Hey, I spent some of 2009 and also 2013-2014 in Kenya working alongside USAID folks

Not calling you a liar but could you please educate me? My experience was that the goal was the opposite.

Now, wading through shitty opportunistic local capitalistic scumbags was an issue, but a separate one.

Such better political discussions here than on Reddit

Bang. That’s the way it could feasibly play out.

I’m trying to think of other possible justifications that the Supreme Court could use. Could they possibly nullify or neuter the 22nd Amendment? What justification could they use based on historical precedent, which the Heritage Foundation members cling to so tightly?

Could they just delay, delay, delay until making a decision after the election, then citing said election as precedent?

I am not familiar with the majority opinion in Trump v Anderson which must have laid out the legal reasoning why the Supreme Court was able to keep Trump on the ballot. It looks like it uses a clause in the fourteenth amendment to simply devolve the decision making power which seems to be an effective dodge and deflection to political winds.

Am also Aussie! I know that the Fair Work Commission and a bunch of unions negotiating award rates consider CPI but is that just one factor they consider or the whole enchilada?

*Trump’s former National Security Advisor

He should be in jail but prob not for whatever they’re charging him with

Edit: just read the charges. If they have evidence he should be in jail for this stupid shit too. Also Trump and Hillary Clinton and maybe Joe Biden

I am also a bit of an accelerationist.

I can’t help but think that if the Democrats could improve conditions for the common people without resorting to tactics that undermine the principle of one man = one vote, we’d see them getting a lot more votes.

They could keep up the pressure to eliminate the electoral college, for example.

Unfortunately there have been just enough shitty centrist dems elected, and a plurality of even shittier Republicans being elected, to block the best proposals. The best hope we had for universal healthcare, for example, was blocked by one man - Joseph Lieberman.

To say nothing of the corporate interests and billionaire donors that influence policy making in the party, and the feckless leadership, that is.

These are a couple of great points:

1. Minimum wage should be tied to inflation

Economist Robert Schiller has proposed a similar idea where we set up a reactive economic policy to execute automatically when some measures of inequality (e.g. the Gini coefficient) rise above a predefined level.

2. An inter-state pact to manage the effect of gerrymandering

Great idea. Reminds me of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact)

I feel alone in my opposition to this proposition. Especially on this platform where most believe the ends justify the means.

You can’t answer voter disenfranchisement with more voter disenfranchisement. District lines should always be determined in a nonpartisan way, full stop.

That having been said we should implement more federal control of voting, at least for federal contests.

I also have much more radically left views in some ways. For example that we should use jury nullification against the emerging American gestapo, have zero tolerance for sieging the fucking capitol building (including shooting those who try), remove corrupt Democratic leadership by prosecution if necessary, etc.

But democracy is democracy. I still have loyalty to enlightenment ideals ffs.

Lieberman.

Fifth circuit

He is a fucking fascist that tried to overthrow the government. Why are we concerned with whether he declined from bad to worse?

Exactly. Americans are insanely cowardly nowadays.

We’ve been voting centrist for decades now and the nazis have more power than ever.

Signed, a Harris voter

Is this debate fundamentally about stare decisis regarding that 5-4 Citizens United decision which specified that the first amendment rights of collectives should be upheld…. versus… the first amendment rights of the electorate as a group in deciding, by 75% majority, to remove such protection?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksempfänger

Hosentashe means pants pocket

It’s so American to put a price in this headline

It’s not inconceivable that foreign nations will use the USA as a sort of dumping ground for undesirables - if they can be reliably pipelined to CECOT in El Salvador, it is a way of laundering humans. Of trafficking to the point of disappearance.

Comey has kind of hilarious judgment. And I read his book and everything.