grue

Back to the Future.

I'm pretty sure we've known that for a fact since April.

That's a good point: at first glance it sounds like a big deal because it's "international travel," but the Bahamas are basically right next to mar-a-lago anyway so (depending exactly which island the wedding is on) it probably actually is within chopper distance.

I mean, it's just a comic, not a rendering drawn by a traffic engineer. There's plenty about it that isn't quite right, but it gets the point across so there's no need to nitpick it. (Source: I'm a traffic engineer, among other things.)

Turning left.

All they needed to do was have a justice department willing to put his ass away

And who's fucking fault was that?!

so i pictured a netflix show where he lives on twitch 24/7 in a big brother type living room.

Would it kill Lemmies to read the article

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0sSXESbTaM

What boggles my mind, though, is that rather than come out and say the report was poor quality and clearly omitted many important issues and thus has limited to no utility, DNC Chair Ken Martin went to the media and tried to sell it like there were important conclusions drawn and that the DNC was enacting them.

Why are you lying?

Back in factual reality, here are some of the things Ken Martin actually said about the report:

When I commissioned a comprehensive review of the 2024 election, I started a process to answer those questions while interrogating where our party has systemically and historically fallen short. I didn’t want that process led by anybody directly tied to the 2024 cycle – either the campaign or the consultants involved – and I did not want to put my own thumb on the scale for what might be produced. What I did ask for were actionable takeaways for the future. I wanted real, in-depth, specific recommendations to improve our allocation of resources, tech, data, organizing, media strategy, and more. I chose someone who I thought could produce this type of report.

When I received the report late last year, it wasn’t ready for primetime. Not even close. And because no source material was provided, fixing it would have meant starting over, from the beginning – every conversation, every interview, every data set.

I am not proud of this product; it does not meet my standards, and it won’t meet your standards. I don’t endorse what’s in this report, or what’s left out of it. I could not in good faith put the DNC’s stamp of approval on it.

I was surprised by how weak and digressive it was.

When they announced their intention to bury it I assumed that meant it was accurate and on point, and they wanted to bury it for exactly that reason.

On the contrary: the new DNC leadership is entirely different from the old, so the new leadership decided to bury it because they understood it was weak and digressive. You got it exactly backwards because you didn't understand the leadership changed.

1. ~~Old DNC leader commissions bullshit, delusional report.~~ Edit for correction: the new leader commissioned the report, but picked the wrong (i.e. old-guard) person to do it and got bullshit delusions as a result.

2. New DNC leader realizes that it's delusional bullshit and decides not to release it.

3. Progressives demand it be released anyway.

4. “It does not meet my standards, and it won’t meet your standards, but I am doing this because people need to be able to trust the Democratic Party and trust our word,” new DNC leader says.

5. Lemmy idiots blame new DNC leader anyway.