The chair is basically a dictator, 100% power, 0% accountability.

Ha, someone made them dictator and the DNC needs money. Just wait. A status-quo candidate will be pushed by corps and billionairs. I’m betting they’ll push Pete Buttigieg.

But I hope you’re right, AOC would be amazing.

I’m having flashbacks to the 2016 primary. They had a guy like Mamdani in policy and principle and decided to put their finger on the scale for Hillary. The 2020 primary wasn’t much better, although it seemed a bit more fair however they could have run anyone and won. Have they finally learned their lesson? They’ll probably be able to win with anyone in 2028 depending on the Republican candidate, so why won’t they run a lackey for the rich again?

I’ll be going to my first dnd session next weekend. Can someone explain why metagaming bob doesn’t like this regulation?

Edit: Thank you everyone! Great explainations.

In theory that could work, but when they all get fired, again, and replaced with military air traffic controllers, Trump will look like he saved the day.

I’m sure everyone would love that and would wholeheartedly support that decision. No blowback whatsoever.

How long has this been the case? And do all of those devices need chips with 3nm process nodes? Why can’t a slightly inferior chip be used?

Didn’t answer my question bot

So they’re not really needed by the average person

What is it about these chips that makes them so special? Are they for something practical or are they for advanced weapons or AI? Why does a country need them so badly?

No fly zone over Ukraine?

It’ll sound a lot better to the average voter to defund the department of war than to defund the department of defense.

I really don’t think most people will just up and murder or rape someone. People are more useful alive than dead and when they’re free vs oppressed. I don’t want to be an ass but I think you watch/read too much fiction. People are better than you think.

I guess that’s what I find confusing. Thanks!

This is so confusing. Which party, if any, was supporting those measures? How’d they get on the ballot?

Again, the article does not support your assertion. It seems you have been led on by the suggestion presented in the article. If you consider the statistics the author presented without that suggestion, you’ll realize they’re fairly unrelated data points that add up to… several interesting, but unrelated data points.

Furthermore, it’s a nation wide data set, right? So how does that break down along state lines? For example, did enough people stay home in Michigan to affect the outcome of Michigan? We don’t know based on the data presented in the article.

Now, would you like to discuss my critical thinking skills? If you have more data I’d be happy to consider it.

I don’t see how your link supports your assertion.

Four parties would be quite interesting. I think we’d need to do away with the first past the post voting system and have ranked choice instead.

I want to push back on your second paragraph because I don’t think it’s quite right. Humans are literally the only species where individuals will cooperate with complete strangers. Pick 5 random people from across the planet, put them in a space together, and they’ll cooperate.

Yeah, it might be too soon to tell. On one hand it’s good to tell the corporate Dems they can’t offer something slightly better than awful, but then empowering the people behind Trump seems so dangerous. People are being harmed, including new people who weren’t being harmed before. Will it be worth it? Will it work out at all? Nobody is guiding this, we’re just reacting. The right is supposed to be reacting, but they have the power.

If that’s true then yes, I think you should stop

Right, not the best. Would you change your strategy?