I really assumed Murkowski would be in opposition and Collins would vote a concerned yes. Murkowski just recently expressed potential openness to supporting Democratic control, FFS.
It very much does not. I think it's designed to make the nominee look like a runaway victor rather than to fairly gauge the opinion of the primary voters. They want the primary to come to a decisive end as soon as possible and the consequence is voters not really understanding whether it's ok to vote for your favorite or to immediately start voting strategically (the answer depends on how well you think they'll do). If it was straight proportional we could just vote how we wanted and if they didn't win their delegates could still influence who did.
The ticker is very relevant. ICE is now a world-ranked military force. They're building concentration camps. Even if it were actually just for immigrants, eventually they'll be deported and you have a bulked up secret police and empty gulags just sitting there waiting to be used.
They all just took a year off with Obama apparently. The dedicated bigots already have their party. They're not needed for Democrats to win.
The primaries for president are run differently. They're proportional, but not evenly. There's minimum amounts to get any delegates and then some confusing weighting that gives more delegates than simple division to those who get more votes. And then at the convention, those delegates can then vote for anyone if their candidate isn't going to win.
So there's a spoiler effect, but not nearly so prominent as FPTP. And the way primaries work, poorly performing candidates will generally just drop out. Not to mention "young people" aren't really Buttigieg's constituency. He basically tied with Bernie in Iowa.
Lol, sure man. Definitely no one ever makes an argument in an editorial. It's not possible as their opponent is not present, may not even read it, and frequently will not be allowed to publish a rebuttal to the same audience.
Arguments are about the audience, not the opponent. Making a straw man when your opponent is not present is the most common form of the fallacy. When they're there they might just say that's not what they're argument is.
Lol, what? Do you seriously think you cannot create a straw man argument in anything but direct debate? Sure Mr. Smartman.
Hint, logical fallacies are about the logic, not the debate.
Just because you feel like the straw men deserve it doesn't change that you're arguing with hypotheticals versions you've created instead of actual people.
You've literally defined the argument of an opposing group to look stupid so you can dunk on them. You're arguing with a straw man. This isn't even a critique of your rhetorical basis though, it's just normal Internet lameness.
Two states allocate votes by congressional district, but that's just first past the post at a smaller level and the spoiler issue remains. You need proportional representation or some actual form of transferable vote to avoid it.
It feels like this slogan is only repeated in left spaces, which then feels like a leftist version of centrists throwing trans people under the bus to chase conservatives. The people who are the primary purveyors of petty hate need to be the priority for the message before anyone on the left is going to feel like preaching tolerance for intolerance is anything but a way to smuggle bigotry into left political spaces.
Millions upon millions of Americans have not defended the 2nd on anti-tyranny grounds. Most of them just have a hobby and think their AR-15 will someday defend their innocent white wife from bands of dangerous minorities. The 2nd Amendment people who actually believe in violent revolution (or the threat thereof) as the backstop of democracy are a tiny minority. We'd need something like "well-regulated militias" for that.
It's a very American viewpoint to believe that sentiments just spring up organically with no influence from political leaders and their role in the whole process is to take opinion polls and only then decide what they believe.
Taking away the microphones of hate-mongers doesn't make hate cease to exist, but it pushes it back into the shadows and cuts off an avenue for it to breed. The US would be a less hateful and less fascist place if Donald Trump was in prison. Leaders can drive the conversation and mainstream fringe ideas. The Democratic establishment just chooses not to.
Yes, that's exactly what they're talking about and you're being extremely weird in making it a priority of discussion on something at best tangentially related.
It's just a straw man writ large because you're miffed at another online argument you had somewhere else.
All the fucking second-order sexists here saying we can't elect a woman because two of the worst female candidates ever lost.
These are the same people who said Obama couldn't win because he was black. Not that they were racist, no they love black people, but they just want to make absolutely extra sure we don't actually try to elect one. Because they imagine their neighbor/uncle/coworker would look at everything going on and think "none of that is important, no black presidents". They're not racist, they just advocate for racism. And with this most facile of analyses they'll believe themselves to be politically savvy realists rather than reactionary children.
This is the cowardice that dooms liberalism. At every opportunity they want to worry about what their opponents will like and time after time will try to blame strategy or immutable characteristics for the failures of their do-nothing policies. Politics is about change. When people's lives suck you don't try to tell them we'll keep doing the same things. And whether the person talking change is a charismatic black man or a clown show, or even... A FEEEMALE, they'll vote for them.
Electors are not granted proportionally. If the Democratic nominee gets 30% of the vote in a state, AOC gets 30% of the vote, and the Republican gets 35% of the vote, all the electors are Republican.
We absolutely don't know anything of the sort. Centrist assholes just cling to that excuse to avoid acknowledging that focusing on appealing to conservatives and pledging to maintain the status quo is a failure.
New Zealand recently just punished three politicians harshly for doing the Haka. They were protesting a proposed law to strip special constitutional privileges for the Maori stemming from the original colonial treaties. Those old British colonizers were apparently too respectful to the rights of the indigenous people for modern conservatives.
His possible win in the general election could bring what the Street hates most — tax hikes and tighter regulation threatening corporate and investment interests.
>Mamdani's emphasis on socialism and redistribution of wealth runs counter to Wall Street's preference for unbridled capitalism and policies that support growth, such as deregulation and low taxes. The 33-year-old has supported taxing the ultra-wealthy, financial transactions and passive income like dividends. He has also endorsed a state-level wealth tax and increased marginal income tax rates on high earners. > >Hedge fund magnate Bill Ackman said he woke up Wednesday "a bit depressed" by Mamdani's victory. The Pershing Square chief said he's now looking at the logistics for another candidate, not himself, to run. > >Lawrence Summers, the former Treasury Secretary and president of Harvard University, also expressed his distaste Mamdani's nomination.
Guys, Bill Ackman and Larry Summers are sad. 😂
The pushback against immigration raids is evolving into an organic movement that is making things more difficult for officers in charge of Trump’s deportation drive
The pushback against immigration raids is evolving into an organic movement that is making things more difficult for officers in charge of Trump’s deportation drive.
Many of those who were loudest in denouncing cancel culture then are now curiously silent in the face of Donald Trump’s assaults on free speech.
The recommendation could also affect the post held by Malcolm Kenyatta, a Pennsylvania state legislator.
A Democratic National Committee subcommittee on Monday recommended that the organization invalidate one of its February vice-chair votes over claims that it unfairly disadvantaged female candidates.
The move, which won't be official unless the entire DNC votes to approve it, could open up new races for the positions held by David Hogg, a Florida activist, and Malcolm Kenyatta, a Pennsylvania state legislator.
The challenge by Oklahoma Democratic Committeewoman Kalyn Free, who unsuccessfully ran against Hogg and Kenyatta in the February race for vice chair, is not related to the ongoing tension between Hogg and the national party over his push to support primary challenges against incumbent Democrats.
Instead, it was based off Free's claim that the handling of the vice-chair vote gave the two men an unfair advantage amid the national party's requirements that its executive committee achieve gender balance.
The U.S. Senate on Wednesday cleared a national defense authorization bill celebrated for troop pay raises but condemned by Democrats for targeting transgender children in military families, sending the bill to President Joe Biden’s desk.
Senators voted 83-12, with five not voting, to approve the $884.9 billion National Defense Authorization Act that received bipartisan praise for the pay bump, upgrades to military housing and investments in artificial intelligence and other advanced technology.
But the annual legislation drew ire this year from Democrats for a provision banning the military’s health program from covering certain treatments for youth experiencing gender dysphoria, defined by doctors as the mismatch between a person’s sex assigned at birth and the gender they experience in everyday life.
All Democrats present for the Dec. 11 U.S. House vote opposed the defense package, which passed along party lines under the Republican majority.
The White House has not released its position on the bill, as it generally does with legislation ready for the president’s signature.
Kamala Harris did not pull Republicans from Trump, and the percentage of voters identifying as Democrat declined, according to exit polls.
Harris only received five percent of Republican votes — less than the six percent Joe Biden won in 2020 when he beat Trump, as well as the seven percent won by Hillary Clinton in 2016 when she lost to him. While Harris won independents and moderates, she did so by smaller margins than Biden did in 2020.
Meanwhile, Harris lost households earning under $100,000, while Democratic turnout collapsed. Votes are still being counted, but Harris is on pace to underperform Biden’s 2020 totals by millions of votes.
Ousted defence minister also quoted as saying Netanyahu rejected peace deal against advice of his security officials
Israel’s ousted defence minister, Yoav Gallant, has reportedly said the army has achieved all its objectives in Gaza and that Benjamin Netanyahu rejected a hostages-for-peace deal against the advice of his own security establishment.
Gallant was speaking to hostages’ families on Thursday, two days after being sacked by Netanyahu, and reports of his remarks quickly surfaced in Israeli media.
“There’s nothing left in Gaza to do. The major achievements have been achieved,” Channel 12 news quoted him as saying. “I fear we are staying there just because there is a desire to be there.”
"If this process doesn't stop immediately, hundreds of thousands of people will become refugees, entire communities will be destroyed and the moral and legal stain of this crime will cling to and pursue every Israeli."
The editors of Israel's oldest newspaper on Wednesday published an editorial decrying the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from northern Gaza amid a ferocious Israeli offensive there that's killed more than 1,000 people over the past three weeks.
In an economic speech in New Hampshire on Wednesday, Vice President Kamala Harris plans to propose a smaller increase in taxes on capital gains, breaking with the policy laid out by President Joe Biden in his 2025 budget, according to people familiar with the matter.
Vice President Kamala Harris proposed increasing the long-term capital gains tax rate to 28% for wealthy Americans during an economic speech in New Hampshire on Wednesday, breaking with the policy laid out by President Joe Biden in his 2025 budget by suggesting a lower rate.
The current long-term capital gains tax rate – 20%, plus an additional 3.8% tax on higher earners – is paid when an investment is sold, or gains are realized. The Biden budget proposes raising that rate to the top rate he wants to levy on ordinary income – 39.6% – for households with taxable income over $1 million. Harris, the people familiar with the matter say, believes 39.6% is too high.
While Harris still supports taxing the wealthiest individuals and corporations at higher rates – as Biden’s budget also calls for – she believes that a lower capital gains rate would incentivize investors to put more money into startups and small businesses. She has also proposed increasing the corporate tax rate to 28%, up from the current 21% rate set by Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.
Progressive Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) announced Wednesday that there are currently enough votes in the Senate to suspend the filibuster to codify Roe v. Wade and abortion rights if Democrats win control of the House and keep the Senate and White House.
“We will suspend the filibuster. We have the votes for that on Roe v. Wade,” Warren said on ABC’s “The View.”
She said if Democrats control the White House and both chambers of Congress in 2025, “the first vote Democrats will take in the Senate, the first substantive vote, will be to make Roe v. Wade law of the land again in America.”
A budget by the Republican Study Committee, a group of more than 170 GOP lawmakers, highlights how many in the party would seek to govern if Republicans win in November.
A new budget by a large and influential group of House Republicans calls for raising the Social Security retirement age for future retirees and restructuring Medicare.
For Social Security, the budget endorses "modest adjustments to the retirement age for future retirees to account for increases in life expectancy." It calls for lowering benefits for the highest-earning beneficiaries. And it emphasizes that those ideas are not designed to take effect immediately: "The RSC Budget does not cut or delay retirement benefits for any senior in or near retirement."
Biden has blasted Republican proposals for the retirement programs, promising that he will not cut benefits and instead proposing in his recent White House budget to cover the future shortfall by raising taxes on upper earners.
"Despite my deep political differences with brother Harlan Crow (who is an anti-Trump Republican), I've known him in a nonpolitical setting for some years and I pray for his precious family," said the presidential candidate.
Harlan Crow (of the Clarence Thomas patronage scandals) donated the max individual donation ($3,300) to Cornel West's campaign, which invited obvious criticism.
Text of his response on Twitter: >As an independent candidate and a free Black man, I accept donations within the limits of no PACs or corporate interest groups that have strings attached. I am unbought and unbossed. Despite my deep political differences with brother Harlan Crow (who is an anti-Trump Republican), I’ve known him in a non-political setting for some years and I pray for his precious family. I find it hypocritical for those who highlight his $3300 donation to my campaign but can’t say a mumbling word about the PAC-driven billion dollars to support the genocidal attack in Gaza sponsored by their candidate! I’m fighting for Truth, Justice, and Love! Onward!
Frankly, the pleasant words make this look much worse than just saying "if some asshole wants to send me money, I'll keep it". Sounds like someone he wants to keep on the good side of, but y'know they're only political differences, not stuff that really matters.