Right. The sentence I quoted was kind of wedged in with the reporting on what you're stating. So it seemed like associating the two, and I didnt really see the direct private sale as something to have lumped in (to report on as something nefarious).
I don't doubt it, and I 100% support regulations aimed at increasing wealth and ownership opportunity and equality. If Compass is shown to be discriminating against minorities, then yeah prosecute the fuck out of them. I just think forcing people to list their home even though they already have a buyer selected isn't really going to do anything about it and just artificially raises the sale price to cover the realtor fees. Say some elderly home owner is nearing hospice or something and wants to sell the house to their grandkid who is starting a family. Why should they have to do anything other than get a mortgage approved and go sign all the deed/title paperwork for the bank and the county? Forcing it to be listed isn't going to suddenly make that home be an option for a discriminated minority buyer, because the buyer has already been selected by the owner.
No, dude. Redlining is about banks not lending to people in a discriminatory fashion. The first sentence in your link:
Redlining is a discriminatory practice in which financial services are withheld from neighborhoods that have significant numbers of racial and ethnic minorities.
I quoted a line specifically about the home owner (a person, not a bank or a coporation) having a specific buyer in mind. Not at all the same thing. Even if the owner lists it publicly, the owner still decides to whom they sell the property. Otherwise you would have property-holding companies out there suing to force the sale to them as the highest cash bidder. Forcing a public MLS listing is regulatory capture forcing buyers and sellers to pay a commission to a middle-man when there didn't need to be one.
Yeah after that long it's just going in the recycling. Another thing you can do is notify the post office or carrier to deliver your mail by name only. This won't stop mail addressed to "current resident," but it should stop the stuff you're talking about.
Probably things like "but the mods do that work for free, we should make things better for them" and "but we have no original content, it's the users who provide value, we should make things better for them." You know, stuff like that.
I always found it amusing how the term "entitlement" has been butchered by Americans.
In this case it's a deliberate misuse by the GOP to conflate the word with welfare programs that the voters see as free handouts to the lazy. So then they can tout polling data that shows voters against entitlement programs as fodder to gut/end social security and Medicare. I'm constantly having to have this discussion with conservatives when they use the word incorrectly.
The primaries are where you vote with your heart for the party you want. The general is pretty much always a strategic vote against the who you really don't want to win. Granted, that requires more than one candidate running for the nomination, and if nobody steps up for it you're kinda stuck. That's what David Hogg's plan is about. Funding progressive primary challenges in Dem-safe districts where the incumbent is asleep at the wheel. If that describes your situation, maybe write to Leaders We Deserve to get them to take a look at your district.
The delegates are legally pledged to the popular vote winner though. Delegates pledged to a candidate who dropped out before the convention will typically vote for whomever their pledged candidate endorsed when they dropped out. If you're thinking of the superdelegates, they don't even get a vote unless the pledged delegates aren't able to elect a nominee in the first round (this change went into effect in 2018).
Right. The sentence I quoted was kind of wedged in with the reporting on what you're stating. So it seemed like associating the two, and I didnt really see the direct private sale as something to have lumped in (to report on as something nefarious).