Separate from the moral issue, this just speaks to her being a really poor campaigner. These are softball questions designed to allow her to create daylight with an unpopular president on her terms. Reminds me a lot of how much she fumbled her primary campaign.

But old guy picked her and old guy was old on camera, so I guess she’s our best option. Still better than the alternatives, both Biden and Trump, but just sort of sad from a nation of 330M people.

No retail worker is going to risk their job based on corporate platitudes about learning opportunities. It doesn’t matter if the company is serious, there’s no way for their employees to know, not enough incentive for them to take a risk, and not enough time for the reality of the job to naturally sink in simply by being there.

The best you can hope for is a cranky old timer to tell it like it is Office Space style simply because he doesn’t care about his job. Maaaybe whatever stores are closest to the corporate office will get fatigued enough by the constant stream of white collar workers on field trips that they’ll just start ignoring them and something might be learned by chance. But most are just going to show up for their mandatory floor time, shadow whichever poor sod is trustworthy and energetic enough to be the corporate babysitter, and then return to their desk none the wiser.

Rich people love debt. Their existing wealth gets them great terms and they’re in the best position to apply the saved capital to investments that return more than the loan rate.

Eh, with 4 days a year they’ll be essentially perpetual new employees who don’t know how anything works and who aren’t given any training or responsibilities because they’ll be gone tomorrow. Everyone will be on their best behavior and no one will tell them the ways they need to break the rules to get stuff done because they’re outsiders who are either management or might rat them out to management. This is a gimmick.

Yes yes, we all have our post hoc excuses for why a state with a historical trend toward the Democrats didn’t continue on. All of those excuses were happening when Florida was getting bluer. It’d be great if all we needed to do was kick our feet up and demographics would solve our political problems, but this isn’t a new idea. People in 2000s thought the Democrats would have a permanent majority by now. Turns out the money behind the Republican party isn’t going to just sit back and let them wither into nothingness.

In 10 years we’ll have a good excuses for Texas too. It will be obvious that some Hispanic group was going to turn conservative because they were fleeing failures in nominally left wing states, or were very religious, or had a machismo culture or something. The young people moving to Texas for economic opportunities will be scared away by the abortion bans. Or they’ll crank their media propaganda to 11. Or maybe Texas really will go blue and we’ll have an entirely different set of turning-point states. The Democrats weren’t doomed to be unable to win the presidency because Florida is no longer a swing state and somehow after all the Republican’s failures and odious behavior we’re still in a toss up now.

If it was a simple matter of waiting for Democrats to break the cycle and win forever, it would have happened by now. People have been predicting the impending collapse of the Republican party for decades.

I doubt it ever will in Israel. Their military service is compulsory, so it just means you were a young adult who, when you were initially conscripted, didn’t jump through the hoops to get an exemption.

Here’s a comparison of Bill Clinton’s, Al Gore’s, and Barack Obama’s election results in Florida:

Florida is reliably blue now, right? Since 2010, the Hispanic proportion of the state has grown by 5 percentage points while the white proportion has shrunk by a similar number. It’s gotta be like Dem +8 by now.

The FBI said the owners of the pastel - Bridget Vita and her late husband Kevin Schlamp, did not realize the Nazis had stolen the Monet and they voluntarily surrendered it.

Did they… ask? You’d think anyone buying a painting of that significance might want to verify its provenance. Either it’s expensive enough you’d want to make damn sure your investment isn’t stolen or it’s going for cheap and you might want to know why. It’s not like Nazi stolen art is some new discovery in the art world.

This author is genocide denier.

Adding to that, the conflation of Zionism and Jewishness via claiming anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism implies that Israel is the expression of Jewishness at the level of a nation state and thus it’s evils are not the action of a rogue state currently controlled by far right zealots, or even simple (psychopathic) political goals, but a representation of Jewishness.

Yeah, I think there’s some sort of survivorship bias going on to encourage accelerationists. They identify the successes and never hear about all the terrible failures. Sometimes making things worse does actually result in mass movements. It’s just that that’s pretty rare and usually it just makes things worse without an awakening, sometimes disastrously. But if it does happen it’ll cause a lot of change and end up in the history books. And in the event it doesn’t the accelerationists probably won’t even be mentioned in the description of the dark times they helped usher in.

And the big problem with all of this is that if people know you’re doing accelerationism, it’s a lot less likely to make people believe in your cause because it just seems like you’re playing a game and detached from people’s actual lives. Because to some extent that’s true and you are.

There are a lot of smart people who don’t have a firm grasp on reality.

Wouldn’t this allow like three states to dictate the other 47?

No, that’s both not mathematically possible and big states aren’t uniform. And all your other statements don’t in any way address how the current system achieves any of those goals. There’s no perfect voting system, but we know our voting system is very bad. Right now most voters are completely irrelevant to a presidential campaign. Not 49%, 80%. If you’re not in a swing state, it doesn’t matter to the campaign what your issues are.

People argued this idea of a permanent Democratic majority in the 2000s and then again after Obama’s election but it never materialized. GenX, with its liberal sensibilities, the rise of college educations, and increased diversity among the population will make it impossible for Republicans to win. Then GenX got older and more conservative and people realized that minorities and college grads could also be made to hate immigrants and queer people.

This idea that “just waiting” is all it will take to end conservatism and other bigotries is a fantasy.

Iran? Wtf? They’re problematic for sure, but uh… How could you possibly come to the conclusion that they’re our top enemy? Smells like either motivated reasoning to support the bafflingly pro-Israel stance of the establishment or being scared to name an actual global power because you don’t want to complicate the relationship further (e.g., China). Still, Russia is right there.

He’s literally not doing what’s most popular. If he was we’d be reducing and/or conditioning military aid, the position supported by a majority of the population. What are you even talking about?

Five in 10 Americans (53%) support placing restrictions on US military aid to Israel so that it cannot use that aid toward military operations against Palestinians.

Wild that people can act condescending when just patently saying the wrong thing after being shown the exact data that proves them wrong.

They’ve polled roughly that question. It would increase support among Democrats and Independents, i.e., the people that matter.

Nearly half (47%) of Americans say they would be more likely to support a 2024 presidential candidate who continues to support Israel, while 48% say they would be less likely to support a candidate who does so. These sentiments, however, vary by political affiliation. While at least half of Democrats (56%) and independents (51%) say that continuing to give military aid to Israel would make them less likely to support a presidential candidate, most Republicans (62%) say doing so would make them more likely to support a presidential candidate.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/americans-split-continuing-military-aid-israel

Yes. Democrats and Independents both favor conditioning arms sales to Israel and say . Republicans don’t matter. There may also be questions that ask “do you support Israel” that also have a majority, but that’s not the question at hand (whether to continue supporting their war effort). And even if you shift to argue that the American opinion is mixed, that’s very much not overwhelmingly favoring continuing our role in the genocide.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/americans-split-continuing-military-aid-israel

https://globalaffairs.org/research/public-opinion-survey/americans-continue-say-us-should-stay-impartial-israeli-palestinian

To quote: “Have you ever even looked at polls? Lmao.”

What? No it isn’t. There are photographer credits, you can just go find the photo on Getty Images, along with other photos of the same child, with an injured man on the same gurney.

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/injured-palestinians-including-children-are-brought-to-gaza-news-photo/2175360329

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/injured-palestinians-including-children-are-brought-to-gaza-news-photo/2175365113

They can maybe singlehandedly win some House races. $14M is a lot of money there. You’ll notice however that Ilhan Omar is still in Congress despite their opposition and Bernie Sanders, who’s much more influential, has nothing at all to worry about. They accomplish a lot more by targeting a couple of already weakened reps and others getting scared than they ever could if they actually had to directly confront them. Their money isn’t endless and is kind of an irrelevant amount when talking about the scale of a presidential race.