I'm splitting hairs here, but there are auto body shops with tow trucks that don't exclusively do roadside assistance and that aren't necessarily unethical.

But yeah, I worked in emergency road service for a very well-known insurer, and even the emergency road service providers are usually unethical assholes. Most were assholes on the phone, would nickel and dime everyone they could for anything they could (and some things they couldn't), wouldn't stick to their ETAs, would drop cars in wrong places, etc.

I still would trust those emergency road service companies over predatory towing companies like Siebert's Towing, or like whatever company it is that OP mentioned.

>Look at Bagby's voting record. It's not particularly outlandish. It's basically exactly the current mainstream of the Democratic party, which in terms of bills that could actually pass is virtually identical to the progressive platform. > >The only thing is that he takes money from big business, which is a cardinal sin for a certain set of progressives but which his constituents mostly don't give a fuck about.

That's . . . That's my point.

Bagby is the kind of guy that is perfectly happy to take corporate money and to vote in ways that don't rock the boat for either his constituents or his corporate sponsors. If he's not making the news, he's happy, because he knows that his constituents will keep voting for him as long as he maintains his "community leader" image. He gets votes by going to community functions and by cozying up to pastors—shit like that. He's not going to introduce bills, because what's the point? His constituents don't notice if he passes bills or not. They don't notice that he takes corporate sponsors, either, or rationalize it as "all politicians do it, but he's our politician."

So you basically end up with a candidate that will vote with Democrats unless it's too progressive or it goes against corporate interests (but specifically the corporate interests of his donors), and who isn't going to introduce any useful legislation.

Bagby appeals to the churchgoing crowd. People whose hearts are in the right place, but have somewhat outdated ideals. Their politics are mostly informed by their church's pastor, their fellow churchgoers, and their family. They value civil rights and they might have a few modern liberal beliefs, like being pro-gun control, but overall, they tend to be more conservative than most Democrats. They would clutch their pearls at the After School Satan Club or marijuana legalization, for example. They are likely to be pro-life. They scare when they hear the word "socialism."

They are also some of the most unfaltering voters. They never, ever fail to show up, and there are a shit ton of them in this district.

Unfortunately, they are not the type to pay very close attention to what bills get introduced, or to have a deep understanding of the intricacies of legislatures.

Didn't mean to give the impression that it was actual criticism. Just having a laugh at the GOP's expense, because fuck 'em.

And yeah, I think it's important to emphasize that while we can joke about it, if we don't show up to vote, we might not be laughing about it anymore.

Huh? I know Bagby's a shoe-in. Where did I ever say otherwise?

I still think that Rodgers gets way too much credit for far too little substance. Everyone (at least in this subreddit) talks about how progressive she supposedly is, but her actual policy positions are far and few between, and the ones that do exist have little depth to them.

She just seems to be Progressive Vibes ™ : The Candidate. At best, she seems incompetent for entering races at a significant disadvantage, as you mention, and for not listing policy positions on her website, like any other damn candidate does.

For the record, I don't think that there was a good candidate in this race. Bagby takes far too much corporate money for my liking. Rodgers was a 'no' from me for the reasons I just described, and Adams is, well, Adams. She had the staffer scandal and, while she's no Bagby, she's taken a few corporate bucks here and there. Ultimately, I was one of the 464 to vote for Adams, but I wasn't particularly happy about it. She also comes across as incompetent, but at least she has tangible policy positions.

I'm really glad that this election is about as low-stakes as it gets since the districts will be redrawn in November, because hoo boy, I think we can do better.

Yeah, I had to drive a little further because of that.

I could walk to IBEW Local 666. I mean, I don't, because crossing East Nine Mile Road there would suck with the lack of sidewalks on the IBEW Local 666 side . . . but I could.

Republican Party of Virginia announces Stephen Imholt as loser for 9th Senate District seat

There's your headline. This district is safely blue (but still show up to vote, folks).

That sounds stupid. If you want to get people to stop electing elderly candidates, then set a maximum age restriction, like the minimum age restrictions we already have on the books. We should never take away people's representation as a half-baked "punishment."

/r/rva is far more representative of people in the city of Richmond proper than anywhere else, from what I've found. A lot of the Rodgers supporters on here probably couldn't vote today because they weren't in the relevant district.

It's special elections all the way down.

(But technically, a challenger could still beat him in the actual election for SD-09. It won't happen, but still.)

IDK, it seems pretty expected to me.

If you look at Bagby's district versus Adams' district versus the district of SD-09 that was up for grabs, you'll see that Adams' barely overlaps it, while Bagby's very much does. Rodgers has some name recognition because of the mayoral race, but so much of the district is outside of Richmond's city limits, where she's more of a no-name.

I would have been surprised to see a close result.

Lamont Bagby – 4,726 (72.43%)

Alexsis E. Rodgers – 1,375 (21.07%)

Dawn Marie Adams – 424 (6.50%)

Just tagging on:

I bought a house in 2021 and realized after purchase that one of my neighbor's dirt "driveways" is made up of approximately one-third to one-half my property.

Haven't been sure what to do about it because I know the risks of adverse possession, but I also don't want to piss them off—they're nice and they park their tow truck there because they can back it out into the T-intersection.

How much would a consultation cost?

EDIT: To be clear, my ideal solution is that they get to keep using it, but without being able to claim adverse possession down the line. Like it really doesn't bother me, but I don't want them to be able to say "this is mine" later. I was hoping I could get them to sign something waiving any future claim to adverse possession or something. IDK, I'm not a lawyer, which is why I've been wanting to talk to one.

They call the store Target because when you shop there, you're a target for MLM grifters.

I can't really speak towards the Laurel area, but have you considered North Chesterfield? Specifically, places between Hull Street Road and Midlothian Turnpike, to the west of Chippenham Parkway?

I used to live over there and I quite liked it. I think you can find a two-bedroom apartment for under $1,500 somewhere in the area.

I moved here in 2019 (from Georgia, not NOVA, and no, not from the Atlanta metro, god damn it) and the best I can gather from this sub is never.

Nobody IRL has ever brought this issue up, though. Then again, though, I've spent most of my time in the surrounding counties—maybe people in the city proper care more.

MILF Island is a state of mind.

I am an ex-automotive claims adjuster and my expert opinion is that that car is totaled.

Hope you're not flying Southwest, OP.

If not, wave to my house when you go over it (assuming you're flying out of RIC).

>Pretty much all astronomical data are freely available and anyone can download them. In the past you had to request observing time to look at some specific targets, but right now there is high probability that what you're interested in is already available in the archives.

Where does one look or what does one search for in order to locate this data?

I'm beginning computer science classes this semester in college and, as my skills increase, this would be fun to play with.

>Of course, my professor was an amazing teacher who had all of his logical proofs prove that Ronald Reagan was a cannibal.

Shit, I'd believe it. /s

That's cool, though. I would take all of the philosophy classes in a perfect world, but I can only really fit one into my degree plan (Computer Science). I figured Logic I would be the best one to take, since it seems like it would be the most applicable in my day-to-day.

I don't really like Wawa—I know, heresy—but I do enjoy their free coffee Tuesdays.

Kinda counting down the days until my college classes pick up again in mid-January. I'm excited for Pre-Calculus II, Statistics I, and Logic I.

lmao

Is that not a HIPAA violation?

Ideas are powerful and spreading the wrong ones can spell trouble down the line.

If there's anything a Donald Trump presidency should have taught us, it's this.