@foolsgambit.bsky.social
"Doesn't work" in what sense? Doesn't result in impeachment, or doesn't achieve some/all political goals that Dems might like to get out of the process?
My least muddled take is that people will never see the office of the presidency correctly if politicians don't act appropriately.
My least muddled take is that people will never see the office of the presidency correctly if politicians don't act appropriately.
December 30, 2025 at 5:03 PM
"Doesn't work" in what sense? Doesn't result in impeachment, or doesn't achieve some/all political goals that Dems might like to get out of the process?
My least muddled take is that people will never see the office of the presidency correctly if politicians don't act appropriately.
My least muddled take is that people will never see the office of the presidency correctly if politicians don't act appropriately.
What's with all the qualifications? Would it not be seen as a coup if the replacement was a criminal? Or from a different party? Or elected on a different ticket?
Seems like your thinking on this subject is quite muddled.
Seems like your thinking on this subject is quite muddled.
December 30, 2025 at 4:55 PM
What's with all the qualifications? Would it not be seen as a coup if the replacement was a criminal? Or from a different party? Or elected on a different ticket?
Seems like your thinking on this subject is quite muddled.
Seems like your thinking on this subject is quite muddled.
Are you claiming that the movement that spent the past 50 years working to take control of the Supreme Court isn't interested in governing through "regular order"?
Besides, a regular order which strips people of human rights is not a liberal order.
Besides, a regular order which strips people of human rights is not a liberal order.
December 30, 2025 at 3:53 PM
Are you claiming that the movement that spent the past 50 years working to take control of the Supreme Court isn't interested in governing through "regular order"?
Besides, a regular order which strips people of human rights is not a liberal order.
Besides, a regular order which strips people of human rights is not a liberal order.
Many of those political actors are also proponents of AI.
Makes you think.
Makes you think.
December 28, 2025 at 8:00 PM
Many of those political actors are also proponents of AI.
Makes you think.
Makes you think.
That's not a new fight, though perhaps science is faring worse now that at some times in the recent past.
How best to apportion health care is a political question. Some political actors (with outsized influence) don't like what science says about how best to treat certain diseases.
How best to apportion health care is a political question. Some political actors (with outsized influence) don't like what science says about how best to treat certain diseases.
December 28, 2025 at 7:59 PM
That's not a new fight, though perhaps science is faring worse now that at some times in the recent past.
How best to apportion health care is a political question. Some political actors (with outsized influence) don't like what science says about how best to treat certain diseases.
How best to apportion health care is a political question. Some political actors (with outsized influence) don't like what science says about how best to treat certain diseases.
Why did the Chicken cross Petronia, between Duval and Whitehead?
December 28, 2025 at 7:36 PM
Why did the Chicken cross Petronia, between Duval and Whitehead?
The problem there is clearly with the Canadian medical advisory body that relied on those two studies (which were called into question in 1995) despite the existence of six refuting studies.
What's needed here is a review of their process, no? How did monetary concerns cloud their decision-making?
What's needed here is a review of their process, no? How did monetary concerns cloud their decision-making?
December 28, 2025 at 7:11 PM
The problem there is clearly with the Canadian medical advisory body that relied on those two studies (which were called into question in 1995) despite the existence of six refuting studies.
What's needed here is a review of their process, no? How did monetary concerns cloud their decision-making?
What's needed here is a review of their process, no? How did monetary concerns cloud their decision-making?
It's surely a no-brainer to pass a law mandating any new assisted driving systems meet this requirement, yes?
December 26, 2025 at 7:36 PM
It's surely a no-brainer to pass a law mandating any new assisted driving systems meet this requirement, yes?
Let's start simple.
GM has rolled out the assisted-driving technology, and you must be on an approved stretch of road to use it.
That technology should be unable to exceed the speed limit on a given road --- and it is premeditated lawbreaking to design it to do anything else.
GM has rolled out the assisted-driving technology, and you must be on an approved stretch of road to use it.
That technology should be unable to exceed the speed limit on a given road --- and it is premeditated lawbreaking to design it to do anything else.
December 26, 2025 at 7:32 PM
Let's start simple.
GM has rolled out the assisted-driving technology, and you must be on an approved stretch of road to use it.
That technology should be unable to exceed the speed limit on a given road --- and it is premeditated lawbreaking to design it to do anything else.
GM has rolled out the assisted-driving technology, and you must be on an approved stretch of road to use it.
That technology should be unable to exceed the speed limit on a given road --- and it is premeditated lawbreaking to design it to do anything else.
Also, you do realize that putting speed limiters in cars is a separate issue to setting appropriate speed limits for given stretches of roads?
Besides, setting an appropriate speed limit is made significantly easier when you know people generally won't be capable of exceeding the limit.
Besides, setting an appropriate speed limit is made significantly easier when you know people generally won't be capable of exceeding the limit.
December 26, 2025 at 7:28 PM
Also, you do realize that putting speed limiters in cars is a separate issue to setting appropriate speed limits for given stretches of roads?
Besides, setting an appropriate speed limit is made significantly easier when you know people generally won't be capable of exceeding the limit.
Besides, setting an appropriate speed limit is made significantly easier when you know people generally won't be capable of exceeding the limit.
Oh crap, in that case, we should shut it all down until we can figure out what the hell is going on.
No driving until we have double-blind, science-backed studies on appropriate speeds, for each linear inch of roadway.
No driving until we have double-blind, science-backed studies on appropriate speeds, for each linear inch of roadway.
December 26, 2025 at 7:24 PM
Oh crap, in that case, we should shut it all down until we can figure out what the hell is going on.
No driving until we have double-blind, science-backed studies on appropriate speeds, for each linear inch of roadway.
No driving until we have double-blind, science-backed studies on appropriate speeds, for each linear inch of roadway.
Do you not know the law?
If you can't safely pass at or below the speed limit, then
If you can't safely pass at or below the speed limit, then
a man with a beard is holding a stick and a sword and says you shall not pass .
Alt: Gandalf says you shall not pass.
media.tenor.com
December 22, 2025 at 4:37 PM
Do you not know the law?
If you can't safely pass at or below the speed limit, then
If you can't safely pass at or below the speed limit, then
I see it like somebody came into our house and is knocking it down with a sledgehammer.
Pardon me for not being grateful they're exposing weaknesses in the home's foundation.
Pardon me for not being grateful they're exposing weaknesses in the home's foundation.
December 22, 2025 at 4:35 PM
I see it like somebody came into our house and is knocking it down with a sledgehammer.
Pardon me for not being grateful they're exposing weaknesses in the home's foundation.
Pardon me for not being grateful they're exposing weaknesses in the home's foundation.
Yeah man, now it's time to make that tradeoff again, with speed limiters. Because the trade-off is 1000% worth it, as you yourself know.
(Otherwise, you would have provided some actual data to support the idea the trade-off isn't worth it.)
(Otherwise, you would have provided some actual data to support the idea the trade-off isn't worth it.)
December 21, 2025 at 6:58 PM
Yeah man, now it's time to make that tradeoff again, with speed limiters. Because the trade-off is 1000% worth it, as you yourself know.
(Otherwise, you would have provided some actual data to support the idea the trade-off isn't worth it.)
(Otherwise, you would have provided some actual data to support the idea the trade-off isn't worth it.)
Please quote post who here is saying speed limiters are a perfect solution and have no downsides or trade-offs.
Either way, what I've consistently been saying is the issues you're raising aren't significant (I even provided supporting data to that point), not that they're non-existent.
Either way, what I've consistently been saying is the issues you're raising aren't significant (I even provided supporting data to that point), not that they're non-existent.
December 21, 2025 at 6:55 PM
Please quote post who here is saying speed limiters are a perfect solution and have no downsides or trade-offs.
Either way, what I've consistently been saying is the issues you're raising aren't significant (I even provided supporting data to that point), not that they're non-existent.
Either way, what I've consistently been saying is the issues you're raising aren't significant (I even provided supporting data to that point), not that they're non-existent.
Also, over 50% of traffic fatalities occur on urban roads.
About one in six traffic fatalities is on an interstate, freeway, or expressway.
So your concern is a vanishingly small part of the problem (and also not a concern, since speed limiters don't force you to drive over a minimum speed).
About one in six traffic fatalities is on an interstate, freeway, or expressway.
So your concern is a vanishingly small part of the problem (and also not a concern, since speed limiters don't force you to drive over a minimum speed).
December 20, 2025 at 3:38 PM
Also, over 50% of traffic fatalities occur on urban roads.
About one in six traffic fatalities is on an interstate, freeway, or expressway.
So your concern is a vanishingly small part of the problem (and also not a concern, since speed limiters don't force you to drive over a minimum speed).
About one in six traffic fatalities is on an interstate, freeway, or expressway.
So your concern is a vanishingly small part of the problem (and also not a concern, since speed limiters don't force you to drive over a minimum speed).
The data we have says "a 1-percent increase in speeders
during a given month was associated with a 0.84-percent
increase in crashes ( p<0.05). The number of non-speeders
did not have a significant effect on crashes."
Non-speeders do not have a significant effect on crashes, period.
during a given month was associated with a 0.84-percent
increase in crashes ( p<0.05). The number of non-speeders
did not have a significant effect on crashes."
Non-speeders do not have a significant effect on crashes, period.
December 20, 2025 at 3:27 PM
The data we have says "a 1-percent increase in speeders
during a given month was associated with a 0.84-percent
increase in crashes ( p<0.05). The number of non-speeders
did not have a significant effect on crashes."
Non-speeders do not have a significant effect on crashes, period.
during a given month was associated with a 0.84-percent
increase in crashes ( p<0.05). The number of non-speeders
did not have a significant effect on crashes."
Non-speeders do not have a significant effect on crashes, period.
Hey you know what would help keep speeds between vehicles more consistent?
SPEED LIMITERS IN MOTOR VEHICLES.
SPEED LIMITERS IN MOTOR VEHICLES.
December 19, 2025 at 4:22 PM
Hey you know what would help keep speeds between vehicles more consistent?
SPEED LIMITERS IN MOTOR VEHICLES.
SPEED LIMITERS IN MOTOR VEHICLES.
Ah yes, how dare you be compelled to drive slowly when its icy out.
I live in a steep and cold part of the world too. I've been stuck in plenty of pileups caused by semis on flat freeways, but I've never seen a pileup caused by a semi going over one of the passes.
(Because speed is the problem.)
I live in a steep and cold part of the world too. I've been stuck in plenty of pileups caused by semis on flat freeways, but I've never seen a pileup caused by a semi going over one of the passes.
(Because speed is the problem.)
December 16, 2025 at 8:15 PM
Ah yes, how dare you be compelled to drive slowly when its icy out.
I live in a steep and cold part of the world too. I've been stuck in plenty of pileups caused by semis on flat freeways, but I've never seen a pileup caused by a semi going over one of the passes.
(Because speed is the problem.)
I live in a steep and cold part of the world too. I've been stuck in plenty of pileups caused by semis on flat freeways, but I've never seen a pileup caused by a semi going over one of the passes.
(Because speed is the problem.)
Anyway, it sounds like you don't like my idea.
What a shock that you don't actually care about the issues you are raising. You're just looking for any argument that will dig you out of your hole.
What a shock that you don't actually care about the issues you are raising. You're just looking for any argument that will dig you out of your hole.
December 16, 2025 at 8:03 PM
Anyway, it sounds like you don't like my idea.
What a shock that you don't actually care about the issues you are raising. You're just looking for any argument that will dig you out of your hole.
What a shock that you don't actually care about the issues you are raising. You're just looking for any argument that will dig you out of your hole.
Wow, that's wild.
I saw you complaining that people took your comment "out of context" because you specifically mentioned highways (despite the post you were replying to not mentioning them).
But now you're taking my comment that doesn't mention highways and inserting highways into it?
I saw you complaining that people took your comment "out of context" because you specifically mentioned highways (despite the post you were replying to not mentioning them).
But now you're taking my comment that doesn't mention highways and inserting highways into it?
December 16, 2025 at 7:58 PM
Wow, that's wild.
I saw you complaining that people took your comment "out of context" because you specifically mentioned highways (despite the post you were replying to not mentioning them).
But now you're taking my comment that doesn't mention highways and inserting highways into it?
I saw you complaining that people took your comment "out of context" because you specifically mentioned highways (despite the post you were replying to not mentioning them).
But now you're taking my comment that doesn't mention highways and inserting highways into it?
Think about all the driving you've done on highways, and how many times you've had to brake suddenly.
How many times was it for a single slow vehicle, versus, say, a traffic jam caused by some reckless speeding driver causing an accident?
How many times was it for a single slow vehicle, versus, say, a traffic jam caused by some reckless speeding driver causing an accident?
December 14, 2025 at 4:38 PM
Think about all the driving you've done on highways, and how many times you've had to brake suddenly.
How many times was it for a single slow vehicle, versus, say, a traffic jam caused by some reckless speeding driver causing an accident?
How many times was it for a single slow vehicle, versus, say, a traffic jam caused by some reckless speeding driver causing an accident?
And that's why you advocate that the speed limit should be 15 mph on any road open to cyclists, enforced by speed regulators in vehicles, right?
.... Right?
.... Right?
December 14, 2025 at 4:36 PM
And that's why you advocate that the speed limit should be 15 mph on any road open to cyclists, enforced by speed regulators in vehicles, right?
.... Right?
.... Right?
Moreover, nuclear energy is safe only to the extent that physical security is ensured.
Climate change is a world-destabilizing phenomenon that will undoubtedly raise security concerns (see, eg, Ukraine). Nuclear is a bad fit for the threat environment of the future.
Climate change is a world-destabilizing phenomenon that will undoubtedly raise security concerns (see, eg, Ukraine). Nuclear is a bad fit for the threat environment of the future.
December 13, 2025 at 5:37 PM
Moreover, nuclear energy is safe only to the extent that physical security is ensured.
Climate change is a world-destabilizing phenomenon that will undoubtedly raise security concerns (see, eg, Ukraine). Nuclear is a bad fit for the threat environment of the future.
Climate change is a world-destabilizing phenomenon that will undoubtedly raise security concerns (see, eg, Ukraine). Nuclear is a bad fit for the threat environment of the future.