Why? Because she can count? Because she can be stern to her caucus and get them to STFU?

She took impeachment off the table for Bush.

Volunteer. Social connectedness is the factor most correlated with happiness.

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.

Beer is oddly terrible and weak in Australia but Toohey’s Old is good, more rare down here in Vic though

Yeah that’s some Pope shit to do

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?

Well they are in the category of bad MLK statues but yeah I agree oral sex is not very similar to a stern expression

This statue of King was also thought to be an improper depiction.

“We don’t even see his feet. He is embedded in the rock like something not yet fully born, suited and stern, rising from its roughly chiseled surface. His face is uncompromising, determined, his eyes fixed in the distance, not far from where Jefferson stands across the water. But kitsch here strains at the limits of resemblance: Is this the Dr. King of the “I Have a Dream” speech? Or the writer of the 1964 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech?”

-Edward Rothstein

*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)

deleted by creator

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.

deleted by creator

Lieberman.