IIRC two states and several major cities have also successfully implemented rank choice, and in every case it's been because of Democrats.

As more and more local governments make the change, it'll become more popular and gain more support on the national level.

The problem is that any third party that manages to eventually displace a member of the duopoly immediately replaces that party in the new duopoly.

Because the duopoly is a result of First Past the Post (FPTP) voting. As long as we use FPTP the duopoly will persist, just with different parties filling the two roles.

Anything short of switching away from FPTP for some form of Rank Choice is going to be a band-aid, mere temporary relief, and not even a very good one.

I've never had a job where my wage kept up with inflation. My annual raise was always below inflation, and I felt lucky to get annual adjustments at all.

I suspect this is simply an artifact of math. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and as long as the average of the two looks good then the people in charge can nod their heads, say "good good," then go spend a week on their yacht.

Cults are about power, specifically for the leader of the cult. It's reasonable to assume that the mayor of the town and most of his cronies are cult members themselves, willfully working with the cult for mutual gain, or the cult has some kind of leverage over them.

Let the sorcerer get a mob, which while enroute to the cult to rescue their friends will be joined by the sheriff etc.

Meanwhile, the rest of the party will want to fight their way out or die trying, and it won't be fun for them if you railroad their actions in another direction. So, let them! The cultists won't kill them without orders (because maybe it's okay to kill these people, but maybe not, and none of them want to take the initiative and risk upsetting the leader)

The party successfully breaks free just as the sorcerer shows up with the mob lead by the sheriff who's on the cult's side. He then "legally" arrests the party for attacking the towns citizens. The civilian members of the mob are easily quelled and dispersed by the sheriff's men, leaving the party to fight a proper mini-boss battle (the sheriff and his men) OR let themselves be arrested (maybe by the suggestion of the NPC friend?) as a means of getting closer to the truth and whoever is REALLY in charge.

If they fight and win, they'll have a blast and earn their escape.

If they let themselves get arrested, you can advance the plot or have a sympathetic townsperson help them escape stealth fully.

Either way they should have a fun 🙂

Trickle down economics, as a theory, has been around well over 100 years, and it's never been believed in by everybody. Hell, a presidential candidate gave a speech against the idea in 1896

You're correct about misinformation having been around forever, but access to and ease to create misinformation is greater than ever before thanks to the Internet.

The author assumes the Court doesn't understand the consequences of what it's doing, but I really don't think that's a reasonable assumption. It's entirely possible they know exactly what they're doing.

Democrats are not "so called progressives".

Some progressives are Democrats, but not all Democrats are progressives. Most Democrats are not progressives, in fact. Things make a little more sense once you accept that.

But only a little.

IMO you should report the things to the labor board and let them decide. You never know what you might be missing with your own read through of the rules.

Because there couldn't be any legitimate reason to do the things they're banning, like cloud seeding, crop dusting, air dropping seeds for reforesting, I dunno, literally releasing anything as you fly over even like CO2 exhaust as mentioned by the other commentor.

Literally all matter is a chemical, chemical compound, or substance. IMO this law is going to be struck down super fast just for being overly broad. Not that that would stop Republicans from passing it and spending millions of dollars in public money defending it in court.

You mean birth rates + immigration > people leaving the state? I'm shocked! Shocked I tell you.

Seriously though, there does need to be an asterisk after "fleeing" that says "if they can afford it" which, let's be honest, excludes most people who want to leave the state.

My parents were just telling me about a friend of theirs who moved back to Ohio... fucking Ohio... after discovering that retirement in Florida was terrible.

Yeah it must be pretty bad if Ohio and Kansas are looking better.

Never mind that the whole point of a provisional ballot is "I don't know if this vote is valid, but here it is just in case it is valid"

I feel like casting a provisional ballot should protect you in cases like hers, not condemn you!

So what you're saying is, more companies are leaving Russia than they expected.

I'm starting to wonder if they're putting her in the limelight as setup for her being Trump's VP pick.

man who is able to think things out for himself

Otherwise known as a man who ignores people who have actually worked things out for realsies instead of just playing at mind exercises. A man who has "thought it out for for himself" that the earth is flat, modern medicine is poison, and immigrants are lazy criminals here to steal his job.

This is America, we don't go back and redo things just because they were done illegally! Trial results, elections, arrest records... Once they're done, they're done! Nothing to be done about it! Except taxes, they can always redo your taxes.

I wish I could add a /s I really really do

I think it’s pretty authoritarian to seek to stifle any speech.

Ohhhhh you're a free speech absolutist. Gotcha.

There's a fuckton of philosophy and case law behind why free speech absolutism is a bad idea. Maybe you can spend some time looking into that, you might gain some insight into why everyone is shooting you down.

Also, words mean things and while authoritarianism always shuts down free speech eventually, not all restrictions on free speech is authoritarianism. This would be the nuance that you claimed other people refuse to see, that you yourself have eschewed in this case.

These people stopped looking in the mirror a long time ago.

Congress would impeach Biden SO FAST so he could then be prosecuted.

... Unless Biden also made it impossible for Congress to meet to impeach him. Which is obviously against the Constitution, but there's nothing to be done about it as long as Congress can't impeach him.

Checkmate, fascists.

... wait

Yup, it's taxpayer money.

The logic is that shit like this will cause voters to demand change and vote in people who will make sure stuff like this doesn't happen again. But the reality is that most voters simply don't care, and there's a non-zero number of voters who are unhappy because they want the black man to stay in prison whether he's innocent or not.