minnow @ minnow @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

293

Joined

2 yr. ago

Huh. TIL.

I guess this is exactly what the judicial branch was created for. We've got an undefined area of legality, somebody's got to sort it out, and until they do we just can't say for sure one way or the other

Has he ever given any indication that he knows what the CHIPS Act is? Because I'm 99% sure he's confusing it with CHIP Children's Health Insurance Program which iirc is part of social security and we know he's aiming to get rid of that.

IMO you're overthinking it.

The Constitution applies to all people within jurisdiction of the United States. Immigration or citizenship status isn't a factor; he absolutely has a first amendment right to say what he said.

The question you're struggling with is regarding people who aren't already within the jurisdiction, or are applying for citizenship.

All of that said, if ICE already deported him then that complicates things. Normally somebody who's been deported will be denied reentry for that reason alone; there's a waiting period (5 years iirc) if they're ever going to be allowed back in at all. But you're correct that they could also deny him reentry for his political views. It's likely that, if he's already out of the country, legally removed or not, a judge will have to order him to be allowed reentry despite both of this things.

Not enough

Approving the post and then locking it before anyone could comment would be a hilarious and fitting way to answer the question!

He already wants to send people to Gitmo, you don't have to sell him on it even more

Not quite true. The two party system is an organic result of First Past The Post voting. Since voting is determined on the local level (as opposed to the federal level) it'll be easier to change to Rank Choice and get somebody new elected that way.

Not "easy" mind you, but "easier"

This is the key component that the "vote third party" people keep missing.

Exactly. Putin has leverage on almost the entire GOP. Additionally, I'm pretty sure this is all stuff they want to do anyway. It's easy to blackmail people into doing something they already want to do.

We're in this mess because First Past The Post (FPTP) voting inherently results in a two-party system, which in turn creates polarization and extremism.

To create lasting, meaningful change we need to move away from FPTP to Rank Choice (my preference) or Proportional Representation. Thankfully, the voting process is determined at the local level (state, county, or city depending on your location) which means the goons taking over the federal government will have a much more difficult time resisting this change.

We need people in local governments pushing for this change. Once we're off FPTP a lot of other changes are going to be easier to make.

Definitely!!!

incompetent

No, malicious. Racist in fact.

Suburbs were intentionally designed to be hostile to families without a car. This created a financial barrier to living in the suburbs, organically weeding out "undesirable" (aka non-white) families. Yes this also meant that many white families also couldn't afford to move to the suburbs, but that was a downside the rich white racists were willing to accept if it meant keeping most non-white families out.

Could you be more specific? Because the only safeguard I'm aware of is impeachment and removal, which requires both chambers of Congress to act against Trump and I just don't believe that's going to happen while Republicans control both chambers and impeachment certainly isn't going to "kick in" as if it's some automatic process.

So I'm genuinely curious about what's got you so optimistic

Cool, so you understand that the problem isn't the cellphone itself but the content on the cellphone. Content that could be regulated, if a society has the political will to institute such regulations. Political will that would be generated by understanding the issues with such content. An understanding that can be gained with a good education.

Glad we agree.

Exactly.

This is just somebody blaming the problems created by poor education on cell phones. Again. Just like they blamed the TV. And radio. And comic books. And dime novels. And music. And dancing...

Here's the issue:

These people with only a few birds are less likely to take the time and money to responsibly deal with a potential outbreak in their flocks. Some will, but many won't, and the ones who don't then become a vector for spreading the disease even further, including an increase in the possibility of the virus making the jump to humans.

To be clear the solution isn't to discourage people from keeping chickens in their backyard. The solution is more education on the issues and regulations to require people to keep their flocks responsibly.

But we live in America, where apparently it's an individuals' right to put their whole community at risk. So, I don't know what else to say other than that ignorance kills.

There are a lot of good answers already but I want to add that this changes the situation for any Hispanic people swept up by ICE. If officials feel like they can connect a person to the cartels in any way whatsoever, that individual can now be accused of being a terrorist. This changes the legal process they face, and that's not good news for them. It'll be easier to send the person to Gitmo. It'll be harder to fight for that person's freedom. They'll likely be tortured, and anything they say can be used as pretense for further aggression by the Trump administration, both domestically and foreign.

Your opinion of LoK aside, this is a weird take given that

It's only slander if it isn't true

You could have stopped there but you felt the need to add

and Korra wasn't particularly good anyway.

totally unprompted. Like, you're the one who made the first statement about whether LoK was "good" or not, so following up with "idk why other people" just seems silly. "Why?" Because you, that's why.

And that's fine. You're allowed to have your opinion and they're allowed to have theirs. Just don't act like it's a mystery that people with different opinions want to share them when you're sharing yours.

not voting is voting

I like to be more nuanced with ideas like this, because I like to acknowledge the widespread voter disenfranchisement that happens in our country.

If a person could have voted and didn't, then I agree; they made an active choice and that counts.

If a person is eligible to vote but can't--maybe their voter registration was wrongfully purged, or they genuinely can't afford to take time off work, or something else valid I dunno--then that's not an active choice to not vote and I don't think "not voting is voting" can be applied.

Wasn't the stated goal to eliminate 2 trillion in spending? So, he's destroyed the government's ability to function and compromised the security of the government's computer systems he's only reached 2.75% of his stated goal? But not actually?

I want off this ride

People say that about the rich in America too. "Don't tax them, they'll leave and take all their money with them!"

But I dunno, maybe we shouldn't let people get so rich we're terrified of them leaving with their money? Just a passing thought...

But also I call bullshit. Doing business in America is, for the foreseeable future, profitable. The rich aren't going to leave because they're making less profit as long as "less profit" is more than "how much profit will I have if I leave"

Of course, now that they've completely captured the US government, the conversation is kind of moot.