The Senate, House, and local winners in those states are going to be livid because that could impact their races, too, so you can expect lots of home court resistance in each state to doing anything like this.
Yes. She can - or more properly her campaign can, on behalf of the slates of Democratic electors in the affected states. They would normally have to file for recounts and then challenge ballots one by one. In this kind of case...it would be a pretty new thing for the courts.
The truth of the matter is that in most cases the election results have already been certified, which pushes things to another level. You'd have to get some judge in each state to agree to let this happen, and then after that you'd have to expect to get appeal after appeal. Moreover, it'd have to happen in three separate states to change the election result. The margins in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are much larger than in Michigan, so they'd have to invalidate a lot of ballots to get there. Fail in one, and you lose anyway. Also, if you assume electronic modification of ballots, how do you identify the ones that are invalid?
This would not fail to provoke Republican counter-challenges in states like New Hampshire and Minnesota, so you'd have more states in play then.
This would also cost a mint (states charge on a per-ballot basis for recounts, varies by state). Stuff would be found that has been relatively secretive until this point - such as the dead vote and illegal alien voting. This would possibly - in fact probably provoke an armed response at this point. I'm not kidding about the armed response bit. Tempers are on edge here, and if you think the Democrats are the only ones angry, you're not taking into account that the Republicans are just more disciplined in general. Also, better armed.
Last point - the House would just vote Trump into office anyway if there were this disaster going on and no one were sure about the electors. Each state gets a vote, and each state's House delegation would vote internally on their collective vote.
It wasn't intended to be witty, it was just stupid. We failed to care much about other people at that age. The rolls were $0.20 at most, so it wasn't like we were doing much harm and the store staff didn't get too torqued up about it.
In contrast, my kids think dull Facebook trolling about appearance is interesting. Even prank phone calls would be better than what they do. I don't even see good graffiti where I live, whereas when I was a kid...one night every white house in the neighborhood became a litany of curses ala "Life of Brian".
Another one I just remembered - somehow, my friends found out my parents' keyless lock entry code for their car. It was a Ford, with a 10 digit keypad built into the driver's side door window molding. Anyway, they spray painted it onto the telephone pole located diagonally from the front door of my house. 48662, assuming my parents would see it when they left the house and get upset. What they didn't realize was that the creosote and tar and whatever else coating on the telephone poles was meant to absorb spray paint, and it did. You couldn't see it - unless it rained. Then the numbers shone out clearly, but when dry you couldn't see a thing.
I'm sure there are many websites that can cure your ill.:-)
My school was pre-participation awards, so we got actual awards for good grades. I got a very few, but my penmanship (yes, that's what they called it) was always poor, so i'd get great grades in everything except for that - straight Ds - and miss out on the certificates as a result. Oh well.
My view has always been that the good grades were a reward in and of themselves and didn't need to be celebrated.
The truth is that I still correct them from time to time. They take big pauses before they say anything related to 'brought', because they know it's one of my hot buttons. It requires conscious thinking on their part to say 'brought'.
Even the stupid shit we did was smarter than the kids today. Seriously. We'd paste together a whole pack of EZ-widers and drop an ounce inside of it and roll a stogie, then get accosted by St. Bernards on the way home and think we were going to get eaten by bears or something. We'd steal fire extinguishers from a church and blow them off on a beach. We'd flick matches into the Goodwill box until it caught fire. We'd drop acid and wander through the supermarket grabbing rolls, taking one bite out and throwing it on the floor.
If you have teenage kids, you'll find out that the stupid things they do are just _dumber_. It's like they have no imagination.
My experience is that the people in a generation older than I am have much better English than the average person of my age. Sure, there are problems with some of the more blue collar types with possessives - they tend to think apostrophe-s is a plural. But that is mostly indicative of people who left school before they had much opportunity to do English composition. Leaving school in the 9th grade or so was surprisingly common circa 1955, if you were going to work with your hands anyway.
My mother has better English than my kids do, certainly, as do I. You can only do so much at home to correct the issues. At least I got them to stop saying 'brung'.
A bunch of people who got propagandized and cajoled into doing something different (and we can see now, bad) by a combination of government and media.
Yeah, I see the irony of it too, but the median IQ is 100 and there's no getting around that. Also, most people are followers rather than leaders. They will move with the herd.
In the literal sense, they are retarded compared to children of similar age 40 years ago. Their grammar and word usage is worse, their punctuation is worse. Their grasp of mathematics is worse. Their knowledge of history is worse. Their cognizance of current events is worse.
No wonder they are susceptible to propaganda for the stupid. They are in fact the ignorant and stupid, relative to their parents and grandparents.
You really need to get more urbane about campaign propaganda. You hear a steady drone of bullshit for 6+ months and then it's all forgotten. That's indicative of something...
Well, I learned what a 'parclo' was, so thank you.
Writing software is like building atop unstable ground and never finding bedrock. Even well written code is unable to entirely isolate itself from the stability issues of its platform with any level of assurance. Software cannot be relied upon absolutely. So while I agree with you that calling coders engineers is wrong, it's probably for a different reason than bad code.
I won't read Kissinger's memoirs because i'm sure he has selective memory. But if you are going to haul someone to The Hague for a trial, I don't think anyone should be surprised to find an airmobile force descending on the same city and removing our citizen, killing anyone who gets in their way.
Whatever you think of Kissinger, he's a US citizen who served his country honorably in WWII and afterward. His decisions are not within the purview of Euro judges. We don't recognize that court.
Some of the highway projects on I-95 interchanges in Maryland should be examined for poor design - imagine spending millions on infrastructure to make the traffic worse and accidents more likely?
I admire Brzezinski, but I think he underestimates the amount of comity that Muslims have with each other. It is true that the Pakistani has little in common with the Egyptian, Moroccan or Indonesian except their religion, but their religion is unique amongst the major religions of today in providing the raw material for creating both a religiously motivated armed force and a rational basis for expecting a theocratic political state - however disjointed the Caliphate became in its various incarnations. Envision a Pope calling for a crusade today...it would be a nonstarter. But creating a relatively universally acclaimed Sunni Caliph...possible, but not very likely at the moment.
I do have to give him credit for encouraging the Soviets to invade Afghanistan. At the time, it seemed but a way station to a warm water port at Karachi, and more dangerous than it actually was.
The Soviet Empire was a historical aberration - a powerful totalitarian government married to geographical conquests mostly the fruit of Allied collaboration and unwise geopolitical moves in the late war and postwar periods. Neither of those prerequisites exist today. That said, trying to deny a Russian government domination of the Ukraine is silly. It is clearly within their sphere of influence and encouraging its government not to Finlandize is simply increasing global tensions. It's another kind of mistake. With a surging China, we may need the Russians - and more importantly, they will need us. Antagonizing them is just making that process much more difficult.
If Trump wanted advice, he could find an academic that would be more in tune with Kissinger's mode of thought. I don't credit Clinton with any special intellect in this area. Moreover, honestly she scares me. I sense that her mindset is still stuck in the polarized conflict of the 1960s even today, based on her actions and her statements.
I'm aware of campaign theatrics, but i'm not saying Trump won't care about what she thinks based on any of that crap.
Did you ever play "Balance of Power" back in the 80s/90s? If you did, then you have a fair idea of how I think Clinton's mind works.
Kissinger was consulted because people care what he thinks, rightly or wrongly. I am not a huge fan of Kissinger's politics, but he does understand the struggle between nations pretty well. A modern Metternich, perhaps. But we can remember that Metternich came to a bad end.
It's the truth. The first news out of all of the riot locations was "fake news" by the definition being bandied about today. But *that* fake news is protected speech, but this kind of fake news is damned to hell.
He'll see prosecuting an old lady for a crime a lot of people (willfully or otherwise) do not understand to be not helpful and just let her off. I know people have a lot of angst about the Clintons and their grifter ways, but they're washed up in politics and it's really not worth it.
Slashdot Mirror
The Senate, House, and local winners in those states are going to be livid because that could impact their races, too, so you can expect lots of home court resistance in each state to doing anything like this.
This would be Florida 2000 x5 or x10. Very bad.
So the poor could buy Pabst Blue Ribbon and Mad Dog 20/20 with it. Or drugs. This is trickle-down economics at its best!
Yes. She can - or more properly her campaign can, on behalf of the slates of Democratic electors in the affected states. They would normally have to file for recounts and then challenge ballots one by one. In this kind of case...it would be a pretty new thing for the courts.
The truth of the matter is that in most cases the election results have already been certified, which pushes things to another level. You'd have to get some judge in each state to agree to let this happen, and then after that you'd have to expect to get appeal after appeal. Moreover, it'd have to happen in three separate states to change the election result. The margins in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are much larger than in Michigan, so they'd have to invalidate a lot of ballots to get there. Fail in one, and you lose anyway. Also, if you assume electronic modification of ballots, how do you identify the ones that are invalid?
This would not fail to provoke Republican counter-challenges in states like New Hampshire and Minnesota, so you'd have more states in play then.
This would also cost a mint (states charge on a per-ballot basis for recounts, varies by state). Stuff would be found that has been relatively secretive until this point - such as the dead vote and illegal alien voting. This would possibly - in fact probably provoke an armed response at this point. I'm not kidding about the armed response bit. Tempers are on edge here, and if you think the Democrats are the only ones angry, you're not taking into account that the Republicans are just more disciplined in general. Also, better armed.
Last point - the House would just vote Trump into office anyway if there were this disaster going on and no one were sure about the electors. Each state gets a vote, and each state's House delegation would vote internally on their collective vote.
To be fair, the T-62 was obsolescent in 1990 and that was essentially the reason the Iraqis had them.
You know it's true in your heart, though.
They came home from (public) school in Central Jersey with it. I certainly wouldn't have taught it to them.
It wasn't intended to be witty, it was just stupid. We failed to care much about other people at that age. The rolls were $0.20 at most, so it wasn't like we were doing much harm and the store staff didn't get too torqued up about it.
In contrast, my kids think dull Facebook trolling about appearance is interesting. Even prank phone calls would be better than what they do. I don't even see good graffiti where I live, whereas when I was a kid...one night every white house in the neighborhood became a litany of curses ala "Life of Brian".
Another one I just remembered - somehow, my friends found out my parents' keyless lock entry code for their car. It was a Ford, with a 10 digit keypad built into the driver's side door window molding. Anyway, they spray painted it onto the telephone pole located diagonally from the front door of my house. 48662, assuming my parents would see it when they left the house and get upset. What they didn't realize was that the creosote and tar and whatever else coating on the telephone poles was meant to absorb spray paint, and it did. You couldn't see it - unless it rained. Then the numbers shone out clearly, but when dry you couldn't see a thing.
My parents never figured it out.
I'm sure there are many websites that can cure your ill. :-)
My school was pre-participation awards, so we got actual awards for good grades. I got a very few, but my penmanship (yes, that's what they called it) was always poor, so i'd get great grades in everything except for that - straight Ds - and miss out on the certificates as a result. Oh well.
My view has always been that the good grades were a reward in and of themselves and didn't need to be celebrated.
The truth is that I still correct them from time to time. They take big pauses before they say anything related to 'brought', because they know it's one of my hot buttons. It requires conscious thinking on their part to say 'brought'.
My argument is that they lack the wherewithal to figure out that the stuff is fake. Whether they will do so or not, regardless of age, is debatable.
My affection for Mr. Randi remains unabated.
Even the stupid shit we did was smarter than the kids today. Seriously. We'd paste together a whole pack of EZ-widers and drop an ounce inside of it and roll a stogie, then get accosted by St. Bernards on the way home and think we were going to get eaten by bears or something. We'd steal fire extinguishers from a church and blow them off on a beach. We'd flick matches into the Goodwill box until it caught fire. We'd drop acid and wander through the supermarket grabbing rolls, taking one bite out and throwing it on the floor.
If you have teenage kids, you'll find out that the stupid things they do are just _dumber_. It's like they have no imagination.
My experience is that the people in a generation older than I am have much better English than the average person of my age. Sure, there are problems with some of the more blue collar types with possessives - they tend to think apostrophe-s is a plural. But that is mostly indicative of people who left school before they had much opportunity to do English composition. Leaving school in the 9th grade or so was surprisingly common circa 1955, if you were going to work with your hands anyway.
My mother has better English than my kids do, certainly, as do I. You can only do so much at home to correct the issues. At least I got them to stop saying 'brung'.
A bunch of people who got propagandized and cajoled into doing something different (and we can see now, bad) by a combination of government and media.
Yeah, I see the irony of it too, but the median IQ is 100 and there's no getting around that. Also, most people are followers rather than leaders. They will move with the herd.
The participation awards and the focus on self-esteem have done their part, certainly.
In the literal sense, they are retarded compared to children of similar age 40 years ago. Their grammar and word usage is worse, their punctuation is worse. Their grasp of mathematics is worse. Their knowledge of history is worse. Their cognizance of current events is worse.
No wonder they are susceptible to propaganda for the stupid. They are in fact the ignorant and stupid, relative to their parents and grandparents.
You really need to get more urbane about campaign propaganda. You hear a steady drone of bullshit for 6+ months and then it's all forgotten. That's indicative of something...
Well, I learned what a 'parclo' was, so thank you.
Writing software is like building atop unstable ground and never finding bedrock. Even well written code is unable to entirely isolate itself from the stability issues of its platform with any level of assurance. Software cannot be relied upon absolutely. So while I agree with you that calling coders engineers is wrong, it's probably for a different reason than bad code.
I won't read Kissinger's memoirs because i'm sure he has selective memory. But if you are going to haul someone to The Hague for a trial, I don't think anyone should be surprised to find an airmobile force descending on the same city and removing our citizen, killing anyone who gets in their way.
Whatever you think of Kissinger, he's a US citizen who served his country honorably in WWII and afterward. His decisions are not within the purview of Euro judges. We don't recognize that court.
Some of the highway projects on I-95 interchanges in Maryland should be examined for poor design - imagine spending millions on infrastructure to make the traffic worse and accidents more likely?
I admire Brzezinski, but I think he underestimates the amount of comity that Muslims have with each other. It is true that the Pakistani has little in common with the Egyptian, Moroccan or Indonesian except their religion, but their religion is unique amongst the major religions of today in providing the raw material for creating both a religiously motivated armed force and a rational basis for expecting a theocratic political state - however disjointed the Caliphate became in its various incarnations. Envision a Pope calling for a crusade today...it would be a nonstarter. But creating a relatively universally acclaimed Sunni Caliph...possible, but not very likely at the moment.
I do have to give him credit for encouraging the Soviets to invade Afghanistan. At the time, it seemed but a way station to a warm water port at Karachi, and more dangerous than it actually was.
The Soviet Empire was a historical aberration - a powerful totalitarian government married to geographical conquests mostly the fruit of Allied collaboration and unwise geopolitical moves in the late war and postwar periods. Neither of those prerequisites exist today. That said, trying to deny a Russian government domination of the Ukraine is silly. It is clearly within their sphere of influence and encouraging its government not to Finlandize is simply increasing global tensions. It's another kind of mistake. With a surging China, we may need the Russians - and more importantly, they will need us. Antagonizing them is just making that process much more difficult.
If Trump wanted advice, he could find an academic that would be more in tune with Kissinger's mode of thought. I don't credit Clinton with any special intellect in this area. Moreover, honestly she scares me. I sense that her mindset is still stuck in the polarized conflict of the 1960s even today, based on her actions and her statements.
I'm aware of campaign theatrics, but i'm not saying Trump won't care about what she thinks based on any of that crap.
Did you ever play "Balance of Power" back in the 80s/90s? If you did, then you have a fair idea of how I think Clinton's mind works.
Kissinger was consulted because people care what he thinks, rightly or wrongly. I am not a huge fan of Kissinger's politics, but he does understand the struggle between nations pretty well. A modern Metternich, perhaps. But we can remember that Metternich came to a bad end.
I doubt Trump cares much what Clinton thinks.
America is doing its usual pendulum shift from one pole to another. Trump will be interesting.
It's the truth. The first news out of all of the riot locations was "fake news" by the definition being bandied about today. But *that* fake news is protected speech, but this kind of fake news is damned to hell.
He'll see prosecuting an old lady for a crime a lot of people (willfully or otherwise) do not understand to be not helpful and just let her off. I know people have a lot of angst about the Clintons and their grifter ways, but they're washed up in politics and it's really not worth it.