We don’t know.

The US came back from a US president hiring private goons to spy on his political opponents.

The US came back from a US president illegally selling weapons to Iran to fund right wing militias in South America.

The US came back from a US cabinet member taking literal bribes from oil companies to give them oil drilling rights on federal land.

The US came back from a US president illegally firing a cabinet member and installing his own lackey.

But it didn’t HAVE to.

I don’t think there’s really such a thing as a ‘point of no return’ for a Democracy. But it is possible to get to a point after which you don’t return.

None of the news you read on this app matters. This is at least an interesting tidbit.

It’s a plurality and not a majority, pretty far from a mandate. It’s a legal win.

They did have a primary.

And Hillary won her primary popular vote against Bernie and you’re still pissed about it so seems like the method isn’t the problem for you, it’s that they (“they” being Democrats according to the party rules) don’t pick whoever you like.

1.7% in 2024.
1.9% in 2020.
5.7% in 2016.
1.7% in 2012.
1.4% in 2008.

2024 is not the outlier. It’s mostly about how well the other major party candidate does.

Money you enjoyed wasting, was not wasted. Seems like he enjoys tacky and gaudy things so I wouldn’t say he wasted it.

He is a worse businessman than if he had just left his father’s money in an index fund, despite being in the scummiest and scammiest businesses, including casinos and a fake university, and benefitting from the wild appreciation of NYC real estate in his lifetime.

But that doesn’t mean he wasted his money.

I suspect that is not accurate because of babies that only live for a few minutes or birth defects that require a colostomy.

But everyone who poops, eventually dies.

It’s not that easy because you don’t bribe a Supreme Court Justice for decades because of the one case that might involve a company you’re invested in. They’re trying to align his decisions with their political opinions, and keep him from retiring so someone who doesn’t share their political opinions doesn’t get his spot.

If you cook with your own blood, no animal was exploited because you freely consented.

Ironically one of the only ways forward for them is to open up immigration to more people. GDP is going to be permanently lower unless they go heavy automation like Japan (requiring a lot of capital that is going to be a lot more expensive post-Brexit), or let a lot more people in.

Actually only half of all people saw the obvious downsides. The other half said “nuh uh it’ll be great, way better in fact” with no evidence or facts and folks went with that.

This is like when McCain in 2008, losing in the polls and running out of money, “paused his campaign to focus on the financial crisis.” Pull back from spending money to “make a statement” and hope people see it as taking a principled stand and reward you for it.

I think people saw promise, he is clearly personally smart, but he has proven himself not up to the job at the debates. I think he’ll get the Buttigieg treatment if Trump wins, set him up with some resume fodder and hope he runs in 12 years or something.

And human blood can be vegan!

Remember when Alex Jones said Obama and Hillary were demons that literally smelled of sulfur? I can’t get that out of my head. It’s like people trying to trigger the smell memory mechanism to influence votes, doesn’t ring true to me. Like even if he did smell bad sometimes, it’s not like he literally can’t be clean, he probably just doesn’t shower sometimes and his assorted handlers don’t call him on it or whatever. That could be bad practice as a world leader but it isn’t a permanent thing like his opinions on immigrants and minorities are.

No impact because the Supreme Court is going to overturn their interpretation of the 14th Amendment.

He still is. They want him to run in 2028.

It actually is extremely sustainable to provide stimulus to your economy that is 100% matched by the federal government. Her problem is that it helps the poor.

I bet the article would have more details but neither of us are going to read it so we may never know.

You make the same profit selling food to a starving person or a full person, but the starving person has a higher willingness to pay. The issue WOULDN’T be distribution if it wasn’t for wealth and income inequality.

Wealth and income inequality can be fixed in Democratic Capitalism, you just vote for a tax that is distributed to the poorest people. We just haven’t done that to the degree necessary to solve this problem.

If you think about it, for food, you would sell more if there was less inequality and you could sell to more people at the same price. So if there WAS some all powerful Food Capitalism Cartel they would be in favor of something like a wealth tax to fund a UBI.