to have been hit in the ear.

Honest to God, I do not understand the whining about this, lol. This doesn't enthuse me, either, so I just don't watch. He'll announce when he announces.