I thought we were just talking outside cities. If you want to talk about cities, it's not like buffalo is known for their pothole-free streets: /r/Buffalo/comments/sxy10m/allen_street_potholes_this_is_getting_ridiculous

Much less traffic on them than the roads around Boston. Out in western ma, there was much more snow this year, but nowhere near the number of potholes.

Which politicians exactly? Can you point to someone in the MA legislature who has advocated for stricter gun laws and has advocated for more police access to deadly weapons?

> Remind me why it’s “safe” for Police to have Ar’s and Glocks but as soon as a normal person gets one it’s considered a “dangerous “ weapon

Does any person actually hold that view? The type of people who are for more restrictive gun laws on individuals are also the type to not be big fans of the police having more deadly, militaristic weaponry.

Then the other states get to claim the cars for 100% of whatever taxes they charge.

If those states don't charge excise taxes and yet somehow maintain their roads just fine, maybe we should be looking into how those states are able to do so.

Except when it turns out that you get caught in a web of one ways that don't lead back to Cambridge st and you get dumped out in Kendall.

If the car is truly in this state for less than half the year (even 1 day less) and your official residence is in another state I'm fine giving up all the tax revenue.

And for those willing to lie to get around it, they'd also be giving up their right to vote in this state and anything else tied to residence.

How would that be a problem with my proposed rules? In your example the owner of the car resides in MA and the car spends the majority of its time in MA.

Edit: I'm not saying that it would solve people lying about which state their car should be in. I'm just saying it would be more fair and it would solve this ridiculous 30 day issue.

That's so dumb. A car should only have to be registered in a single state. Tie it to someone's official residence, or maybe whichever state the car is operated in the most.

The road conditions were way worse than what you'd be led to think based just on seeing the snow come down. It honestly just looked like some flurries to me, but the roads were like an ice rink.

I've driven in much heavier snow and the surface conditions weren't as close to as bad.

Were you out on the roads tonight? It doesn't matter how much it snowed, the roads were super slippery.

I was going like 20mph on the way home and slid a good distance when I had to stop a few times. The antilock brakes really kicked in. I saw a bunch of emergency vehicles out and drove past a minor accident.

> I saw someone using an angle grinder on a bike in front of a police station.

Did you talk to that person? How do you know it wasn't their bike and they lost their keys?

Anyway, I don't think a bike thief would choose a locked up bike inside a bike shed that requires a registered charlie card to enter and likely has video surveillance as the one to steal.

> Nobody gives a shit about bike theft.

That's not far from true, except for the bike owners :-P.

> Also I really don’t care to argue this matter lol

Says the guy who replied to me 3 times in 6 minutes LOLOLOLOLOLllllOOOoloooLLooooLLLLol

> Not only that ...

Not only what? You didn't respond to anything I wrote.

A total non sequitur, and also completely wrong. so... cool.

The information is true whether it's published there or anywhere else. If they're not aware of the large number of election deniers in (and running for) political offices, then they've not been paying attention.

It's not like you'd have to be reading The Washington Post to know about it. They're not the exclusive location for this information. The politicians themselves have been saying all of this stuff out in the open.

We're not even talking statistics here. It's literally just counting up names. If you're saying it's wrong, it would be very easy to show that.

They're just numbers. Which numbers have the liberal bias?

So 300 republicans running for office, and the people voting for them, and the "poll watchers" don't care about this stuff?

> Tiny number of people who are actually election deniers

You're not paying attention:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/interactive/2022/election-deniers-running-for-office-elections-2022/

> Nearly 300 Republicans seeking those offices this November have denied or questioned the outcome of the last presidential election, according to a Washington Post analysis. > > Many will win. More than 170 election deniers are running in districts or states where Republicans are expected to win, according to Cook Political Report race ratings and Partisan Voter Index. Dozens more are in competitive races.

That's not true. No one disputed the actual results or claimed it was actually stolen. Virtually everyone agrees with the actual counting of the votes (no votes were added, changed, or thrown out).

People were saying there was interference from, and collusion with, Russia. Those actions would be illegal in their own right and would have influenced the outcome of the election, but no one said the actual outcome of the election should be overturned.

It would be like if I kidnapped you on the morning of the election, and didn't let you go until after so that you couldn't vote. That kidnapping was illegal. And it certainly affected the tally of the votes. But that doesn't mean that the results should be overturned or that you should be allowed to vote retroactively.

The difference is that there are plenty of people that say the actual outcome of Biden's election was wrong. That he actually "stole" the election. That votes were directly tampered with. And it's not just a couple of crazies that are shouted down by the "sane" Republicans. There's a huge portion of sitting Senators and Representatives and Supreme Court justices who believe this crap.

Didn't the oracle of bacon do this like at least 20 years ago?