Fuck, I'm a Millennial, and I'll never forget this. And my Gen Z kids are also pissed even though we are fortunate enough to be able to pay for their college. This family is never voting red.
Yeah between this, abortion rights, and the affirmative action thing... it's gonna be a rough next few years, but in the long term the Republicans are toast. I think what we're experiencing now are their last spasms for power because they know they're on the way out.
Just look up the amount of registered democrats vs. registered republicans in this country. IIRC there's like half again as many democrats.
It's almost like the only reason republicans ever win elections right now is due to is voter suppression.
I hope all americans pay attention. This was struck down due to the way it was implemented (under the "heroes act" as an "emergency) which reflects how broken the US political system is.
While the court is conservative this probably better reflects how broken the system is in Washington. It's arguable whether this is the courts fault or the dems for using something they knew might be struck down. The initial picture of this just being the courts fault is probably too simple - it is better seen through the prism of next year's elections and both sides posturing and scoring points.
It's helpful to the dems to have another unpopular court decision, but it's up for debate whether this is straight forward conservative court blocking the dems or the dems knowingly pushing something that would get struck down to help drive outrage, it a bit of both with the dems taking a gamble knowing they win either way. None of the scenarios reflects well on US democracy.
It's helpful to the dems to have another unpopular court decision, but it's up for debate whether this is straight forward conservative court blocking the dems or the dems knowingly pushing something that would get struck down to help drive outrage
It's a great lesson in how important elections are. Trump was able to appoint multiple supreme court justices which have shaped the future of America for years due to their most recent decisions and will continue to shape it for decades after he is gone.
It's a great reminder why first-past-the-post needs to go. Who's going to step up for the Dems this year? Are we really counting on an anemic Biden to carry the party against an energized right? Or will someone step up to the plate only to be reprimanded as a "spoiler"?
We need actual competition in the political space. If incumbent cronyism could be effectively challenged we'd have politicians who care a bit more about representing and a bit less about political capital.
yeah, i'm glad that there wasn't anything that could of been done under Obama...oh wait (yes it was a multi factor fuck up, but all the fuck ups were from people who were supposed to be "on our side" trying to claim power just a little longer and fucking miss me with the hand waving of there was nothing that could be done! there was!) Voting is important yes but can we stop pretending it's a fucking magic bullet? Cause it's not. Its one tiny itty bitty thing that needs to be done. Hell voting doesn't even work if you don't have any of the other stuff surrounding it. People need to get organized both at home and at work and get ready to take the fight to them through unions and strikes at the very least.
i'm so fucking sick of the answer to all of this is "go vote" when there is much more than just that needing to be done. Don't just vote, go get fucking organized with community, and fucking fight.
Don't just vote, go get fucking organized with community, and fucking fight.
And do what exactly? Hold a sign on a sidewalk and yell? It all revolves around voting. If your actions don't end up changing votes, then it's literally pointless.
"Getting organized with your community" could mean things like volunteering to help register voters, giving people rides to polling sites, resisting voter suppression, etc. It could also mean things like setting up group panel discussions to help regular people articulate their needs to elected representatives, or organizing fundraisers for political candidates.
In my opinion these types of activist work have potential to be more helpful than just encouraging to people to vote in an abstract sense.
You can even sometimes organize groups of people to solve problems directly on their own. In a town I used to live in, people got sick of waiting on the government to provide better clinics, so they started a free clinic with donated money and labor. Later, they were easily able to secure government grants once it was operating. No voting, signs, or yelling required (I believe they did have a few benefit concerts). It was a win for the community, who got a free clinic, and a win for the local government, who got a longstanding problem off their plate with essentially no effort on their part, just a little ongoing funding.
Doing the work of calling people up & coordinating getting them to come to events (like, say, polling sites, or city council meetings, or benefit concerts) is basically 90% of what "political organizing" is.
I want to copy this to use in other threads. This perfectly captures out tired of this argument I am. Also when try to blame people rather than the candidate, when they lose an election.
Voting is the BARE MINIMUM required of a citizen living in a democratic society. You use all tools available to ensure a difficult job is done efficiently and effectively.
At scale, thinking that any problem cannot be solved via a single-facet solution is so myopic that I can barely contain my anger when I encounter it.
Couple that with a lack of understanding that nothing is instant, and everything requires participation in a democracy - and it becomes nearly impossible.
It’s a vote saying that nobody was able to excite them enough to get out and do something.
Everybody looks at those voters and assumes that they are votes that they would get, but a lot of them are swing voters. People unexpectedly coming out led Barack Obama to a huge win in 2008, but on the other hand people unexpectedly coming out also led to a Donald Trump win in 2016. For the ladder to be possible, there are a number of areas that went blue in 2008 that decided to go red in 2016, and perhaps decided to go Blue again in 2020.
All this being the case, that makes it the candidate’s job to get people to want to vote, and for them.
I think a big problem right now is that you have two options, and both of them are kind of shit. You hear this from a lot of allegedly right-wing commentators who call it the uniparty – neoliberals and neo conservatives working together to enrich their corporate backers to the detriment of the common Man. Every time that any president, whether it be Barack Obama or Donald Trump or Joe Biden goes up there and tells the American people that they are better off than they were four years ago when they’re objectively not, especially once it happens a few times you get a Halo voter.
Yeah, Democrats lost a Supreme Court seat because one old lady refused to retire and they lost out on months of judicial confirmations this year because a different old lady refused to retire.
(if the Republicans take the Senate in 2024 I hope it's by a narrow enough margin that they have to worry about 90-year-old Chuck Grassley the same way we've had to worry about Feinstein)
Still can, we just have to avoid giving Republicans a window of Senate + WH control in which to replace Alito or Thomas. (and even if we only get one of them we get another crack at it a few years later with Roberts)
Thomas is 75, fat, and I assume he's not doing daily yoga, abstaining from alcohol, and following a strict vegan diet on all of these rich-guy junkets he goes on. Alito is 73 and likewise. Pure evil can get you an awfully long way - c.f. Henry Kissinger - but even so, the odds of either of them lasting much more than another decade are pretty slim.
That whole situation still makes me so mad. That turtle bastard refused to even hold hearings for Merrick Garland for 9 months because it was an election year, and then four years later held hearings voted on and seated Barrett after the election had started.
We should absolutely have a liberal 5-4 majority. Instead we live in a conservative 6-3 dystopia, with Republicans openly planning on denying any results they disagree with and installing whatever fucking president they want.
For all we know that one person could have convinced another to vote in favour of debt relief. Or perhaps when it became clear the vote was standing 5-4 it would make one of those five decide it's not clear enough and switch their vote because there wasn't a strong enough majority to block the executive branch.
Or perhaps if it was blocked at 5-4 it would give more options for result to be challenged or appealed.
Lots of things might be different if politicians who say they are for the people actually act in the best interests of the people, even if that means they retire.
Let's not pretend that he conservative justices didn't already know how they were going to rule on this. They just needed to do a little parallel construction before issuing their opinion.
Re: Feinstein, my understanding of why they've kept he is that, with her, the Dems have a one-seat majority on the Judicial Committee. The moment she resigns, it's an even split. Customarily, the Senate would promptly appoint a replacement and all would be well. However, that vote would be subject to the filibuster, and the Dems don't trust McConnell to not block it. If McConnell does block a replacement, then the Judicial Committee stays split and appointing any judges becomes completely impossible.
They'd rather deal with Feinstein's limited availability rather than take the gamble that they'd be allowed to fill a replacement. I agree that she should absolutely retire, but there are political games that have to be considered when the stakes are this high.
Because Republicans would rather break the system than allow it to work as intended. Because they know that's the only way they can ever have an advantage.
You know how everyone knows you're supposed to brush your teeth twice a day for 2 minutes, AND FLOSS? If we all did that on the regular, dentist appointments would be quick and painless the vast majority of the time.
Instead, we've got people who barely brush, never floss, avoid the dentist and then hate the dentist for giving them pain and grief when they finally get around to it.
Voting is like that. No one would have to harp on everyone to go vote if everyone did it, and frankly if everyone voted according to their own actual interests and benefits, we wouldn't be IN this mess to begin with.
It's not that it's a magic bullet, and I don't think anyone is pretending it is. It's that not enough people ARE voting, and it's the single best way we have to make a large step in the right direction.
If we all voted blue every election, without fail, eventually we start to see the impact of avoiding the GOP regressions. Eventually we gain momentum.
Vote AND organize. But if you can't even be arsed to vote, what makes you think you'll be willing to do the vastly more intensive actions involved in an active fight?
Do the bare minimum ffs. If you (global you) don't vote, miss me with the bullshit angst and wimpy call to actions no one will take. It's just as much a hand waving whether it's a fist, a middle finger, or a dismissal if it's not engaged otherwise. We need to use ALL the tools we have against oppression.
It's especially galling being repeatedly told to vote when the dems refuse to actually fucking fight. They made nowhere near the amount of effort to block Trump appointees that republicans made to stop Obama appointees and no amount of "high road" moral victories will outweigh the effect of having a far right leaning supreme court for a generation
Taxpayers spent over $1 Trillion on the PPP program, of which, $200 billion is thought to be fraudulent. Another case of only corporations get socialism in the US.
"They steal so I want to steal too!" You worthless leftists never argue for principles. It always some lame, logically fallacious argument for why something should benefit you directly. Instead of arguing for reigning in corporate power and addressing the root cause of high college tuition you advocate for stealing from other tax payers.
You people deserve to be poor and destitute. Fucking lazy, stupid, unprincipled pieces of shit. I cross my fingers that the vax will eventually cull your herd. Useless eaters.
So you want to steal from other Americans that did not attend college or did attend college but not during the eligible period, because the corporations do it? You people are trash.
If you live in the US you are rich compared to the rest of the world. You are already in the top 90% of global earners. Stfu. Move to a 3rd world country with what you have and live like a king.
And why the hell would we just lay down and accept the fact that our grandparents didn't have student debt because tuition could be paid with a part time job?
Why should we accept that sometimes three incomes isn't enough to support a family when one "unskilled" laborer used to be able to comfortably support a family of five.
Why should we accept the fact that full time at minimum wage can't afford to rent an apartment anywhere in the United States?
Why should we accept that people would rather kill themselves than saddling their family with medical debt.
Why should we accept that people are forced to dangerously ration a drug that costs $10 to produce but costs hundreds of dollars at the pharmacy, with insurance?
Why the fuck would another country having things worse mean we should stop fighting for better?
our grandparents didn't have student debt because tuition could be paid with a part time job
If a thing costs $10, and the government offers to pay $5 of it without any further action, the price of the thing rises to $15. Government money without restrictions is a big part of why tuition costs so much.
sometimes three incomes isn't enough to support a family when one "unskilled" laborer used to be able to comfortably support a family of five.
Why should we accept the fact that full time at minimum wage can't afford to rent an apartment anywhere in the United States?
Tax money that goes to loan forgiveness for upple middle income people is tax money that can't be spent on decreasing the wealth gap, and in fact will help solidify the wealth gap for anyone not fortunate enough to have a college degree (ie the vast majority of poor people).
Why should we accept that people would rather kill themselves than saddling their family with medical debt.
Why should we accept that people are forced to dangerously ration a drug that costs $10 to produce but costs hundreds of dollars at the pharmacy, with insurance?
Debt forgiveness increases the cost of things. What we need is to attack the roots of the problem - the cost. Don't give people government money to repay private businesses for their ridiculous costs. Use government money to bring the cost down.
California is developing its own generic insulin that it will sell at cost. This will force companies to lower their prices. THAT is how to attack the problem.
That's not even all of the fraud, that's just the really obvious stuff - overseas scam artists inventing fake companies. Rich members of Congress getting PPP loans for their "businesses" and using the money to buy yachts doesn't seem to be counted.
So now they want to legislate what kind of stickers private business owners can put in their shop windows? Wow, I’ll remember that the next time republicans start whining about government overreach and calling everyone snowflakes.
Don’t just talk about it next time the topic of government overreach comes up, get angry about it. If you’re talking to someone you know, make them feel stupid for supporting a party that’s afraid of stickers.
I would love to rub the average republican’s face in this sort of hypocrisy, but they don’t care. You can’t play chess against someone playing calvinball.
Nothing matters to them except power. No reasoned arguments. No past events, statements, or beliefs. Only power.
They’re an existential threat and we should treat them as such.
I’m so sick of people somehow believing that being polite to bigots will magically change them. Punching them in the face and socially excluding them changes them
Socially excluding them could have the opposite effect. Suddenly everyone they surround themselves with is also making jokes disparaging trans people and supporting their suspicions that masks are the mark of the beast and that vaccines will give you blood clots and kill you.
Whoa, finally one thing I miss from Reddit. Those grammar correction bots were so nice to see in the wild. Unironic big up for doing it manually, though
She uses words like "microaggression" repeatedly, so she's practiced at finding offense where there isn't any.
She's American, so she's ignorant of foreign cultures and believes hers is superior. Anyone who doesn't conform is an "ist".
Her German is weak. Many Germans do not speak English. She complains about having to take lessons.
She moved to a small town and complained about small town problems. In small towns, people speak even less English, and are even less used to foreigners. Public transport is less accessible.
I mean, yeah, Germany is certainly not the most welcoming country in the world, but wtf is she on about?
She literally complains about earning US$ from "freelance marketing gigs" (lol, is that code for "tiktok"?) and having to pay the exchange rate? I didn't realize US$ was the official currency in South Korea? Also gas is expensive, yes, but last time I checked it's basically impossible to buy something like a 50 mpg VW Golf in the US, so... (I suspect they're driving a RAM2500 and wonder why nobody likes them, lol)
"We live in a small German town called Otterberg because of my husband's job" vs "Also, we can't afford to live in a city like Berlin or Frankfurt, which have more young people and other expats." – What is it now?
I'm really looking forward to Stephanie's report from Bumfucknowhere, Ohio, because I seriously doubt they can afford to live in SF or NY either.
For real. I went to Frankfurt am Main a few years ago and it was wonderful. The people were incredibly nice and were very patient as I stumbled my way through broken German and more often than not switched to English.
I get it can be a culture shock to live in a new country where you're not a native speaker and where customs are different, but you can't expect everyone to cater to you.
Yup, the title of the article is incredibly misleading. She didn't move to "Germany", she moved from a big city to a small town that happened to be in Germany, then got surprised that it felt insular, like the vast majority of small towns in the world. You could move from a big city in the US to a small town in the US and have exactly the same experience.
Yeah, how would she react in a rural part of SK? She was probably staying in Seoul or Busan, of course a small German town would feel quaint in comparison!
She also complains about lessons being expensive, because she probably chose to go the Goethe institut route. But IRC you can get lessons for much cheaper or even a free vocational course at a Fachhochschule - although I suspect she's not elligible for that, because her husband earns too much.
Of course, that would mean mingling with immigrants and muslims. Let's be honest, that's almost certainly one of the reasons she chose to go the more expensive route. This woman gives off "I'm an expat, not an immigrant" Karen vibes.
The best thing is where she claims "state-sponsored integration programs offer language classes for free" in South Korea and the link goes to a page only listing youtube videos, duolingo, and books, udemy courses, etc. that are certainly not free.
Why does every new ev for the US have to be mega deluxe luxury SUV? No one in the US is buying your affordable EV because you only sell them in Europe!
I went for a hoon in a BYD the other day, it was awesome fun. Not the dolphin, the other A*.* one that’s everywhere.
I believe they’re a cheap EV but it has all the bells and whistles, goes like the clappers, can do cool stuff like start the AC remotely so by the time you walk from work to your carpark it’s nice and comfortable, gets 450ish on a charge and can be topped up overnight on a standard power point for most people’s commute.
I’m so keen to own an EV, all I need is a justification… Right now I have a work vehicle that carries a tonne (literally) at all times which makes an EV less appealing.
There’s no margins there. Just like in real estate, the best margins are at the high end. They won’t make affordable cars while they can make more money on expensive ones.
Yeah, a surprising number of people don’t want these hyper complex cars with thousands of microchips and millions of lines of code operating them. Give me an electric 2012 Honda fit/Toyota matrix equivalent that just fucking works and costs $20k or less new.
It’s the batteries. They are the biggest cost in an EV. The margins on such a car would be too low. Even the new Volvo XC30 is 35k plus which is one of the cheapest and most barebones EV.
Good luck finding enough batteries for that many cars. That’s the entire problem right now. They can’t scale the production to the point that will make the production of econobox EVs reasonably profitable. Because the worldwide production capacity of lithium batteries is lagging behind the demand right now. Also why the cost of the batteries are high.
Yeah, I don’t care about color changing LEDs in the trim or talking computers, just give me a cheap android-auto-compatible head unit (replaceable please, none of that integrated bullshit), a cheap instrument cluster and a real handbrake.
I’m just refusing to buy a car newer than 2008. Really an arbitrary cutoff, but that seems to be about when every car started to get as many electronics into them as possible.
An EV at that price was always unrealistic the battery is 75% that cost. But an ICE under 20 is easy. People just want nicer shit when they see the vehicles or have to head to Mitsubishi.
Everyone’s super obsessed with 300-400 mi ranges though. 100mi would be totally fine for most people and would require a small fraction of the battery (bigger batteries give decreasing returns)
Until it’s not, and then it’s an expensive pain. I travel 500 + 700 miles three times a year and renting a car for a week isn’t viable. There are enough edge cases just like that for most people.
Nobody wants to stop for 25 minutes (if you are lucky and don’t have to wait in queue) on their longer trips.
The actual solution you agree looking for is PHEV. That’s the middle ground that’s perfect for most individuals.
The phev f150 is the most functional auto/tool for travel and work I’ve ever seen.
Electric cars make zero sense for the less well off. No one wants to go and sit some where for 45 minutes for 80% of a charge when they can go tonangas station and fully gas up a car in less than Five minutes. Also that is if there isn’t a line to one of the few public charging. Imagine working a shit job for 40k a year and then having to go and sit and wait for wven an hour to get to charge your car that then takes an hour to charge it self
Imagine working 40 hours a week and having to breathe gas fumes while you bike to work because your homeowners insurance doubled and now you can’t afford your ICE car.
No one thinks the transition to electric will be fun but it’s necessary because we waited 30 years to even acknowledge climate change. If you want to drive an ICE, you should have to pay for the destruction you’re causing so we can subsidize public transport. But failing that, EVs are the bare minimum.
I guess you are walking around with your phone until it dies, charge it for 5mins and then repeat? … or do you just plug it in over night or when you are not using it? That’s really not a good point you are bringing up here. You could critisize, that there are only few public charging stations (with user friendly terms) or what the comment you answered to is critisizing or even that there are so few alternatives for (really) climate friendly transport, but your point is just ‘what if I am not able to think at all??’
If you own your own home with off street parking, this is established and known technology. Still kind of expensive, but for example, I just got a new circuit for a charger, for less than a new circuit for an induction range.
The place we need to put the most effort into is rental places or HOAs with off street parking. We have the technology, we know how to do it, but there’s a mismatch between who pays and who benefits. It’s a people problem. If the landlord/HOA pays, how can we help them see the benefit so they’ll be willing to? Eventually this will solve itself when EVs become popular enough that people will be unwilling to rent or live there, but now it’s an obstacle. A purely human obstacle
The less well of typically do bot own thier own homes.
More to the point people who rent in apartment complexes or own condos can’t just have a new breaker put in at thier condo or apartment complex. Some places have large parking lots and would require a lot of work to wire all the spaces woth thier own chargers. Also while it’s simple for you to get a 240v breaker put into your electrical box, what about an apartment complex that has a 100 cars ? It can require expensive work to support that much power drain and most people will commute during the day. That means all the load will happen after 6pm and before 9am.
Also in the mean time what do you do of you don’t own your own home? Buy an ev and hope the complex you are renting at will put in a charger or two ? What about all the hoa fighting adding chargers and so on.
Yes, you are right. It only makes sense if you jave the option to charge at home, at your work or similar. Anyway, I’m happy I don’t have to think about this kind of shit. I get on my bike and just drive, if something is broken, it’s usually a $15 fix I can do by myself in an hour.
Why does every new ev for the US have to be mega deluxe luxury SUV?
Because car manufacturers don't give two shits what people need, nor what's best for the environment, they're in the profit making business, and that's all that matters.
We're at the point now where this shouldn't need to be pointed out, the fact it does goes to show just how successful (from their viewpoint of course) their propaganda is..
Because people are buying all the mid- and high-end EVs. If it's more profitable, there's some sense to it until that saturates (although it sounds like that's finally happening maybe)
GM tried real hard for the lower-end. And cars like the Bolt EUV ended up actually really good especially for the price. Then they cancelled it because they just weren't making enough money or volume or scaling like they wanted.
And at the moment ALL the carmakers have gone kinda nuts with pricing. And sales are still super strong overall. Just...softening. Apparently especially for EVs.
Also, people are paying way, way too much for cars. It's insane how many people making $60,000 a year or less are buying cars worth almost that much, and taking out these ridiculous loans. I guess the interest rate hikes are putting a little damper on it, but it's been just stupid.
The Bolt EUV is the only reason we have an electric car now (personally, I would have gotten the smaller and cheaper Bolt but it was a family decision to go with the EUV). It was reasonable for what you get. The only downside is the slower charging compared to other EVs but I don’t plan on taking it for longer trips. We have an ICE for that.
I currently lease a 2 years old Renault Zoe (very compact car) for 200€ a month (0€ upfront). It was a special deal in Germany for a few months. I charge at home with solar panels and rarely drive more than the 300-350km range.
It honestly feels like the holy grail of electro mobility.
And if you had an ICE car you would be spending around that 200 just on fuel, as it is with both my kids and their baby EVs, its like having a free car.
Doubt they care. They do anything to uphold a two party system where they can raise campaign contributions from the same corporate interests that also contribute to radical regressives, while at the same time being able to hold some offices solely by being the marginally less shitty party (at least publicly). Ranked choice makes a third party a viable option and the Democrats as a political party with no real stances doesn’t make sense in the world where they aren’t the sole alternative.
they always have, if we’re honest. Corpo Dems think the working class needs shepherding. they like to pretend they’re benevolent while their benefactors fuck us slowly. They’re benevolence is only incomparison to the party of “Saying the Quiet Part out Loud”.
No, this isn’t a both-sides argument. This is a “just because one side is objectively worse doesn’t mean the Corpo Dems don’t also really suck.” argument.
Liberals have always and will always be the natural enemy of the Left and the working class. That’s been true for almost 400 years and it isn’t changing now.
1.
willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas.
(in a political context) favoring policies that are socially progressive and promote social welfare.
h
Similar:
progressive
forward-looking
forward-thinking
progressivist
go-ahead
enlightened
reformist
radical
freethinking
left-wing
leftist
politically correct
PC
woke
right-on
h
Opposite:
conservative
reactionary
Theology
regarding many traditional beliefs as dispensable, invalidated by modern thought, or liable to change.
relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.
1.
a supporter of policies that are socially progressive and promote social welfare.
"she dissented from the decision, joined by the court's liberals"
2.
a supporter of a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.
Typical gaslighting liberal nonsense. Keep trying to tell us that corporations don’t come first to the Democrats. It’s blatant bullshit and every ordinary person knows it.
"Leftists" as you like to call them don't exist in the US. Leftists in the US are Democrats aka neolibs. Literally the left wing of Congress. The leftists you're thinking of are a rounding error, they effectively don't exist.
But in any case what few leftists there are in the US are working with the neolibs against the regressive neocon fascist bastards trying to take over our country. Fascists are the natural enemy of the working class, and anyone with a brain. Picking libs over fascists is such an obvious take anyone arguing differently is a moron or a boot licker.
They didn’t even mention anyone not being able to vote because of race. They mentioned in court that certain areas that happen to have older voters, poorer voters, and black voters could be potentially undermined by ranked choice. And it’s proven to be true. As shown in previous elections time and time again. It is called undervoting.
All I had to do was read the article to not come to the same conclusion as half the people in this thread. Community fail. This thread proves some people can’t be bothered to read. And that’s what the argument made in court was about - confusion.
You didn’t read the article. I did. You also apparently didn’t read the TLDR bullet points. I did. Let me get the excerpts for you:
They argued in a lawsuit that low-income and Black voters would be confused by the system.
In a lawsuit filed earlier this month seeking to block ranked choice voting in Washington, DC, the local Democratic Party argued that implementing the system would be particularly confusing for voters in predominantly Black areas.
The lawsuit notes that in elections for at-large seats on the DC city council — where voters can currently choose two candidates — voters in Wards 7 and 8 are less likely to cast a second vote, a phenomenon known as “undervoting.” “Many of those voters report their confusion about selecting more than one candidate for what appears to be the same office,” said Wilson in the lawsuit, arguing that implementing ranked-choice voting “would introduce an additional layer of confusion to the electorate.” // “I have a similar concern for seniors and persons with disabilities,” Wilson added.
They’re explicitly saying these minorities are more likely to be confused.
About your point about “they can’t be racist because they’re black”… yes they absolutely fucking can. There is zero need to call on race here. “Our constituents report confusion leading to under voting” is all that needed to be said. Tying it to race is…. Racist. Tying it to age is ageist.
You can read anything any way you want if you literally rewrite like you just did. That’s a straight up Trump-style move.
They don’t care about disenfranchising anyone and you damn well know it. This is solely about Democrats worrying about competing against independent progressives in DC elections where they stand a very real chance of losing power if the voting system stops favoring them.
They are progressive black local leaders representing their community. Not racists. Not “corpo dems” haha.
And they are saying minorities, the elderly, and the poor are more likely to be undermined because of lack of resources to be made aware of said changes. They did it last year, and many people in those districts didn’t make a second vote. Which means their vote counted less than others.
Under voting isn’t a theory. It’s something that’s demonstrably occurred in these specific districts. They can see how people vote and notice that it is happening.
Saying one demographic is more likely to be left unaware of said changes, after looking at the data, and noting the negative impact, is not the same as saying “black people are stupid.” That’s where your mind went for some odd reason, though.
The local dem chapters in these types of districts aren’t Hilary Clinton, bro. They’re the opposite.
Nice try. You’re disingenuous and desperate AF.
There’s people who hate nuance, and there’s people who have a clear agenda. And they’re typically the same people. And that’s why you jumped straight to the “they’re racist corpos” when it’s objectively the opposite.
Just to be clear: I am generally for ranked choice. And I’m generally for calling out corporate dems. But I’m not cool with disingenuousness, even/especially from people I otherwise stand in agreement with on issues in general.
Calling these particular people racists is exactly what Trumpers would do. Btw. Same shitty playbook.
Lmao. DC Dems are 100% corporate. You act like someone can’t be black and a corporate shill at the same time, which of course is racist.
This is solely about suppressing competition from independents and third party candidates. They’ll use any argument they can to maintain the monopoly on power they have in DC. You’re falling for it.
Saying one demographic is more likely to be left unaware of said changes, after looking at the data, and noting the negative impact, is not the same as saying “black people are stupid.” That’s where your mind went for some odd reason, though.
except that they didn’t need to tie it to race at all. you’re right. they have polling data. “These wards were severely undervoting in the last election because of a lack of awareness; ranked choice disenfranchises our constituents” is really all that needed to be said. Unless you think race is actually the contributing factor and not - just here me out here- adequate resrouces spent on awareness campaigns in those wards prior to the vote and in the polling stations day of.
But awareness campaigns and extra pollworkers to make things go smoothly… don’t help keep status quo with democrats and republicans sharing power by agreement because ranked choice (among other reforms,) absolutely would weaken their power. as out outsider looking in and only knowing this… they really don’t seem all that progressive, here.
Nice try. You’re disingenuous and desperate AF. There’s people who hate nuance, and there’s people who have a clear agenda. And they’re typically the same people. And that’s why you jumped straight to the “they’re racist corpos” when it’s objectively the opposite.
You’re missing my point. People who tend to miss points tend to be… well just read you’re own quote back.
I do appologize for the assumptions. being anti-rank-choice tends to be a corpo-dem position; not a progressive one. Because it makes… you know… progressives… easier to elect. (more broadly, 3rd party.)
once again. the point is there’s zero need at all to tie this to racism, which they very much did. IMO, “its confusing” is not a valid argument for not doing something new. people can learn and get through it- particularly with help. “its confusing” is a very good argument for taking steps to clear up the confusion. which of these two options do you think supports their constituents better?
That’s the argument they’re trying for in court, which is not the same as what they think. The reality is much more mundane. Probably more frustrating too.
Ranked choice voting makes it easier for incumbents to lose. It makes it harder (but still… not actually difficult) for retiring office holder to coronate their hand-picked successor. That’s all this comes down to. Especially in a place like DC that votes for a single party by such wide margins. Places that lopsided, in a FPTP primary system, once elected a politician is all but incapable of losing. Even to horrible, horrible scandal.
Ranked choice threatens that. If DC switched to it overnight, >90% of the incumbents would win reelection trivially. In fact I’d be surprised if any of them that ran again lost. But they don’t like that it goes from just short of a guarantee, to still really highly certain.
Did you just say fuckin nepotism? Yeah I’m turning off the PS5 and turning on the rain sounds. And you’re right, the reason you provided is just as frustrating. It’s less demeaning than their court argument.
And they’ll still overpay themselves while making consumers and lower employees suffer. Consumers get shittier service and employees get shitty pay, longer hours, more demands…If they don’t get laid off.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for anything to catch up to the 1%. To be honest, I don’t know the average person even really want it to. I mean, suppose I use Uber. Am I really going to be out there writing letters to my congresscritter pressuring them to force Uber to stop selling their product below cost and consequently make my Uber rides significantly more expensive? “Oh man, I sure wish Amazon would stop selling me such cheap products with next day shipping. This problem needs to be fixed, they’re hurting the free market!”
Eventually the frog might get boiled, but that’s some time in the future. The frog is feeling comfy now.
That’s sad. I couldn’t imagine bragging to the world about how I have no moral spine and will suck off whichever slaver gives me the comfiest servants’ quarters, at least not without turning it into a parable about how I got disillusioned
I couldn’t imagine bragging to the world about how I have no moral spine and will suck off
You realize I’m speaking generally, right?
In fact, I’ve never once used Uber or Lyft in my entire life. My point is that the average person isn’t going to push for something that has a tangible negative effect right now to possible make things better in the murky future.
Now I could say: Well, the rabble sucks but I on the other hand am a cut above the rest. I’m one of the few who is willing to make the tough choices and endure whatever sacrifices are necessary to Do What’s Right. But hey, talk is cheap so what’s the point really? I guess if I’d added a bit about how special and great I am (it’s true!) I might have avoided having my fellating skills become part of the discussion.
The point of it is ro share your experience and show it can be done to the “rabble” who would otherwise go “welp, it sure sucks… but what you gonna do?”
The point of it is ro share your experience and show it can be done to the “rabble”
There’s nothing to figure out in the “how” part though. It’s just a question of the person having the motivation to make personal sacrifices with tangible effects in the present for a less tangible benefit in the future.
Saying how I’d be the exception in this case seems more like boasting than really doing something constructive. That’s not my style.
I wonder when buying these 3rd party apps as acquisitions, if Reddit brought along their dev(s) in the process. It sounds like they didn't, which would be so shortsighted. Because what it seems is that once Reddit had these programs in their possession, they didn't know what to do with them, or how to integrate them into their own source code...at least with Spell this seems to be the case. I have no idea about Alien Blue, which I had used at one point prior to using Reddit's own mobile app. All they had to do with Alien Blue is rebrand...why didn't they?
How do you employ nearly 2,000 people. an army of unpaid moderators, and not come up with proper tools to navigate your own program, or find profitability off its user data? I think that Huffman has had no plan, leads a top-heavy organization, has been coasting along the company putting out day-to-day fires, and now he's scrambling to quickly find something profitable to show his investors.
There are a lot of things that don't make sense at the core of Reddit, because Google, Chat AI, and ad revenue are the places to make a profit...not API usage from 3rd party apps. I watched a really great video of the history of D&D last night on Nebula, and wow talk about lessons that Reddit could learn about 3rd party contributors.
(I'm going to link the video, but you need a subscription to Nebula and/or Curiosity Stream to view it). TL;DW summary: D&D works best as a business when it collaborates with 3rd party contributors and its fans.
Look, my ONLY goal is to have D’s in leadership because the alternative ushers in a totalitarian fascist hellscape russian client state. If Brandon fucks off to the next life while in office, I don’t care. His replacement won’t be a traitor.
No pretty sure that’s what they’re arguing. Same dumbass argument that leftists made in the Weimar Republic. Let the fascists take over and then we’ll win the next one, and then they all were murdered. Idiots. There’s no weedling around fascism. You fight a head-on with no mercy. You don’t try to work around it, you don’t try to outlast it, you don’t try to use it. You murder it. That’s what they deserve and that’s the only way to fight them.
I voted for Bernie in the primaries in 2016, then for Hillary when Bernie lost the primary. If Hillary was president when we replaced 3 Supreme Court justices, we would still have choice for abortion and student loan forgiveness.
Don't vote for Republicans, they don't care about women's rights, minorities, LGBTQ rights, worker rights, non Christians, and our democracy.
Too many people fffked up that decision and voted for the guy with the misogyny, racism and entitlement because his name was slathered on watches and ties.
But like so much else these days, these giving opportunities have become controversial, in part because some critics insist retailers are taking a tax benefit for their customers’ donations.
The store serves only as a collection agent for your gift. Assuming the business is following the law, it will not include your donation as part of its business receipts, or income, nor will it claim the charitable gift as an expense.
As a customer, the donation will appear on your receipt and you can claim it as a charitable deduction when you file your income tax return.
tl;dr:You are still the one making the donation and eligible for the charitable deduction, not the business through which you donated. Businesses like it because they can say things like "Walmart facilitated donations of $n to agreeable charity in 2023." It's a company exploiting your generosity for good press, not for a tax scam.
There was a case in which a company used the donation to fulfil its legal obligation - used the money from customers to give money the company was required to do due to a settlement. So it is a scam.
This is one of the most infuriating misconceptions, and it can be corrected with some simple research. Yet people continue to parrot this basic falsehood because "corpo bad".
Depending on what store is asking for donations, the charity might be run by friends and family of the executives or board of directors of that store.
The charity will then spend an awful lot on compensation to the people running it. The absolute worst offender in the space was Susan G Koman. (since fixed)
The point being, there are some charities that are better than others, it's often best to donate to them directly instead of going through a third party.
This is one of those things that people repeat without checking because it agrees with their worldview. I have to admit that the first time I heard it I didn't check it myself, although I didn't repeat it to anyone else before I saw it debunked elsewhere and confirmed they were correct. Sometimes we need to remind ourselves to be better.
Even worse, during the Great Resignation, employers effectively penalized employees for their loyalty, offering sky-high salaries to attract job candidates while neglecting their existing staff. As I reported in 2022, veteran employees received salaries that were 7% lower, on average, than new hires.
The biggest raise I've ever gotten in my 20 year career was 10%. The smallest increase in salary from switching jobs was 20%, and that's an outlier. Staying in one job just isn't worth it anymore.
His boss apologized, telling him that the layoffs had nothing to do with him. It was just business.
And there's the problem. Employers are businesses, and no matter how loyal your boss is to you and vice versa, some beancounter will axe your job without a second thought. "Just business" is anathema to loyalty.
businessinsider.com
Hot