And how does it look when he fires the guy investigating his son? That’s the same shit we derided trump for doing… tinkering with the Justice Department which has long operated with a high degree of independence for exactly these reasons.
No win situation for Biden, who assumed he would get another term in office. Don’t pretend it isn’t anything but.
Electricity is pretty consumable
Even if the court says they can’t revoke, the court has no power to stop them.
25’ against what, humans?
I got news for you, birds that get shot are usually more than 25’ away.
They should really issue some sort of identification showing to which quadrant you belong so that friendly quadrants will accept you as a visitor with open arms.
For small spaces with limited occupancy, you can get away with opening into the room. Main exits are push, unless it opens onto a public sidewalk and not a stoop or something.
Europeans: haha you guys have no history!
Also Europeans: haha you’re curious where your family emigrated from! Losers!
Yes, and you abolish FPTP and now you elect a president how? I’m interested in your proposal, because it’s incomplete to say get rid of FPTP… Otherwise top vote getter, who gets maybe 30% of the vote leads the country which is also an abomination as 70% didn’t vote for that person.
Abolishing FPTP requires doing something else on top of it, ranked choice or run off would be better than the highest count.
Okay so you go with what system?
Let’s say the breakdown of votes looks the same as the Swedish breakdown. There will be more people that voted for a different candidate than the red one (Social Democrat).
This then requires a run off system like france, or a ranked choice, which is also fine to propose, but you can’t hold up a visual of a parliament and say the system is so much better, when we talk about one singular office.
The post compared two things that have different end goals
This fixes congress. How does this fix the presidency, which is one single office?
All they need is 5 SCOTUS justices to agree the text means whatever.
Then you need a different SCOTUS session to disagree or all of that to fix the text
That’s some Sov Cit level legal gymnastics.
“This undocumented immigrant is just travelling, we have no jurisdiction over them”
So why do women who doomed this country still get to enjoy the finer things?
It’s not like women turned out in droves for Harris either. Who’s going to withhold from the women that dropped the ball?
I have no idea, but if there is such a rule, it doesn’t matter when the car costs this much. Rich people are gonna do rich things.
Imagine you’re a deer bear. You’re prancing along, you get thirsty, you spot a little brook, you put your little deer bear lips down to the cool clear water… BAM! A fuckin bullet rips off part of your head!
Originally started typing something to a completely different post. Whoops.
But yes, that becomes the challenge when deciding to stake employees versus a simple profit share.
Staking employees gives them longer term incentives, whereas profit sharing will be fundamentally a sales commission.
I believe it happened before. He was on the outs, but it was the death knell.
Vesting periods, increasing stake over time, and conditions that shares are sold back to the company upon exit. You’d need to figure out how the valuation is done.
Basically turns out into a bonus with deferred payment and a chance for growth of the bonus if they work hard to support company growth.
But if the defense was “I panicked and hit the gas when people surrounded me” this is something that would poke quite a few holes in that argument.