I actually think a core part of being republican has to do with hating someone and feeling superior to them. It can revolve around sex, education, accent, culture, religion, sexual orientation, government structure, or skin color, but they have to hate on someone. You can plot the generations of conservatives by who they (primarily) hate at any given time.
They have to wrap themselves in their hate-blanket and fantasize about how they’ll have their AR-15 locked and loaded when the baddies come around. First they need to be scared, so they make up stories and lies about how “the other” corrupted their children, stole their jobs, took the government assistance, or performed DDOS on their interview, and then talk with friends or family on how evil the other is. Then they get great pleasure in having a big hate-orgy and trying hard to “trigger a liberal” spewing their made up hysterical bullshit.
A short list who’s-who hate list for conservatives: communists, socialists, civil rights activists, labor unions, abortion rights people and doctors, environmentalists, academics, immigrants, “the gays” (all LGBTQ+ individuals), muslims, transgender people, “mainstream media”. They’ve got to hate someone.
It’s why I don’t think humanity will ever get along unless an external, immediate threat unites us. Aliens or something.
What like a foreign dictatorship meddling in your democratic process? Or maybe that’s not existential enough - what about an urgent planetary climate crisis caused by a greedy minority trying to steal or planet’s limited resources to turn into useless stock?
Hmm, probably, but I feel like humanity would largely come together, or split into two camps.
I would envision either “everyone against the demons”, and the few who are with them are a small, covert minority, kind of like criminals, or humanity splitting into two camps, which would still be division, but arguably less divided than how we currently are.
To this point, how could we increase the number of people who take the side of humanity?
My thinking is that reducing anomie and inequality, increasing the bonds between people, all help move that number in a positive direction, as more of us realise that we need eachother.
This is my sneaky way of saying that we could be doing this now. That sure, maybe there will always be those who are just in it for themselves or a tiny in-group, but that’s no excuse for fatalism/doomerism.
IE we don’t have to wait for baleful aliens or demons spewing forth from hellgates. If we’re not waiting for the perfect unifying scenario, we can start moving the needle in a positive direction now. :)
This is what happens when you don’t hold criminals accountable for their actions. If we’d actually been tough on these assholes, then we wouldn’t be in this predicament. What are we going to do when all these states say that Trump won? If the past is any indication, the Democrats will cave and let Trump take office, or will bring their case to the SC who have shown that they don’t give a shit about democracy and will install a Republican regardless of the election outcome.
We should have tried those responsible for January 6 and held them accountable, including long prison sentences. I’m looking at you, Trump, Gohmert, MTG, and anyone else who actively tried to overthrow our government or gave in-depth, secret tours to groups that tried to.
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Associated Press:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
The article says that, unfortunately, they’re on kind of shaky ground here.
The action came after Musk and Trump held a two-hour conversation on social media platform X on Monday night, during which Trump complimented Musk’s ability to cut costs by saying he would not tolerate workers going on strike.
“You’re the greatest cutter,” Trump said during the conversation. “I mean, I look at what you do. You walk in, you just say: ‘You want to quit?’ They go on strike - I won’t mention the name of the company - but they go on strike. And you say: ‘That’s okay, you’re all gone.’” Musk chuckled but did not respond to Trump’s comments, making it harder for the NLRB to find him liable for making illegal threats to workers at his companies, said Wilma Liebman, chair of the NLRB under former President Barack Obama.
Under federal law, workers cannot be fired for going on strike, and threatening to do so is illegal under the National Labor Relations Act, the UAW said in a statement.
I totally agree that they violated that law in spirit, but I don’t know if the NLRB will go for it.
From the WSJ article covering this suit: “The UAW, which has endorsed Kamala Harris, the presumptive presidential nominee for the Democrats, has been eager to blunt the former president’s appeal to working-class voters by painting him as a friend of the wealthy.”
No shit he’s a friend of the wealthy. He keeps insisting he is wealthy himself, while threatening anyone that wants to actually verify that for decades. And dealing with fraud charges for various financial “irregularities”.
Nope, most states require either a certain percentage/number of registered voters for a party or a state-wide petition to get onto the ballot. The only 3rd party on all 50 states’ ballot is the Libertarian party. The Green party is a distant 4th place, as they often need to regather signatures and new petitions every 2-4 years.
If a new party was formed for 2028, it might get enough ground in one state, not any to really sway the balance of the Electoral College.
It's that he lied on his forms about his residence. These people are fucked up. No idea why he needed to lie about living in NY, but when you fill out these kinds of forms, you're not allowed to fuck around, rightly.
oh, i understand why he was disqualified. but like you, it doesn’t make any sense as to why he would lie. i guess you can trust a brain worm to fill a form accurately?
“The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves”
US Constitution Amendment 12
The presidential and vice presidential candidates that the electors vote for cannot be from the same state.
He has absolutely no shot of winning any electoral votes or even a state’s popular vote. RFK is not a serious candidate. He’s a crazy person who happens to have a well known name that others are using to try and spoil an election.
If he falsified his permanent residence so that he could side step a (admittedly stupid) rule that state electors votes don’t count if both the president and vice president candidates are from their state, then he falsified his application for nothing, since he has no chance of winning CA in the first place.
It’s from the 12th amendment. A state elector must vote for at least one candidate from a state other than their own. So electors from Nevada could place both their Presidential and Vice Presidential electoral votes with an all-California ticket but California electors may not. There was talk of Kamala picking Newsom for VP but she’d have to change her residency for that to happen. Everyone would know that would be BS and possibly cost her California’s electoral votes or her candidacy in the second state, so she picked Walz instead (not the only reason but you get the idea). Kennedy got caught pulling a fast one so here we are.
If you don’t actually reside at your legal residence, it’s invalid. It’s like moving to a new house and not updating your driver’s license. You don’t get to claim that you live at your old house - your license just becomes invalid until you fix it.
Reuters - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Reuters:
> MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Guardian:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
Today.com - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Today.com:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.