Sounds like the perfect opportunity for the media to run one-sided stories about how much support there is for one issue or another, to scare people into opposing it. You don’t know how many people voted for an issue until it’s too late to cast your own vote.

Let’s say you get to cast 3 votes, and that I’m a corrupt politician. I’d put an issue that you care deeply about on the ballot with 3 other issues that you’re likely to care about. If I can engineer a ballot with 4 issues that you really care about, but only 3 issues that my coalition cares about, we can concentrate our votes while you’re splitting yours, and we win all 3 of the ones we deem important.

“the department put out a request seeking the public’s help to find the knife”

Translation: “We’d love someone to come forward with a knife and claim it’s from the crime scene, so we can cover our asses.”

The police don’t want you to know this, but the knives at crime scenes are free. You can take them home with you. I have 458 knives.

they expected future generations to update the constitution as necessary to protect the republic from those who would seek to undermine or replace it.

The problem with this is that it requires people in power to vote to limit their own power. And while there have been some, certainly, who have been willing to do so, getting a supermajority of people willing to do it is simply not something I see as remotely possible anymore.

Stupid sexy raccoons…

Hi - I’m a Linux newbie.

I don’t tell other Linux users that I use linux because it almost always leads to a bunch of questions that I don’t know the answer to. So let me assure you, that awkwardness is on both sides of that conversation you’re describing.

Yeah I mean, the towtruck owner was not without fault by all I’ve read but even so, the guy stole a truck and caused a lot of property damage and that’s a jailable offense no matter the circumstances.

I feel like maybe you aren’t actually familiar with the issue you’re commenting about here. Maybe you should read the article and watch the video before defending this guy.

I think she panicked a little bit. She was asked the question, and thought, “Oh shit, this is what fucked Clinton,” and didn’t want to leave any doubt in WV residents’ minds that she was going to take their jobs away, so she gave a clear, no-bullshit answer.

Obviously yes, it would be preferable that the overwhelming opposition to fracking from most of the rest of the country was enough to offset one very small, backwards state’s fears, but that’s not the country we live in right now. Maybe in the future.

Regarding the fracking issue, what was she supposed to do there? Hillary Clinton said she was going to shut down coal mining and it was a major contributor to losing her the election as a whole. We didn’t need a repeat of that.

Well, given his problem with Harris is that she supports abortion rights, he can just get fucked along with his opinions.

I honestly love this; they’re basically saying that they think her talking points were good enough that she couldn’t have been doing it off the cuff. Great endorsement for Harris.

It’s a fine take and I mean, I’d love to have the option to vote for that alternative, but realistically right now, none of us do. No matter which side of the aisle you’re on, if you abandon the side you’d normally vote for to vote third party, you’re only helping your own personal worst case scenario.

Really, all of these third party… parties should be focusing more on pushing for an alternate voting system. I know they say we should get away from two-party politics, but I rarely see any actual action taken to try and accomplish that. Ranked-choice was on the ballot 4 years ago in MA, but didn’t pass, and if these third parties had poured their campaign budget into getting it passed, they’d be getting my vote in November. As it stands, they won’t be. Their policies, frankly, don’t matter, because we can’t vote for them, as much as we’d like to, without voting against our own self-interests and really, those of the entire country.

The Daily Show did a piece on it, if you don’t mind a distinctly left-leaning focus and want to be entertained while still getting the highlights, rather than seeing an objective summary of the whole thing.

My favorite moment from the whole thing was when Harris offhandedly mentioned that his rallies were bad, and he spent a full minute of his rebuttal time insisting that his rallies were awesome, then started arguing with the moderators when they fact checked him. You could see that that, above everything else that went on, rankled him. It really highlighted the narcissism.

“Better half of billionaires” is a pretty low bar.

There’s always a relevant XKCD.

Simmons (the woman who murdered the guy) was not the one he had the relationship with. Her trauma (as described in the article) was that she believed her stepfather (whom she stabbed 5 years ago) abused her daughter. As far as the article covers, she had no involvement with the guy she shot and dismembered at all. He had a warrant for failing to register as a sex offender; Simmons apparently saw that and, because of her “disdain for pedophiles”, murdered him.

Whatever your feelings on the guy, we simply can’t condone extrajudicial killings. I know it feels good sometimes to think “Yeah, that guy deserved it!”, and in some cases, maybe they do, but it doesn’t matter - it’s still vigilantism.

In this case, it seems that she’s just a violent woman. If I’m reading it right, she stabbed one person, and murdered two (three separate unrelated incidents) so she deserves the life sentence she got, however you slice it.

I feel like if we just required them all to be at work, every day, until these problems were resolved, they’d sort themselves out real quick. The fact that they get to not do their jobs and still take 6-week vacations every summer - and I mean every summer, because as you note, this always happens - is fucking ludicrous.