And tariffs are perfectly legal when they go through the proper channels. So, the administration just needs to go through the proper channels and work with the legislative branch to pass such tariffs. And they shouldn't be predicated on a bullshit national emergency
Another perspective is that a 3% increase in prices - even without non-labor inflation - to pay people closer to a living wage reflects a more accurate cost of that dining experience. It could be that the public is subsidizing those restaurants' labor through social programs that make up the difference vs a living wage
As you noted, with the real (or at least more realistic) cost of eating out reflected in the pricing, consumers will decide if that experience is worth it. And some businesses may close. And that's called capitalism
Oh that's my bad. I didn't realize only one lawyer could work on any aspect of a case at a time. I wasn't aware that criminal cases were on a very strict timeline that cannot be impacted at all through resources or prosecutorial discretion on when to charge
I would respectfully argue that everybody knew that there was an election coming that Trump was going to run in, and there was a possibility of him winning it. And that should have dictated the timeline to bring charges. And if that meant more resources or bringing fewer charges, or whatever, that should have been the game plan.
If you believe he's guilty, you don't give him time to run out the clock
All fair points. My intended point was that take some exception to Bernie's blanket statement that the Dems abandoned the working class voters. Though I agree they haven't focused enough there, nor message it correctly.
Biden definititely ran and led on a more progressively left platform after Bernie and AOC collaborated with them in 2020. I think it's clear Harris was going to continue that, but I don't think it was properly messaged
Are you trying to make a point? Because you're not saying anything
I'm not defending Harris' overall campaign, but I am taking some issue with Bernie claiming that the Democrats have abandoned working class voters.
I like Bernie, and he makes some good points about the lack of any bill put forth to raise the minimum wage. But I think his overall characterization is quite a bit off base, especially when compared to what the Republicans are offering working-class voters. Which is basically nothing
I'll listen to any counterpoint with an open mind but you have to make one
Fascism needs a strong leader - authoritarianism is at the core of fascism. Of course the rank and file don't go away, but without a strong leader, they lose their power.
Serious question: Referring back to the points I made in my previous post, who is going to effectively step into the fascism void in the US when Trump is gone?
Vance? He's a clown and isn't a true believer in Trumpism
DeSantis? Another clown
Ken Paxton? He's evil enough but not sure he has the charisma to inspire the MAGAts
Trump's base is comprised of sniveling sycophants who don't have the personality, influence, or will to actually try and take over
Sure, but I was specifically talking about the US.
That said, when the US has a potential leader embracing fascism/authoritarianism, it creates an opportunity for the growth of those political ideologies across the world.
Keeping Trump out of office and believers in democracy in office will help blunt the power and growth of fascism across the globe. It's not the sole solution, but it's quite important that the most powerful country in the world not elect fascists.
While I generally agree with what you said, I'm not convinced Trumpism doesn't die or at least go back into its hole when he goes away.
Trumpism is really nothing more than a power grab by an authoritarian who uses white nationalism rhetoric to enthrall the baser segment of society and amass a voting base to maintain power long enough to undermine democracy.
Trump could die tomorrow, and there's a dozen wannabe authoritarians that would try to fill that void and run on Trumpism.
I'm not convinced there's any MAGAts out there than can inspire the base, get the MAGAts in Congress to coalesce behind them, and solidify the financial support of the Musks, Thiels, etc of the oligarchy.
I'm not following what point you're trying to make here.
Kamala Harris' team is going to make known any and all Republicans who support her in an effort to try and convince Independents and Republicans who don't like Trump to get out on Election Day and vote for her, particularly in swing states. That's just smart politicking to try and beat Trump.
I would guess the average Democratic voter hates Dick Cheney but understands that when people as awful as Liz or Dick Cheney actually endorse Harris publicly, it is a clear indication just how dangerousTrump and MAGA really are.
Ona daily basis, Trump and Vance make no attempt to hide their hatred of women, drag queens, gays, lwsnians, immigrants, people of color, etc. While Harris and the Dems defend those groups publicly, legally and politically.
Whether the Left is perfect or not is not the point. MAGA would like to see Chappel Roan censored, disempowered, and possibly imprisoned.
I'm not calling Chapell a centrist, I'm saying she being foolish and failing to exercise her influence. She couldn't instead say "I don't disagree with Harris on A, B, C, but I support her candidacy because of basic human rights, and here's what I would like her to commit to".
Instead, she's failing to help her fans understand what's at stake here, and they may sit on the sidelines come election day
I don't see how the full quote really changes anything.
I fully agree with her position that folks she be informed and engaged in their local politics.
Fully agree with her that people should use critical thinking skills.
But saying both sides have the same amount of problems is a ridiculous false equivalency, and directly threatens the very people she supports. One side is going to make life a living hell (if not outright cause deaths - see: abortion rights for an example) for LGTBQ+ people, for women, and for people of color. There's no "both sides" argument here.
She's within her right to call out the Left for specific issues she disagrees on, but she loses credibility for effectively saying one side is not better than the other in all the areas I've described
I'm quite disappointed in her both-sidesism comments. Maybe that approach is defensible in "normal" times, but not when one candidate/party is fascist, authoritarian, anti-democracy, anti-women's rights, anti-trans, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-people of color.
My feeling is that Chappell is effectively supporting that party by not taking a more vocal stand against them, particularly when she has the ability to influence so many young voters whose lives will be impacted for decades by what the extreme right has done in this country, and will further try to do if they win the White House (and/or Congress) again.
It's one thing to say "I'm really attracted to her, but I'm too much of an introvert to initiate a conversation"
But this is sounding like stalker-type fixation level shit
That's as kind as I can put it