I'm removing this comment because you've been reported for trolling.
Be aware that every member of the mod team has brought up your name and the word "ban" in the same sentence, especially for your behavior in other magazines.
I defended you and said no - let's not judge their actions for other parts of the Fediverse. That's how you become r/pyongyang. But when your behavior in this magazine earns reports from other members of the community, we will act on them.
You have a choice right now: you are in full control of your actions to participate in this community by not antagonizing or trolling. Nobody is asking you for ideological agreement, just that you don't spend all your free energy here trying to get a reaction out of others.
Well MTG does CrossFit, so she is probably the stronger of the two. But she also has just more pure surface area of face which makes Boebert's ability to land a punch higher.
TL;DR: It's because his campaign is beating the antivax and COVID restrictions drum, but GOP polling shows that COVID isn't listed in even the top 15 issues of concern for conservatives. Also, DeSantis is somehow boosting Trump's numbers because Trump has managed to play both sides of the vaccine issue with his base.
Shit this gets tricky because I wouldn't want states to not talk to each other about domestic violence if a person is trying to buy a firearm in a new state...
I mean also, if this article were bacon I'm trying to buy, it's all gristle... Surely there's something more substantive to say about this speech out there in the politinews arena?
All Congress needs to do is add three dates to our campaign law: one for the earliest launch of campaign exploratory committees, one for the launch of campaigns proper, and one for a universal primary vote and caucus day.
I agree that the country needs a single primary voting day, but I cannot see how it is possible to achieve when individual states have laws about the day of their primaries. For example, Iowa always has the first primary because it has a state law to ensure it will always have a primary before any other state. As much I believe we would all benefit from centralizing voting (one universal ballot, national holiday across all business for voting, universal primary day), the reality is that all the things that make your voting experience good or awful are under the purview of the states. I don't see any outcome for the proposal in this writing that doesn't end up in SCOTUS with an opinion that reiterates states' rights.
So I think the tactic is to look at the states like a domino run. Iowa has to be the first, but doesn't have to happen any earlier than it does. Why not instead coax the later primaries into pushing back as far as their laws permit, then slinking back primary dates for middle states, etc., until Iowa starts in July instead of March?
I will also throw in that one reason why campaigning in the US takes so long compared to countries in Europe is because we are 4000% larger in geographical area. Yes, I would like to see shorter primaries in the lead up to the general election, but candidates stand to make impact on their numbers and recruit from undecideds and independents through travel and town hall events. Some politicians such as incumbents are still juggling governing while campaigning. I don't think traipsing across the US in 1-3 months would benefit anyone other than extremely wealthy and bored candidates (as in, they don't have anything more pressing to do but travel). I'm not sure this improves the quality of our options, per se.
Personally, I'm against the kind of hunkered down tribalism of the 2-party system. It is challenging and difficult to campaign as a politician who wants to show that you will be responsive to the plethora of various needs and experience that our country expresses when you have to distill down to party purity in order to clench nomination.
But we are in a place where one of those two parties is not running in favor of democracy. It's running in favor of fascism. Until that party has either lost relevancy in American politics to the point it is a neutralized threat or until leadership changes significantly to more democracy minded people, this is a Fascism v Everyone Else election, and as a member of the Everyone Else party, we have to organize and throw everything we've got against fascism. These 3rd party ventures (including Cornell West in the Green Party) need to step down and take several seats. Take what your skill set is and use it to either throw it in the lot to defeat fascism, or shoot, use it to vet real leadership in the GOP if you want to be so bipartisan.
Yes, there is middle ground for these policies, but it wasn't acceptable to people on the right. Safe, regulated abortion on demand for any reason at any point prior to labor is the farthest left; no abortion access even in the event of miscarriages, rape, or incest is the furthest right. We had safe, regulated abortions almost on demand until the end of the second trimester. That was the middle ground and conservatives pushed and pushed to either completely remove access through nonessential bureaucratic hurdles such as how Texas passed a law in 2013 that all abortion clinics have admitting privileges at local hospitals and all hallways and doors in the center had to be wide enough to wheel gurneys through in the event of an emergency - ostensibly solutions in search of a problem, just to shut down the large majority of abortion providers - or have engaged in a decades long push to manipulate the right type of Manchurian president into attacking the Supreme Court into overturning Roe v Wade.
In the years following that 2013 law, Texas dropped from 41 abortion centers to 10. The law was overturned in 2016, but the damage had been done. Leases for centers had changed terms, funding streams dried up, staff had scattered to the winds... If what we already had in place wasn't an acceptable middle ground, then we as a country would have been able to codify Roe v Wade.
To put it a different way: I'm not saying there is no middle ground. They have said there is no middle ground. To use your own words, it's disingenuous to act as though both sides are being intractable in the policymaking process.
If his largest donors have already maxed contributions, then this fundraising model is not sustainable for the transition from primary to general campaigning. Without people on his team who can stretch a dollar (spent $8M in six weeks?!) then he's going to flame out early each quarter.
That is the lowest I've ever seen a margin of error. During general election voter polling, the average is 3-6%, which is why I found the 5% lead Biden has on DeSantis so surprising.
