The bolt is a subcompact, the Camry is a midsize.
The Camry is three feet longer, has two more doors and weighs 200lbs less.
A better comparison would be to the Yaris, Toyotas subcompact gas hatchback which weighs between 900 and 1400lbs less depending on options.
Yes and no.
Yes it’s possible. No it’s not scalable or affordable.
Synthetic plastics (all plastics for the purposes of this conversation) are byproducts of the petroleum industry. They’re making gas out of oil and are left over with plastic precursors so those get made into something and everyone wins* because the materials are basically free.
Last I looked we were creeping up on two billion tires a year.
i agree that we need to build trust in the process. I think the right way to do that is to go ahead with a hand count. if they’re conspiring to cast doubt like you’re saying, it’s the way to put a stop to that line of thinking.
be realistic here, georgia was the subject of allegations of tampering last time around and just because of that there will be allegations this time around. it would have been better to prepare earlier but the unserious move is to wait till election night to start the hand tally.
Okay, like I said, there are insane bigots.
What is going on?
there are insane bigots.
I do not see evidence that this group is pushing forward a bigoted agenda in deed.
I am open to being wrong. If you have evidence of it, I want to see.
I don’t think that a hand count in a state whose election results were called into question last time is a crazy move.
I think suspicion of a conspiracy to use a hand count to slow the process down to the point that the election is decided by the house is not a good reason to prevent a hand count.
I feel like I’m missing something critical here, but it doesn’t seem like you want to resolve people’s concerns or build trust because you believe those concerns don’t merit addressing and that it’s not possible to build trust with the people you see as your enemies.
Okay let me get this straight:
There’s a group of people who don’t believe you can trust the elections. They think there’s a big conspiracy to manipulate them and have taken positions in the board of elections in order to make sure it’s done right (whatever that means).
You and others think that theyre the ones involved a conspiracy to manipulate the election, and have occupied those positions in order to further their plot. You and others believe that they’re going ahead with a hand count, the method used when an election is in contention and its results need to be verified, so that the process will slow down and their candidate will be appointed by the house.
You don’t think that trust can be built with that group and that they should be purged from office and the ability of those positions to verify and certify elections should be removed.
You think the best response to a conspiracy minded movement which doesn’t trust the elections and has occupied the positions in government ostensibly tasked with election security and veracity with the stated purpose of making sure there is no manipulation is to force them out of those positions and take away that power.
This is “put battery operated speakers in stop signs that remind schizophrenics to take their medication” level thinking and I’m here for it.
I’m sorry for not replying to you sooner, I couldn’t find any examples of people lying to claim fraud in that article.
I read it a bunch of times and it’s very possible that I missed it, so point it out if you think so.
That’s why I didn’t get back to you till now.
I’ve really tried to not argue from the standpoint that hand counting is ontologically good, but that there’s a reason why in this case, in this election, under the conditions that Georgia is and will be under, hand counting is a better choice.
In a bunch of comments up the chain I say as much and I’ve been trying to stay consistent with that.
I’m really not willfully trying to avoid the point.
I must be missing something. It sounds from all the articles you posted that the crime was covering up payments.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but each of the 34 counts refers to a payment made in an attempt to conceal the hush money as legal expenses. If paying hush money were illegal I bet there would be many fewer out of court settlements…
I guess I don’t take your meaning…
Yeah I’m with you. That line of thinking will only attract support from conservatives.
Not in the slightest.
My understandings is that the convictions were for not keeping records of what he did, not reporting what he did with the money and trying to cover up what he did with the money, not for what he did with the money.
Falsifying business records are the 34 different counts he was found guilty on.
That’s not illegal.
The crime is not reporting it.
It’s reported on a filing. Sometimes electronic but paperwork in spirit.
If the “problem” in your words is the crime, then the problem is paperwork.
The crimes are falsifying business records, not paying hush money.
The hush money was paid by trumps attorney who was then reimbursed with campaign funds. The crime is not paying hush money, the crime is covering it up.
As I said before, I don’t think it’s a very good idea to try to beat trump over the head with the convictions. At best you appeal to reactionary voters who have regressive ideas about crime and justice and at worst you have to reply to questions like “it’s legal to pay hush money out of campaign funds?”
If you can’t build trust with a group what do you think is the way forward?
Yeah I didn’t say that I think it’s a mistake, I said I think it’s not a good idea for the democrats to use the convictions as a lane of attack.
I even said that trump probably systemically doesn’t file paperwork he’s supposed to and that it’s common for people to do that.
Okay, you and the Georgia board of elections disagree about the 2020 result.
What is the right way to go about building trust in the election process in that circumstance?
Is it to just tell the people who think there was manipulation to sit down and shut up or is it to go ahead and prepare for the inevitable accusations of manipulation?
What im trying to make clear here is that I think that the board of elections is making the right call, even if they don’t think hand counts are inherently better like I do, and even if they’re nefariouslly planning to drum up unfounded accusations of manipulation, because they’re making the call that has the most opportunity to build trust in the election process back up.
How should it be?
I honestly think it’s more likely that like almost every business, nonprofit and other organization I’ve had any experience with, trump doesn’t have a “proactive” filing regimen.
An old ass accountant I used to work with explained why it’s like this: why give them something to beat you over the head with? Just know the requirements, know the punishment and give the least amount of information you possibly can until compelled.
Of course, larger, richer groups are more able to take that strategy, but that’s a systemic problem.
But it doesn’t matter for the purposes of the crimes in question if it was an “innocent” mistake or purposeful omission.
I think it’s pretty disingenuous for the democrat message to be an attack on trump for simply having been convicted because democrats are at the same time trying to catch lefty and otherwise third party voters who see that criminal justice system as having serious fundamental flaws.
I think getting bogged down in the details of trumps convictions isn’t helpful to the democrats either because explaining them to people makes trump relatable. Nothing he actually did with money was a crime. It was not filing paperwork that was the crime.
The whole thing becomes more akin to having to pay a ticket for a taillight you got fixed because you didn’t bring the receipts to court.
“Your honor, the taillight in question is new, intact and installed on my car”
“Your car isn’t in my courtroom”
“It’s in the parking lot 80 feet to the west of your courtroom. I have a picture of it right here.”
“I will only admit a receipt”
Tbh the conviction rhetoric only appeals to reactionary right wing voters who want to punish people with records or makes him incredibly relatable to normal people.
If anything it seems like a hedge to move towards the right.
It’s really funny seeing ppl make the surprised pikachu face about fetterman.
I don’t agree with his reasoning, but I do agree with his assessment that it’s a mistake to push the felon message so hard with trump.
If simply being convicted of a crime makes you a person not worthy of serious consideration in the political sphere, is that implicit endorsement of the legal system? Seems pretty conservative if you ask me.
Even if a person was to believe that our legal system is infallible and that there’s nothing wrong with weaponizing its decisions against one’s enemies, doesn’t bringing up the felony convictions beg the question of what they’re for? That hasn’t been a powerful message for democrats.
I have no love for trump, democrats seem to be messing up here though.
Again, I don’t see anyone saying that they’re planning to lie in order to claim fraud.
I’m also not entirely convinced that a hand count can be manipulated as easily as you’re suggesting based on the election work I’ve been involved in.
This honestly seems like one of those times that a stopped clock is right, a person truly believes there is gonna be fraud or recognizes that there are gonna be claims of it and pushes to prepare for the worst.
Let me flip the script on you:
Georgia was the focus of a lot of claims of election fraud last time around. If your goal was to build trust in the election process there, wouldn’t you want to go ahead and be prepared for the worst, a hand count?
lol that half the comments are libs getting btfo because there is currently a defacto ban on refugees from gaza.