Never mind that the whole point of a provisional ballot is "I don't know if this vote is valid, but here it is just in case it is valid"
I feel like casting a provisional ballot should protect you in cases like hers, not condemn you!
Never mind that the whole point of a provisional ballot is "I don't know if this vote is valid, but here it is just in case it is valid"
I feel like casting a provisional ballot should protect you in cases like hers, not condemn you!
Can't be prosecuted unless Congress acts first? Detain Congress before they can act. Easy peasy, dictator for life.
It's not about nuance. It's about deal breakers. For some people, a deal breaker might be something like poor hygiene. For other people, it might be voting for or otherwise supporting politicians who belong to a party that's actively trying to curtail human rights for anybody who isn't a white cishet man.
That you or anybody else would find the first example acceptable, but not the second, is ridiculous.
My parents were just telling me about a friend of theirs who moved back to Ohio... fucking Ohio... after discovering that retirement in Florida was terrible.
Yeah it must be pretty bad if Ohio and Kansas are looking better.
Democrats are not "so called progressives".
Some progressives are Democrats, but not all Democrats are progressives. Most Democrats are not progressives, in fact. Things make a little more sense once you accept that.
But only a little.
There's the thing about "'Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." But then there's it's corollary "any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
I'm other words, Molyneux should know better by now, and the fact that he clearly doesn't can only come from a willful refusal to.
they aren't
You just haven't seen it yet. Try coming out to them as trans, see how that goes for you.
Yup, it's taxpayer money.
The logic is that shit like this will cause voters to demand change and vote in people who will make sure stuff like this doesn't happen again. But the reality is that most voters simply don't care, and there's a non-zero number of voters who are unhappy because they want the black man to stay in prison whether he's innocent or not.
Trickle down economics, as a theory, has been around well over 100 years, and it's never been believed in by everybody. Hell, a presidential candidate gave a speech against the idea in 1896
You're correct about misinformation having been around forever, but access to and ease to create misinformation is greater than ever before thanks to the Internet.
I'm a jeweler 🤷🏻♀️
The author assumes the Court doesn't understand the consequences of what it's doing, but I really don't think that's a reasonable assumption. It's entirely possible they know exactly what they're doing.
Because there couldn't be any legitimate reason to do the things they're banning, like cloud seeding, crop dusting, air dropping seeds for reforesting, I dunno, literally releasing anything as you fly over even like CO2 exhaust as mentioned by the other commentor.
Literally all matter is a chemical, chemical compound, or substance. IMO this law is going to be struck down super fast just for being overly broad. Not that that would stop Republicans from passing it and spending millions of dollars in public money defending it in court.
because it will just give his GOP opponent ammo to claim "see he's radical too".
But they already do that, so why care?
Read the WPATH Standards of Care. Decisions are made by the child, with the support and approval of the parents and a team of medical and mental health professionals.
You'll notice that on the list of things that are illegal to discriminate against, everything is either an immutable part of the person (national origin, race, gender) or is something that is unethical to ask a person to change about themselves (religion).
Political beliefs are nowhere on the list, because they're not immutable and it's not unethical to ask somebody to change them.
Discriminating against somebody for their political affiliation or political beliefs is legal and, in some cases, moral/ethical.
(As an aside, this is what makes all the people wanting to discriminate against LGBTQ people on religious grounds so egregious; they always had the right to discriminate against LGBTQ people on political grounds, but that wasn't enough for them. They had to do it "in the name of God.")
"Free speech absolutism (but not if you link to my competitor)" isn't free speech absolutism. It's just another hypocrisy to throw on the pile.
Or, they get more money from Russia.
AFAIK You're thinking "worth" as is "should the people's voices be heard". The other person is thinking "worth" as in "can we trust that the voices being heard are actually the people's voices and not a giant bot farm being used by Meta to skew the results in their favor?"
I think you missed the point where I said "it's not about nuance."
I'm not claiming my examples don't have nuances, I'm claiming that many (most) people have things on which they won't compromise. Standards, if you will. Those standards may have nuance, but they remain uncompromising.
To use your examples, if "not trimming their toenails enough" is a deal breaker for someone, then the nuance of "but they shower ever day" doesn't matter.
Because it's not about nuance. It's about deal breakers.
You had me with the first half ngl
You mean birth rates + immigration > people leaving the state? I'm shocked! Shocked I tell you.
Seriously though, there does need to be an asterisk after "fleeing" that says "if they can afford it" which, let's be honest, excludes most people who want to leave the state.
A lady I know had to divorce her husband after he had a stroke and turned into a raging, abusive narcissist. I can only imagine how confusing and painful it was for her.
I don't follow that particular but if politics very closely, so I'm genuinely asking: is that still the case post-Brexit?
Remember, it isn't that Trump supporters don't know what he's done, it's that they don't care.
Which was always the intent, more or less. It was just kind of a tradition amongst audio engineers to use it once in every film. It had nothing to do with the studios.
These people stopped looking in the mirror a long time ago.
It's not random. Conservatives and religious fundamentalists are dramatically more likely to have children than progressives and other leftists.
The thing is that the study with the mice was seriously flawed. There's been more research since then, which is why we're getting this announcement now (even though the announcement itself is little more than "oh hey there might be something to this? We definitely need more research before we can know for sure.")
"Keep what you earn" is a bullshit concept in the first place. If it was a valid ideology at all, then I should be getting paid 100% of the value that I generate for the company I work for. That's what I earned. But nobody's making that argument because it's plainly farcical. So too is the idea that we should "keep what we earn" when it comes to taxes.
Same in Pittsburgh. The DNC backed the incumbent who was so conservative he ran on the Republican ticket when he was successfully primaried off the Democratic ticket by a progressive. The progressive won the general election too, but the DNC sure want happy about it.
Besides, what better way to say 'I love you' than with the gift of a spatula.
Why not both?
You're painting a false dichotomy. We can take care of all these domestic issues, and we can give foreign aide. It wouldn't even be hard, it would require a small fraction of the military budget or a slight to most increase of taxes on corporations and the ultra rich.
But some people don't want to give money to poor/starving people, regardless of how much it costs. You could end all foreign aide and all the money would just go... somewhere else that isn't poor people's pockets.
We need additional regulation about profit margins and executive compensation, or something along those lines, to prevent cost increases from being passed on to the consumer when it could just as easily come out of the profit margin or executive compensation.
It's a good joke, right?
The only alternative is to use the tools we have: let the free market work, but not at the expense of the employees. This means, yes, wage increase will be passed into the customer, who will reduce how much they use the service (decrease demand), which will either drive down supply to justify higher prices or drive down prices to increase demand again. Either option creates opportunities for competitors to enter the market which also drives down prices.
All that said, let me be clear: I prefer option A over option B, but I'm not getting my hopes up.
You keep mentioning whether it's effective policy, but that has nothing to do with SCOTUS. Their one and only concern is whether the policy is constitutional. Effectiveness is for the other branches of government to deal with.
I think it's worth noting that the primary reason why the ACA left so many people uninsured is because it allowed States to decline the Medicare expansion, and most of the GOP controlled States did. That should never have been possible; single payer/Medicare for all is the only real solution.
And it's that acceleration that's the real problem. If this sort of warming happened over twenty or thirty thousand years, the ecosystem would have a chance to adapt and maybe humanity along with it. A couple hundred years? Nah mate, ecological collapse is going to happen and it'll probably take us with it.
Play with swords.
I do historical reenactment in the SCA and the fencers use actual metal blades to fight. It's HEMA but with fun clothes and a ton of other optional activities like brewing and making our own coins (those are my chosen activities, but a lot of people do costuming, calligraphy, music, apothecary... the list goes on).
It makes my inner child so happy 😊
Congress would impeach Biden SO FAST so he could then be prosecuted.
... Unless Biden also made it impossible for Congress to meet to impeach him. Which is obviously against the Constitution, but there's nothing to be done about it as long as Congress can't impeach him.
Checkmate, fascists.
... wait