There not being a better play doesn’t mean that play is a good one. It is a bad play, just the least bad one. What it means the system overall is broken and careening ro a crash, since the actually good plays are not politically viable. Mind you not that they wouldn’t be voter viable, but the gatekeepers who get to choose what is put in front of voters viably don’t want them there, that kind of politically non viable.
Ehhhh. 2016, the year of an open no-incumbent primary? That is not called division, that is called primary democracy working as supposed. Primary is exactly the time, when party membership is under no obligation to show unity. That only needs to happen during the national election stage.
Also just due to winning primary one isn’t as candidate free to ignore other candidate bases. Not out of any high ideals, but hard political reality. No voter is obligated to show up and voters are emotional beings. Slight them and they might stay home (which is the actual risk, instead of them voting for the other party).
It might be “self-harming”, but again voters can be emotional instead of rational. One has to play to their actual psyche, instead of the idealistic perfect rational psyche one would want them to have. Atleast if one wants to win and shouldn’t the aim of democratic party be win by near any means begging, promising the moon to its base, being as enthusiastic and energetic as possible for the national good of avoiding another Trump presidency.
People talk about electorates obligation to avoid another Trump presidency. What about DNCs obligation to go above and beyond to avoid another Trump presidency.
Which is easier to change? The collective psyche layout of 300 million people or one party’s campaign program and political agenda? It’s easier to fix the candidate/candidates program to match the electorate, rather than fix the electorate to match the candidate.
So if there is “division” among party base, it is the candidates and party programs job to move to match, cover and repair the cracks. Not out of high ideals, but since that is the one practically fast enough way to fix the issue. Base isn’t going to suddenly change their psyche and emotional state just, because DNC says to do so out of national good. Again emotional beings, not robotic, rational automatons.
It isn’t about need, but about want. Every extra notch of control they can get over workers employment opportunities, they want.
No it really isn’t that popular, based on polling done just before the Hamas attack.
Like it is among the most supported among Palestinians, but that leaves out the little matter of majority of Palestinians support no one, trust no one. They support no one, see no hope of better future with any path and pretty much are living due to day trying to manage the practical matters of their lives.
Yeah these polls always being in terms like “registered voters” or “likely voters”. Where as they really should poll “eligible to vote” instead to get full picture of the societal political mood situation.
Nor does it remove it from being a war crime. Just being indifferent to whether one hits civilians or not is a war crime. The bar is one has to concern oneself actively with considering how to minimise civilian casualties.
Why do you think USA has abysmal voter turn out… … … … …
Just it will, it it makes the lesser of two evils to turn to be actually good, instead of lesser evil.
Ones power in democracy isn’t in given ones vote It is in withholding it. Your vote is your hostage and the political party is the hostage negotiator trying to get it from you.
If you give away the hostage before the bargaining even begins, you have no leverage. You are nobody, non-entity. Your opinion and your interests don’t matter. Since you always release the hostage, before the negotiating starts.
At some point in comparative lesser of two evils must come the moment of “in absolute measures the evil is too much, even the lesser evil”. Withold vote and the egotistical lesser evil, who doesn’t want to lose to the greater evil has to listen to your concerns and turn course.
Until the first moment you withhold vote, they can happily slide in behind the greater evil just two microns behind them in the evil slide.
Then they stay home to vote “neither of the above” or in more active form cast ballot voting for “Mickley mouse” aka foiled ballot.
Then again not like the “very shoot ourselves in the foot, but just little bit, instead of lot” on decades long repeat leads to anything good.
If ones vote is to be taken for granted, you have no power. Only way you can hold your own side accountable is by threatening to withhold the vote.
That is bargaining. Voting Democrat nomatter what and after that asking could they please do something, that is begging. Begging rarely works as well as bargaining.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Joys of two party system.
Most likely people just get apathy and instead of flipping to Trump, they simply stay home. Which is the other bargain. What you offer for me to bother to go from my home to the voting station in the first place.
That is their play “you can’t take us for granted anymore, we care about our vote and bargaining power on long term enough to suffer on short term to buy long term relevance”.
Whether it works is different matter. I don’t know, if democratic leadership has the where with all to take their left flank of voters as anything but given serval supporters to be kept in line with “but we are only little bit bad, those guys are really really bad”.
Whatever it is called with that kind of caffeine content you warning label it with listing of exactly how much caffeine it has. Well maybe unless it is named literally "coffee" and is plain brewed coffee and at that brewed coffee with the normal levels of caffeine coffee contains.
Ones frappe, whippazino also better have needed labels in cases, since given all they mix how the heck one is to know what exactly is the contents. Oh this is extra special "angry frappe" with double squared shot expresso, so exactly how much caffeine is that dear seller per one glass? I just thought you put chili in it or something to make it "angry", but has literally multiple times more caffeine content.
This is why all the energy drinks atleast where I live have the ever present "contains high amount of caffeine x mg/100ml".
You sell something like that as counter served item with no packaging label to read, well now your menu list must contains at minimum highlights. Something like "our special drunk (HC)" and then somewhere on the menu there reads "HC means high in caffeine". Then obviously at the counter must be a full labeling booklet of "here is our every product from the plainest brewed coffee to our jumbo mega sandwich and special brew beverage with full nutritional information and ingredients"
Just like one can't sell say a pastry in cafe with nut creme filling with out having a big marker on all the menus "contains nuts, nut allergies bevare". Since similarly nut allergic consuming nuts can be life threatening, well for some people consuming caffeine isn't healthy and must be disclosed.
Also how are his bitter water abortion potion brewing skills?
Which is the key problem. Everyone is a "responsible gun owner" and "good guy with a gun"… until sometimes they suddenly aren't anymore. At which point your protection is what was person able to keep under normal circumstances aka what they had in their possession on the moment they had a mental snap.
Was it a semi-auto shoot as fast as your finger pulls rifle with potentially hundreds of rounds in quick swap magazines or do they have a manual action hunting rifle or shotgun with fixed magazine, that need to be manually reloaded.
Do they have a pistol with again potentially hundreds of rounds of quick reload ammunition or don't or maybe a target pistol with fixed magazine.
That is why places around the world have magazine and type restrictions, since they exactly know "checking backgrounds isn't fool proof and now amount of background checking helps again sudden newly emerging situation after the checks have been done".
Sure that 5 round moose hunting rifle will absolutely wreck say those 5 people, but one can't exactly run amock shooting around endlessly with moose rifle. Damage limitation. 5 dead people is better situation, than 22 dead people. As cold calculating as that is.
They are always on the case first. They have feelers through all the various church state separation orgs. As soon as one of the likes of freedom from religion foundation, ACLU etc. Hear about a case, someone is bound to send Lucien a message and would you look at that within days they have found a local Satanist to have standing.
Lucien sends smiling letter to the local government with "I heard there was religious freedom on offer, just give us a week we have the Baphomet statue dusted off from the temple and on the way there. It takes like 2 meters by 2 meters and 3 meters tall. You have free lawn available?"
More like he knows Lucian Grieves of the Satanic Temple has already prefilled a letter with his lawyer friend to have St. Lucifer's Preparatory Academy financed by Oklahoma state funds. Just waiting for the Catholic funding to be upheld and the letter gets mailed. Along with affidavit from a local Oklahoma Satanist who is absolutely enthusiastic about having their child schooled at St. Lucifers.
Like protestant vs Catholic is least of their problems. They have to finance a Wiccan Coven school, Muslim masrada, scientologist school, a norse Viking academy and so on.
Since as the rule goes: can't start making rulings on which religions are in and which are out.
Slashed tire doesn't justify threatening with deadly force. Since that is what it was. How are the protesters to know its a replica airsoft gun from distance and not a real firearm. Person was injured since this person caused a fearing their lives scattering and rampage of people.
Hence why he is in charge for menacing charge. Since that is what it is and why it is a crime. Since society knows just threatening with deadly force causes panic and leads to injuries and damage.
The right response to "someone slashed my tire" us to call the cops and should one catch the perpetrator red handed, take out the obiguitous camera phone and take evidence footage of the likely by now running away perpetrator and turn that evidence over to police. That call insurance company.
What are you gonna do, vote for the other party that definitely wants you dead or at the very least abused and subjugated?
You seem to forget there is a third option, the most likely option in such case. Just not turning up to vote at all.
But the thing is Democrats could change their strategy. Since frankly (I don't know why, seems stupid given how small and hard to catch segment it is) Democrat strategy is to chase the middle of "moderate Republicans and fence sitters".
When I would hazard a guess, if they instead adopted are strategy of exactly focusing on non-voters with democrat leaning would bring them lot of votes.
In general blaming the voter is a bad idea. It is way easier for party to qdapt to voter sentiments with their strategy, than it is for a party to change the emotional and mental state of millions of voters. In this case it is really the customer aka the voter is always right. If one can't convince voter to vote, it is the candidates fault. To play otherwise is to say millions of people ought to adapt to single or couple persons whims. It shouldn't be that way and in general it isn't that way.
Since in practice, if person is apathetic they won't vote. No amount of "but that is stupid of you" will fix it. Apathy is emotional matter, not matter of logic. As much as some consultant might try to assume humans are rational, no they aren't. Humans are inherently emotional beings and party wanting to succeed must adapt to that.
Only way out of apathy isn't fear, it just makes apathy deeper. The way out is hope, promise of prosperity and then delivering on that promise. Since to not do so is to cause betrayed expectations and doubly deep apathy.
Well depending on how they count was there a flip or are the ratios different since certain amount of people have moved to the "not likely voter" category. So instead of flip, there is apathy among democratic voters.
Since they say among black voters, not among black population. Those are two different things and it matters which is it. All voting eligible persons, regardless of likelihood to vote, or just likely voters.
Since voter/not voter is not a fixed grouping, there is constant movement over that line.
Nah. 2k$ was a cheap PR face save for them. Pay 2k$ or deal for weeks and months with “remember how Tesla was a stingy bad corporate and cancelled a large order to a small business without compensation”.
Noh they can go “Well yeah the cancellation wasn’t exactly gracefully, but hey we compensated the business for it. Our bad.”
Mind you even just paying the while 15k$ would have been small change for them. So I guess they are not utterly (business relations wise) horrible company, but still a cheap conglomerate.