Could be. Or maybe your numbers aren't reasonable for the area. (more likely) But even setting aside that, there are plenty of reasons "hurr durr get a new jerb" may not be realistic advice: maybe the hours for a fast food job don't work because they're already working two jobs, or they have kids, or whatever. I didn't say no one can get a new job, I engaged my empathy (try it) and pointed out that it's not a universally available option.
Yes, in this specific instance, especially with this specific crime and these specific bits of evidence, it should be a slam dunk for anyone with any sense to refuse to support Trump.
But, that could have been said in 2016, too. Trump didn't just show up in 2015 when he started running for President, or even when he lead that super racist "birther" movement prior to that; he's been a terrible person his entire life, and no one gets a full pass on voting for him, no matter which time they did it, as far as I'm concerned. People that support Trump, especially in 2023, don't give two shits about whether he's qualified for the job. It's a cult of personality; nothing more. I'm only half joking when I suggest that if Trump died of natural causes in a month, he'd still have a good chance of winning the GOP nomination. His supporters just don't care about consequences or reality. Whatever triggers the lizard-part of their brain is what they do.
I think you are vastly overestimating this effect. What subset of Trump supporters are not already all-in on supporting him, but would become so if he was charged with additional crimes in another state? (where those crimes took place.)
Yeah, maybe. I also see it somewhat like "Your state is stripping away your rights? Just move.", in that it's not always an option for some people. Though it would be nice to imagine everyone working there was likeminded with Lindell, instead of just a wage-slave without many options.
I honestly don't know what you're arguing here. Are you saying the justice department should bow to public pressure and not attempt to hold Trump accountable for his actions?
I'm sure it does to some degree, though I don't know if it's enough to matter on modern computers, and isn't that what flatpak does, too? (duplicating dependencies)
In any event, if you don't need an application from a specific distro there's no reason to create that container. The non-ubuntu ones get created when they're needed. (And I think the next version of VanillaOS will be debian-based, not ubuntu; in case that matters.)
Yeah, that's what I mean. You can use flatpak (or snap if you swing that way) but you can also install applications via containers. They're still not installed on the OS-- even "native" applications get installed via the container. So if the application you want is maintained for arch in aur, you can add the --aur tag to the apx command and it will install that version instead of the default, which is ubuntu. This also works for fedora applications.
I don't disagree with your predictions, but the whole point is that public opinion won't matter if the judge is not a hack. That is to say, who cares if Trump says it's a witch hunt if he's charged again in NJ? He's already saying that.
They don't hype it as much as (I think) they should on that webpage, but VanillaOS does this thing with it's package manager, Apx, where it allows you to install applications from various distros via containers, and run them all side-by-side seamlessly. It's neat.
I in no way mean this to defend Trump, but being tried for a crime does not mean one is guilty of a crime. And at a very (very) abstract level, even being guilty of a crime does not make a person necessarily unfit for office.
You may not understand this right now, but you are speaking from a place of privilege.