Advertisement Β· 728 Γ— 90

Posts by Michael Anderson

what??

2 minutes ago 0 0 0 0

People seemed to have gotten very annoyed by the party "not having" a primary in 2024 and Harris being anointed etc. Now in theory the viability of additional parties mitigates all that but selling it may be difficult.

1 hour ago 0 0 1 0
Post image

I was initially lukewarm on Steyer, but I’ve come around to the idea that it’s actively good to have a billionaire help lead the charge to tax billionaires.

1 hour ago 248 26 20 2

What is the best non list based PR model? I worry a ton about selling the list structure to the public and think it has the most problematic constitutional issues (though I am open to being wrong there)

1 hour ago 1 0 1 0

WHAT?!?

2 hours ago 2 0 0 0

At least at the state level for federal offices. I think the ethical question becomes important when/if dems have the power to institute a national reform plan for house of representative districting.

3 hours ago 0 0 0 0

πŸ‘€

3 hours ago 1 0 0 0

The thing is there are some statements that truly are universal it just that these are not them.

5 hours ago 1 0 0 0

Personally that is why I think these kinds of categorical statements are bad. They always smuggle in some set of unstated assumptions

5 hours ago 6 0 2 0
Advertisement

You are incorrectly thinking there is one filibuster and that changing this rule would at all effect or implicate the 60 vote threshold for normal legislation when it would not. This senate has already voted to change rules for nomination timing and block consideration by a simple majority.

5 hours ago 0 0 0 0

*and it

5 hours ago 0 0 0 0

No, nominees already only require 50 votes for cloture. They would simply be going nuclear on this one rule at would not impact the legislative filibuster.

5 hours ago 0 0 3 0

Yes, and a dem or Tillis would object that the rules require 60 and then a majority would vote to overrule the objection.

5 hours ago 0 0 1 0

The majority can change the rules anytime it wants and has done so already during this Congress.

5 hours ago 2 0 1 0

As a background matter it is ALWAYS true regardless of what the rules may say right now on paper.

5 hours ago 0 0 1 0

So thats not exactly true. The full senate can vote to discharge the nominee from the committee.

5 hours ago 4 0 2 0

Do we know that he doesn’t have the votes in the full Senate?

5 hours ago 0 0 0 1
Preview
Vote Blue No Matter Who: Party Politics as Political Agency Politics is a collective enterprise aimed at controlling the state, and requires working together as co-partisans.

"vote blue no matter who" includes sewer socialists

www.liberalcurrents.com/vote-blue-no...

5 hours ago 295 47 11 11
Advertisement

Matt has some good sober thoughts here even though I generally disagree and would vote for the amendment if in VA. I will, however, be pretty mad if dems do not move to fix the collective action problem here nationally when they next have unified control.

6 hours ago 2 0 0 0

I think this may be what people mean when they say you are "intense," a lot to unpack here. But you keep doing you!

6 hours ago 2 0 0 0

I think adopting a party list system is going to be way to big a lift. Voters have just too ingrained an association with voting for a specific candidate and legitimacy. (see eg all the squawking over Harris being "installed"). Maybe eventually we get there, but there have to be intermediate steps

8 hours ago 1 0 0 0

Usually no for the obvious reasons! But the most recent round of this discourse was set off by Corry Booker shaming some individuals for abstaining from voting for Harris in 2024.

8 hours ago 2 0 2 0

Need to read the piece still, but in general I am on board. However, the dynamics at play are complex and I think its important to note that elected politicians making these kinds of arguments tends to be the worst situation as it has the air of entitlement and tends to lack true reciprocity

8 hours ago 3 0 1 0

We are so back!

8 hours ago 1 0 0 0
Post image

Iowa polls

Governor
🟦 Rob Sand: 51%
πŸŸ₯ Randy Feenstra: 39%
β€”β€”
Senate
🟦 Zach Walls: 46%
πŸŸ₯ Ashley Hinson: 44%
β€”
🟦 Josh Turek: 46%
πŸŸ₯ Ashley Hinson: 45%

netchoice.org/new-72-of-am...

8 hours ago 200 35 13 48

I would like to know more for sure, but I think the act of having to continually reapply it is part of the point.

18 hours ago 0 0 1 0
Preview
Israeli Soldier in Lebanon Sledgehammered a Statue of Jesus

"The military ... said it was working to assist the community in Lebanon to restore the statue to its place."
(Really? Maybe worth mentioning that this village is in the Israeli buffer zone and the residents may never be allowed to come back.)

18 hours ago 3 1 1 0
Advertisement

AH OKAY.

this is a recalled R+11 sample. 51/40.

I’ll fuckin take it

1 day ago 24 4 2 0

This was very hard for me btw 😭

20 hours ago 3 0 1 0

The thing is if you do not feel it and find no personal motivation to change, changing for others would be both bad and doomed to fail. The ultimate goal is to find a partner who jives with you as you.

20 hours ago 4 0 0 0