Ah, gotcha. I misunderstood.
Andrew Jackson was also a bastard, especially for his treatment of natives. But I meant Johnson.
It is complicated because the rules are different in each state. Also, Trump was convicted in New York state but he resides and votes in Florida.
For out-of-state convictions, Florida defers to the other state’s rules. New York would allow Trump to vote if he resided there because he is not currently in prison, so Trump can vote in Florida legally.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-felony-conviction-can-he-vote-b95e7b4c9158d999e8bc89b00fbda911
While W. sucked in many ways, there is no way he is the worst. Off the top of my head I can easily think of four better contenders: Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan (both guilty of pro-slavery fuckery before the Civil War), Andrew Johnson (fought to let the Confederates off the hook after the war and opposed the 14th amendment), and Donald Trump (first president to be impeached twice, first to be convicted of a felony, and may be remembered by future historians as the spark that ignites the next Civil War).
Seems like the world has moved away from that
Assuming that the world was once just, and recently changed to become unjust, is completely flawed. History provides endless examples of people with power and money doing horrible things and facing little or no consequences.
Oh, I completely get it. It’s a battle of delayed gratification versus instant gratification. I can take care of business now and have stress-free fun later, or I can have fun now and let future-me deal with the consequences.
Smooth, predictable operation requires forethought, planning, and willingness to stick to a process. It’s not nearly as fun as living in the moment and improvising.
Thank you, kind stranger!
Can we get a NSFW flag, please? This literally almost became an uncomfortable conversation with my coworkers.
No information is the best option. How bad the misinformation is depends on intent. Is the misinformation a lie intentionally told to conceal a truth? Or is it bullshit, information intended to persuade regardless of truth?
Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them, although the response of the one is guided by the authority of the truth, while the response of the other defies that authority and refuses to meet its demands. The bullshitter ignores these demands altogether. He does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attention to it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.
From Harry Frankfurt’s essay On Bullshit
This would fit better in !askmeanything@lemmy.ca.
The Onion got new owners earlier this year, and they seem serious about making it a sharp and relevant publication
Loved that show.
In a similar vein, I’m curious about the modern consensus on “you guys,” as in, “what do you guys want to do this weekend?”
Or result in US businesses moving their trade dollars from tariff-affectrd countries to others that could really use the money, like Mexico or Central America.
Here in the US, I first learned about this from a Japanese exchange student. We quickly told him not to try it. Dude would have gotten his ass kicked by whomever he poked.
Of course Wikipedia has a helpful diagram for those who don’t know about Kanchō.
How large a flag are you flying? Simple window mount flag holders should work for flags up to about 18" x 12". For a bigger flag, if you have a trailer hitch installed you can get hitch mounted flag pole holders.
Nice flag, btw.
Yes, voters choose the candidate when they participate in the primary. But before the primary ever happens there’s a lot that goes on in terms of determining who will run in the primary, and what resources they have to run a viable campaign.
Political junkies talk about the “invisible primary,” which Vox’s Andrew Prokop, in an excellent overview, describes as “the attempts by important elements of each major party — mainly elites and interest groups — to anoint a presidential nominee before the voting even begins. … These insider deliberations take place in private conversations with each other and with the potential candidates, and eventually in public declarations of who they’re choosing to endorse, donate to, or work for.”
Clinton dominated this invisible primary: She locked up the endorsements, the staff, and the funders early. All the way back in 2013, every female Democratic senator — including Warren — signed a letter urging Clinton to run for president. As FiveThirtyEight’s endorsement tracker showed, Clinton even outperformed past vice presidents, like Al Gore, in rolling up party support before the primaries.
Not only did the DNC go out of its way to steer resources toward Clinton, there were leaked emails wherein party officials were brainstorming ways to undermine the Sanders campaign with negative messaging.
This is a better fit for !politicalhumor@lemmy.world. I’m going to remove this one due to the community “no politics” rule.