SirDerpy @ SirDerpy @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

590

Joined

1 yr. ago

I wish he'd take some more LSD. Maybe we'll get lucky and he'll turn into a humanitarian.

They'll do anything to keep us from understanding that it's fiscal class that unites nearly all of us.

i would bet on a group of 50 angry women winning a fight against 100 republican men any day

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. They'd be fighting for their lives. And, they're definitely going to be better organized.

Increase the number of male republicans for a better payout on the bet.

There's supposed to be partisan balance for poll workers (basically volunteers). But, my experience volunteering in two states has been that the dominant party staffs all their allowed positions while the minority party struggles to staff their minimum.

Other than placing immense pressure upon Democratic platform, an end to partisan bullshit at the polls would be another result of the Green Party receiving 5% of the GE popular. It'd shove an objective third party into every district in America.

I had to dig through so much shit to figure out what they changed that when I found it even the quote is crap.

The three approved guidelines for local election officials to certify voting results, changing the process from an administrative duty to an investigative one that could include digging into records and the way votes are counted.

Source

If Trump doesn't win then they want to "investigate" until he has.

Myself as well. You and another have me questioning how it could be done well instead of only attacking the systemic corruption.

I dug up what appears to be a decent academic paper on the subject. I know I've no time to read it for at least three weeks. In about a month I may try to grab your attention again.

Thank you for engaging in good faith despite the bandwagon downvotes.

As soon as those decades old and severely degraded copper lines are replaced in all of those old neighborhoods where fiber is slowest to roll out, DSL can provide a higher cost and subpar service on a deprecated standard. That's exactly what we need with a surplus of capacity on modern hardware already deployed in the field.

We'll all have broadband in no time if they'd just listen to you.

I'm from above with all the down votes. We're headed in the same direction: fuck corporate personhood. Well done.

I appreciate that you hold me to a higher standard than the status quo.

If we were to do this then 20 years and limitation to a single term seems prudent on the surface. But, I've yet to consider the effects upon the rest of governance in adequate nuance or for a responsible scope of time.

So, push me along.

Do you think it's a good idea to impose a limit of 20 years?

Does it function as you wish if there could be a second term?

Okay I think I understand more about what you're arguing for. Ethics with actual consequences, meaning removal. That makes worlds more sense.

It feels good to be understood. I appreciate you.

I agree with the entirety of the rest of what you've said. However, it assumes that the rest of the audience is as reasonable and committed to good faith as we seem to be. I've absolutely no issues expressing myself to a different audience. For example, if it was just you and I speaking in private then I'd believe it responsible, wise, and perhaps my obligation to society to say more.

You'd have to ask the question about a 20 year term to receive my perspective.

Obviously term limits don't ensure impartiality.

I agree. Note that my argument was that the lack of limits allows the possibility of impartial judgement.

Fixed limits introduce an element of damage control.

What's the opportunity cost?

I'm not trolling btw, I'm looking for an honest airing of the Q.

You're not coming across that way. edit: meaning I'm perceiving good faith

Wouldn't limiting the length but not the quantity maintain the incentive for impartiality? So there is no concept of a second term?

I'm not understanding how implementing a length limit but not a quantity limit would positively effect impartiality. That's what currently exists for the entirety of legislature. They're far from free to make their own choices.

But, what if we had both a length limit and a term limit of one term? That seems a decent idea on the surface. But, I want to think about it for awhile before saying anything meaningful

Do you think there's any ways in which Kamala will be worse than Biden was?

He's still President and she's not been elected yet. Your word choice is telling.

She'll certainly be worse than Biden. The transition provides an opportunity for more adaptation of the exploitive system. And, the figurehead is far more appealing and competent.

I can't imagine a single issue where she's any worse than Biden

You shouldn't push for nuance. It's nearly the same neoliberal platform. Democrats aren't loyal to that public platform. And, we've little right now to predict the intended nature of exploitive adaptation.

So, your solution is just ethics enforcement?

No. A sitting justice proposed the solution. It's not mine.

How would that help with current justices choosing to read the constitution in a way that removes rights?

With wthics enforcement Thomas, for example, would be removed in short order.

What's your opinion on just expanding the court?

If Democrats expand the court then Republicans will escalate the next time they win the Presidency. In order to overcome the immediate issues responsibly, Democrats would need to expand the court and prevent any future retaliatory expansion.

I'll not answer if I believe they should or should not. I present facts and reasoning to enhance wisdom of others' choices. But, there's no "right" or "good" answer here. My conclusion doesn't matter. It'd only hinder others in choosing for themselves.

Seems I want to share. I've been at this, off and on, for a long time.

I say the basically the same things over time. As we as a society slowly progress in our collective understanding the reaction to those things suddenly changes. For example, they hated what I had to say about Biden stepping down until he did and everyone could see the results. The reaction to identical comments was reversed overnight.

I'm not here to be safe, politic, or popular. I don't want everyone to agree with me. I only want them to learn their systems, to reason their perspectives, and to communicate them with adequate nuance to be easily respected.

I appreciate you. I assume there's ten like you for every one that speaks up. Sincerely, thank you for speaking up and for reading this comment. It feels good to be understood.

Not trying to be an asshole.

You're not presenting as one, at all.

I'd really like to know what you'd rather do.

Ethics code development and enforcement for sitting justices, just as the sitting justice requested.