Trump 2nd term prediction thread
So, looks like Trump not only smashed the electoral college, but is looking on track to win the popular vote, which seems to be an unexpected turn of events, but a clear sign of the current temperature in the country and perhaps the wider world.
Would be interested to hear views on how his 2nd term will pan out from both sides of the aisle - major happenings, what he's going to get done, what he's not going to get done, the impact of his election on the current conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, whether his popularity will remain the same, wane, or increase, etc.
A bit of an anemic OP, I know, just interested to hear people's thoughts now that the election uncertainty is over.
I said you don't have positive rights in the american federal constitution that was the topic (ofc a generalization and perhaps a bad one as the right to a lawyer is definitionally a positive one. But you don't have positive rights to general welfare, education, healthcare and the like).
That was the topic given the 1a purported violation was a federal one and it isn't a violation as there is no positive right to subsidized speech, that was the topic originating the conversation on positive/negat
The constitution saying or not saying something doesn’t mean that it’s not a staple of American life. State courts are also not in the constitution (which sovereign citizens constantly bring up) but it’s irrelevant because they are still a fixture of American life.
Have you ever been to South Dakota? No one ****ing lives there. Had she done that in a dense area they would have been piling up bodies.
The problem you have with covid is you're using information we know today about it and trying to retroactively apply that information. It doesn't work that way with novel viruses.
They would not have been "piling up bodies".
I started pandemic in South Carolina before moving to Arizona then to Missouri-- all red states and all with pretty limited lockdowns. Everyone was fine. No one died.
Pandemics are much easier to manage in a state like South Dakota because the population density is so low.
This is false given that having empty space is irrelevant and mortality in urban areas where most if the people live, even if you want to believe it depends on density, will depend on local density not in state density which is a completely irrelevant data point for all purposes.
Sioux Falls has a 2k/sqml pop density which is kinda in the low side for urban areas but doesn't make it "much easier" ti manage a pandemic even if you believe that pop density is key.
Confront with cities with similar population and density and tell me how many had the same violent authoritarian provisions Sioux Falls had
The constitution saying or not saying something doesn’t mean that it’s not a staple of American life. State courts are also not in the constitution (which sovereign citizens constantly bring up) but it’s irrelevant because they are still a fixture of American life.
But it means that you can legally remove it without violating any right, IE acting perfectly legally if you do, if you so choose after being duly elected, which... Was the point.
Pocket0 claimed trump policy proposal to condition federal money to college on them promoting and defending american and western values was a violation of free speech.
It simply isn't
This is false given that having empty space is irrelevant and mortality in urban areas where most if the people live, even if you want to believe it depends on density, will depend on local density not in state density which is a completely irrelevant data point for all purposes.
Sioux Falls has a 2k/sqml pop density which is kinda in the low side for urban areas but doesn't make it "much easier" ti manage a pandemic even if you believe that pop density is key.
Confront with cities with similar po
You could construct a mythical state that had a low overall population but a population where most people lived in a densely populated area. But as you point out, that isn't SD. SD's largest city has less than 1/4 of the state's total population and isn't particularly densely populated.
Have you ever been to South Dakota? No one ****ing lives there. Had she done that in a dense area they would have been piling up bodies.
The problem you have with covid is you're using information we know today about it and trying to retroactively apply that information. It doesn't work that way with novel viruses.
Freedom is always more important than everything else, you don't need any information to make that claim.
And behaving like that is actually true with no ifs and no buts even before having the full picture was the moral test.
If you aren willing to die for freedom you don't deserve either freedom or life in the right libertarian ethos.
And Noem splendidly confirmed that and for me, that's such a spectacular show of moral perfection I was in awe at the time
You could construct a mythical state that had a low overall population but a population where most people lived in a densely populated area. But as you point out, that isn't SD. SD's largest city has less than 1/4 of the state's total population and isn't particularly densely populated.
Mythical like... Sweden? Where (country) density was absurdly used to claim they didn't face the same problems everyone else faced?
Sioux falls is a normal (for the USA) non super-dense urban area.
People lived normally, some distancing voluntarily (that's what freedom is about), some living like before, no need for violent mandates.
Not easier to do than in any other equivalent urban area in California or Texas or Colorado and so on
As Trump fills his cabinet with the usual ghouls, some of his base is getting upset. There is a large segment of his supporters who are anti-war. Some are libertarians, some have other reasons. But they took him seriously when he said he was a candidate for peace. Looks like they'll be disappointed. It'll be interesting to see how they react.
I would imagine his supporters will do the same thing the Dems would do. claim that his picks arent that bad, ignore their supposed principles, and claim Dems would be worse.
As Trump fills his cabinet with the usual ghouls, some of his base is getting upset. There is a large segment of his supporters who are anti-war. Some are libertarians, some have other reasons. But they took him seriously when he said he was a candidate for peace. Looks like they'll be disappointed. It'll be interesting to see how they react.
You would think they'd remember from 2016 or at the very least remember when he made Bolton secretary of state but I guess many were too young to remember such things.
^^
Please don't listen to this troll.
Eating this lifestyle is by far the best kept secret in human nutrition. It will heal anyone from any psychological issue such as depression, anxiety, panic attacks or suicidal thoughts along with many other ailments. These are absolute facts, it's not bull****.
^^
Please don't listen to this troll.
Eating this lifestyle is by far the best kept secret in human nutrition. It will heal anyone from any psychological issue such as depression, anxiety, panic attacks or suicidal thoughts along with many other ailments. These are absolute facts, it's not bull****.
Symptoms also include gout, scurvy, and insane diarrhea.
The good news is we will still have some semblance of a defense against the 1st amendment attacks that will come from the incoming administration.
BATON ROUGE, LA. (AP) — A new Louisiana requirement that the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public classroom by Jan. 1 was temporarily blocked Tuesday by a federal judge who said the law is “unconstitutional on its face.”
U.S. District Judge John W. deGravelles in Baton Rouge said the law had an “overtly religious” purpose, and rejected state officials’ claims that the government can mandate the posting of the Ten Commandments because they hold historical significance to the foundation of U.S. law. His opinion noted that no other foundational documents — including the Constitution or the Bill of Rights — must be posted.
....
In granting a preliminary injunction, DeGravelles said opponents of the law are likely to win their ongoing lawsuit against the law. The lawsuit argues that the law violates the First Amendment’s provisions forbidding the government from establishing a religion or blocking the free exercise of religion. They had argued that the poster-sized display of the Ten Commandments would isolate students, especially those who are not Christian.
^^
Please don't listen to this troll.
Eating this lifestyle is by far the best kept secret in human nutrition. It will heal anyone from any psychological issue such as depression, anxiety, panic attacks or suicidal thoughts along with many other ailments. These are absolute facts, it's not bull****.
So true. It's why we get to enjoy the emotional trainwreck of DNegs every summer in his Vlogs. His diet is absolute ultra-processed and sodium infused bullchit yet he thinks its actually healthy for him, its quite hilarious.
The good news is we will still have some semblance of a defense against the 1st amendment attacks coming from this administration.
BATON ROUGE, LA. (AP) — A new Louisiana requirement that the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public classroom by Jan. 1 was temporarily blocked Tuesday by a federal judge who said the law is “unconstitutional on its face.”
U.S. District Judge John W.
Louisiana state government isn't "this administration" and yes courts work well to fend off attacks from the religious right as they always did, one would hope they worked the same when pseudo-religious indoctrination was mandated or forced in school (rainbow LGBT stuff, rewriting of history and so on) but that's not the case yet.
You are protected because the horrific set of ideas of the worst right comes from a religion, while the rest of society if an equivalently horrific, or worse set of incredibly controversal ideas is "just progressivism"
Even if it's by PB, try to check the claim.
If you substitute calories from refined sugars with fatty meat and cheese you are going to be better of in the vast majority of cases (as the vast majority of people on your countries eat too many refined sugars).
Ofc it's even better to eat a balanced diet that rotates between all main food sources, better if non of them are ultra processed, better yet if fresh and you minimally cook and process them yourself.
And buy veggies and fruit *in season*.
Better if you avoid combinations that don't work well for your body (steak + potatoes is bad for a lot of people but it's hard to realize it is and give up on that for example, deep fried cooking style is bad for others, and so on) which you should constantly test and verify (and we can change in time with age and life events).
But if you want to go on denying diabetes is systematically made worse if not caused by overconsumption of refined sugars and excessive amount of ultrarefined cereals go on, but I think you know you would be lying.
