bostonbananarama @ bostonbananarama @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

385

Joined

2 yr. ago

The original article is discussing the possibility that RFK Jr. could syphon enough electoral votes to ensure that no candidate reaches 270, thereby moving the vote to the House. I don't see that as likely or possible.

I suppose he could take Biden voters, but I think it's much more likely that he takes Trump leaning voters.

In 1992 Ross Perot got 18.9% of the vote, nearly 20 million Americans voted for him, and he didn't win a single electoral vote.

if the MBTA ever gets its shit together...

Might be better to plan for transporter technology than that, more plausible at least.

I think dumber needs to be preceded by "much, much, much" to even be in the ballpark of an accurate statement.

Important to note that these actions are not obviously unconstitutional, and certainly would not be unconstitutional in the period prior to Heller (2008), and probably not before Bruen (2022).

Why did "Dems" quickly become Biden? Is it because you found numerous quotes from Democratic Senators like Whitehouse and Van Hollen taking him to task? Biden criticized Thomas after his comments on contraception and marriage equality.

Curious what pushback you'd like to see from Dems? I've heard many condemn him, but no actions taken, I assume because none are viable.

Me.

I think you're confusing harassment with oversight. You know, the entire point the SEC exists.

Do those employees deserve a living wage?

No context needed, unequivocally, yes.

It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. - FDR

If only there were nearly 50 years of data proving your wage theory wrong. Productivity skyrocketed, and workers wages stagnated. Who got paid for all that value that was created? I guess all the people providing labor weren't providing real-enough value?

Unions provide the same benefits today as they did 100 years ago. They attempt to level the imbalance between the employer and workers. If there's a large imbalance then the workers don't have the leverage to negotiate better wages.

You realize that most studies show that direct cash payments to people on welfare/needy return better results, right?

The Constitution is silent as to the number of justices, Congress has determined how many supreme Court justices there will be. That number has been changed over time by Congress. Term limits are no different.

If the supreme Court wants to go that route, it is already been established that Congress can expand the number of justices. Congress can simply expand the number of justices, seat those justices, and then change the terms for Supreme Court justices with the new members voting in favor of the constitutionality of that change.

Even impeaching every Supreme Court Justice would be quicker and easier than the constitutional amendment. Congress unquestionably has the power to impeach Supreme Court justices.

Technically true? Well, what the other person said was entirely false. It's not nitpicking when someone says that the constitution says justices have lifetime appointments and it actually doesn't say that.

It becomes relevant very quickly when you want to change the system. An act of Congress requires a majority vote and signature by the president, fairly simple. A constitutional amendment requires 2/3 of both chambers and ratification by 3/4 of the states (or a convention by the states).

Because most aren't willing to risk their lives and their comfort to make the world better for everyone. "What do I get out of it?" they will ask.

I don't think this is it. I think it doesn't happen because people don't know who will be with them. If I knew there was going to be a general strike were 20 to 30% of the population stopped working, I'd be in. However, I don't want to torpedo my entire life for a movement with no followers.

You just don't understand. Tax cuts allowed job creators to create more jobs. Tax cuts are like printing money for everyone in the whole country. Do you know what we need to solve the debt crisis? More tax cuts! Maybe we eliminate the IRS altogether.

/s

$10b is nothing, a rounding error in the federal budget. It's a sad day when you come to the realization that people go hungry and homeless simply because we allow it. Both problems could be solved in under a year if we had the will to do so.

That said, Ukraine is worth supporting, it's definitely not an either/or situation.

Who are these people, I don't know any of them. You can't negotiate with a person who's acting in bad faith. They don't care if the government functions, they don't want it to anyway. But the option of throwing out the rule of law and doing whatever you want isn't appealing either.

Actually during recesses Republicans would leave someone behind to keep the Senate in session. They'd open and then adjourn, essentially blocking recess appointments.

Just pointing out that the constitution does, in fact, not say for life as you stated.