It's beside the point, but this isn't even *wrong* correctly. Going from $10 to $600 would be a six thousand percent increase, not six hundred percent. The reverse is a roughly 98 percent decrease.
As much as people like to go after the Times, this is an absolutely damning article. Illustrates the president's insanity in stark terms.
When the first cease fire reports came in late yesterday, I wasn't sure if Lebanon was included. But I figured I'd find out in the morning. Surely it would be clear by morning, right?
I don't quite understand what Pakistan is proposing. Two weeks' ceasefire in exchange for opening the Strait? Trump might want that, sure, but does Israel? And do all the hardline factions in Iran? It might depend on who has to cease fire and where (Israel, in Lebanon?), but the details are tricky.
It's worse than war crimes. Killing an entire civilization is genocide.
That's an explicit threat of genocide, isn't it?
In the context of the WSJ interview, where he gives Tuesday evening as a deadline, I think it's "just" a threat to do war crimes (bombing power plants) rather than a nuclear threat. But it's petrifying that the latter cannot be ruled out.
Iran probably knew that at this point. He doesn't believe in abiding by agreements. From their point of view, given that this is the case, why make one?
Those four options are all a) escalatory and b) useless. The goal seems to be c) massaging Trump's ego but that doesn't get the Strait open.
There are two interpretations of this. One is selective grading (because Biss was running against Kat and Van Hollen doesn't have a competitive race). The other is far uglier. The presence of the ugly interpretation, correct or not, means that this is a mistake that has to be fixed pronto.
I never thought she'd get within four points of a win. She's talented. I didn't vote for her today, but I hope she runs for another office, ideally something on the North Side (state rep, perhaps?).
Yep. I live in IL-9 and got their incessant and obnoxious mailers. Some pro-Fine, but mostly anti-Biss. They didn't want Kat either, but they didn't run ads attacking her (guess they didn't see here as a threat). Whoever runs their political strategy is not particularly bright.
Where in Chicago are they from? There are bits of IL-09 that have a big Orthodox population (parts of West Rogers Park and West Ridge), and will vote very differently from, say, Edgewater.
Krishnamoorthi's district, at least a big chunk of it. About what I'd have expected?
Mail tends to be older voters, who watch more TV. Krishnamoorthi has dominated TV ads.
Wonder if she's working on a story he doesn't like.
No way in hell it gets enough D votes to overcome a filibuster. They'll have to pass it in reconciliation if they want it at all, and that might not be trivial either.
Oh look, a panel that isn't awful. Nice.
Patty Murray negotiated the agreement and has publicly defended the ICE provisions she negotiated, so I'd guess she might be at least a lean yes?
What on earth is this nonsense? There are no motives other than one man's derangement.
From the article, these transactions happened in 2018 and 2019. How on earth is this not barred by the statute of limitations?
I actually suspect they'll find that hard, given that Alito specifically said that CA's justification, like TX's, was political rather than racial.
Yeah, that line is really interesting. They didn't have to write that. And Kagan didn't have to dissent "respectfully" either. But they did, and she did. I wonder if the deal was to allow the gerrymandering in both TX and CA. Regardless, the practical effect is to lock in both the TX and CA maps.
Can we arrange for him to take over FIFA and leave the presidency? His talents (getting attention, stupendous corruption) make him an exceptional match for that role.
I remember VA-Gov 2017, where the polls had Northam generally leading but mostly by 1-5 points. Quinnipiac came in with Northam +9. Northam... won by 9. I doubt Spanberger's margin is 15, but it would not surprise me at all if it were comfortably in double digits.
Seems unequivocally good, no? If they buy Lederman's argument - and it's compelling - then the Guard just cannot be deployed under 12406(3) in the way they've been doing it. The military would have to be there (under a separate authority) and unable to handle things, which is very unlikely.
There is no causative association. There is a weak correlation, which people studied to see if it was causative, and proved conclusively that it isn't.
She. But... yeah, more or less.
No. That only got one vote. There was one vote for that position (Nelson, a Trump appointee). There was one vote for "the district judge got the facts wrong so he can do this" (Bade, Trump appointee). There was one vote for "this is bonkers of course he can't do this" (Gruber).
I was more encouraged after the argument than I expected to be. Perhaps I'm off base, but it seems to me like it will still be hard for Republicans to dismantle currently extant VRA districts (because the obvious remedy - returning to the old map - is not race-based).