Trickle down economics, as a theory, has been around well over 100 years, and it's never been believed in by everybody. Hell, a presidential candidate gave a speech against the idea in 1896
You're correct about misinformation having been around forever, but access to and ease to create misinformation is greater than ever before thanks to the Internet.
Democrats are not "so called progressives".
Some progressives are Democrats, but not all Democrats are progressives. Most Democrats are not progressives, in fact. Things make a little more sense once you accept that.
But only a little.
IMO you should report the things to the labor board and let them decide. You never know what you might be missing with your own read through of the rules.
My parents were just telling me about a friend of theirs who moved back to Ohio... fucking Ohio... after discovering that retirement in Florida was terrible.
Yeah it must be pretty bad if Ohio and Kansas are looking better.
Never mind that the whole point of a provisional ballot is "I don't know if this vote is valid, but here it is just in case it is valid"
I feel like casting a provisional ballot should protect you in cases like hers, not condemn you!
Congress would impeach Biden SO FAST so he could then be prosecuted.
... Unless Biden also made it impossible for Congress to meet to impeach him. Which is obviously against the Constitution, but there's nothing to be done about it as long as Congress can't impeach him.
Checkmate, fascists.
... wait
Yup, it's taxpayer money.
The logic is that shit like this will cause voters to demand change and vote in people who will make sure stuff like this doesn't happen again. But the reality is that most voters simply don't care, and there's a non-zero number of voters who are unhappy because they want the black man to stay in prison whether he's innocent or not.
Can't be prosecuted unless Congress acts first? Detain Congress before they can act. Easy peasy, dictator for life.
they aren't
You just haven't seen it yet. Try coming out to them as trans, see how that goes for you.
It's not about nuance. It's about deal breakers. For some people, a deal breaker might be something like poor hygiene. For other people, it might be voting for or otherwise supporting politicians who belong to a party that's actively trying to curtail human rights for anybody who isn't a white cishet man.
That you or anybody else would find the first example acceptable, but not the second, is ridiculous.
There's the thing about "'Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." But then there's it's corollary "any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
I'm other words, Molyneux should know better by now, and the fact that he clearly doesn't can only come from a willful refusal to.
IIRC two states and several major cities have also successfully implemented rank choice, and in every case it's been because of Democrats.
As more and more local governments make the change, it'll become more popular and gain more support on the national level.