Non-politicized decisions are wacky, the Sackler decision had Gorsuch and Jackson in the majority and Kavanaugh and Sotomayor in the minority.

“Coincidentally,” the abortion and gun rulings are all exactly the same 6-3 teams based on who appointed them.

It’s pretty much settled fact that this Supreme Court puts ideology over impartiality.

1. It’s a very progressive district, that’s how she got elected in the first place. This is not a surprise.

2. I bet my politics fit closer to the other guy, but I’d still vote for AOC between the two because she has a national influence and disproportionate power in the Caucus. If you’re actually voting to influence Congress towards helping your district in particular, AOC might get that done even if it’s secondary to her national political project. Some moderate guy in a safe D seat would absolutely never get anything for your district.

Dumb framing. They aren’t panicking, they’re framing the results so they can fit them to their narrative no matter what happens. Biden wins = he was on drugs, no way senile and incapable Biden could win otherwise. Biden loses = full proof he’s senile and incapable.

There’s no economic reason the nominal GDP of any country or the world in general has to continuously increase. The important metric is per capita production. As long as people get continuously more productive through innovation, standards of living will continue to increase.

At the national level, vying for long term economic power in the world, a higher and younger population is going to be a huge advantage very soon and countries should be trying to get as many immigrants in their borders as they can. But instead they are…going a different direction.

How often do you wear a suit? Dry clean as necessary, hang it up between uses. I’ve never ironed a suit.

The one example I’m familiar with is a name brand ice cream company that produces the store brand ice cream too…in that case the recipe is different, cheaper ingredients to cut costs to the bare minimum. But using the machines for a higher volume saves money.

I’m sure ‘same exact item’ does happen too but just ‘same manufacturer’ doesn’t mean exactly the same item.

Can’t believe Harriet Tubman got all that infrastructure up.

An 87 year old man using a slur, I feel like you get a slight pass sometimes for being old and not knowing a formerly-commonly-used word has become derogatory.

But he used it, got called out, issued an apology, and then used it again. Yikes.

Metric has been legally “preferred” in the US since 1975. We just don’t use it.

Also while I was looking up that year I came across this wild factoid:

In 1793, Thomas Jefferson requested artifacts from France that could be used to adopt the metric system in the United States, and Joseph Dombey was sent from France with a standard kilogram. Before reaching the United States, Dombey’s ship was blown off course by a storm and captured by pirates, and he died in captivity on Montserrat.

Literally the only answer to this question, though. He can’t say he will pardon him, politically it would be terrible and it might impact the trial itself. And he can wait until after the election and pardon him then, even though it will mean he was lying now.

I don’t think this comment is particularly newsworthy.

It’s not “above the law” when the penalty is still within the range of punishments listed in the law broken. The former president and/or nominee would still be punished according to the law, just at the lower bound allowed by judicial discretion.

I know what I’m about to say is not going to get a ton of love here buuuut…

I’d argue that if you’re a former president, you SHOULD get deferential sentencing. Too much potential for abuse otherwise. Imagine if Trump won in 2024 and suddenly Biden’s document retention case got re-opened and he got the harshest possible sentence.

Similarly but separately, major party nominees should get deferential sentencing. It’s an influence on the political process, and you should err on the side of having less influence. If you lock up a nominee so they can’t campaign, it’s not really a fair election. ESPECIALLY when it’s a crime from 8 years ago.

Like, still get sentenced within the guidelines of the crime, but just towards the more lenient edge. If someone is guilty of murder you can’t NOT put them in prison. But if the penalty for the crime doesn’t require prison, it’s quite a leap to get to prison on a former president, current nominee.

In general, my take is that people should be entitled to a warning, but if they still want to do something to themselves that is a really bad idea and the impact is pretty much on them, well…

This literally is the status quo.

The problem is that the impact is not only on them. There are people who are immunocompromised, particularly the elderly and cancer patients undergoing chemo, and children too young to get various vaccines, and they rely on herd immunity to avoid getting these diseases that might kill them or get them seriously ill or complicate their medical situation. So it’s specifically societies most vulnerable populations that are harmed, which is bad, not to mention the possibility that with enough spread the viruses could mutate and get around vaccines which would threaten everyone else.

And then you have to weigh those real harms against…what, exactly? People just…don’t want to? Because of their incorrect belief that the vaccines are more harmful than helpful?

The government exists to handle externalities like contagion and pollution and caring for vulnerable groups. Arguably, we should be a lot harsher on requiring vaccinations, like how we were on polio. But we aren’t.

Weird to “call for” a riot. Not generally the type of thing you schedule ahead of time.

It was very frustrating that just like what happened with “fake news” which was originally used to describe false news articles generated usually to help Trump, the same thing happened with the concept of a two-tier justice system. Originally describing how wealthy people like Trump don’t get the same justice that poor people do, now Republicans are trying to use it to describe Republicans getting charged for things Democrats wouldn’t be.

He was specifically illegally conspiring to keep it a secret from voters, that’s why it was a felony instead of a misdemeanor falsification of business records.

They passed a constitutional amendment in Florida to let felons vote, a couple years ago. The legislature tried to backpeddle it as much as they could in order to prevent black people from voting, but the main mechanism is forcing the felons to pay a bunch of money, which isn’t a problem for Trump.

This would be a life goal of mine if they could guarantee I wasn’t going to get a damn DVD.

Same way Uber lost money for 7 years straight. Investors.

I need examples or I don’t understand.