DeSantis wants to avoid a 'Chris Christie moment' like what happened in 2012 when Christie was photographed walking with Obama on a beach looking at storm damage after Hurricane Sandy. Christie took a lot of flak for that by Republicans and Right-wing media.
OCU

#7 | POSTED BY OCUSER

Yep. That was the first thing I thought of. And it makes sense.

It says TERRIBLE things about what is important to the Republican base. And, by extension, anyone who would be willing to run as a Republican and behave in the reprehensible ways that actually appeal to that base. So, do not get me wrong, he deserves every bit of criticism that he gets.

But I do see where he is sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place (even though he CHOSE to put himself there).

It also explains why people like Trump and Vivek are so appealing to Republicans, while mainstream politicians cannot seem to gain any traction. Because the Republican party's expectations of how their politicians will govern are completely divorced from reality. If a Republican ever tries to actually effectively govern then they will be attacked and castigated for actually cooperating with the other party, for not attacking, disrupting, and demeaning democrats at every turn. The whole of the Republican party ideology has become "piss off liberals". There is nothing else that they believe in with any consistency.

It looks like he did not try to vote twice or anything. Just that he tried to claim residency in his district when he did not have it, then voted in his district. It seems like he is really being punished for falsely claiming residency in order to run for office, but the only charge they can get him on is for voting in a district where he did not have residency?

Though, my interpretation could be incorrect.

Not that I am defending this idiot. But this seems less a case of actual "voter fraud" (where he is trying to subvert the election) and more being charged under a technicality due to his other unethical behavior.

A bookie's odds are set so that they will make money regardless of the outcome. They aim for the bets to balance, have people betting both sides, so that regardless of the outcome they bring in and pay out about the same amount of money. Obviously with the odds a little skewed so they also take a percentage of the top.

They can definitely screw up their posted odds and not balance their bets, but that can happen on either side of the bet.

IDK, unborn babies are a source of profound nausea when I consider half of them will grow up to be republicans.

#9 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

That... and the morning sickness.

America IS winning. And Russia is losing.

Our goal is to do what is best for America. And having a war eager authoritarian strongman win is NOT in America's best interests.

Having Putin lose is just not in Republicans' best interests.

The real question is why the interests of the Republican Party are contrary to the interests of America as a whole.

The body cam footage (or at least some of it) has been released and is on YouTube.

For example, why shouldn't he own a firearm? Especially considering all the wacko MAGA tools that want to hang him.

#58 | POSTED BY HORSTNGRABEN

There is a good chance that the current supreme court would find that law to be unconstitutional. Because there is no historical basis for denying someone's second amendment rights based on the fact they are a drug user.

Collective punishment is a war crime. If that's true for the Russians,it's true for the Ukrainian's or any one else too.

#8 | POSTED BY EFFETEPOSER

You consider disrupting someone's vacation to be "collective punishment"?

That is pretty ridiculous, especially when you seem to consider the slaughter of Ukrainian civilians not to be.

Except that I usually use the "thumbs up" emoji as acknowledgment of what someone says, not necessarily agreement.

I feel like it should be incumbent upon the person claiming the signature is binding to prove it is unambiguous. Especially if they asked to "acknowledge receipt" of the contract?

This judge is an idiot.

What, are half the country no longer under threat of being homeless if having to pay an unexpected $500 bill?
This is supposed to be serious journalism, right?

#8 | POSTED BY HAGBARD_CELINE

Is that really different than other times?

From what I have seen, 70% of Americans are just bad with money. They live paycheck to paycheck, spending what they take in, regardless of how much they make.

Since this article is about the strength of the labor market, and not how good (or bad) Americans are at handling money, how is the "unexpected $500 bill" thing relevant?

In effect, and as I have been saying for the past 8 years, the problem is not Trump. The problem is the Republican party, and the conservative movement. Our system of government is too strong for one person to destroy it. But, if one political party, one side of the ideological spectrum, decides that they want to destroy this country (which their actions indicated it is what they have decided), then that is MUCH more likely to be successful.

Now people fret over this impending fascist dictatorship... somehow led by a guy that can't even get people to sign up for his social media platform.

#4 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG

There is nothing special about Trump. He is just a hateful narcissist. There are lots of those people around, and there always have been.

What is is significant is that the Republican Party (or, more accurately, their base) decided that he was the type of person who they thought best represented them, who best reflected their values.

I don't care about getting rid of Trump. He is just one piece of scum. If you get rid of him, there where be another to take his place soon after. What is significant, what SHOULD worry you, is that he is a symptom of the rot that has spread to the core of the conservative movement. And, for some reason, this guy who "can't even get people to sign up for his social media platform" is the current frontrunner to win the Republican nomination. At the same time he is under federal indictment for, at the very least, gross negligence in his handling of national security secrets.

Yet, the fact he is under indictment only seems to make him more popular with conservatives in this country? That is the rot that this article is talking about. Do you want to try to explain why you think that does not portend bad things for the political future of this country?

(I could go into all the other high crimes that Trump committed while in office, which his popularity prove that conservatives also don't care about, but I don't need to add another few thousand words to this post.)