Well the democrats seem to be either too weak or unwilling to release the lock on said ratchet, so take your pick. Either way we should still be trying to elect better people to the offices where we can actually make a difference.
Well the democrats seem to be either too weak or unwilling to release the lock on said ratchet, so take your pick. Either way we should still be trying to elect better people to the offices where we can actually make a difference.
You ever hear of the ratchet effect? It only works that way when the 2 controlling parties have similar goals.
Thanks for ignoring the second paragraph.
a president can potentially pick several Supreme Court justices
Only if they have support from the senate.
Plus as the head of state, they are one of the biggest symbols of national identity.
Maybe they shouldn’t be.
If low voter turnout is a problem, and they don’t want to vote for arguably the important role, why would they bother going out and queuing at all?
I’m arguing it’s not the most important role and trying to get people to go vote even if they skip the president part of their ballot.
This doesn’t acknowledge the core of my argument. This doesn’t even contradict anything I’ve said.
That was pretty weird. You’re also misrepresenting my argument. As far as my motivations for posting, they are 1, get people to vote even if it’s not for president and 2, steer more conversation towards local politicians.
If we keep focusing solely on the president we’ll never get better options.
We still have snow sometimes that means there’s no global warming.
That’s included but not the only thing I’m talking about. Also the real point I’m trying to make is if we’re able to elect better people to congress and make those voices unignoreable, then it doesn’t matter who the president is.
You’re so right, because we are not currently living under a full extreme fascist state, that totally means the US isn’t moving in that direction. /s
Then run for office.
Also with how far away we are from elections, I doubt you’ve actually checked what options you have in the more local races.
Do the downvoters think the office of president is the most or only thing worth voting for on your ballot?
Massive support for war and policing. Crack down on protesters. Etc.
That’s actually pretty good. Maybe it’ll say something?
Isn’t this kind of posting just feeding into said noise machine?
If the thing in question is changed, and the only part of us that can directly affect is our opinion, then I would call that a social construction.
We define what existence is. We have all collectively agreed that being here in the perceptible world means that something exists. We could choose to include the imaginary in its definition and then would be able to say that dragons and wizards exist. We could also choose to say something has to be present in 4 dimensions to exist, in which case we’d not be able to say that anything exists.
A social construct is simply an idea that has been created and accepted by the people in a society which includes the dictionary itself. I’d also say that these definitions are often useful at allowing us to communicate and cooperate with one another, but that doesn’t mean we didn’t make up the idea.
Our naming and classification of things is all socially constructed. So yes, our categorization of edible things as food is a social construct, but our physical need to fuel our bodies with something digestible is not. But also, using it that way makes existence a social construct, so it depends on how rigid you want to be.
Here’s my opinion of how to try a bagel in its most classic format, me being someone from the northeast but not New York. Everything bagel, cut in half (like a sandwich), toasted, smear each open face with plain cream cheese (can substitute for veggie cream cheese), eat each half separately.
Otherwise it’s just a different shape of bread like ciabatta or baguette. Personally I don’t love bagels for sandwiches because they tend to not hold up structurally, but bagel is my favorite context for cream cheese.
The actions the democratic party has taken in the past few decades seem to be legitimizing the radicalization of the republican party that is inching the US towards a fascist state. You may be able to argue that’s not their intention, but that doesn’t change the results they’re achieving. Whether they keep the ratchet locked with desire or ineptitude doesn’t substantially change my argument.