swansont

It may not be absorbed efficiently, but adding any energy is going to raise the temperature. You can also superheat water in a microwave (it’s one of the concerns about putting liquid water in one) in which case you start out above 100 C.

Yes, you could have steam hotter than 100 C if it absorbed microwaves.

On of my CO’s made a comment to this effect - he discovered that he actually had to lead because he was in charge of a bunch of civilians (and a top-heavy bunch at that; lots of people who were equivalent to officers, rather than a normal pyramid structure). Pushback from people criticizing decisions and having to deal with a union was a new experience. — Having a military background lends credibility when dealing with the military. But it’s not clear to me that you have an edge in decision-making

Who is proposing a unity ticket? The same chuckleheads who were rooting for a contested convention? You might lose voters on the left for any you gain on the right. If you want an energized left, which is what’s happening right now, you can’t throw cold water on them with a “unity” choice.

But white men often don’t have to work as hard to succeed — not to say that they don’t, but they (we) don’t have barriers to overcome that women and/or ethnic minorities do, and have advantages from the structures already in place. Hence the adage that women have to do things twice as well to be considered half as good.

“Page not found” LOL

You didn’t provide the actual case studies in your references. Just links to the site where the case study might possibly be found, which really isn’t a proper reference.

I’ve met Nobel winners, authors and admirals, but the coolest was meeting astronauts (the return crew of STS-124)

Aren’t you the author?

What case studies? Are you just cherry-picking some successes among all the obvious failures?

Yeah, that tracks. Nothing I read were direct announcements, but I wasn’t sure if the second-hand reports were from him or his team, or declarations vs hints. One analysis pointed out that it’s still an open convention - anybody can declare - but there’s no point to doing so unless your goal is something other than winning.

I wonder if the fact that a majority of delegates have already endorsed her entered into that. I thought he had earlier said he was throwing his hat in

That rabbit's got a vicious streak a mile wide! It's a killer! He's got huge, sharp-- eh-- he can leap about-- look at the bones!

<somewhere way down the list> Has met me

AtoMick-u235 has been banned for a very rude and childish response to being asked to follow the rules. They can be a certified genius elsewhere.

Didn’t say or mean to imply that. Just that women and people of color will likely identify more with Harris, and she’s been very vocal on abortion, which has resonated quite well with women. Some white men will like her just fine. Some will hate her, but many of them weren’t going to vote for a democrat anyway.

! Moderator Note There’s not a well-defined amount, but it can’t be zero. You can be a legend in your own mind elsewhere. Don’t bring this up again.

! Moderator Note You’d better add some soon or this will be closed

I suspect she will do well with people who are not white males. I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how quickly the dems have backed Harris. Their history did not suggest this, and was a major reason I thought a change would be a bad idea. $100 million raised after Biden stepped aside is a pretty good indication of support https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/22/live-updates-harris-democrats-biden-drops-out-trump-campaign.html I’ve seen Mark Kelly suggested as a possible running mate; the AZ gov would select a replacement so it wouldn’t be a lost senate seat

So, where’s the actual theory?

The country as a whole, perhaps but I think iNow has a point that what’s important is the battleground states, and those aren’t as ready. Look at the legislation they’ve passed recently. Because polls aren’t driven by media narratives* and polls are never wrong *I literally just watched John Oliver point out how polling on fear of “migrant crime” spiked after media mentions of it exploded. This isn’t rocket science. (it’s a cognitive bias, leveraged by people who use propaganda)

A nonwhite person won twice, and a woman got more votes than Trump in 2016. A lot of Trump voters have died since then (some thanks to Trump). The question is whether the GOP has been able to suppress more votes than that. But Dobbs is the big difference since then. People don’t like having rights/freedoms taken away. AndTrump being a felon.

Oh, bullshit. None of this was inevitable. It was because of everybody dogpiling after the debate. If the press didn’t wet themselves at the thought of holding the GOP to the same standard and reported news instead of chasing clicks, and certain dems having a backbone instead of caving to megadonors (who freaked out because of the “news” stories) the path could have been quite different. I think the US is too homophobic and that would cost votes. I think Pete’s great and should be campaigning but that and his inexperience would be negatives.

What are they, and how do you know this? Our rules require that material for discussion be posted. “read the paper” is not an acceptable response.

From whom? The same anonymous sources that started this clusterf* or was it the donors who didn’t like the support that labor was getting? Always were, apparently. A “conscience clause” meant that they could vote for another candidate if they wanted to, but being pledged to Biden probably meant they wouldn’t have wanted to. We won’t know what would have happened if there had been no infighting, and instead there was a full-court press on all of Trump's failings, Dobbs, and the myriad other unpopular positions in project 2025. That’s where all the time and energy should go (and should have gone)