Using the term "articles" is generous considering the dubious sources that get posted here that conveniently parrots a particular viewpoint. The problem isn't necessarily an organizational problem, but moreso a credibility problem in the spaghetti that gets posted. Trying to spot the bullshit from the factual is what I find exhausting. OP is right to filter out this content until this platform figures out how to handle propaganda and innuendo federating like wildfire.

Thomas Jefferson argued that the Constitution should be rewritten every 19 years.

And yet, when I look for my sample ballot:

But regardless, ballots were not finalized until this ridiculous ruling, and the county boards of elections will start making 'legal' sample ballots available shortly.

We don't have sample ballots yet, but this matches our local reporting:

Now LaRose is abusing his position on the Ohio Ballot Board to paint Issue 1 in a comically negative light. The Ohio Constitution bars ballot language that would “mislead, deceive, or defraud the voters.” Yet the board’s description of the amendment states that it would create “a new taxpayer-funded commission of appointees required to gerrymander the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts” to produce “partisan outcomes” (emphasis added). It also declares that the amendment would “repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018,” a gratuitous reference to the failed reforms of the previous decade.

This is grossly misleading of what we approved in the past.

Is this a pasta or are you just a sociopath that wore a trenchcoat in school? It's hard to tell these days.

If that is simple to you, then you really haven't done any research into the subject. Would you call the native tribes of Oklahoma colonizers after they regained much of their land from the state? Of course not, because it's not as simple as I've described it - imagine a non-native Oklahoman calling the Chickasaw colonizers because suddenly they are in the jurisdiction of that Nation? That's what extremists sound like, using charged words that evoke emotions from other situations unlike the one described.

I understand that a line has to be drawn somewhere, and frankly it doesn't matter how far back either's claim goes - there are significant numbers of Palestinians and Israelis who have only known the current boundaries and any changes fundamentally alter their identities. Sure, we can go into the genocides committed against the Jews in the region over the past 2000 years that expelled them from the area and gives cause to antisemites that call Jews "white", or violence perpetrated by Europeans when breaking up the Ottoman Empire and stoking ethnic violence over the past 100. But those claims only matter to the extremists as wedge issues used to divide.

Extremists shouldn't get to determine the future of millions who clearly want to live peacefully together. No one can bring back the murdered, but Israel, regional powers, the US, and European countries owe it to humanity to rebuild the destroyed cities in the same fashion that we intend to rebuild Ukraine.

Israelis and Palestinians aren't monoliths and both groups generally want to coexist peacefully in a region they both have legitimate historical ties to. Yes, to stop the current fighting a ceasefire is needed. However, a ceasefire is not going to solve the problem of the IDF's unrestricted killing of civilians as bystanders in response to Hamas directly targeting civilians as part of their genocidal aims towards Jews (in general).

Just because the Israeli government has more power doesn't suddenly make Israelis the "baddies." There's a reason why Palestinians, and other regional groups, want Hamas gone and look to the West Bank for the PLO to lead the future of a Palestinian state. Hamas takes actions without caring what happens to the people of Gaza as long as they get to kill some Jews (and inspire their killing globally) and provoke disproportionate retaliation from Netanyahu to feed back into their system of civilian oppression.

The moment lasting peace settles in the region, Netanyahu can't continue to avoid his personal legal problems, Hamas can't reach their goal of a global Jewish genocide, and Iran can't continue to destabilize the region and avoid its own internal instability. The fact that weapons manufacturers don't get to profit from this stability is also a global win.

The goal is to prevent the killing of Palestinian civilians and to restore their self-governance where they're settled- also to rebuild. It should be fairly obvious that Hamas is the biggest roadblock. The IDF can then focus on right-wing settlers breaking Israeli law and restore those settlements back to Palestinians in their new state.

carried out by apartheid settler colonialists who want to kill every single Palestinian on this planet

This is the kind of hyperbole that makes it real easy for others to label critics of the actions of current Israeli leadership antisemites.

No, Israelis are not trying to exterminate all Palestinians; Yes, Netanyahu does not care about limiting collateral damage when targeting suspected Hamas militants.

If you're passionate enough to comment, be passionate enough to communicate unambiguously.

I'd rather NASA be funded well enough to not need private, profit-driven, corporations dictating how we explore space. That and Musk's stench sticks to all his companies, for good or bad.

Be angry at the person leaving out "Report: " from the article in this post, not Axios. It's very clear that Axios is reporting on private conversations from its title and contents.

It sounds like you have a misconception of what it means to be transgender, though that doesn't necessarily mean that transracial identity isn't real. I'd rather you provide a more in-depth comparison between the two and draw better similarities before engaging any further. If you want to advocate for a position, understand as much as you can about the topic. The way you describe your understanding of transgender identity in your post does little to assuage any feelings of trolling or JAQing off.

Russia could've turned the aircraft around and scuttled the deal. The government wanted the news of the exchange to only take place after the prisoners touched US soil and couldn't be kidnapped back to Russia.

Kindly explain how a parent has a greater stake in our nation's future. A tangible stake - not some metaphysical "blood ties" or "descendants" stake that they have no tangible relationship with. Make sure that your explanation also doesn't accidentally give slaveholders additional rights for the extra "property" they have.

Bro, you inserted yourself into a conversation where someone claimed that the shooter was cosplaying a Republican and, inexplicably, defended them. The only person you should be getting butthurt with is yourself instead of dropping the inevitable "both sides" shit 🤣

I'd point you to the assassin of John Lennon - he is/was a big Beatles fan but murdered John anyway because of who John became. That still doesn't have anything to do with the parallel argument, in this case, of the likelihood that Mark was pretending to be a Beatles fan or not.

Actions do speak louder than words - this would-be assassin registered as a Republican. The conspiracy theory that he was trying to affect a Primary makes no sense based on timing alone, let alone there not being an iota of evidence indicating he wasn't a Republican. Republicans created the environment for this kid to do what he attempted to do and they should own up to their culpability rather than rely on bots and useful idiots to blame everyone but themselves for this problem.

Apparently it's not uncommon

You know what's incredibly more common? Being an actual Republican and voting in a Republican Primary.

Everyone loves a harmless conspiracy theory, but this theory is anything but. Unless the shooter specifically admitted to this conspiracy theory, peddling this bullshit is reckless. About as stupid as child molesters in pizza place basements that don't exist.

But you are making a choice: you're choosing to only let observable facts influence your beliefs. Everyone is an atheist by default, and most of them are then told to believe what they're told from birth, but at some point people make a conscious choice on how information is prioritized. Humans aren't read-only and I would say it's a safe bet that most people have the opportunity to influence their own beliefs and act accordingly. Obviously if someone is abused and doesn't develop mentally, then yeah, don't hate the person but don't necessarily give up on helping that person develop, either

Sounds like you've never socialized with others who have a stutter. Instead of understanding how different mental/physical impairments affect people, you'd rather just make assumptions and baseless claims that confirm your own biases. Biden's stutter is a well documented ailment that has affected him, in similar ways, for a long time - we just got to see it when he was clearly under the weather.

You can factually disagree with Biden's policies, but to create this elaborate scenario out of whole cloth and purposely ignore Trump's own verbal missteps just tells all of us all we need to know about why you commented.