Facts For Thee

Maybe just"A".

JD Vance is just ChatGPT in a robot in a skin suit

Nah, some weirdos like AI. No one likes Vance, not even Vance.

A couple of media places did release a very short blurb in small print that the "suspect" had no plans to assassinate anyone according to law enforcement after a short investigation.

Honestly, I’d be surprised if the venn diagram of “people who would keep guns in their car” and “trump’s base” wasn’t a circle.

There’s going to be a lot of false positives in an environment like that

The Riverside county sheriff is the one who first used the term assassination attempt. Media uncritically repeated what the sheriff said.

And when it comes to America, a man with guns in his car is a normal situation.

God I hate this place.

I was sitting there reading the articles thinking, "if a loaded weapon amongst Trump supporters is an assassination attempt we're going to need a spreadsheet here .."

The other 2 were prevented

It blows my mind as a non-Amerian that their politicians are saying that the right to own a gun and carry it around is more important than children being able to go-to school without the fear of being killed. That's just the cost of 'freedum'.

Therefore the average NRA opinion: If everybody has a gun...

Edit: I'm from Europe and a supporter of strict gun laws. I just saw an analogy in NRA and the Syndrom quote.

Only important in the US, though.

I'm usually pro gun-rights, though with reasonable restrictions. I have two issues with your comment though.

First, not human right, American right. It'd be such a weird thing to say it's a human right to own firearms when they're a pretty modern thing, meanwhile shelter, food, and water are not.

Second, the second amendment is invalid. It's based on an assumption that isn't true anymore "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." A standing professional army was not the norm of the time and it wasn't expected that the newly form small US would have one. It was expected we would have to rely on a citizen militia for defence. I know what the courts have ruled, but they ignore this first section. Since the first assumption isn't true, the following assertion must be invalid. IANAL but I have no idea how it's made it through the courts so long without this being shown.

i mean this as a genuine question: why do you think it’s important that people have access to guns? i never really got the appeal, but also haven’t talked to many people who do think guns are important, so it would be nice to hear a different perspective on this

Honestly, they should just put a box or dome over him as it would just need someone crazy enough but smart enough to calculate an arc.

Better yet, just hold the rallies in a properly inspected building. (Not sure if any property owners will let them rent anymore though.)

Can't wait until we use a predator drone to dome a predator.

This is an opinion only. I wanted to preface it that way because I realized how much it sounded like I had inside knowledge. I do not. I'm a drunk, ignorant redneck.

I wouldn't put it past them, but those polls shouldn't move the needle very far at places like the silver bulletin or 538 because they weigh based on how trustworthy the polls are. Reputable polls aren't getting bought and fake polls may hit news articles but don't really hit forecasts very hard.

I've watched 538 since they came back online. There was a point where Kamala had greater than a 60 in 100 chance to win. Right now it's about as low as it has been with her up 53 to 46.

We're halfway through October so I have no idea if we're getting a surprise. I'd like to see something that tilts things blue.

I fucking hate this. Are people really that oblivious regarding who these people have shown themselves to be?

On one side, the top of the ticket is somebody who has lied and cheated their whole life, even to a criminal extent, and has never shown any capacity to learn or grow in any meaningful way. They have shown nothing but contempt for anything related to justice or democracy or social progress. The VP pick for this candidate is funded by tech bro billionaires whose entire philosophy is predicated on the notion that a few wealthy and powerful oligarchs should dominate a rule over their lesser peasant-like laborers.

On the other side, the top of the ticket is a career civil servant who has been elected to all three branches of government and holds a juris doctore that proves their competency in law and the processes therein. They have flaws, but appear to be open to learning and growing, changing stances on policies as the times change and more information comes out. The VP pick for this candidate is perhaps best known for expanding liberties and ensuring that all schoolchildren were properly fed in the state that they were elected Governor of.

This election should be a fucking blowout victory for the latter candidate. It's absolutely absurd that it could be even remotely close. There is, and I'm not exaggerating when I say this, nothing redeeming about the other ticket. Nothing. They will not help you in any way. They will consolidate wealth and power for themselves and their inner circle, and you ain't in it. They are not only unwilling, but unable to show any sincere compassion for you. The best they can offer is sociopathic performance of compassion to manipulate you into giving them your vote. Do not fall for these proven charlatans.