this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
283 points (97.3% liked)

politics

19170 readers
4602 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

One of Congress’s most powerful Republicans apparently feels powerless in the face of Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign.

Sitting for an interview with CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell explained that he didn’t see any other option than to endorse the GOP presidential nominee—despite having made previous declarations against Trump, including blaming him for the violent events that unfolded on January 6.

“The issue is, what kind of influence, even if I had chosen to get involved in the presidential election, what kind of influence would I have had?” McConnell said after insinuating he was duty-bound as the most powerful Republican in the Senate to support the candidate that Republican delegates voted for.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 84 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Hey guys, I poured some diesel on this fire, and hid all the extinguishers. Turns out that it's hard to control it now.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I think petrol is worse if you want a better example than diesel.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Petrol instantly vaporizes and explodes, and exhausts itself more or less right away. Diesel takes time to heat up enough, but once it does, it's a raging inferno that easily reignites by itself after being extinguished.

Source: I've started (sanctioned, legal, and utilitarian) fires with both

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

How would it go if they were mixed and ignited?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Diesel burns slowly, though petrol makes diesel easier to ignite.

We mix them 3:1 Diesel/Petrol (called 'driptorch' fuel, used in 'driptorches') to safely put fire to the ground when we need to.

Source: am firefighter.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Never tried, but I would suspect that petrol could be an effective accelerant, as it'd reach its flash point long before the diesel does.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

We all understand the message, no need to clarify the type of fire it should be.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Ideally, it'd be a turd-fire, but afaik, they don't exist, so I went with diesel.