“Mail carrier assaulted for delivering mail.”
20 Likes
Maybe it will shake out later, but I’m pretty sure this could involve the Feds, i.e. postal cops (don’t eff with 'em).
19 Likes
TBF they were cheaper when you couldn’t get milk or eggs during the early stages of the pandemic, but also way more expensive when grocery stores did have them in stock.
13 Likes
Gritty’s aunt explains how votes are counted in Pennsylvania.
12 Likes
11 Likes
9 Likes
The problem as always with purging that many voter registrations so late in an election cycle is that the number of errors that will prevent eligible voters from voting vastly exceeds the number of voters who will vote illegally. Less than a handful of voters vote illegally each election, while a 0.1% error rate will deny 700 voters of their vote - or worse, as Florida and Texas have shown, get them in legal trouble for no reason.
13 Likes
Vance knows that abortion isn’t the real reason why families aren’t having more babies: it’s because car seats are so onerous. Excuse me while I go find a brick wall to beat my head against.
16 Likes
"In particular, there’s evidence that the car seat rules that we’ve imposed, which of course I want kids to drive in car seats, have driven down the number of babies born in this country by over 100,000. So as we think about how to make kids safe here, I think we should do it in a way that’s accommodating to American families.”
14 Likes
Yeah, what’s the point of even having kids if you have to keep them “safe,” amirite?! 
14 Likes
What’re the odds he’s never actually strapped a baby into a car seat?
13 Likes
Yeah…not quite. Postal Inspectors are armed as they are technically part of the Federal Marshal service.
8 Likes
From 2020, this explains the study. It’s interesting and probably has some merit.
But I think the bigger point is people aren’t having more kids because it’s so darn expensive, whether it’s bigger vehicles to cart them around, food, education, shoes, etc…
I know we never had another child because we could barely afford the one we had and that was 40 years ago.
The actually study.
7 Likes
Not only aren’t those his wife and kids, he’s single and lives alone with his dog. He’s a childless dog dude. Which is fine, but it’s hilarious to me that that’s now unacceptable for a Republican candidate. He also recently got engaged, according to his campaign, which I find a little sus.
17 Likes
14 Likes
Even taking the study’s conclusions at face value it would still only account for a small reduction in families choosing to have three or more children within a given period of time, not the number of couples choosing to have children at all.
These laws significantly raise the cost of having a third child, as many regular-sized cars cannot fit three child seats in the back
The abstract goes on to suggest this might have reduced the number of US births by as much as 8,000 children annually, but that’s barely a rounding error in a country with an annual birth rate around 3.9 million.
10 Likes
That is a “study” with a predetermined outcome torturing the data to support it.
16 Likes
A study that was then further amplified and sensationalized by the totally objective and impartial minds at Reason magazine. 
13 Likes
