u/SockDem

Had First Take on in the background while I was doing stuff around the house. All of a sudden they annonce it as breaking news that Rasmussen had passed at 93.

...and they just completely rushed through the segment. The host stumbled over her words multiple times, and then they gave each panelist maybe 30s of input each, the last panelist then cut the last one off for the Pat McAfee intro music halfway through his thoughts where they didn't end up mentioning it at all.

C'mon, gotta do better than that for the death of your network's founder.

7->E train to Jamaica it is :/

It’s just nonsensical, why can we not integrate the systems better on the literal combo ticket? The home railroad fare + $8 is pretty bullshit now that they expire at 4am every day.

I do the usual heat on medium, put some oil in the pan, turn down to a slightly lower heat so as to not continue heating up for 30s, put ingredients in the pan. That all works great!

It’s typically when I go in for a second or third or fourth “step” where I get things sticking. Anyone have any advice on that? I can’t seem to figure out a sweet spot temperature’s, kinda frustrating

Title sucked, hope it’s not a problem.

https://preview.redd.it/yt32nrxn0och1.png?width=2048&format=png&auto=webp&s=cbf9393359ee97e83f248c310ae26d11bbe9204c

Editorialized title, here's the full thread:

Section 102- Point access blocks. Directs HUD to create a model code for single-stair buildings. This will be very helpful in creating more family-oriented apartments. (see this article of mine from last year on that). 2/10

Section 103- Environmental exception for infill housing. It’s ridiculous that building new housing on already developed land can sometimes trigger special environmental reviews. This fixes that. Sections 206, 501, and 802 make similar additive moves here. 3/10

Section 106- Temperature Sensor Pilot program. It creates a pilot program to study having temp sensors in federally funded housing. The idea being that if taxpayers are funding you, we get to make sure to aren’t roasting tenants in summer or freezing them in winter. 4/10

Section 107 has good provisions on model zoning reform. Similarly, Section 209 has some cool grant stuff around pattern books. Section 210 has pilot funds for turning empty spaces (old warehouses, dead malls, etc.) in housing. 5/10

Section 201- Opportunity Zones. Makes it easier to build housing in places that the government has already put effort into attracting investment and jobs. Section 211 updates FHA loan limits for multifamily housing. 6/10

Section 202 funds deep repairs for low-income homeowners and small-scale landlords. 213 does some great carrot-and-stick work around to tie the CDBG to housing supply growth. Section 504 also does good stuff with CDBG around disaster relief. 7/10

Section 301 repeals the chassis rule. This is going to be big for manufactured housing and is a personal favorite of mine. Section 302 fixes some financing issues around modular housing- that will help too. 8/10

Section 1001- this is the much modified provision around institutional investors. Thankfully, it’s much, much better than what was being proposed a few months ago. Build-to-rent is safe with this. 9/10

This is the most consequential federal housing legislation in decades. It’s got reforms to single-stair buildings, NEPA, chassis rule repeal, USDA rural housing, FHA loan limits, CDBG, and all kinds of other stuff.
In other words.....LFG! Time to build some housing. 10/10

Zeteo (left-wing online magazine) partnered with Searchlight (liberal-centrist think tank) to dig a bit deeper on how Americans feel about some form of national health insurance scheme.

>The survey included multiple descriptions of Medicare for All in an effort to test what parts of the policy most affect its overall support or opposition.

The result?

Support peaks at 52% — but declines to 40% when voters are told a federally administered program would replace private health insurance (including employer-sponsored plans) and be funded through significantly increased federal taxes.

If given the choice to enroll in a federal program, 70% of voters say they would prefer to stay on their current health insurance.

They also kinda touched on the M4A vs. Public Option when breaking out the respondents into groups:

>20. Would you support or oppose the U.S. creating a comprehensive national, government- administered health insurance plan – something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get – that every American has the choice to enroll in? Americans who chose to enroll would receive comprehensive insurance, and the program would be funded through increased federal taxes combined with monthly payments from those enrolled.

>Total Support

>Total Oppose

>Net Total Support

>48%

>21%

>28%

>21. Would you support or oppose the U.S. automatically enrolling every American in a comprehensive government-administered health insurance plan – something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get?

>Total Support

>Total Oppose

>Net Total Support

>52%

>19%

>33%

>22. Would you support or oppose the US creating a single, federally administered health insurance program covering all Americans that would replace private health insurance, including employer-sponsored plans? All Americans would receive comprehensive insurance with no premiums, deductibles, or copayments, and the program would be funded through significantly increased federal taxes.

>Total Support

>Total Oppose

>Net Total Support

>40%

>29%

>11%

Paywalled, but the actual study is open to review: https://www.searchlightinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/EMBARGOED-Zeteo-x-Searchlight-Health-Care-Wording-Test-Survey-1.pdf

https://preview.redd.it/o8yx0fk7yebh1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=4beae274c60d27e89ae800873df6d5c44157d21d

https://preview.redd.it/fxn97z55vbbh1.png?width=1170&format=png&auto=webp&s=557d93f585a22334e4fa2dfe309cfb61db37fdef