partial_accumen

The statement said withhold Medicaid for states banning IVF. Aka if you ban IVF, the bill would punish the state by withholding Medicaid. Seems to be the opposite of what Republicans want with IVF.

I see your confusion: (many) Republicans want to ban IVF.

Look at the title of this post we’re in. “Republicans block Senate Democrats’ IVF bill”. That bill protects IVF, and the republicans shot it down.

You lost the ability to vote against him.

He freezes in shock when someone discovers and destroys one of his Horcruxes.

But that’s not what that statement says.

I read the OP again. I read your statement again. I’m not seeing a different meaning than the one I came away with and commented on originally.

What are you saying the statement says that my comments contradict?

that would withhold Medicaid funding from states that ban IVF, but it was blocked by Democrats.

Withholding Medicaid funding doesn’t seem like a great idea. But on the whole being against banning IVF seems like a good idea. Am I missing something?

Republicans don’t want to secure IVF and don’t want to pay for Medicaid. GOP state’s would happily block IVF to get Medicaid defunded.

It’s ugly af. Was that a project requirement or something? It looks like it has a fucking underbite lol.

It is, but its pure function over form. If you want the whole story on this here’s a well done 13 minute youtube video: USPS Oshkosh NGDV Postal Van - Ugly by Design

Short version for the ugly:

• drivers need to stand up at full height inside for ease of use
• drivers, when seated, need to see very close to the ground what is in front of them
• drivers are not all the same torso height. Men are usually taller than women so you need a really tall windshield for very tall seated drivers, and very sharp and short hood for very short drivers.

Its ugly, but is a very VERY functional design. I’d rather mail carriers are comfortable in their ride than feeling stylish.

“Please eat a ‘Trump brand verification steak’ to sign into your account”

Yep, for decades. They used to be much larger consuming the space of a large table. Now they are small units like this:

Just search for “surface mount rework” or the nickname “hot air pencil”.

The long trailer under neigh could itself be uhaul rental. So maybe even 6 is the answer.

In today’s news of “Every accusation the GOP makes is an admission of guilt”:

GOP accuses immigrants of eating pets, while today the GOP began eating its own pet, Laura Loomer.

I always thought the “fix” to a traditional soldiering iron was a hot air pencil.

Vyacheslav Volodin, the chairman of the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, and a close ally of President Vladimir Putin, said Moscow would be forced to use “more powerful and destructive weapons” against Ukraine if Kyiv started firing long-range Western missiles at Russia.

Hey Vyacheslav, what weapons besides nuclear (and maybe biological) weapons does russia have that it hasn’t used against Ukraine already? Do you think if you use a nuclear weapon against Ukraine that that ends the war? Do you think the rest of the world will just say “welp, I guess russia used a nuke, better let them have Ukraine now”. Not even close.

They have a vehicle they can sell and it’s been out four years: they need to be well on the way to redesigning it and its factory, rather than pushing back on selling it

Only if it can be profitable now, or if its built into the plan to lose money on EV sales to learn the market and refine the product.

It sounds like Ford is focusing on the short term, and they’re not able to make a profitable EV.

It’s not that they can’t manufacture for a price that can be profitable, it’s that they haven’t yet sold enough to make back their development costs.

Thats one possibility, but not the only one. Its possible that the design of the vehicles are too labor intensive so irrespective of scale they will always be unprofitable. We have good indications this may exist for Mach E. It was designed and built very quickly as a “skunkworks” style product to respond to Model Y market dominance (and giant profit margins). Ford used almost exclusively off-the-shelf parts to get it out the door quickly. The consequence to this is lots and lots of labor to use parts designed for another application in a different one. Its all doable and it works to build a product, but potentially at the cost of profitability. At product launch the Mach E was an MSRP of $54,700. Today that same vehicle MSRP is $43,995. Thats a huge amount of margin to give back that would eat up many small production improvements since launch.

They could be selling like hotcakes but they much rather go back to their cash cows and the oil industry to milk.

Have we seen that Ford and Chevy are able to manufacture EVs at a profit? Chevy Bolt reportdely lost $9k per vehicle sold. Ford has reported they’ve lost as much as $40k per vehicle sold on Mach e.

It is absolutely possible to create profitable EVs, but so far Ford and Chevy don’t seem to be able to.

The offered contract also notably includes “a commitment to build Boeing’s next new airplane in the Puget Sound region,” Boeing said

A social media post 40 years from now:

“TIL Back in 2032 Boeing temporarily went into business building tiny single engine 4 person private jet, but only sold one before shutting down the production line to check a box on an agreed union labor contract.”

OP article is just pointless anecdotes telling us what we already know: that people will vote Trump, and do so thinking his policy will actually fix the fentanyl issue. That isn’t news. It’s influence fodder. Trump having a policy, and that policy being demonstrably ineffectual is news and shouldn’t have been buried under 8 paragraphs of rhetoric.

I think you may missed the point of the article. Its not really an article about the Fentanyl crisis. It’s an article about political rhetoric.

Remove the word Fentanyl and replace it with a number of other issues and the result is similar. Trump brags about doing things and talks tough but most of the time he does nothing. Democrats don’t really brag about it, but many times put plans and policy into action to address the symptoms or the underlying cause.

The point of the article is that Democrats aren’t doing so well communicating to voters that Democrats are actually governing with action and solutions and not just talking. However without bragging about it, Democrats get no credit with voters. The article postulates that because of that communication failure, they are losing some votes to Trump. As in, this isn’t a policy failure on the part of Democrats, its a correctable communication failure.

I can’t make long distance calls anymore. Anyone else having problems with their Blue Box?

“To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.”

“I think — I pray — he can be disciplined,” Tricia McLaughlin, who was a senior advisor to Vivek Ramaswamy’s campaign for the 2024 Republican nomination.

Wow. “I think” “I pray”. I always thought their phrase of “thoughts and prayers” was just an empty platitude as an excuse for inaction. I turns out that’s not the case! That’s really their go-to gameplan they use for themselves in the place of concrete actions.