thrawn

A lot of people like Kreia from KOTOR2 but Revan will always have my heart. My favorite SW character, though canon trilogy Thrawn probably ties.

I started reading some of the books again a couple years ago and every time Bane or Tenebrous think about Revan, I always smile a little inside. Greatest Sith Lord in my eyes.

thrawn

Yep. I love high quality food and spend a lot of time learning to copy from chefs I like. I’m very selective about ingredients (e.g. fish, only so much is flown in daily and accessible to normies), often make my own sauces, and have a pretty large collection of dinnerware and lacquerware for accurate plating.

Yet like clockwork, several times a year I will eat multiple McRib patties in a single sitting. That shit has presumably the worst ingredients, the same sauce as every other year slathered inconsistently, and is presented in a cardboard box that has definitely gotten thinner. It is in no way worth anywhere near the price but I do it anyway.

Sometimes slop hits the spot. Plus I can’t make my own heavily processed slabs of… whatever those things contain.

He wrote Fant4stic, XXX: State of the Union, and Dark Phoenix. I think there’s a higher chance of him getting this trilogy than we think.

It’s not about winning Iowa so much as it is a reflection of national climate. Though Selzer is historically far more accurate than Emerson.

Here’s a comment about why Selzer is a standout in the context of Trump’s previous elections.

Here’s my comment on the same thread which includes [Nate Silver’s writeup] (https://www.natesilver.net/p/theres-more-herding-in-swing-state) on why other pollsters are less reliable right now due to herding. Emerson is the second worst herder on his list.

Now I agree, it seems rather unlikely she wins Iowa. Selzer’s numbers leave room for a narrow Harris loss. I just wanted to provide context on why this poll is vastly more significant than Emerson’s. If she hasn’t made a massive mistake, the national climate is much more Harris friendly than it feels. I won’t let myself be optimistic over this, but it makes it a lot harder to be pessimistic.

From Nate Silver’s write up on this poll:

Yesterday, I complained about how so many pollsters are “herding” by publishing results that are almost an exact tie in a way that is incredibly statistically improbable given the unavoidable sampling error from surveying a small number of voters. I also noted a handful of prominent exceptions — rouge pollsters like the New York Times/Siena College that practically exist in an entirely different universe and imply a much bigger political realignment.

Another such maverick is Ann Selzer of Selzer & Co. (Selzer and NYT/Siena are our two highest-rated pollsters.) As my former colleague Clare Malone wrote in 2016, Selzer — like NYT/Siena — has a long history of bucking the conventional wisdom and being right. In a world where most pollsters have a lot of egg on their faces, she has near-oracular status.

Emphasis mine. While polls were decently off in 2016 and 2020, Selzer’s were not, and reflected a significant underestimate of Trump by nearly every other pollster. This poll suggests Harris is being underestimated. If Selzer is correct, Harris wins very comfortably.

It’s hard to explain how unexpected this result is. Harris proponents like myself were hoping for Trump +8-9 or less, which would correlate to a Harris win in the electoral college. You can still see this on r/fivethirtyeight from the bad site. I’m not optimistic and my best hope was Trump +7. People misread this as Trump +3 and were still celebrating. Headlines aren’t exaggerating here: this is a truly shocking poll. If the real result is even Trump +5, he is likely to have lost handily. If this is as accurate as Selzer has been since 2012, he will have lost in a true landslide. (Let’s not get ahead of ourselves, of course.)

I’ll link again Silver’s article on herding because it makes a strong case that most polls are not currently reliable due to self-preservation. Selzer releasing these results is not a self preserving move and would be a large pockmark on her otherwise “near-oracular” record.

You can scroll through my history and see that I am not an optimistic person. I initially assumed a Harris loss before Biden dropped out because RFK was still polling too well, a traditional indicator of loss when dropping incumbent status. I was pleased with her upward momentum— and still am, she deserves a great deal of credit for an excellent campaign— but she has always been the underdog in my mind. This is the most positive sign I’ve seen all season. It helps that Siena’s most recent PA poll was also quite positive at Harris +4 if I recall.

I’m too worried to be hopeful, but this has made it harder to doom. It’s so unexpected that I take it with a grain of salt, but if she’s even half right, things are a lot better than they feel.

Glad to hear! It really is a struggle but it’ll be worth it.

This is generally what I recommend. I’d also suggest going into it as blind as possible simply knowing that it’s a half comedy, half historical drama. It gets pretty heavy at times, more than most comedies. One of my favorite movies ever.

I saw it not even knowing that much and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Great film.

Hi op, how has the journey been going? Are you still trying to lose weight?

Okay so I haven’t heard about her before this but, from this thread and a quick google search, I feel like I know enough. Anyway. I’m hopeful then that the fame will pass— lots of internet fad celebrities fade and become more or less normal people again soon— but she pockets enough money to live a good life and keep paying it forward.

Good. I don’t know why they picked someone as likable as Walz if not to get him doing media appearances.

While cringey, Trump’s appearances on podcasts or with young YouTubers is likely a part of his grip on young men. The left doesn’t reach out to them much and demographics don’t like feeling ignored.

Walz is an excellent communicator and should be on TV and such as often as he can. Hell, get him on Rogan. That moron seems so malleable that Walz will have him nodding along in the first 30 seconds.

Recorded speech about engaging in crimes is often acceptable evidence. It’s probably the same with written messages.

I guess it’s up to the accused to prevent law enforcement from acquiring what they said, whether it be preventing recording, preventing police from sifting through mail or unsecure communications, or preventing police from acquiring the accused’s copy of potentially illegal communications. Which he is currently attempting.

I don’t blame him for trying, and would agree on a lesser extent that he is right to prevent self incriminating now. But copied communication as acceptable evidence is pretty settled in law by now.