unicorn

Yes, we'd be told immediately! 😁 Biden wouldn't waste a second to inform us!

Well, you didn't admit you were factually wrong about voting for her in the 2020 primaries. That's you, but at least now you're admitting she was only on the ballot in November. Research strongly suggests VP picks only have an effect in the VP's home state (which is why Trump--or his advisors--wisely picked the Ohio Senator, from a swing state). That also makes intuitive sense. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/18/vance-or-harris-does-a-vp-pick-help-win-the-us-election#:~:text=In the last election%2C Biden,on Biden's popularity among voters. "Even if presidential candidates perform marginally better in their running mate’s home state, as some studies suggest, their overall national popularity seems largely unaffected. In the last election, Biden announced Harris as his VP on August 11, 2020. Based on the voting analysis platform FiveThirtyEight’s average of 2020 presidential election polls, Harris did not have a significant impact on Biden’s popularity among voters....". You sure have a wild imagination, for someone who accuses others of not paying attention to facts. And it's silly (to put it politely--rather than say stupid) to say that the election might be about Biden's ability to carry out his duties tomorrow. Obviously whoever is elected in November would have to carry out those duties until January 2029. Neither candidate fits that bill, as both are going downhill fast. It's questionable whether Biden will be able to carry on his duties until January, but I think that few people believe he'll have that capacity for 4.5 more years. The saving grace for Biden is that at least he's not a complete whacko like Trump--who God knows how he will react when he goes all paranoid, the way Biden is now, believing his best friends are plotting against him. As I've said before, my preferred candidate would be Michelle Obama, if she were to accept, since she polls the best. Also, as I've said before, I believe Klobuchar would probably have a good chance against Trump. I'm fine with Harris, who at least has a reasonable chance against Trump (which Biden does not). Also, it's silly (at best) to say that Biden hasn't been diagnosed with dementia, or Parkinsonism, or anything else. We do not have access to his medical records (for obvious reasons), so to make such a declaration is off-base. (We do know, however, that a Parkinson's specialist has come to the White House multiple times. Whether Biden is taking meds for Parkinsonism is between Biden and his physicians). Maybe you should, as you yourself suggested, just JO and watch porn. Pelosi (and myself), prefer an open nomination process, rather than automatically giving Harris the nomination: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/19/us/politics/nancy-pelosi-joe-biden-drop-out.html?te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240720 "Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the former speaker, recently told her colleagues in the California delegation that if President Biden were to end his campaign she would favor the “competitive” process of an open primary rather than an anointment of Vice President Kamala Harris as the new Democratic presidential nominee...".

Stop the BS about people voting for Harris. VP's are not on any primary ballot, so it's factually incorrect, and you know it, that "they voted for her in the 2024 primary." While it is technically true that she was on the ballot in the general election in 2020, you, and everyone else, knows damn well that people vote for the candidate that they want for POTUS, and not separately for the Veep. I don't know enough about the technicalities about campaign finances (nor, I strongly suspect, do you), to know of the intricacies of campaign finance laws to know whether, if Biden steps down voluntarily, the money somehow vanishes, or gets returned to the donors. I doubt that's the case. I suspect the problem comes in if Biden refuses to step aside, as almost everyone (except you) seems to be encouraging him to do. What is clear to almost everyone (except you) is that if Biden stays in the race, the results will almost certainly be catastrophic for the Democratic Party and the US in general. I thought you knew I was a medical professional, and have correctly diagnosed dementia multiple times in my career. While it is helpful to be able to administer cognitive tests (which Biden has said he refuses to take), and also important to know that other medical conditions, such as syphilis, B12 deficiency, and hypothyroidism have been ruled out, the diagnosis is made primarily on the basis of behavioral observations, both by medical personnel and by those who know the person over time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alzheimer's_disease#Diagnosis "...AD is usually clinically diagnosed based on the person's medical history, history from relatives, and behavioral observations...". (Note: while AD is the most common form of dementia, Biden may have Parkinsonian Dementia, or some other form entirely) When my mother developed dementia, the long-term care insurance companies sent specially-trained RN's to confirm her primary care physician's and neurologist's diagnoses. When they went to her house, her long-term house-keeper was there, and the RN asked my mother what the housekeeper's name was. My mother couldn't recall, which essentially cinched the diagnosis (especially since my mother had a Ph.D.), although she also failed the MOCA test. I'm not sure if my mother's physicians actually also administered MOCA tests. The verbal history of her behavior (calling the police to report her car stolen because she couldn't remember where she parked it, leaving the gas on in the house, and so on) was enough (in addition, of course, to ruling out other forms of dementia). As is common for those with dementia, my mother thought her loved ones, physicians, and so on, were all in a conspiracy to falsely diagnose her. This is similar to Biden, who thinks that his closest friends, including Pelosi and Obama (who chose him as his running mate), are in a similar conspiracy: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/19/us/politics/biden-drop-out-2024-election.html?te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240720 "...Mr. Biden has been around politics long enough to assume that the leaks appearing in the media in recent days are being coordinated to raise the pressure on him to step aside, according to people close to him. He considers Representative Nancy Pelosi, the former House speaker, the main instigator, but is irritated at Mr. Obama as well, seeing him as a puppet master behind the scenes. The friction between the sitting president and leaders of his own party so close to an election is unlike anything seen in Washington in generations — especially because the Democrats now working to ease him out were some of the allies most critical to his success over the last dozen years. It was Mr. Obama who elevated Mr. Biden from a presidential also-ran to the vice presidency, setting him up to win the White House in 2020, and it was Ms. Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, who pushed through his landmark legislative achievements...". The only two people I know who don't think Biden should step aside are Biden himself and you. Things that make you go hmmm.

Talk about needing a reality check. First of all, he only won the 2024 primaries "overwhelmingly" because there was no option. Secondly, the only person who ever "voted" for KH was Biden. Biden won the primary in 2020, and he picked a running mate. Period. You're obviously old enough (63 or 64) to know that the VP isn't elected separately. Thirdly, much new information has come to light since the primaries/caucuses took place (some as long as 6 months ago, i.e. the New Hampshire Primary), that has extreme relevance to the election. For one, it's obvious to everyone that Biden has developed marked cognitive impairment, and, what's worse, is that he lacks awareness of this disability (as is common for those afflicted with dementia). (I will note that Trump also has dementia, though not as bad, and will probably be at Biden's state in 1-2 years, and will be much more dangerous) Perhaps even more importantly, it's now obvious that Biden has almost no chance of winning, perhaps even flipping the Senate if he stays in (obvious to almost everyone except Biden). I don't know if Harris is popular enough to win against Trump, but at least there's a chance. The reality is that Biden staying in the race will lead to disaster for the US (and Biden doesn't seem to care, having said so himself).

I doubt that's true. I haven't seen the polling numbers for this person, but I'd guess that Amy Klobuchar would have a better chance, if Michelle Obama refused to step up to the plate. I suspect AK would be happy to run if nominated.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/only-michelle-obama-bests-trump-alternative-biden-2024 Can't we all agree that the most important goal is to defeat Trump?

I don't know if she'd accept the nomination, but for Chrissakes, why not nominate the person who has the best chance to defeat Trump? https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-07-10/poll-other-democrats-outperform-biden-in-matchups-against-trump Doesn't seem that complicated.

From what I've heard, Michelle Obama has the best chance to defeat Trump. Shouldn't they pick whomever has the best chance? I wonder if she'd step up to the plate if asked.

That would go with foaming at the mouth...

He's married (to a woman). 😪

He got his undergraduate degrees in physics and mathematics at the University of Chicago. How amazing to come from a foreign country, be so scholastically successful, and, apparently, have time to go to the gym as well! https://www.facebook.com/kaan.baykara.7/about_work_and_education

This man surely won the Mega Millions jackpot in the genetic game of life! Take a look at all of the studies he's published! https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xVYRaDgAAAAJ&hl=en

I was even more amazed when I found out the path of gorgeous Turkish model Kaan Baykara. Talk about being blessed with extreme good looks and brains, this man is earning his Ph.D. is theoretical physics at Harvard University! https://hetg.physics.harvard.edu/people/houri-tarazi

I wonder if his fellow fire fighters ever rib him over his good looks? Talk about being rescued by a knight in shining armor (or a shining hot body)...

I often look up some of the men I use as J/O material, often budding or would-be models, to see what they eventually end up doing. Many take careers which capitalize on their looks, such as personal trainers, realtors, etc. But some go into surprising paths. Austin Scoggin has hundreds of photos of himself online, but ended up taking on a career as a fire fighter--in Austin TX of all places (though he's from Oregon). I wonder if he picked Austin TX because of his name?? https://www.famousbirthdays.com/people/austin-scoggin.html

It doesn't seem that complicated. Some kook tried to kill Trump, gets killed himself. At least one person from the Secret Service should resign. Shouldn't happen again. End of story.

Available in various flavors...

https://youtu.be/zKPMVex-UKk

My neighbor said she hires a company to apply orange oil to prevent termites. I haven't noticed anything myself, but when I bought the property 4 years ago, it required termite treatment, and that involved tenting with toxic chemicals (no food, pets, etc.). The company my neighbor uses has only 2.3 stars on Yelp, so I called another company with 4.9 stars, which advertises orange oil. They say they only treat for actual infestations, not for prevention. There does seem to be some sense in a simple preventative care, to avoid more costly and difficult treatment later. But what do I know? Is there any sense in termite prevention? Do any of you do this?

Well, I doubt there's anywhere a changeable, highest court is bound by its own previous decisions. In the US, the SCOTUS has reversed many of its previous decisions, including its recent reversal of Roe v. Wade. However, I'd be surprised to learn that there's anywhere in which lower courts don't have to abide by higher court decisions. Otherwise, the litigant could just simply appeal to the higher court and reverse the lower court's ruling.

Thank you for correcting a (highly) factually incorrect posting. Civil juries are almost unique to the US. They are extremely rare in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_trial "...In England and Wales (which have the same legal system), everyone accused of an offence which carries more than six months' imprisonment has a right to trial by jury. Minor ("summary") criminal cases are heard without a jury in the Magistrates' Courts. Middle-ranking ("triable either way") offences may be tried by magistrates or the defendant may elect trial by jury in the Crown Court. Serious ("indictable-only") offences, however, must be tried before a jury in the Crown Court. Juries sit in few civil cases, being restricted to false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and civil fraud (unless ordered otherwise by a judge)...". Jury trials are also extremely rare for civil cases in Ireland: "...In the Republic of Ireland, a common law jurisdiction, jury trials are available for criminal cases before the Circuit Court, Central Criminal Court and defamation cases, consisting of twelve jurors...". I think both of you are incorrect regarding jury trials in Cyprus. There are no jury trials, even for criminal cases, in Cyprus: https://e-justice.europa.eu/18/EN/national_ordinary_courts?CYPRUS&member=1 "...The District Courts hear at first instance all civil cases (except for admiralty cases) and criminal cases for offences punishable by a term of imprisonment of up to 5 years. Each administrative district in Cyprus has a District Court. Case are tried by one judge and there is no jurys are heard ... The Assize Courts hear criminal cases only. As a rule they try the most serious cases involving offences that are punishable by a term of imprisonment of over 5 years. Each Assize Court consists of three judges. Decisions are taken by majority vote. There is no jury...". As you correctly pointed out, defamation is a criminal offense in many places, including many US states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation "...on the state level, 23 states and two territories have criminal defamation laws on the books: Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands. In addition, Iowa criminalizes defamation through case law without statutorily defining it as a crime...". I don't know about Thai law, but it certainly may be the case that Thailand is unique in allowing truthful statements to be considered defamatory. In all civilized countries, a truthful statement cannot be defamatory. I believe it's absolutely shameful, for sure, if one can be jailed in Thailand for posting something truthful. The OP didn't make reference to any reliable source, so I leave it up in the air as to whether I believe the statement that truthful statements can be considered defamatory in Thailand. I'll wait for a more reliable source (given all of the factually incorrect statements from the Pataya TImes source, that source is obviously unreliable).

Whether he was charged or not, unless the video was doctored, he did it. A 10 year-old can never give consent to that.

I sometimes troll Model Mayhem for wanking material, and this man's self-introduction gave me a chuckle: https://www.modelmayhem.com/youssefkayaz "As you can see, I'm really attractive, charming, humble, modest and very photogenic. It would be a shame for all that to go to waste. That's why I model. A bit more about me? Well I have an undergraduate degree (BA) and am in second year Nursing studies. In addition to modeling and acting, I have many interests, including sports, current events, world peace, etc. However, my greatest goal is to one day rule over the fashion/modeling industry by using my intellect and impressive personalty ..". His humility and modesty really come through in his self-description! 😄 I'm not sure he'll ever "rule over" the industry with his intellect and personalty, though. 😁

Really, now. There's video of him performing horrific acts on pre-pubescent children. I don't need to wait for a jury to feel outraged, nor do I feel I'm being self-righteous. Unless those videos are fake, he's a monster, and I don't feel I'm being self-righteous in saying so, just because this hasn't gone through the legal process. I hope that at least has the decency to plead guilty, and not force the jury to witness the video evidence. 🤮No one should have to look at that, and if he forces anyone to look at this because of his denial, I hope the law comes down hard on him.