If you say so, but many teachers are teaching religion like it is a fact too.
Even my school sold Noah's Ark with the same confidence as geography.
If I would start to write down everything scientifically wrong with that story,
I wouldn't be able to stop for at least a year.

And who in their right mind doesn't learn anything after leaving school?

Anyway, it was based on nothing then, and in the last 40 years
that science has been perfected to a teeth.

What links to terrorists?

No formal denaturalization proceedings have been filed against her, as of yet.
Also no conclusive evidence proving that Rep. Ilhan Omar lied on her immigration paperwork has been made public.

When you consider Trump to be a god, it's your own defect that makes you think
that people like me view someone like her as an authority or a 'goddess'. It doesn't work like that for us. We don't worship figures; we expect leaders and activists to represent OUR values. If they stop doing that, we drop them like a bad habit.

Anyway, she wasn't laughing because she stopped caring about climate change.
She was laughing at that specific march because she views polite, routine Friday parades as toothless and ineffective against entrenched systems, which is why she shifted to more direct, disruptive protests instead.

The most recent protest Greta Thunberg attended took place this week (November 10–12, 2026) at the UN COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Turkey. Thunberg protested inside demanding the removal of corporate oil, gas, and petrochemical lobbyists.
She also held a press conference calling the negotiations hypocritical and warning leaders that "The planet is not dying, it is being killed.".

only registered users can see external links

You heard what you heard, but you can check for yourself what it was based on
and how much it was scientific consensus or not. What American schools were teaching when you were young is not accurate up-to-date science.
They hardly had any decent computers to do any complex calculations,
which is very important for climate science.

That was at least 40 years ago. The CO₂ concentration was 347 ppm back then.
It is up to 428 ppm today.

Maybe you'll notice that I have to provide a higher number for the daily CO₂ concentration, every time we talk about it? Exactly, that's the whole issue.
It's not that long ago that I told you that we passed 400 ppm for the first time.

• The 'Ice Age Fallacy': That '70s ice age story is one of the top 10 myths endlessly recycled by anti-climate blogs and think tanks. It has been debunked a million times;
if informed people are still using this as an argument, then they are just being dishonest.
It was never the scientific consensus, as it was based on just a handful of outlier studies. Back then, a few harsh winters, temporary cooling from industrial air pollution, and Cold War fears simply made sensational "new ice age" headlines sell well. The core science is simple, established physics we’ve known for over a century: CO₂ traps infrared heat, so adding more of it directly warms the planet. Every single qualified scientist agrees on this basic physical first-order effect, as it is not a subject of serious scientific debate. When a few scientists talk about cooling, they mean complex second-order effects, like melting ice disrupting ocean currents.

• Natural changes: Scientists obviously know the climate changed naturally in the past. What makes today different is the scale and speed: ice cores going back 800,000 years show CO₂ never once went above 300 ppm. In just the last 100 years, we’ve pushed it from ~305 ppm to nearly 428 ppm, which is a rate 100 times faster than any natural shift ever recorded in those cores.

• The name change: 'Climate change' has been used alongside 'global warming' for decades, and the UN's IPCC has had 'Climate Change' in its name since 1988. One describes the rising global temperature, while the other describes how that trapped energy makes extreme weather more frequent and intense, driving massive floods, severe droughts, stronger storms, rising sea levels, and melting ice sheets.

• Volcanoes & Net Zero: Humanity emits over 100 times more CO₂ each year than all the world's volcanoes combined do in that same year. In fact, we emit as much CO₂ in just three days as every volcano on Earth does in an entire year (and major eruptions actually cool the planet temporarily by blocking sunlight). Meanwhile, saying 'the UK is too small to matter' is just an excuse to do nothing. We can only solve this if every country participates. Otherwise, everyone just points fingers at each other and nobody does anything, ignoring how Western innovation drives down clean energy costs for the rest of the world.

If you have a decent memory then you know that I addressed those points many times before. What is talked about in schools isn't the same as the scientific consensus.

It's super inefficient for everyone to take care of their own needs.
It's much more efficient to organize things collectively.
Still, if the government fails me, I am perfectly capable of doing lots of things myself. There are just lots of people who can't. Their failure is a failure that hurts all of us.

Absolute nonsense. Do you even consider all the hidden costs from fossil fuels?

These are all arguments based on the misconception that energy grid planners, economists, and climate researchers would demolish fossil fuel backups, before a mix of renewable energy technologies and storage can reliably take over. Grids rely on diversity, not standalone batteries.

Contrary to the claim that planners ignore backup and transmission costs, federal agencies and regional grid operators use advanced "capacity expansion" models (like NREL’s ReEDS) that explicitly calculate total system costs, including storage, transmission, and reliability margins, before approving new energy mixes.

Texas Winter Storm Uri (2021) was NOT caused by renewable energy. The vast majority of the lost generation during Winter Storm Uri came from unwinterized natural gas, coal, and nuclear plants, alongside frozen natural gas pipelines.

Viewing transmission lines purely as a cost is ignorant as fuck. Connecting cheap, abundant power to high-demand cities reduces congestion and drives down wholesale electricity prices.

If you don't understand how fickle the prices of fossil fuels actually are, while suffering the highest prices in history, because of the stupid attack on Iran, then you will never learn.
The best way to lower the prices of fossil fuels is to be less dependent on them. Solar and wind might not be available at every moment, but as soon as they are, they are MUCH cheaper forms of energy.

I just bought a plug-in home battery, and changed my energy contract to 'dynamic'.
After dinner, when we are watching TV, I take out my phone, look at the electricity prices for the next day, and check the weather to see when the sun shines. When there is some wind or sun, the electricity is cheap and when there isn't the electricity is expensive.
Then I program the battery for when to charge and discharge, in about 5 minutes. It then fills up with about 5 kWh of electricity at e.g. 35 cents/kWh and I let it discharge when it's e.g. 65 cents/kWh, at the time that I use it too. Correcting for some loss and wear of the battery, just that action saves me about Ђ0,90. That is in the winter, when my own solar panels are making me at best 3 kWh per day. In summer, I can charge the battery for free and discharge it when it's dark out to save my expenses or even sell the electricity for the best rate. I'm working on a Home Assistant system that does the calculation for me automatically with AI, but I am rethinking that a bit, because it's actually fun to do myself.
It looks like this investment can pay for itself in about 3 years.

"revenge bullshit"? Accountability for Trump being a fucking traitor you mean?

Biden put the country back into a booming economy after the Covid crisis that Trump managed like a buffoon, while the right-wing media fucked up people's minds about vaccines, which resulted in over a million dead dumb-asses.

It's true that Americans didn't feel any benefit from that booming economy, but that's because the billionaires don't share any benefit with working class Americans. Unfortunately, most Americans are not smart enough to understand how they are exploited to the last penny.

Then Trump promised to fix that for them, but did the exact opposite immediately,
after he got elected. The majority of people now understand some of that, but I have
no confidence in them to memorize that longer than a goldfish.
Some people actually voted for Trump, because they thought that he was better for Palestinians than Kamala Harris. If you are this goddamned stupid, I cannot help you.
I hope they suffered for their stupidity. There is a limit to my patience for stupidity.

The infighting of the Dems is about GETTING RESULTS!!! Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are cowardly weaklings, who are already working against the interest of their own voters. They do that for bribes from corporations and AIPAC. They need to be kicked out to PREVENT lack of progress. You are correct; Democrats do have a track record for lack of progress. That's still better than a record of absolute destruction. Democrats like Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are the cause of that lack of progress. The people understand that, which is why they have an approval rating of 18% and 13%, lower than Trump who was just voted against in an absolute 'bluekake'. Literally every Democratic voter should demand Chuck and Hakeem's resignation, because they will destroy everything that they just voted for. Don't act like you know what's best for them, because you don't even know what's best for you.

Make your prediction about what's coming.

Is she going to force schools to put up the Five Pillars of Islam
or the moral verses from Surah Al-Isra (Chapter 17 of the Quran)?

Let me provide them for you, so you will recognize them WHEN she does:

The Five Pillars of Islam:
• Shahada: The declaration of faith (belief in one God and Muhammad as His messenger).
• Salat: Performing the five daily prayers.
• Zakat: Giving alms to the poor and needy.
• Sawm: Fasting during the month of Ramadan.
• Hajj: Making the pilgrimage to Mecca (if physically and financially able).

Surah Al-Isra (Quran 17:22–39):
• Worship: Worship only God and associate no partners with Him.
• Family: Be kind and respectful to your parents.
• Charity: Give to relatives, the poor, and the traveler, and do not be wasteful.
• Life and Family: Do not kill your children out of fear of poverty, and do not commit adultery.
• Justice: Do not take a life unjustly, do not touch the property of an orphan, and be honest in trade (give full measure and weight).
• Humility: Do not follow that of which you have no knowledge, and do not walk proudly on the earth.

So can we agree that religious texts shouldn't be forced onto children?

Why would it be 'common sense' that medication that is developed for TREATING depression would cause people to start murdering?

When you say "No one knows how these meds work", you don't have to say "I don't work in the medical field". That's obvious. Medical science knows a lot about how these meds work, Because that's how they come up with new meds. And what they do is studied extensively, before it's allow to use them. It's very clear that those meds are helping patients who ACTUALLY need them.

You are now raising a point that is valid; the prescription of antidepressants for other mental health issues than depression. I completely agree that doctors are prescribing it way too much, just to get that patient out of the door. Instead of continuing to search for a definitive diagnosis, they prefer to treat the symptoms. They calm your emotions, but the underlying problems have not gone away; they are merely somewhat suppressed.

I've seen this with both my girlfriend and my mother. Both had/have physical pain, but instead of diagnosing and treating the pain, they treat the mental stress of the pain. In case of my girlfriend, the doctor provided what I call 'coat rack diagnoses'; terms like 'irritable bowel syndrome' and 'fibromyalgia' (which literally means muscle ache) or 'anxiety disorder' for the fear of suffering horrible cramps for hours; diagnoses that just describe the symptom, instead of the cause.

It is easier to dismiss complaints as being due to psychological issues than to keep searching for physical causes. Prescribing antidepressants is quick and easy. If the patient doesn't come back after being put on antidepressants, they think that they did their job.

There is obviously a mental health issue related to mass shootings; a happy sane person doesn't do that. Blaming antidepressants for a gun violence epidemic is the EXACT SAME THING that doctors do; NOT looking at the REAL problems in society, but picking something that people distrust already and is factually a problem, to use
as a 'coat rack' to hang the problem on.

When there is a mentally ill person, who ends up killing a lot of people, it's ridiculous
to blame the effort of treating them, instead of the mental illness.

The first issue with mass murders is the access to guns. Your country is an outlier for gun deaths, mostly because of that. And OF COURSE there is a mental health issue related too. It's just ridiculous to think that you would solve that by taking away antidepressants.

It's similar to the opioid crisis; doctors prescribed them way too much and didn't do their due diligence when patients needed to quit them again. That doesn't mean that people don't need heavy pain-killers sometimes. Some people have chronic pain and have no further treatment options available. The risk of addiction to opioids is then subordinate to the preservation of some quality of life. If doctors don't understand that, and leave their patients to suffer, the force those patients into the black market. Then they get unsafe products and kill themselves of an overdose. You can blame the illegal market for those deaths, or you can blame the failures of doctors for that. I think I can predict your choice; what puts the blame back on individuals the most, especially if you can blame it on poor or colored individuals. Blaming a system, that would require work and money, to solve it.

Cops arrest people for nothing all the time.
And even if they do arrest actual criminals, the law requires EVIDENCE.

Socialists, lefties, progressives and liberals want a rule of law that is fair
and that works to rehabilitate criminals. They also want a society where people
have a decent chance at a good life. That makes people turn to crime less.

Every country that applies those ideas has much less crime than your country.
That's not soft on crime, that's smart society building.

Maybe you want to live in a world where you need to be armed and on guard
to defend yourself at moment's notice, all the time. I don't. I want to be free.

I did not argue that scientists have mapped every single step of neuroplasticity. The claim we were talking about was RFK Jr. saying antidepressants are the primary driver behind mass school shootings.

Even the summary you pasted says decades of clinical trials show these drugs genuinely help people with depression and anxiety. If you want to defend RFK Jr., you have to show evidence that antidepressants cause mass shootings, not paste a Google summary about serotonin.

Dear HAKEEM and CHUCK...
only registered users can see external links

What you are doing here is a classic motte-and-bailey switch. You are substituting RFK Jr.'s ridiculous claims, that Wi-Fi causes 'leaky brain,' tap water turns kids transgender, and antidepressants drive mass shootings, with completely different, milder points like static electricity under power lines or river pollution.

Standing under a high-voltage line making your hair stand up has nothing to do with a home Wi-Fi router damaging your blood-brain barrier. Flushed pills polluting a river does not mean drinking tap water changes a child's gender identity. And doctors not knowing every detail of how SSRIs work does not change the fact that 96% of mass shooters were NOT on antidepressants.

You are defending safe, watered-down versions of his claims, because the actual claims don't hold up. And you wouldn't need to do that, if the guy was sane.

You also didn't address the claim that he is a fucking sell-out.

I'm talking about RFK Jr., your Secretary of Health and Human Services.
A complete whack-job and here are just some of the stories for why I call him that:
• The Central Park Bear: He found a dead bear cub, put it in his trunk to eat later, but got busy and dumped it in Central Park under a bicycle as a prank.
• The Brain Worm: He testified under oath that a parasitic worm crawled into his brain, ate a portion of it, and died inside his head.
• The Chainsaw Whale: He used a chainsaw to cut the head off a dead whale, tied it to his minivan roof, and drove five hours while rotting whale juice leaked over his family.
• The "Dog" Photo: When a photo surfaced of him holding a charred animal carcass, he publicly defended himself by clarifying that it was a goat, not a dog.
• The Emu Fight: He claimed he had to fight off a rogue emu on his property and subdued the massive bird by tossing an embalming-fluid-soaked blanket over it.
• Wild Science Claims:
- Vaccines cause autism (a heavily debunked theory).
- Wi-Fi causes "leaky brain", allowing toxins to cross the blood-brain barrier.
- Chemicals in the water supply are turning children transgender.
- Antidepressants are the primary driver behind mass school shootings in America.
- HIV does not actually cause AIDS.
Even you might not believe all of this shit, and he is supposed to lead an agency
for advancing medical expertise. How would you like it if Democrats pick a purple-haired queer antifa pacifist for Secretary of Defense? (with lots of piercings)
I'm sure you feel safer under this drunk doomsday preaching Christo-fascist.

He has talked about chemicals poisoning people for years and especially glyphosate. Now he is supporting Trump in even expanding the use of glyphosate. They are both bought by big corporations, to fuck over the American people.

Senator John Kennedy is a grifter. He's telling you what you want to hear.
Immediately after the January 6th attack, Kennedy sharply denounced the rioters, calling the event "shameful" and an assault on democratic institutions, demanding
that the perpetrators be fully prosecuted.
During the September 29, 2026 Senate hearing, Senator John Kennedy unleashed
a barrage of personal insults and mocking questions at Special Counsel Jack Smith:
• "You make me want to throw up in my mouth."
(Reacting to Smith's handling of congressional phone records).
• "Was your wife disappointed when Trump won?"
(Attacking Smith's family to imply political bias).
• "Do you believe in the Tooth Fairy? Do you believe in the Easter Bunny?"
(Mocking Smith's claim of being completely non-partisan).
• "Anybody who knows a law book from a J.Crew catalog knows that this violates the Constitution." (Insulting Smith's legal knowledge).
• "He's not Bambi's baby brother."
(Snapping at the committee chairman when told to let Smith speak).
That's not because he changed his mind on this. It's just political theater
from a man who has ZERO PRINCIPLES.

He was more of a clown than Obama, but he pales in comparison to Trump.
What do you have to call him a clown? "Put the record player on"?
And a bit of stuttering? Cut up clips that make him out to be wandering?
Even now he is still more able to tell a coherent story than Trump ever could.

Trump is the ultimate political clown because he replaced governance with an infantile, non-stop circus explicitly tailored to the cruel humor and deep-seated insecurities of his followers.

He set the stage for this circus on day one, using absurd, over-the-top bragging, flashing a massive fortune built on nothing but debt, and famously crowning himself a "stable genius", while this ultimate "fail-son" of a real, self-made businessman
was barely capable of keeping his inherited empire alive.

• The Complete Caricature: His visual presentation is a deliberate, cartoonish gimmick. The neon-orange skin, the iconic hair structure, the oversized brightly colored ties, and the rigid signature dance are the carefully crafted props of a slapstick performer designed to capture instant attention.

• The Non-Stop Arena: For Trump, the circus never closes. He stays trapped in a permanent loop of rallies where the performance never stops. The stage is his personal ballroom, and he refuses to cede the floor for a single second.
Even high-stakes global politics are reduced to empty alpha-male posturing,
vanity, and shallow optics.

• Infantile Playground Politics: Serious policy is non-existent. Instead, domestic leadership is replaced by persistent mockery, stupid nicknames, and schoolyard insults. Governance is reduced to narcissistic vanity projects, like demanding to rename the White House reflective pool, while he plasters his name across everything like a traveling carnival owner. Every single thing must be covered
in a gaudy layer of boastful gold.

• Strategic Chaos as a Shield: The circus is his ultimate defense mechanism.
The exact moment negative news or a legal scandal breaks, he instantly triggers a brand-new, loud spectacle to shift the spotlight. Through this distraction, his flagrant incompetence is deliberately repackaged as entertainment, allowing his base to simply laugh away systemic failures.

• The Comedy of Cruelty: His supporters did not vote for a diplomat or a statesman; they bought a ticket to watch a circus ringmaster whose sole purpose is to attack and humiliate political enemies. This fits perfectly with the specific humor of the
far-right. They do not understand or care for witty wordplay, nuance, or intellectual irony. For them, humor means saying the meanest, coarsest, and most brutal thing possible about the people they hate. The direct outrage and hurt of their enemies
is the actual punchline.

• The Bully and the Inferiority Complex: Behind the curtain, Trump views his own followers as absolute fools who easily fall for this mind-numbing stupidity. Yet, it works flawlessly. If asked what makes him a great president, his followers cannot name a single concrete achievement. Instead, he gives them exactly what they crave: a constant validation of their shared contempt for everyone outside their bubble. Driven by a massive collective inferiority complex, these followers act like a crowd of schoolyard losers, devoid of independent thought, submissively falling in line behind a loudmouth bully. This clown makes a mockery of the entire world, solely so his followers can finally feel better about themselves.

Trump aligns perfectly with an electorate that finds complex politics and economics far too complicated. Having long abandoned the belief that government can improve their lives, they deeply despise anyone who expects better.

This is why Trump's clownish form is so immensely satisfying to them. By reducing complex societal debates to crude and cruel jokes, silly nicknames, and cheap theater, he drags the intellectual elite down to the schoolyard level. His loud, absurd performance validates his insecure followers: they don't need to understand a complicated world if the clown can simply reduce it to a joke.
Trump’s true power is not providing results, but satisfying their desire to see the world mocked, humiliated, and punished.

You have people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Pete Hegseth, Kash Patel, Stephen Miller, Pam Bondi, Kristi Noem, Karoline Leavitt and Katie Zacharia. Have a little humility.

What?

Republicans didn't win that state, they stole it,
because their fuckery was at record levels.

• The "Use It or Lose It" Policy: Georgia law allows the state to target registered voters who have not participated in recent elections. If these individuals do not respond to a single piece of mail, their registration is canceled. In 2017 alone, under then-Secretary of State Brian Kemp, over 500,000 voters were purged from the rolls in a single day, a move that heavily penalized infrequent, younger, and lower-income voters.

• Flawed Data Processing: Independent investigations, such as those conducted for the AP and specialized voting rights organizations, found that tens of thousands of citizens were wrongly removed under the assumption they had moved, when they had actually remained at their registered addresses.

• Disproportionate Impact on Minorities: Any minor discrepancy—such as a missing hyphen, an apostrophe, a typographical error by a government worker, or a maiden name variation—led to a registration being flagged and frozen.

• Targeting Specific Demographics: In the lead-up to the 2018 midterm elections, approximately 53,000 voter registrations were placed on hold under this policy; an analysis of the data showed that nearly 70% of those blocked registrations belonged to Black applicants.

• Targeted Closures: Between 2012 and 2018, Georgia municipalities closed more than 200 polling stations across the state. These closures were heavily concentrated in deep-blue urban areas and low-income, predominantly Black neighborhoods.

• Calculated Delays: The reduction of polling places, combined with a lack of functioning voting machines allocated to these specific districts, created a bottleneck. Voters in minority precincts routinely faced waiting times of four to eight hours to cast their ballots, which acted as a direct economic and physical deterrent to voting.

• Restricting Mail-In and Drop-Box Voting: The law severely limited the number of mail-in ballot drop boxes, capped their operating hours, and placed them inside government buildings, making them inaccessible outside of standard business hours. It also shortened the window to request an absentee ballot.

• Criminalizing Voter Support: The legislation made it a misdemeanor to distribute water or food to voters waiting in the hours-long lines outside polling stations, a measure explicitly seen as a punitive action against heavily populated voting precincts.

• State Takeover of Election Boards: The law granted the state legislature the power to suspend local county election officials. This allowed a partisan state body to intervene in the management and certification of election results in heavily Democratic counties like Fulton.

• Mass Target Campaigns: Leveraging the law, conservative activist groups submitted challenges against hundreds of thousands of individual voters right before elections, using automated data matching that frequently misidentified eligible citizens. This forced cash-strapped local boards to process massive volumes of challenges and created confusion, intimidation, and provisional ballot requirements for valid voters.

So spare me your nonsense about 253 votes. A lot of Republicans need to be
put in prison to defend future elections.

What 30% of Americans doesn't try to work and EARN their way thru life.
I think that you are damn disrespectful to your fellow Americans.

Of course mom-and-pop stores can’t compete on price; the game is completely rigged.

Small businesses pay full taxes and get hammered if they violate a single rule. Meanwhile, mega-corporations get billions in subsidies and tax breaks, cities literally pay them to set up shop under the guise of "creating jobs". However, those jobs are low-paying, high-stress, and built on exploitation.

Corporations squeeze suppliers, destroy the environment, and walk away clean, because they buy off politicians with bribes and threats.

I’m not attacking you for choosing the cheaper route to protect your wallet. I get it,
you have to survive. I am attacking you for praising and defending the very machine
that forces you into that corner.

Even if that were true, banning it is still counterproductive.
My country has had a liberal approach to cannabis for ever.
And 25,2% of adults report that they have ever used cannabis.
The US has always been more restricting and is still in many states.
51% of American adults report that they have ever used cannabis.

The US also has the worst drugs problem in the Western world.
What data do you need to convince you that your ideas are not working?

That's because banning things that people want doesn't work.
Making it illegal makes them turn to criminals, who also sell hard drugs.
In The Netherlands people just go to the coffee-shop where they can only
get products that are legal to sell and use. (legal, taxed and regulated)
No one is asking them if they want to try 'something stronger'.

That top 1% doesn't NEED any help to succeed. They help themselves enough.
You are part of that lower 30%. YOU need help, not the 1%.

Yes, it's very easy to become branded as a criminal in your country.
Run into a cop who had a bad night sleep, your life is crewed, or ended on the spot.

Listen; I like that anything I want can be delivered to my door in a day. Does this make the world a better place? Easier yes, better not much. It's just supporting the mindless wasteful consumerism that you have spoken out against. People filling the gap in their heart with cheap crap made in China. You don't like that at all, until you can praise the 1% for it.

They have destroyed 'mom and pop' shops intentionally, so they could be monopolies,
and then they raised the prices when we were all fully dependent on them.

The 1% designed a system so convenient that we want to defend it, just like you are doing now. It is however based on exploitation.
From the warehouse workers to the truck drivers and delivery people, no one in that chain is making any decent money anymore, except the 1%. That is why I call it exploitation.
We are all supporting them to extract more from their employees, which turns out is eventually harming ourselves. We are all turning into their serfs, to support their wealth.

So why do you want that handful of people hoarding the profits to succeed
over the millions of hard-working people actually keeping the country alive?

You are indoctrinated to think this is capitalism, but it's not, it's corporatism.
They will continue until they own everything and we own nothing.
Instead of just buying the government, they will BE the government.
Tell me the difference between that and what was called 'communism' by Stalin,
Mao Zedong and the Kim family?

Several progressives did it on 1/10th of the money of their opposition.

However, Angie Nixon lost, because the national Democratic party’s investment in Florida stood at effectively $0 in major media spending, compared to the tens of millions of dollars national groups poured into
other target Senate seats, such as Texas.

The only reason that she got this close, is because people supported her.
It's a damn shame that the national Democrats didn't support those people.

Put you OWN substance against it. Ever heard the term "free speech"?

It was an upload error, not physical theft: According to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, the physical memory card was not stolen or missing from the building. The local board of elections simply failed to properly upload its contents into the central election management system on election night.

The system caught the human error: The discrepancy was flagged during routine quality checks. The county noticed that the number of voters who checked in didn't match the number of digital ballots cast, which prompted them to look for the un-uploaded data. As Raffensperger noted, "Georgia's election safeguards are designed to identify discrepancies, and that is exactly what these guardrails did."

If you want a real systemic issue from this exact 2026 election cycle, look at what happened in Georgia in August 2025. The state quietly conducted one of the largest mass removals in U.S. history, purging 471,000 voter registrations (~6% of the state's total).
Civil rights groups like Black Voters Matter literally sued the Secretary of State in February 2026, because the state refused to turn over the full records on who they kicked off and how they picked them.

Rather than focusing on consequences after death,
I prefer to focus on consequences in life.

I didn't say "NO jobs". Disputing below.

Chronological order:

Harry S. Truman (D): +11.12 million total, ~116,000 average/month
Dwight D. Eisenhower (R): +3.53 million total, ~37,000 average/month
John F. Kennedy (D): +3.75 million total, ~110,000 average/month
Lyndon B. Johnson (D): +12.12 million total, ~199,000 average/month
Richard Nixon (R): +9.37 million total, ~140,000 average/month
Gerald Ford (R): +1.95 million total, ~67,000 average/month
Jimmy Carter (D): +10.34 million total, ~215,000 average/month
Ronald Reagan (R): +16.51 million total, ~172,000 average/month
George H.W. Bush (R): +2.62 million total, ~55,000 average/month
Bill Clinton (D): +22.94 million total, ~239,000 average/month
George W. Bush (R): +1.35 million total, ~14,000 average/month
Barack Obama (D): +11.60 million total, ~60.400 average/month
Donald Trump (1st term) (R): -2.67 million total, -56,000 average/month
Joe Biden (D): +16.25 million total, ~338,000 average/month
Donald Trump (2nd term) (R): +728,000 total (ongoing), ~34.600 average/month


Ranked from most to least jobs per month:

Joe Biden (D): +16.25 million total, ~338,500 average/month
Bill Clinton (D): +22.94 million total, ~239,000 average/month
Jimmy Carter (D): +10.34 million total, ~215,000 average/month
Lyndon B. Johnson (D): +12.12 million total, ~195,000 average/month
Ronald Reagan (R): +16.51 million total, ~172,000 average/month
Richard Nixon (R): +9.37 million total, ~140,000 average/month
Barack Obama (D): +11.60 million total, ~121,000 average/month
Harry S. Truman (D): +11.12 million total, ~116,000 average/month
John F. Kennedy (D): +3.75 million total, ~110,000 average/month
Gerald Ford (R): +1.95 million total, ~67,000 average/month
Donald Trump (2nd term) (R): +1.38 million total (ongoing), ~62,500 average/month
George H.W. Bush (R): +2.62 million total, ~55,000 average/month
Dwight D. Eisenhower (R): +3.53 million total, ~37,000 average/month
George W. Bush (R): +1.35 million total, ~14,000 average/month
Donald Trump (1st term) (R): -2.67 million total, -56,000 average/month (MINUS)


The 'recent' pattern:

Bill Clinton (D): ~239,000 average/month - UP
George W. Bush (R): ~14,000 average/month - DOWN
Barack Obama (D): ~60.400 average/month - UP
Donald Trump (1st term) (R): -56,000 average/month - DOWN
Joe Biden (D): ~338,000 average/month - WAY UP
Donald Trump (2nd term) (R): ~62,500 average/month - DOWN


Here is Trump's 2nd term history:

January 2025: +115,000 jobs
February 2025: +98,000 jobs
March 2025: +42,000 jobs
April 2025: +65,000 jobs
May 2025: -25,000 jobs
June 2025: +74,000 jobs
July 2025: +12,000 jobs
August 2025: +55,000 jobs
September 2025: +38,000 jobs
October 2025: No data (Government shutdown)
November 2025: +60,000 jobs
December 2025: +50,000 jobs
January 2026: +78,000 jobs
February 2026: +92,000 jobs
March 2026: +54,000 jobs
April 2026: -12,000 jobs
May 2026: +62,000 jobs
June 2026: +112,000 jobs
July 2026: -5,000 jobs
August 2026: +186,000 jobs (Fully revised upward)
September 2026: +60,000 jobs (Fully revised upward)
October 2026: +165,000 jobs (Latest report)


"beating economists' expectations of roughly 65,000."
It's telling that economists only expected 65,000 jobs, which shows how low the confidence in his economic direction actually was. Beating a historically low bar
is more about a temporary stroke of luck than solid policy.

His average still stands. Stop celebrating outliers.


At the end of the day, I care about the general well-being of working-class people,
not just abstract economic indexes or job numbers. True well-being is measured by whether a working family can actually afford a roof over their heads, healthy food,
sending their kids to good schools, having childcare that doesn’t cost more than
a second job brings in, and having a healthcare system where bad luck or getting sick doesn't instantly ruin a hard-working family financially. If a society adds millions of jobs,
but people still can't afford these basic necessities, the system is failing.

People didn't feel that enough when Biden was president. Trump promising to fix everything won him the election. Then voters found out that he fucks them over
like no president before, which made them reconsider trusting a pathological liar.

People smoke and give themselves cancer, consume (too much) alcohol and destroy their liver, eat way too much saturated fats and clog up their arteries, eat way to much fat and sugar and give themselves diabetes, and eat nowhere near enough plant-based food and starve their bodies of nutrients.
All clear results of behavior. It's human nature to risk health for other benefits.

Meanwhile, cannabis/marijuana edibles in responsible use carry a fraction of the systemic health risks that everyday sugar, tobacco, or alcohol consumption do. Unlike those substances, cannabis is widely used for genuine therapeutic benefits, offering vital relief from chronic pain, anxiety, and sleep disorders, without causing any lung damage.
No substance is completely risk-free, but isolating one risk, while ignoring the massive toll of other use/consumption/behavior is a logical fallacy.

Millions of people die every year from cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases, directly driven by tobacco, alcohol, and poor diet; preventable deaths that shape our entire healthcare crisis. In stark contrast, fatal overdoses from cannabis alone are practically non-existent, and its statistical contribution to mortality pales into absolute insignificance, compared to the slow-killing 'vices' that your culture tolerates.

Something for the gamers:

"Crossplay games be like"
only registered users can see external links

Not like most 75 year old AMERICAN men.

She is a lesbian who doesn't dress and wear her hair like a woman.
They call themselves "butch", but it's also called "masculine-presenting".

Sure they can buy elections. If it wasn't for all that money buying propaganda,
at best 5% of voters would have voted for Republicans.

They just fucked-up the lives of people a little too much this time.
Don't hold your breath next time. People have the memory of goldfish.

Mississippi has probably elected a DEMOCRAT,
because of how tone-deaf their senator Cindy Hyde-Smith is.

only registered users can see external links
"If you cannot afford beef, just pick another protein"

That's literally what MAGA accuses Democrats of.

Mississippi voted for a BLACK DEMOCRAT for that. Mississippi!
I repeat; MISSISSIPPI!!!!

Maybe she fled the rise of fascism, because she is a lesbian.

I wouldn't call her unrecognizable, but let me quote her:
"If I look older than when you saw me last, it's because I'm older
than when you saw me last."

Perhaps she's simply allowing herself to look like a 68-year-old woman.
Do you have a problem with that?

For the fun of it, I presented you comment to ChatGPT, for analysis. It did actually find some points, but I have no desire to engage with you, because you are not an honest actor. I will just present the highlights of ChatGPT's reaction:

Yes. 😂 I think I can make sense of what he's trying to say, although his message is quite incoherent and jumps between several subjects.
He's essentially combining a few political, moral and ideological arguments into one rather confused rant.

His claim ----- What we can establish
Children aged 10 were going to get voting rights ---- He gives no bill, state or evidence to support this.
The Supreme Court overturned it ---- He doesn't identify a ruling.
Socialism destroyed empathy ---- That's his political opinion, not an established fact.
Polls were wrong about Trump ---- Some polls underestimated Trump, but polling is not the same as deliberately misleading people.
Trump won against Harris ---- Correct. Trump won 312 electoral votes to Harris's 226.

The most interesting contradiction is that he starts by talking about empathy, kindness, altruism and treating people well, but then calls people stupid, refers to Harris as a "bimbo" and dismisses anyone who disagrees with his political views. That's quite a contrast.

My interpretation is that he's trying to communicate:

"I'm a traditional, patriotic American. I believe in kindness, personal responsibility and putting the country first. I believe left-wing politics, socialism and mainstream media have corrupted society. I support Trump because I think he represents the truth, and I distrust institutions that disagree with my worldview."
That's the underlying message. But he mixes genuine philosophical ideas with political assumptions, unsupported claims and personal insults.

In short: He starts with JFK's philosophy of public service and ends with a partisan political rant. The two parts don't sit particularly comfortably together.

A rather sharp but intelligent response:

You started with a rather beautiful thought about empathy, kindness and altruism. Unfortunately, somewhere along the way, you seem to have lost sight of those very values yourself.

You speak about treating people with kindness and respect, yet your message is full of contempt for people who don't share your political views.

Perhaps the real question isn't whether socialism or communism has destroyed empathy, but whether we are capable of practising the empathy we so readily preach.

Remember, this is not me, just ChatGPT. You don't deserve MY effort.

I say things with substance. You don’t.

The world going to shit is of your concern too.
Especially, because your country is largely responsible for it.

It's not about replacing voters, it's about replacing JOBS.
The immediate problem of AI is data-centers turning people's drinking-water into sewage, multiplying people's power-bill, and killing people with noise pollution.
No research should destroy people's lives.

But true, there is also a risk to voters, because at some point there is no way
you can hold fair elections anymore; when AI can hack everything.

Your point: Accountability for Democrats, not for Republicans.

Your Republicans in Florida won with the slightest margins from 2 Democrats who had almost NO money for their campaigns, while the GOP spent tens of millions of dollars in media buys, ground operations, and digital advertising
to protect their incumbents.
Even in your beloved Florida, Democrats would have won, with just a fair game.

They all fit Trump like a glove

Eight-year-old bullies on the playground have better comebacks than you.

I'm not the one who doesn't understand the difference
between upper middle class and billionaires.

About the Supreme Court; that branch of government is broken, and Republicans destroyed it. We can all see clearly how they corrupt the meaning of the Constitution, just to favor the wealthy elites who pay them off. That blatant corruption needs to end, by any means necessary, and I fully support the Democrats in fixing it. Call it whatever you want, I call it saving the system.

This is why you calling it 'political revenge' is so hypocritical; you constantly defend a rule of law with harsh punishments for regular citizens. Whenever someone is killed by the police or ICE, your immediate justification is that they should have complied. You also blamed a black teenager for getting shot, just for ringing the wrong doorbell at night. Your demand for flawless compliance applies to everyone you don't like.
But when it comes to Donald Trump or his cronies, your entire philosophy vanishes. Suddenly, holding a man accountable for a decade of crimes, corruption and trying to overturn an election is labeled as 'revenge'.
You want strict compliance for the powerless, but absolute immunity
for the people you like. I'm not having it.

Your side baselessly accuses independent prosecutors like Jack Smith of weaponizing the law, while Trump openly orders the DOJ to hunt down his political enemies. He literally used Truth Social to command Pam Bondi to prosecute Adam Schiff, James Comey, and Letitia James. When career prosecutor Erik Siebert refused to bring baseless charges due to a lack of evidence, Trump fired him and replaced him with his own defense lawyer to force the indictments through. We just watched his administration send federal agents to raid the home of Representative Ilhan Omar. He even uses DOJ officials and billions in campaign money to sue the media for his personal hurt feelings, all while lying about private citizens every single day. ‘Revenge’ is a massive understatement, for Trump acting like a rabid dog biting at everyone around him.

Democratic leadership like Hakeem Jeffries is focused on governance,
so I don't have any confidence that they are going to do what is needed
to restore the rule of law. Crying about 'political persecution' the moment Trump is held to the same standards as everyone else is pathetic.
Cry me a river!

Your exchange with AI made me laugh, it completely rejected your framing. You’ll probably cry bias, but that’s exactly what AI is built to prevent. If I try to make it accept a biased angle, I get the exact same objective results.
AI operates on facts and logic, not partisan echo chambers. It didn’t take your bait, because reality doesn’t support your narrative.
I use AI to eliminate biases from my argumentation and check facts.
You should try it sometimes to prepare a message before you send it.

So what is the problem, the plane or the young female pilot?
It was the same plane, but in both cases the young female pilot was NOT flying. She is only the co-pilot, responsible for confirmation and communication with the tower. The actual flight controls are operated by the pilot. He decides to change height and do that, not her.
Changing height to avoid icing and turbulence is not out of the ordinary. It does show that the weather was particularly bad, but the weather is bad more often and still no Learjet 60 has ever dropped out of the sky like that one.

I understand that coincidences exist and happen all the time.
But the Palm Beach Jet Crash is a perfect example of multiple incredibly low chances occurring simultaneously. That is not the case in your example.

Did you see the video in the 'YouTube can be educational' topic, about Christians saying that evolution is mathematically impossible? That's based on a misunderstanding of chances and thinking that the process of evolution is dependent on incredibly unlikely chances. When I say that the Palm Beach Jet Crash has a mathematically very unlikely possibility, that's NOT a misunderstanding of chances. It really needs to be calculated by multiplying several very small chances, resulting in a highly unlikely occurrence:

Total Probability = P(Unique Crash Mode) Ч P(Active SHORAD) Ч P(Trump's Presence) Ч P(Exact Coordinates in the US)

Using standard historical aviation and logistical data, we can estimate the four individual probabilities to see how they multiply.

1. P(Unique Crash Mode) — The Mechanical Failure
* The Baseline: Over the last two decades, there have been roughly 20 million to 30 million global business jet flights per year. Fatal accidents occurring during the cruise phase (at 35,000+ feet) account for less than 5% of all accidents.
* The Model: The Learjet 60 had flown for decades without ever suffering a spontaneous high-altitude structural failure or unrecoverable vertical plunge while cruising under normal operations.
* Estimation: The odds of an aircraft experiencing a catastrophic high-altitude stall/structural event of this magnitude on any given flight is roughly 1 in 10,000,000 (10^-7).

2. P(Active SHORAD) — The Military Variable
* The Baseline: Short-Range Air Defense (SHORAD) systems like the AN/TWQ-1 Avenger are almost exclusively deployed in active war zones or permanently around major national command centers (like Washington, D.C.).
* The Deployment: Deploying these active systems to a temporary civilian residence due to a specific drone threat environment is an incredibly rare event. If we assume such highly advanced systems are active at Mar-a-Lago for perhaps a cumulative total of 4 weeks (28 days) out of a multi-year period:
* Estimation: The probability that these systems were active on any random day is roughly 28 days out of 10 years, which is about 1 in 130 (7.6 x 10^-3).

3. P(Trump's Presence / Air Force One Window) — The Timing Window
* The Baseline: Official tracking shows Donald Trump spends roughly 65 days per year at Mar-a-Lago during the social season.
* Calculation: 65 days of presence divided by 365 days in a year means he is physically there ~17.8% of the time
* Order of Magnitude Estimation: 1 in 5.6 (1.78 * 10^-1)

4. P(Exact Coordinates in the US) — The Macro-Location
* The Baseline: Calculation by the ratio of flight hours spent inside that specific 7-mile circle compared to all other US flight hours.
* With roughly 3,300 local flight hours out of 20,000,000 total national flight hours per year, this represents the exact physical exposure within the macro-location of the US.
* Estimated as 1 in 6,000 (1.67 * 10^-4)

THE GRAND TOTAL (Multiplying the Chances)
When we run these order-of-magnitude estimations through the formula:

Total Probability = P(Unique Crash Mode) x P(Active SHORAD) x P(Trump's Presence) x P(Exact Coordinates in the US)
Total Probability = (10^-7) x (7.6 x 10^-3) x (1.78 * 10^-1) x (1.67 * 10^-4)

The resulting combined probability is approximately 1 in 4.42 * 10^13
1 in 44.2 trillion YEARS. The universe has existed for 13.787 billion years now.

CONCLUSION
This astronomical number is exactly why this case is mathematically almost impossible. This is not a misunderstanding of chances. When a coin lands on heads 50 times in a row, a statistician doesn't say "well, coincidences happen". They immediately check if the coin is rigged.

Can you fault that calculation?

Do you understand the difference between someone making $400,000 a year and a billionaire? Don't be daft.
You can make $400,000 a year without exploiting anyone, you CANNOT become a billionaire without exploiting lots and lots of people.

I'll look at the rest later. Until then, go sit in the shame corner for this oblivious argument.

No, none of the factors that made the first incident curious are repeated here.
This is a completely different case:
• Location: The crash happened in New Smyrna Beach, over 160 miles north of
Mar-a-Lago, completely outside any security zones.
• Aircraft Type: Unlike the Learjet 60, this was a small, single-engine light aircraft, which carries a much different safety profile. These crash all the time.
• Flight Profile: It wasn't a mid-air disintegration from 35,000 feet, but a low-altitude crash near a local airport where the fuselage remained largely intact, which occurs significantly more often.

Florida is one of the busiest states for private aviation; linking two entirely different aircraft types hundreds of miles apart is just a coincidence, not a pattern.

Do you even check anything, before you react to it? Even if you don't trust ChatGPT, ask Grok.

If those were actual Democratic goals? These ARE!!! They represent the EXACT framework the party has voted for, attempted to pass, and consistently fought for over the last DECADE. While political rhetoric can often cloud the core message, the actual legislative record shows a sustained effort to enact these exact policies, with about half successfully made into law and the other half actively blocked by Republicans.

When Democrats held the majority, they successfully passed massive, tangible pieces of legislation directly matching these points:
• Rebuilding Infrastructure: They passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to modernize roads, bridges, and secure clean drinking water.
• Lowering Drug Costs & Healthcare Premiums: They passed the Inflation Reduction Act, giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices and expanding subsidies to lower family premiums.
• Protecting Supply Chains: They passed the CHIPS and Science Act to bring vital microchip and high-tech manufacturing back to American soil to protect local industries.
• Expanding Veteran Care: They passed the PACT Act to deliver healthcare and benefits to veterans exposed to toxic environments.

For the remaining items on the list, Democrats have repeatedly drafted and introduced legislation, only for these goals to be blocked by Republican opposition and split party control:
• Raising the Minimum Wage: House Democrats repeatedly passed the Raise the Wage Act to lift the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour, but it consistently failed to clear the Senate due to unified Republican opposition.
• Capping Childcare & Paid Leave: National paid family leave and federal caps on childcare and eldercare costs were originally central pillars of the Build Back Better framework, but they were entirely blocked and cut during fierce Senate negotiations to pass the final bill.
• Border Technology & ICE Accountability: Democrats have routinely introduced funding for advanced fentanyl-detection scanners and extra immigration judges, alongside proposals from progressive factions for mandatory ICE bodycams and judicial warrant enforcement.

However, these specific measures have been repeatedly blocked or stalled as part of the broader, ongoing partisan deadlock over comprehensive border security and immigration reform.
The list isn't just a wishlist; it is a direct summary of the exact legislative blueprint the Democratic Party has spent the last ten years fighting to implement, succeeding where they had the votes and being blocked where they did not.

How many more billions do those high earners NEED to have an incentive? What incentive do you have left after you earned your 100th million, or your 10th billion? Why do want to reward them so much, while your only incentive for the working class is avoiding hunger?

You clearly don't understand tax brackets. You don't take home less money than your neighbor by crossing into a higher bracket. That is a total myth. You and your neighbor pay the exact same rate on the first $340,000. You only pay the higher rate on the extra money above that line. You always make more by earning more. Your investment in college still entirely pays off.

As for prices going up if we tax the rich? Corporations are already charging record-high prices right now while hoarding record profits. Fair taxes don't cause inflation; they fund the infrastructure, public schools, and healthcare that actually lower the cost of living for the rest of us.
Donald Trump passed huge tax-cuts for the wealthy. Did it lower inflation?

You are complaining about taxing the person making $375k, while completely ignoring that multi-millionaires and billionaires don't even pay income tax.
Their wealth is tied up in stocks and assets, meaning they pay next to nothing.
Because the ultra-rich pay so little, the well-doing American who actually went to college and invested in themselves has to pick up the TAB and pay MORE.
Your side literally caused the exact problem you are accusing Democrats of. Republicans talk big about cutting spending, but they always blow up the deficit by cutting taxes for the top 1% and giant corporations, leaving the hard-working professional to pay the bill.

Someone has to pay for all your wars and presents to the wealthy. You are on your last leg, so they cannot squeeze you any further. So, they look at the exact person you say to worry about.
Trump squeezed those people like no other actually. He made healthcare even more expensive, put tariffs on almost everything, and created massive inflation by blowing up the national debt. Your costs shot up, but did your income?
Then he let corporate interests run wild, doing absolutely nothing about Big Oil companies making record profits over the backs of hard-working citizens.

Your side makes them angry about paying taxes, but because of Trump's federal debt explosion, skyrocketing health insurance premiums, student debt interest, the absolute minimum income a family needs just to start a baseline middle-class life anywhere in America has shot past $100,000. People used to be well off at that income, and Trump is turning them POOR.

Is evolution mathematically impossible? (for if you don't understand why)
only registered users can see external links

The oldest sign of a liar is their refusal to justify their claims.