I believe it could be true, but why would anyone bother. No one’s measuring the things. They could just say they were. I mean who’s going to try to prove how many feet below the surface they are buried. So if the flag pole is 80ft above the surface and 10% below like a standard bury, it’s 88ft. Don’t understand why you would make them taller than the white house though.

Insider trading that is paid for by the people.

I agree that Silwa wouldn’t normally win, but if you have centrists voting for Cuomo and Adams, some centrists and left of that voting for Mamdani, the 300,000+ voters out of a million that voted for Silwa last election may come closer than one would expect.

Hopefully it’ll be 40% Mamdani, 20, 20, 20. But if it appears close I can see Cuomo or Adams "endorsing the other and dropping hoping to get a chance

Yeah, I haven’t looked at much but it looks like Schumer supported the winning candidate because he won and is now going to need support to beat the Republican candidate when that time comes. So yes, in theory Schumer is going to say to vote for the Democrats, but would you rather him support Adams or Cuomo who are going to run as independents now, likely to ensure the votes are split for Democrats, or Silwa the Republican? I don’t know much about Silwa. He’s a 71 year old who focuses all his efforts towards crime it seems. Which being a Republican who is staunchly anti crime just means to me he will be trying to persecute the population for existing in any manner he doesn’t like.

This makes no sense. The vote was blue vs blue, and the guy defending him and people who aren’t sure about him are blue.

You can’t vote or be for against anything but blue in the primary for a democrat.

Unless of course you are just saying no one should have voted for the candidate that you seem to want in?

How could consequences for a civil matter be criminal. Just sounds wonky to me. It would be like saying marriage is a civil matter, but if you get divorced or cheat on them them it’s criminal.

There isn’t much opposition in Tennessee, but Memphis and Nashville still exist. So you have Tennessee judges that have blocked their bills to ban drag shows, hemp products, ID’s for porn, and laws against transporting women in need of health services. They don’t always win long term but they don’t just let everything go through without a peep. I’m sure there are others I don’t remember, but it is always nice to see when they do block something.

“Immigration matters are civil matters, meaning that immigrants – whether they are naturalized citizens or not – do not have the right to an attorney in such cases.”

How can immigrantion matters be considered a civil matter if you criminalized someone’s immigration status?

Example in Tennessee: "The legislation, criminalizing the act of being in Tennessee without legal immigration status, would come with both jail time and an eviction notice from the state. Judges would be required to issue 72-hour warnings to leave Tennessee to anyone charged or convicted of the crime.

The first offense would be a misdemeanor, but would rise to a felony if someone is charged a second or subsequent time."

That means Tennessees courts should immediately shoot that down as unconstitutional because it is a civil matter according to the federal government.

No I haven’t said anything about my sentiment about Waltz. He has said we can’t allow what is/has happened to the people in Gaza to happen, and supported immediate ceasefire though. Which go completely against why you say you dislike him.

…also “lying to us” really? The sentence made no sense. Even Fox pointed out he misspoke and he said Israel instead of Iran. And made fun of him for it. There was more wrong about the sentence than just that… it’s 2 sentences jammed together incorrectly like he looked down and read the next like or something.

That’s not his take though is it, that’s just what you want it to be for some reason.

What’s his take?

So your quoting something that was clearly misspoken as why you dislike him so greatly. The sentence makes no sense as many pointed out on every news station at the time saying he misspoke.

If it wasn’t two sentences garbled together like everyone assumed, who exactly are Israel proxies that he wants to expand? It very clearly was meant to be something along the line of Iran and it’s proxies (referring to the actual subject of the conversation, Hezbollah) are expanding. Hezbollah “expanding” at the time was considered a big threat because the U.S. was dumping shit tons of cash to stop the attacks on ships instead of telling Israel we would sanction them and cut all further support unless they withdrew from Gaza and called an immediate permanent ceasefire. (Which is why Hezbollah was shooting at ships).

Biden should have made an executive order to do so and demanded the sanctions be placed. (which Congress would have said no too, but if the president bluffed, we don’t know if Israel would have stopped or been certain they could wait for Congress to say no).

What do you have against eating orphans? It statistically should drive down homelessness and potentially rent prices. Probably not good for the economy or moral though. Your parents died in a traffic accident, sorry kid… You’re off to the buffet.

So your plan is to give up, or try to change the Democrat party to move further left? A new party couldn’t place a member on the Presidential ballot by 2028. They have to hold positions in multiple states of lower positions to do so, and that would split the possible centrists from the leftists and guarantee another Republican win.

Hating on individual Democrat members who drive the party Congress/Senate to the right makes sense. Hating on the entire party just helps lose support for their party and thereby support the “true” villains as you labeled them.

Could have done what when Biden was president? A bill like this was impossible to pass under Biden even if you could get the Democrats who notoriously don’t line up together to get on the same page. It has to pass both sides of the legislature, and they didn’t have a majority in both sides like Republicans do now.

According to the article it says it requires only 51 votes to override. So “real” or not if the Republicans actually fall in line like always it once again doesn’t matter what the Democrats in the Senate do. There are more than 51 (53) Republican senators, also Vance would vote for it. So they can have 3 people not vote for it and it would override it apparently. I thought the parliamentary would require 3/5 to override, but maybe that only pertained to some of the clauses they took out to ensure it did not require 60+ votes

Haha, hopefully we all get more than 15 minutes and a variety of reasons. I fuck up things all the time because how little I pay attention on here. I quoted something the other day as being Vance when it was Johnson. The only guarantees I can give in life is that I will die and I will make mistakes

Let me help you with that: https://lemmy.world/post/32234525

Sorry, hoping you get a laugh from this. I figured it was the easiest way to link the sub

Hard to say where he really sits without knowing more about him, but voice wise it seems he was calling for people to protest Israel’s actions while not performing them specifically at Jewish events. Which I get. Bringing the protests to specifically Jewish events in the U.S. isn’t protesting Israel, it draws the idea that if you are Jewish you are Israel, which is false. His comments that Palestinians should be able to live without fear I haven’t seen anyone mentioning and the fact that they are quoting him from 2021 saying Israel should be more surgical, 2 years before things escalated from the Oct 7th attack and prior to any ground invasion.

A U.S. Senator speaking about Israel overreach in 2021 is actually surprising.

The electrical college will always look different ways because winner takes all voting. It’s all that matters at the end, but a 1.5% change in the votes would have flipoed most of the battleground states. It was closer than many make it out to be