Biden isn’t going to say “yeah I’m thinking of dropping out”, nor will his campaign, even if they’re strongly considering it. It he does decide to step aside, it will be a sudden announcement with no forewarning.

I agree with your premise though. It isn’t impossible. We just need to collect data and do polling for like a week to understand how much the debate hurt Biden, and if there’s any good alternative options who have a better shot.

I think debates and townhalls are Biden’s best bet right now. He needs to show that it was just a bad night for him.

And if it wasn’t just a bad night, it’ll spur action to find a viable replacement.

It happens! The important part is review and learning from the mistakes.

Oh definitely. I just think their primary influence was on the size of the margin, not the actual outcome of the election. And it still benefits them, since they can say it was a 17% margin instead of like 3-5%.

It’s a 17% difference now. I’m honestly skeptical that AIPAC money is the big cause here. It seems like he had a lot of other issues that contributed to his loss. I was reading earlier that he didn’t really communicate or interface with his constituents much, while Latimer was a much bigger community presence.

This is a trend I’ve noticed actually. A lot of people who do take morally correct positions like to let their positions speak for themselves and not do as much communication or outside engagement. They want to let their moral high ground do the talking. And while their positions are laudable, their core job is to represent their constituents. If they ignore that, a loss isn’t surprising.

We all make mistakes. I once forgot to include gravity in a pressure drop calculation for a 100 ft vertical pipe as part of a steam drum system. I had to send an awkward email revising the design pressure I previously communicated out.

But hey, if we were perfect, we wouldn’t need peer review.

I have a little bit of experience with limit switches, but that’s really interesting. It certainly seems like an unusual system. I’m a lot more familiar with safety relays.

It really says something when even oil companies will design for these considerations but Tesla won’t.

I’ve unfortunately been working on process control strategies for almost a year now on new and novel applications for my company, so I’ve been intimately familiar with this. If it isn’t obvious, this isn’t my favorite professional area of interest hahaha.

Designating fail open and fail closed valves is so intrinsic to what I’ve been doing that I can’t imagine someone designing a car control system and not thinking about that at all.

It’s basic safety for industrial plants to designate powered equipment as “fail open” or “fail closed” or on/off. It’s shocking that this wasn’t applied to Tesla cars.

We really need an industry that performs industrial grade HAZOPs on consumer products and publishes a report for everyone to see.

Might be the doors are fail shut if anything happens… But that seems like the worst design ever.

Come to think of it, it’s basic design to designate features as fail closed/fail open on loss of power in an emergency, and you go with what’s inherently safe. It appears Tesla did not consider basic safety design. To no one’s surprise.

I think what’s most surprising to me is that Florida’s legislature was in favor of the art grants.

We should really change that. Things would be so much safer if we applied this level of scrutiny for anything considering the public.

Making fun of them for their contradictions does nothing to stop them.

It certainly won’t stop them, but it’s also one of the greatest weapons against them. Ridicule of fascists is one thing they absolutely cannot stand, and its something the voting public pays attention to – especially if the ridicule causes them to act out.

Ridicule should not be the only tool, but it’s still a valuable one.

Sorry, what the fuck. This is a complete failure on engineering controls and safety. A safety analysis on an industrial plant would find something like this to be a major safety vulnerability that needs several redundant safeguards.

Jesus fucking Christ.

This is how I felt about Roe being overturned several years ago. It would unleash hell on Republicans and make them incredibly unpopular, but it would not be worth the cost of women suffering.

And unfortunately, I was right. It has proved utterly disastrous to Republicans, but a lot of women have suffered. People have had to go through pain and experiences that no one should ever have to – except perhaps the conservative SCOTUS justices, Trump, and Republican senators.

Insulation can only do so much. It’s sufficient in some countries and areas of the US, but in others it’s just way too fucking hot. When it gets to 100+ degrees F during the day for multiple days in a row, insulation isn’t going to keep your house cold for long.

Makes me wonder actually how badly this’ll backfire. Students are inevitably going to ask their teachers why death penalties exist or other things like this.

You forgot the most important line!

“Thou shalt use these commandments as the foundation of law in a country called the United States of America in the year 1776 after killing my son”

C’mon it’s so iconic

Poor reading comprehension. Typical lib.

Once more, overcompensating way too hard and needlessly throwing around terms to try and make yourself look like an actual leftist. You know what the clearest sign of this is, liberal? Other than you basically going “no u”?

I never said a thing about the USSR lacking compassion to animals. Nor did I ever mention NASA nor make a judgment on which group was morally superior. That all came from you, because you felt the need to bolster your leftist “credentials”. But I see through it.

It’s not terribly surprising that both NASA and the USSR space program did awful things to animals. They were racing each other, moving quickly and breaking things. It would be too risky to test humans in incredibly novel technology like that, but they wanted data and results. So they tortured poor animals instead of taking the time to go more slowly and do safer tests. And let me be explicitly clear, both space programs are guilty of this and damnable for it.

What’s your next reply going to be, I wonder? Ignoring basically everything I said, and talking about more of NASA’s fuck ups, like “well we don’t know it doesn’t work” with Challenger? Sprinkling in some leftist terms to convince yourself you aren’t a liberal? Or will you totally pivot to something else and call me Clyde again?

Please, mix it up a bit this time. The formula is getting rather dull. There’s better ways to try and convince us you aren’t a liberal.