Aren’t they Ex-Emoloyees? Oh shit, sorry, they meant Twitter employees. My bad.

Amateur hour.

Needs to be at least a dozen dogs to really count.

Vance was too young to be VP in 2016 thankfully.

Maybe having legal representation on your campaign that does all the legal work like this is incredibly important instead of relying on an unaffiliated clerk? I expect any candidate I would vote for to be able to navigate electoral process effectively by having a competent team. This is the inverview process, and they’re failing at it.

And no, the parties didn’t set these rules up. These rules were set up by each state, and each state varies on the rules and requirements.

That would have been the former CEO. This guy has been around just over a month and actually has an engineering background. We’ll see if he’s actually effective and values his workforce with how he handles the strike.

Too bad we all don’t have a Julie around.

Working all day for a mean little man With a clip-on tie and a rub-on tan He’s got me runnin’ around the office like a dog around a track But when I get back home, you’re always there to rub my back

Hey, Julie, look what they’re doing to me Tryna trip me up, tryna wear me down Julie, I swear it’s so hard to bear it And I’d never make it through without you around No, I’d never make it through without you around

Hey Julie - Fountains of Wayne

What a weirdo.

Didn’t this pastor get the memo, witches and Wicca are cool now.

Watching Tim Walz get the news in the middle of a live post debate interview that Taylor Swift was endorsing Kamala & him was amazing.

His reaction is so genuine and joyfull. You can tell he’s on the verge of happy tears.

Since I know Tim Walz doesn’t drink, I’ll just invite him over for a friend’s & family cookout instead and feed him too much carne asada.

Link to mentioned video of him getting the news: https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/taylor-swift-endorses-kamala-harris-see-tim-walz-react-live-219048005739

Each state would have to decide for themselves how it works.

And yes, candidates win all the time due to their opposition dropping out, dying, etc etc. But TMK, has never happened with a presidential election.

This seems like a brilliant feature to roll out as they’re getting investigated by the DOJ for being a monopoly.

Americans, the last Trump presidency was a fucking disaster on so many fronts that ended with a massive pandemic that the management of was sabatagoted by Trump as president while also championing an insurrection.

How the fuck is anybody undecided at this point? You have to have had your head in a hole for the last 8 years to be undecided today.

Lol.

Trump campaign floundering so hard that an assisnation attempt of a former President couldn’t dominate the news cycle and they’re trying to make it happen 2 months later.

Not gonna happen weirdos.

Have we tried foreplay?

Aka, the Nickleback joke ruiner.

Don’t under estimate the tribes from showing up and swinging AZ blue again.

Nickleback would probabaly be happy they’re getting played again.

80s?

Southern Washington and the majority of Oregon were hot spots for white supremacist “utopia” migration dating back to before the Civil Rights movement.

As a white dude, it’s fucking scary visiting some of those small towns in both states. My wife will even suggest not going to areas due research she’s done to verify that were not stepping into a social trap.

CNN changed ownership a while back and it’s had a clear impact on their bias and reporting standards. Giving a voice to the “far right” was a final straw of my “trust but verify” stance I had with them before that change.

Obviously I don’t trust Fox, OAN (do they still exist?), InfoWars or any of the similar ilk at all. Thats not to say that I write off everything right wing, but there isnt many that pass muster in the US ATM.

There’s also a handful of “left” publications that I dismiss offhand due to a history of sensationalism and bad perspectives.

The majority of news is a “trust but verify” stance with me (using a secondary media outlet). It’s not a straight “this news source is credible” stance, but whether or not they have a history of news that is overtly biased, sensationalized, or mis-reporting. And then there’s the individual article itself.

I down vote the source. CNN is a down vote from me every time. Same with a handful of others.

It’s usually a slow trickle of slighted information that resonates with somebody until they’ve flipped to a view/position contrary to their own interests manipulated by a foreign actor. It’s why your previous posting behavior was received so negatively, as you were tripping the “trolldar” of many individuals as it seemed you were posting with a “hidden” agenda. Which I have to say, while I don’t always agree with you, your recent posting behavior and approach to discussions is no longer tripping my internal warning klaxons.

But an even bigger example is Q-Anon, where there was a slow trickle of info that slowly worked it’s way into so many susceptible individuals.