And just in case Trump does call, they won’t be recording it.
To be sure, as somebody noted above, next time the Repubs will have all this sort of groundwork done before the election, not after.
I’m aware of that (and was acknowledged in my previous post), but this ain’t normal times. If ever there was to be an (IMO more than likely) outlier midterm, it’s the one coming up in eleven months. There’s just too waaaaaay much on the line, this time around, for dems to worry about their fickle mid-term apathy of voters past. And despite the current, unpromising polls, that in no way convinces me that such a downturn will be reflected in the midterms.
I guess I have more faith in a much, much more engaged electorate, coming up.
Heh, not that actual counted votes might matter anymore, though 
I wish I had that much faith in the average voter. But, we’ve seen time and again that they just don’t come out in midterm years.
Personally, I vote as often as they legally let me. I love to vote in odd years, as that’s when we get to vote for city council and school board. Turnout is pathetic, so my vote in those matters counts a whole lot more than it does towards national politics.
I am fortunate that I live in a Republican stronghold, so it is unlikely that my vote gets messed with. I am unfortunate to live in a strong Republican area, as it sucks in most other ways.
What happened in 2020 is evidence of what happened in 2020. Here’s what Republicans are teeing up for 2024:
Republicans are seeking to replace Georgia SoS with Big Lie supporters
Republicans are stripping power from Republican officials who failed to back the big lie
Republicans replace election officials with Big Lie supporters in CO, AZ, MI
Why do you think the conditions that prevailed in 2020 are going to hold forever? Because “reasons?”
Really?
# Wisconsin GOP leader: ‘Zero chance’ of taking over elections
(yep - once again link-loading problems. At least it can still be clicked on)
Yeah? So you’re not wearing sheep’s clothing when saying that? Or do that increasingly popular, abrupt 180-degree about-face-on-what-you-had-just-said kinda thing, in the vien of Cruz/McCarthy?
It does feel very much like a professional sport’s team owner giving his head coach a vote of confidence, and then firing him a week later.
Far, far safer to assume he’s lying and continue to work to prevent it than to assume otherwise.
Once again, it works. I think you’re doing it wrong.
It looks like you’re putting both the headline and the URL link on the same line, properly punctuated (sort-of) to be a link but not to load the preview. You need to put the URL link alone on the line all by itself.
thanks for sharing.
(pardon this brief derail, here, folks)
Sure, it appears here, despite me doing the usual copying it and pasting it the same way I did last time, (and for all the oodles of successful times I’ve previously done it).
So, no idea how it worked this time around - pretty sure I didn’t copy and paste the url any differently than my previous attempt - I’ll have to put this down to a zenya ghost in the machine.
anyhoo back to regular programming.
[derail continued]
@Guest-starring_Id – Some additional ideas on what may be happening. Hidden here because totally off-topic in this thread. But may be of interest to some. A bit detailed and thus, a bit lengthy:
Click here to view
There are two basic ways to copy a link (each of which may be accomplished by various combinations of keyclicks and/or mouse clicks, depending on your system and browser). First, note that a typical link consists of two main parts: (a) The visible text that appears on your screen, and (b) the URL link that you will go to when you click on that. Headlines on the main page of a news site are like this, for example.
You may be switching back and forth between these two methods of copying links without realizing it.
One method: Highlight the headline, then copy it to your clipboard, however you normally do that. This is likely to COPY the visible text AND the link to your clipboard. When you paste this into a Discourse reply, you will get both, and Discourse is smart enough to fill in all the proper surrounding punctuation to make the right syntax. Result: You see the visible text in your post, and you can click on it to go to that page. But you do NOT get the preview in your post (which is apparently called a “One-Box”).
The other method: Don’t highlight the visible text of the headline (or maybe do, apparently it doesn’t matter). But point at the headline and then right-click (or whatever equivalent on your system) to open a context menu. On this you may see “Copy Link” or “Copy Link Location” or similar. Click on that. This copies ONLY the link, and not the visible headline text, to the clipboard. (ETA: There may be other equivalent ways to do this on various systems, maybe.) Paste this into your Discourse reply on a line all by itself with no additional punction, and you should get the preview One-Box. But caveat: This depends on the target web page to have the necessary HTML code in it to enable this. So even this doesn’t work with all web sites.
Try these two methods and see if these give you the two kinds of results you have been seeing.
[/derail]
Cool, thanks - pm’ed ya, to spare everyone.