Bill Clinton never debated George W Bush
Bill Clinton never debated George W Bush
What kind of Dem candidate is pro fracking?
One who exists in a fucked up electoral system where the entire fate of our country rests upon a few thousand votes in western PA.
There was a time when it was the coolest snack to have at school in the US. Very popular. And it is still certainly a thing for kids nowadays.
Every single person who grew up in the US in the 80s, for starters.
I love the concept of it, but the thing about the NPVIC is that it’s 0% of the way there until it’s 100% of the way there. So while 77% seems like we’re close, and there is legislation pending that could get us to 95%, the only reason it seems to be going forward steadily is that it does nothing unless you go all the way.
The moment there is the prospect of legislation in a state that would get that last 5%, not only will that legislation be fought tooth and nail, but every state that has already entered the compact will have to fight like hell to keep it in place, not once but constantly forever. Because if you’re just over the threshold then almost any state backing out of the compact will nullify the whole thing again.
It seems too fragile to be a workable solution. But I guess I don’t see anything wrong with trying!
thoughtful people
There’s your problem right there
When I have it integrated into my development environment a la Copilot, predicting the next block of code I’m going to write (which I can use if it is relevant and ignore if not), I find it to be a huge timesaver.
I think you replied to the wrong post
I think the very important point you’re missing is that schools did not exist in fear of school shootings before Columbine. There were no lockdown drills and crazy security measures for entering and leaving the building. So making a big loud noise would not make people instantly think someone was shooting up the school like it very well might today.
“You” and “thou” come from different roots. They are not simply different orthographies like “ye” and “the”.
If “literally” means “figuratively,” then we literally have no word for “literally.”
It’s worth pointing out that you just used the word for “literally” and we knew which sense of the word you meant through context. Just like the verb “dust” can mean to put a layer of small particles on something but can also mean to remove the small particles from something. Humans are able to sort these things out.
However, one of the best things about language is that if a need actually arises for more clarity about “literalness”, a solution will naturally emerge to address it.
Even the word “literal” started out as a word that pertained specifically to the written word, and scholarly things, and its sense evolved to refer to things not necessarily written down, to the present meaning of “the most straightforward interpretation of what I’m saying”. A need arose and a word filled the need.
I’ve always wondered why so many people have this reaction, rather than seeing it as a cool thing that languages can do. Namely, taking bits from other languages and making them into something new.
They aren’t in charge of Congress, who actually makes laws (i.e. the crucial one here) or the Supreme Court (maybe you noticed this at some point?)
It would help if you could give an example of a safeguard or two that is within Biden’s power to put in place. The only actions I can think of (that couldn’t be instantly reversed by a new president) all depend on Congress, which makes them virtually impossible. But maybe there is something I am not thinking of?
shit is not better because Democrats got voted in and we should demand more out of our leaders
You call a Republican majority in the House “Democrats voted in”? Do you call a 50-50 split Senate with Manchin to be “Democrats voted in”? How about we give them enough people in Congress to accomplish big things before throwing up our hands in exasperation that they didn’t accomplish enough. They need enough of a majority in the House and Senate that one or two rogue Democrats trying to make a name for themselves can’t derail anything and everything they want.
Why would someone downvote you. This is 100% true. Congress makes the laws. The president can set the agenda but things can only happen if there are enough people in Congress who will actually vote for it. Since we know 0 Republicans will ever help with anything, that means the Democrats need enough of a majority to overcome the GOP, and enough of a majority that one or two rogue Democrats looking to advance their own profile can’t hold it hostage. We had that for a brief time in the Obama admin and they passed the ACA. During the Biden admin Manchin alone could make a name for himself by blocking anything and everything.
It’s a crappy system where you have to control both houses with some breathing room, and the presidency, to get something done if one party decides to stonewall everything. But that’s the reality. Our system of government has serious problems.
However, assuming that the Democratic presidents are privately glad they can’t do most things they say they want to do, when they are never given the opportunity, and then using that assumption as the basis for cynicism, seems unreasonable. What do you gain by assuming this? Why not work as hard as we can to give them a real actual opportunity, and then see what happens.
It’s like I’m wiping a marker
It’s because the two-party system is a systemic problem. Our winner-take-all voting system always punishes similar candidates, so if similar groups don’t form a coalition and choose a single candidate to run for them, they will cannibalize each other and surely lose. So, you inevitably end up with two parties each representing all the factions on one side of the spectrum.
As a result, anybody on the national level who decides to run as a third party candidate (a) doesn’t understand our voting system, (b) is just doing it for the publicity, or © is out of their mind.
If we had a different voting system that did not punish similar candidates (like ranked choice), not only would quality third parties be possible, they would be inevitable.
It is genuinely amazing. I have watched it multiple times since I first saw it! It feels like something that would be funny but should get old after a few minutes, and yet it never does.
The whole talk appears to be done in one continuous take!