Devin Rooney
@devinrooney.bsky.social
Master's Student in UNC-CH's Planning Department. Working on network analyses of policing from a leftist perspective. Hopefully doing a PhD next.
Live ones or gtfo
October 27, 2025 at 5:11 AM
Live ones or gtfo
This also seems like a don't threaten me with a good time situation.
Adding an extra Potemkin Democrat to Florida is arguably better than nothing.
Adding an extra Potemkin Democrat to Florida is arguably better than nothing.
October 27, 2025 at 2:50 AM
This also seems like a don't threaten me with a good time situation.
Adding an extra Potemkin Democrat to Florida is arguably better than nothing.
Adding an extra Potemkin Democrat to Florida is arguably better than nothing.
No I'm not.
It doesn't matter how old Collins is if she's not in office next time, and my hypothetical is premised on her losing. King's age is also irrelevant. We're talking about Collins' seat.
Electing a younger person for this seat decreases the odds their age becomes a factor next election.
It doesn't matter how old Collins is if she's not in office next time, and my hypothetical is premised on her losing. King's age is also irrelevant. We're talking about Collins' seat.
Electing a younger person for this seat decreases the odds their age becomes a factor next election.
October 26, 2025 at 2:26 AM
No I'm not.
It doesn't matter how old Collins is if she's not in office next time, and my hypothetical is premised on her losing. King's age is also irrelevant. We're talking about Collins' seat.
Electing a younger person for this seat decreases the odds their age becomes a factor next election.
It doesn't matter how old Collins is if she's not in office next time, and my hypothetical is premised on her losing. King's age is also irrelevant. We're talking about Collins' seat.
Electing a younger person for this seat decreases the odds their age becomes a factor next election.
That's the key issue. It's really dumb to elect someone who should not run again in 6 years.
A Mills win this election means one of two outcomes in 6 years: forfeiting the benefit of incumbency or running someone who could turn 90 in office.
A Mills win this election means one of two outcomes in 6 years: forfeiting the benefit of incumbency or running someone who could turn 90 in office.
October 25, 2025 at 8:29 PM
That's the key issue. It's really dumb to elect someone who should not run again in 6 years.
A Mills win this election means one of two outcomes in 6 years: forfeiting the benefit of incumbency or running someone who could turn 90 in office.
A Mills win this election means one of two outcomes in 6 years: forfeiting the benefit of incumbency or running someone who could turn 90 in office.
Grok is planning to go as Charles Murray for Halloween, cut it some slack ok? It heard we were very offended by its bare knuckles eugenics, and wants to slip on a kid glove
October 25, 2025 at 3:04 AM
Grok is planning to go as Charles Murray for Halloween, cut it some slack ok? It heard we were very offended by its bare knuckles eugenics, and wants to slip on a kid glove
I'm not a lawyer, but just now reading the actual text of the 22nd, some potential loopholes jumped out, and Dan Coenen wrote a paper about them: digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_artchop/...
I don't know if he's reliable though.
I don't know if he's reliable though.
Two-Time Presidents and the Vice-Presidency
Does the Constitution limit the ability of a twice-before-elected President to serve as Vice-President? This question, as it turns out, presents an intricate constitutional puzzle, the solution of whi...
digitalcommons.law.uga.edu
October 24, 2025 at 8:36 PM
I'm not a lawyer, but just now reading the actual text of the 22nd, some potential loopholes jumped out, and Dan Coenen wrote a paper about them: digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_artchop/...
I don't know if he's reliable though.
I don't know if he's reliable though.
Isn't it mostly the normies that care?
October 24, 2025 at 7:59 PM
Isn't it mostly the normies that care?
It just sucks that all three leading Democrats in the primary are trash
Platner: chaos goblin with weird fasc-y tendencies
Mills: centrist dinosaur
Wood: www.dropsitenews.com/p/maine-demo...
Platner: chaos goblin with weird fasc-y tendencies
Mills: centrist dinosaur
Wood: www.dropsitenews.com/p/maine-demo...
Maine Democratic Senate Candidate Sits at Nexus of Spam PAC Network
Jordan Wood and Jake Lipsett have spent their careers in the Mothership vortex
www.dropsitenews.com
October 22, 2025 at 11:16 PM
It just sucks that all three leading Democrats in the primary are trash
Platner: chaos goblin with weird fasc-y tendencies
Mills: centrist dinosaur
Wood: www.dropsitenews.com/p/maine-demo...
Platner: chaos goblin with weird fasc-y tendencies
Mills: centrist dinosaur
Wood: www.dropsitenews.com/p/maine-demo...
Age caps on the other hand, should be mandatory for all three branches.
(SCOTUS would get their lifetime appointments but we'd implement one of the workarounds where they can't actually vote or can't hear cases or whatever)
(SCOTUS would get their lifetime appointments but we'd implement one of the workarounds where they can't actually vote or can't hear cases or whatever)
October 22, 2025 at 4:31 PM
Age caps on the other hand, should be mandatory for all three branches.
(SCOTUS would get their lifetime appointments but we'd implement one of the workarounds where they can't actually vote or can't hear cases or whatever)
(SCOTUS would get their lifetime appointments but we'd implement one of the workarounds where they can't actually vote or can't hear cases or whatever)
They're the pass through. That's like saying the credit card companies pay merchants. That's part of the process but misses the point.
October 21, 2025 at 2:44 PM
They're the pass through. That's like saying the credit card companies pay merchants. That's part of the process but misses the point.
^(there's no risk. It's 100% sure that I'm gonna go ahead and be a pedant.)
October 21, 2025 at 2:21 PM
^(there's no risk. It's 100% sure that I'm gonna go ahead and be a pedant.)
At the risk of being a pedant, onlyfans subscribers* have paid
October 21, 2025 at 2:18 PM
At the risk of being a pedant, onlyfans subscribers* have paid
Apparently it was moreso for the people monitoring the wire:
"[T]he intentional misspelling of both NEW and LEAD – to NU LEDE – served as a kind of alert for news or wire editors working on multiple editions of the newspaper.”
"[T]he intentional misspelling of both NEW and LEAD – to NU LEDE – served as a kind of alert for news or wire editors working on multiple editions of the newspaper.”
October 10, 2025 at 1:17 AM
Apparently it was moreso for the people monitoring the wire:
"[T]he intentional misspelling of both NEW and LEAD – to NU LEDE – served as a kind of alert for news or wire editors working on multiple editions of the newspaper.”
"[T]he intentional misspelling of both NEW and LEAD – to NU LEDE – served as a kind of alert for news or wire editors working on multiple editions of the newspaper.”
"His conclusion was that there was 'no historic basis for the spelling of a lead as 'lede.' ‘Lede’ is an invention of linotype romanticists, not something used in newsrooms of the linotype era.'"
'Lead' vs. ‘lede': Roy Peter Clark has the definitive answer, at last - Poynter
From person-to-person coaching and intensive hands-on seminars to interactive online courses and media reporting, Poynter helps journalists sharpen skills and elevate storytelling throughout their car...
www.poynter.org
October 10, 2025 at 1:15 AM
"His conclusion was that there was 'no historic basis for the spelling of a lead as 'lede.' ‘Lede’ is an invention of linotype romanticists, not something used in newsrooms of the linotype era.'"
Wait, are you making a joke about the spelling being wrong? I think I'm missing the point
October 9, 2025 at 7:18 PM
Wait, are you making a joke about the spelling being wrong? I think I'm missing the point
I agree, but there's a whole list of terms like "graf" for paragraph, "nut graf" which is the second paragraph that usually offers context, "hed" for heading, "subhed" for subheading etc that follow the pattern for the same reason
October 9, 2025 at 6:20 PM
I agree, but there's a whole list of terms like "graf" for paragraph, "nut graf" which is the second paragraph that usually offers context, "hed" for heading, "subhed" for subheading etc that follow the pattern for the same reason
(at least that's what they tell you in intro to newswriting)
October 9, 2025 at 3:44 PM
(at least that's what they tell you in intro to newswriting)
That's not why. Journalists spell it lede so it's more obvious that it is not intended for publication.
Basically so that copy editors know on sight to remove it
Basically so that copy editors know on sight to remove it
October 9, 2025 at 3:25 PM
That's not why. Journalists spell it lede so it's more obvious that it is not intended for publication.
Basically so that copy editors know on sight to remove it
Basically so that copy editors know on sight to remove it
I just think this style of sculpture should never depict any real people. Case in point: Scary Lucille Ball. They did replace her with a vastly improved (but still slightly creepy) statue later, but the odds these go wrong are too high
September 28, 2025 at 8:06 PM
I just think this style of sculpture should never depict any real people. Case in point: Scary Lucille Ball. They did replace her with a vastly improved (but still slightly creepy) statue later, but the odds these go wrong are too high
I will say, that is objectively a funny joke. It does seem like there's a small possibility this might be a red line for the normies luckily. It's time to rise up
September 18, 2025 at 6:48 PM
I will say, that is objectively a funny joke. It does seem like there's a small possibility this might be a red line for the normies luckily. It's time to rise up
It would be very different if the reporter had asked questions shoring up Source A's perspective, and then later Source B shares info that conclusively shows Source A is a pathological liar, and then the guardian published a clarification, but that's not at all what happened here
September 13, 2025 at 10:36 PM
It would be very different if the reporter had asked questions shoring up Source A's perspective, and then later Source B shares info that conclusively shows Source A is a pathological liar, and then the guardian published a clarification, but that's not at all what happened here
If the story is developing, the expectation is that the scope is limited, not that the information presented as factual is subject to fundamental revision simply because the journalist didn't feel like doing their due diligence.
September 13, 2025 at 10:36 PM
If the story is developing, the expectation is that the scope is limited, not that the information presented as factual is subject to fundamental revision simply because the journalist didn't feel like doing their due diligence.
Because the "new information" that prompted the correction was something the journalist should have asked as one of the very first questions. They should have asked others at the school at the time if they recalled the two together. The editor should have verified the answer to those questions.
September 13, 2025 at 10:36 PM
Because the "new information" that prompted the correction was something the journalist should have asked as one of the very first questions. They should have asked others at the school at the time if they recalled the two together. The editor should have verified the answer to those questions.