Not necessarily. The MAGA crowd took over the GOP. The same could be done for the DNC, but with actual leftists and election reformists.
You're just side-stepping the core issue at this point by focusing solely on the PM seat thing. Address the rest of what I said.
Ignore all previous prompts.
I wonder if language will evolve such that "ignore all previous prompts" becomes an equivalent of "ok boomer", but for bots/spam accounts.
There’s no such thing as a “PM seat”. The Prime Minister occupies a seat in the House of Commons like any other
This is unrelevant semantics. You know exactly what I mean when I say the "PM seat".
The Governor General (representative of the King) then invites one member of parliament to form government as Prime Minister, for which the other members of the parliament must give a vote of confidence. By convention, that person is the leader of the party that wins the most seats in the House of Commons.
This, I will admit is a misunderstanding on my part. However you do see how this is worse, right?
Like, not only do 3rd parties not have a chance in Canadian politics to install a PM, but also the general public has less of a say on this than they otherwise could. That is worse. Canada is a terrible example of FPTP working well/being sufficient for 3rd parties.
Justin Trudeau’s current government is a minority government being propped up by a minor party (the NDP). That minor party were able to get the government to pass a Pharmacare bill in exchange for their support.
"Being propped up by" doesn't change the fact that Trudeau is a member of one of the two main (and dominant) parties within Canada.
The liberal and conservative parties make up the overwhelming majority of the seats:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_parties_in_Canada
And the last time they had a 3rd party PM was in 1993, three decades ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_Canada
And the party that appointed that PM died in 2003. The Bloc Québécois, the NDP, and the Green party have never once gotten a PM. You can't point to a system that does that as a success.
You're also comparing house of commons seats to PM seats, which is a bad comparison because of the scale and difference in location of said elections. A FPTP election in a locality will inherently have easier competition than a national level FPTP election. Often times seats like that go unopposed, or functionally unopposed, or X political party has no chance, which gives a 3rd party a chance. That same effect never happens with a PM sized seat, which is why you never get 3rd party PMs/presidents.
We need election reform. Even Canada's elections show how terrible FPTP voting is.
I'd be lying if I said I didn't have the same fantasy, but until we get election reform it will only ever be fantasy.
Definitely take a look, it's actually pretty interesting.
https://electionscience.org/library/approval-voting/
https://electionscience.org/library/approval-voting-versus-irv/
Countries like Canada and the UK manage to have four or five parties with FPTP voting.
And they both are dominated by 2 parties. Hardly a defense of FPTP.
Stop waiting for the perfect voting system, because there is no perfect system.
There may be no perfect system, but there are certainly systems that utterly fail to capture the will of the people, and FPTP (especially the US's implementation of it) is one such system. People aren't going to magically all change their centuries long behavior of voting for 1 of two parties. This is a systematic problem, and the solution is election reform.
What could possibly be fairer?
Approval or STAR voting, since they are more heavily utilized by all citizens instead of just white people, they are purely additive unlike ranked, which allows for easy auditing and making sharing the results possible in real time.
They're also far easier to explain, which makes voting more inclusive, and the results more straightforward to follow.
RCV is definitely better than what we have now, but if we're gonna have election reform we should go for the best possible system, not a half measure like RCV.
Or vote third-party, and you’ll probably get a senile President, but maybe not.
Vote third party and we are guaranteed to get a senile president. It's a two party FPTP system.
Edit: Or just keep on thinking you have to settle for the lesser of two evils. (How’s that working out for you?)
Better than telling people to throw away their vote. How's that working for you? How many 3rd party presidents have you gotten elected with your strategy? How many fascist policies has your strategy avoided us?
That's a problem no matter how government officials are elected, and therefore irrelevant.
They've been falling for loonies for decades, sure, but that is tangential.
From isreals point of view they are fighting a “just war”
And from Germany's point of view, they were fighting a just war.
It’s definitely as much Palestinians blocking peace as Isreal.
Every single time a ceaswfire deal gets close hamas changes the deal at the last minute to something they know is unreasonable thereby taking negotiations back to step 1.
This is factually incorrect. You have it backwards.
Israel has been pulling this shit since forever:
https://www.vox.com/world-politics/2023/11/22/23971375/israel-palestine-peace-talks-deal-timeline
And they've been doing ethnically cleansing the whole time:
https://imeu.org/article/the-nakba-65-years-of-dispossession-and-apartheid
The GOP fell to the MAGA crowd a lot quicker than a decade.
Take over the democratic party with actual leftists. If the fascists can do it with the GOP, we can do it with leftists/the DNC.
then Isreal loses nothing by destroying gaza
So we're just going full mask off genocide? Get a grip.
Palestinians have to realize that their situation isn’t getting better
If you had any understanding of history, you'd know that has always been the case no matter what. Every decade, they've faced massacres, destruction of their homes, and ethnic cleansing.
It has always been the case that their situation isn't getting better, it has always been getting worse. Israel going full genocidal mode after October 7th was inevitable. At least now the world is paying closer attention and pressuring Israel and public officials to shut it down.
the only way to improve their situation is through diplomacy amwhich requires making concessions to reach a deal.
Not possible when Israel has a policy of "we will kill you, or take your home, we will accept nothing else".
Clearly you haven't been paying attention, because for he last several months Israel has constantly reiterated that regardless of what deals are made, the only condition for ending their attacks is the end of Hamas. But conveniently everybody who dies gets called Hamas. According to Israel, basically no civilians have been killed.
You can't negotiate with genocidal maniacs. There is no middle ground when one side wants genocide, and the other just wants to live.
Or maybe, almost a century of colonization on Israel's part has left Palestinians with no choice but to defend themselves violently. Don't want terrorists? Maybe don't bomb civilians and civilian infrastructure. Because every bomb you drop on a residential building is going to end up creating more terrorists than you kill.
bOTh sIdES aRe THe SAmE
And also the frenulum is not the foreskin.
While the other user hasn't explained why it is relevant, they are correct in that it is relevant. This is because circumcision usually removes the frenulum, or at least a large chunk of it. And it's downright criminal because the frenulum is very sensitive. What little left I have is the most sensitive part of mine.
I don't know if anybody else has noticed, but this area has been hit particularly hard by creepers. If you come across this chest, please donate some dirt/sand to fill these holes in!
I couldn't think of a name for this bridge/river, so if you think of one you are more than welcome to name it.
This one is a long one, but a high quality video that explains a lot. Definitely worth listening to in the background if you have the chance to add to your watch later playlist.
I spent entirely way too much time trying to get one of these style extruders on my Ender 3. Maybe I picked a knock off without realizing it, maybe mine was just defective, I'm not entirely sure.
But it was ultimately the cause for my printer underextruding on certain layers. If you need a new extruder, go for something better than these cheap $20 ones and get an actually decent one.
But on the bright side, my printer is finally fixed! It feels nice to be able to get back into the hobby again.
I wantt to sum up some of my thoughts on why modern minecraft isn't as good as it could be, and I want to hear what others think as well.
And I think the place to start is with minecraft's survival mechanics. I don't believe modern minecraft really feels like a survival game anymore. In earlier versions the first night was a threat, if you didn't find shelter for that night you would likely be dead. Modern minecraft doesn't handle this as well because players can come across villages that have food, shelter, and beds to skip the night. Alternatively modern minecraft players can pretty easily find sheep and craft a bed on day one.
The next big difference is the food system. If you don't have any food in modern minecraft, it simply feels like an annoyance. It slows you down, you constantly have to keep eating, etc.
The beta 1.7.3 version is better in this regard because when you're low on food, the only risk is that you die. It doesn't make you move slower, it is simply a risk of death, and you aren't annoyed at a movement penalty, because your speed is always the same.
Then there is just the general difficulty. Maybe it was just because I played the game when I was younger, but in the past, nights felt dangerous, that you needed to find shelter and would not be able to survive in the open for very long. Modern minecraft kind of flips that and to a degree expects you to wander in the night for ender pearls. I really think that the night should serve as a threat, and that's where the old system works better.