The average poll respondent is older, whiter, and more conservative than the average voter. So you end up with a skewed sample.

Any reputable polling group will adjust for that. Granted, fewer and fewer people are answering their phones and taking these polls, but basic demographics are a well-known and pretty easy to adjust for thing. Most polls take a lot of that information for that reason

I think people need to stop thinking that “most likely outcome” = prediction. They gave Trump a 1/4 chance of winning in 2016, which is far from impossible and better than most were saying. Their latest trackers have really emphasized the probability aspect of things, rather than the expected vote share.

They actually did a project about this. Here’s how close they were with US House predictions: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/checking-our-work/us-house-elections/ (you can look up other elections but since there are so many to work with here I thought it was a good place to start)

Funny, I thought people are more likely to go to the polls over things that affect them and their families directly. Abortion and weed legalization being common examples. I’m assuming you have a source to back up the idea that supreme court justice term limits ranks up there in getting people to vote? Also, you do understand the difference between a “popular idea” and something that will motivate people to vote?

My Democratic rep and Senators are in pretty safely blue territory. What am I/they supposed to do about the other half of Congress they have to win over a good chunk of?

As opposed to, like, passing my own constitutional amendment because someone won’t do it for me?

What exactly is a realistic path to make a real one happen?

And that’s an excellent segue to what I was going to bring up upstream: we only have so many resources to drive voters. There are plenty of relatable issues that can drive people to the polls so Trump doesn’t have another opportunity to appoint anyone. Removing SCOTUS lifetime appointments isn’t going to do it. But if we can keep a Democrat in the White House and control in Congress, we may still have lifetime appointments but at least there will be reasonably sane people in the court.

And before you say anything about a false choice fallacy, campaign resources and attention of the voting base are finite.

Certainly not in the current political climate. You think a good chunk of Republicans can get on board with that when they have a 6-3 majority in the court right now?

That will take a constitutional amendment, which… Good luck

It just died because the battery manufacturer screwed it up

That’s debatable. They are bringing it back, and it will have the newer Ultium battery, but whether the battery recall is what did it is hard to say. They did run another model year after that happened, though I would’ve expected a little more after the refresh from the 2022MY.

On the other hand, the Bolt platform was released in 2016. A lot has changed since then, particularly with charging. 55kW is laughable compared to pretty much everything else on the market these days, and they may need to go back to the drawing board to update it.

I’m fairly certain it has to be requested by one of the parties. I’m sure Jack Smith’s team has been getting it ready for quite some time now, but you only want to fire when you’re 103% certain it will work, otherwise you’ve just made things a lot harder for yourself.

an nda is enforced by the justice system it’s not going to enforce it against itself

It’s not that simple. There are two main components to the legal system, civil and criminal. Civil is between two private parties (people, companies, and sometimes the government) for disputes with contracts and such. Criminal law is when the government brings changes against you for breaking the law.

Generally law enforcement (“the justice system”) works on the criminal side of things. It doesn’t really care about a contract between two people if something illegal is happening. Can you imagine the loopholes that could create in organized crime if you just had to write a contract and you couldn’t use an otherwise willing accomplice as a witness?

I’m a huge fan of the “half your age plus seven” rule. Even if it’s legal (assuming no grooming prior) it’s still pretty creepy. Especially since that’s the age you marry - presumably you’ve been together for a bit before that too.

In the US, it’s made by Hershey. At least the bigger complaint about that company is chocolate that’s not nearly as good as opposed to points at everything

Honestly, I’m not sure how exactly the law is written. I believe that was a factor out of several that raised the misdemeanor of falsification into a felony (by doing so to conceal a crime). The judge’s instructions to the jury was that they needed to be unanimous that a crime was being concealed, but they didn’t have to agree on which one(s). Unless some members of the jury go to the media (for their sake, I sure hope they don’t) and that gets brought up, we’ll probably never know which way that wind was blowing.

Not just the financing, but hiding the Stormy Daniels story during the election. They were using the National Enquirer (yes, I know) to promote Trump, make up stories to bring down his opponents, and hide the Stormy Daniels story (which was needed when the “grab them by the pussy” video leak caused chaos and arguably almost sunk the campaign). THAT’S where the election interference came into play.

There’s a certain chemistry between Ryan, Colin, and Drew that just cannot be replicated

On that note, wasn’t Whose Line is it Anyway originally British? Because Drew Carey’s was peak!

Remember when Mitch McConnell was in the news constantly for deliberately halting progress to serve his party’s goals? We don’t even hear about him anymore

We’ve heard less about him for the last 4 years… Partly because of others taking the stage, maybe, but also because he became Senate minority leader. There’s a lot less to be done in that position, and I think he knows it.

There is also a little subjectivity in whether the reason for falsifying the business documents was to cover up a crime (election interference). My understanding is that that’s what raises the charges to a felony.

With that said, I don’t believe the defense really tried to pass it off as general PR’ing or anything like that

“Huh, I hadn’t really considered this [kinda racist when you think about it] view, but it’s actually pretty popular [by bots] so maybe there’s something to this!”