The autopsy concluded that so-called “identity politics” don’t resonate with white male voters. The report noted the success of Trump’s attack ads, particularly the anti-trans spots with the kicker, “Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you.”
“If the vice president would not change her position—and she did not—then there was nothing which would have worked as a response,” the report asserts.
Fuck these ghouls
You’ve got to spend some serious time around elephants to find a bigger piece of shit than Ken Paxton.
Prison. The off-ramp should be prison. There. Considered.
Being more likely than packing the court still doesn’t seem likely. They haven’t shown any willingness to actually do anything of substance and this would be a huge thing to achieve. I hope I’m wrong though.
from the article for those curious about how it’s framed:
All this sounds like pie in the sky, if not “un-American,” right? Actually, there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that mandates either single-member congressional district or first-past-the-post balloting. A 1967 congressional statute requires single-member districts. Legislation to repeal or replace it would arguably be easier to enact that some blatantly partisan Court-packing scheme or a ban on partisan gerrymandering that might not pass judicial muster.
It’s possible that Callais’s impact is so dire that it would make such radical reforms suddenly possible and perhaps even palatable across party lines. When it comes to gerrymandering, we are clearly entering the “hyper-partisan doom loop of escalating division and polarization” that led Drutman and others to embrace proportional representation and fusion voting. Donald Trump is the perfect expression of the prevailing style of politics, and Democrats who fear and despise him should think hard and think big about how to escape the poison.
The idea is proportional representation, and “could” here of course means if we grant that it had any real chance of happening.
Respectfully disagree.
While it doesn’t comport with many (better) people’s concepts of it, these people aren’t all hopped up on secular humanism when they ban books and open de-transition centers
BREAKING: I can say anything I want like this. Do you have a source?
Their point is it’s a job title and working for the worst offenders in big tech isn’t entailed in that. You can work in tech by writing surveillance software for Palantir or you can work in tech by being the website admin for UNICEF. Both are tech workers, but only one is part of the problem.