NanLaew

I will see your "radical progressive woke left" and raise you "dumb superficial gullible right"

Insert "Shhhh..." emoji [here]

You started it when you misrepresented the election results with this landslide nonsense. But OK, your other points are valid. The "traditional" swing states swung. With less than two weeks to go, mainstream media suddenly (desperately?) quoted polls that suggested North Carolina was going to flip and could carry Harris to victory (pending results in your "traditional" swing states). In the end, it wasn't even close in NC and of course the swingers swung and the rest is history. Apart from Carter and the first Obama term, the state has been red since Tricky Dicky. Not a snowball's chance in hell IMHO. That, to me, this colossal straw clutch was affirmation that the Democrats were going to be toast. It will be interesting to see if the pollsters get a firmer handle on predictions going forward, but somehow, I doubt it.

As I understand it, the only demographic that shifted a bit from Trump to Harris were white males with post graduate degrees, i.e. not dumb proles.

Yes, let's see if the importance of the mid-terms is lost on EITHER party. It's going to be interesting.

PA is the perpetual SWING state. It has flipped 10 times in the past 70 years. Historically, it has seen more Republican electoral votes than Democrat. It's never been a blue state.

Don't get me wrong. The Democrats thankfully lost and the Republicans won. Now, let's see how the next two years work out for the president-elect.

Did it flip though? Anyway, it looks like I've got you furiously googling for maps. Good boy. Much appreciated.

Don't disengage quite yet. Maybe your thread is a tad premature as they swarm to slather themselves in the myth of the landslide that never was. All this while they furiously doggie-paddle away in their shallow pool of intellectual mediocrity.

You see what you had to do there? You had to qualify your big win with "barring the deep blue states". Now, if one of them had been flipped, then THAT would have made the win epically landslidey. Bigly even.

Excellent summation of the Democrats worldview and not just the OP's. The party allowed Biden to be nominated when he was already beyond his use-by date. Everything they've done since then has only been varying degrees of damage limitation.

Harris only had 108 days to get her sh*t together, versus the almost two years since Trump declared his candidacy. Their profligacy wasn't unexpected when they need to throw everything and the kitchen sink at the task. I think the Australian vernacular would be "running around like a headless chook"? I agree that theirs was a pretty hopeless task, especially when the campaign managers appeared focussed on the woman's vote while offered absolutely nothing to counter any of Trump's very bold proclamations of what he would do while himself not offering any substance as to how he would actually do it. Now, whether that was Harris's telling them what she wanted (unlikely), or the grandees of the Democrat party telling her what they wanted (probably), despite MSM pulling 11th hour, must-win swing states like NC and the importance of their Gen Z voters out of their butts, the result was fairly predictable. Well done the red team and...good luck America.

How wonderfully and woefully simplistic. Huge swathes of a state where mostly nobody lives are red. Great fishing in AK though. Context: 48.2% of the American electorate didn't vote red. That's almost half. 50% of the American electorate voted red. That's only half. Now, with regard to the latter, what does fifty/fifty mean? The answer isn't "landslide" either.

Not a landslide. Hope this helps.

Correct. But by your own yardstick, "your opinion may not be the same but that does not make you right."

I know you're excited but if an opinion needs "interpretation" and "context", if it needs any sort of explanation, it's simply a win.

It's a very popular misrepresentation of a landslide. But carry on.

It wasn't a landslide. But carry on.

Have you had a comprehensive medical check up? Pushing 70, there's probably one or two things that are already likely, simply due to old age. I think it is better to be forewarned BEFORE signing up for medical insurance and get one of those comprehensive 'executive' medical examinations. Private hospitals will be more expensive but some public ones have cottoned on to the idea of health checks and 'wellness' for the locals and can do the same... just takes longer and will probably be less 'comfortable' than a private hospital. There are still a few insurers who don't require a pre-screening medical examination while you are still under 70 years old. However, they will ask for FULL disclosure when you apply and, if you didn't tell them about the glaucoma, enlarged prostate or stage 1 hypertension, they can and will weight the premium if they find out after-the-fact.

Have you had a comprehensive medical check up? Pushing 70, there's probably one or two things that are already likely, simply due to old age. I think it is better to be forewarned BEFORE signing up for medical insurance and get one of those comprehensive 'executive' medical examinations. Private hospitals will be more expensive but some public ones have cottoned on to the idea of health checks and 'wellness' for the locals and can do the same... just takes longer and will probably be less 'comfortable' than a private hospital. There are still a few insurers who don't require a pre-screening medical examination while you are still under 70 years old. However, they will ask for FULL disclosure when you apply and, if you didn't tell them about the glaucoma, enlarged prostate or stage 1 hypertension, they can and will weight the premium if they find out after-the-fact.

For me, about the same age with a 100,000 baht deductible and no out-patient, about 75,000 baht/year = $180/month

The discriminating farang will pick and choose rather than go full retard. Driving on the wrong side of the road or on the pavements, for example, can be quite convenient at times. "Full retard"... that's funny. I think the overriding difference between the locals and us foreigners is the latter have mostly been taught or have a notion about driving defensively. The most obvious aspect is seen on the main highways and motorways here where keeping one's distance doesn't apply. When playing follow-the-leader, as soon as they see a brake light, their FIRST reaction is to dart left or right, to shoot the gap, to get to the front, to be 'me first'. I tend to lift my foot off the gas pedal FIRST because if they are braking, it is logical that there's something ahead of them that I cannnot see. Like a u-turning tractor-trailer. Maybe, if they outlawed these ridiculous dark window tints and people behind have a better view of through their glass of what's ahead... oh, stop it. There's me overthinking it again.

Scunthorpe yakuza.

Apologies if the following seems like 'gaslighting', but.... your comment, 'when in Rome'... implies you mimic Thai driving / riding behavior ???... ...Does that mean you drive and ride with reckless abandonment exampled by many drivers here?.. i.e. jumping red lights, riding without a helmet, tailgating, speeding, wrong way down a one way street, riding on the wrong side of the road, over taking on blind bends etc etc ??? Of course, not, you are not that daft...... 'Adapting to' local driving behavior and standards, does not necessarily mean 'adopting' local driving behavior and standards... So, I don't think 'when in Rome' is a correct approach, unless you meant something else other than that implied by the statement. Does "gaslighting" include citing only the extreme, worst-case and most dangerous acts of local driver stupidity? Yes, I mimic the "local driving behavior and standards" here in Thailand, same as I mimic "local driving behavior and standards" when I'm on the 610 loop in Houston during rush hour, or haring up the M6 to Manchester at quarter-past dark already. ...and in Rome.

You mean like the same way they could cancel the Thailand Elite program?