As a west supporter I'm fine with this. Though I'm not fully convinced on the magnitude of the spoiler effect, eg. If 2% want to vote for west that doesn't mean that those 2% vote for Kamala if he's off the ballot, they'll most likely just not vote. The race in Penn seems really tight though so anything to get Harris over the line is good.
If you arent in a swing state ( eg. Margin bigger then 10%) and think Kamala's tacking too far right then id recommend looking into west. He and stein get a lot of slander on here because people are deathly afraid of spoilers but his platform is actually pretty good if you want to do a protest vote. Again in a non-swing state so everyone doesn't come after me for "helping trump"
If you live in a swing state or any state that is up for grabs, then yeah don't vote for third party. If your in a deep blue/red state, I'm talking > 15 percent swing, vote for whoever you want in the presidential, your votes just going to get collapsed into the state vote for the electoral college any way. Should still vote for the two parties or whoever's competitive in state and local elections because your vote can have an effect.
If the electoral college says my vote effectively doesn't matter in deciding the next president since I'm in California, then at least let me use my vote to send some sort of message.
I mean openais not getting off Scott free, they've been getting sued a lot recently for this exact copy right argument. New York times is suing them for potential billions.
They throw the book at us
Do they though, since the Metallica lawsuits in the aughts there hasnt been much prosecution at the consumer level for piracy, and what little there is is mostly cease and desists.
It is a different level of scale, mastodon has about 1 million users spread over a bunch of instances. Threads has over 200 million users on one instance. also due to the network nature of social media the amount of connections and messages sent through those connections can scale exponentially with the amount of users.
actual leaders should step forward and reject martyrdom culture
Well Israel is killing them as well . Israel will not tolerate any leader who advocates for a free Palestine. Look at the West Bank and how far fatah's collaboration has gotten them, slowly being pushed out by terrorist settlers. This is why Palestine has no future, Israel forbids it. If you peacefully protest you get shot in the leg , if you use violence then that violence is brought back on you 50 fold. Anyone who thinks Hamas just needs to play nice doesn't grasp the full historic context.
this would push investors towards the non-included class of real estate
You'd have to pay property tax then, and unless your in California your paying that on your "unrealized gains" as well since they'll re-asses your property every few years and tax you on the newly assessed value.
He's still polling just under 5%, yeah he's not gonna win but that's still better then any other third party candidate in the last couple cycles and represents millions of (braindead) Americans. Even if you don't support him you should care he's endorsing trump as the race is still very tight and if a majority of his supporters follow him into the trump camp that could be it for Harris.
Where the fuck is he going to go that's progressive enough to not be hostile to his homosexuality but conservative enough not to tax his ungodly hoard. The u.s. is as good as it gets for people like him.
I don't doubt that people don't like migrants, but most people don't like them because they "cause crime" or "take jobs" ( problems way smaller then the right wing media narrative about them) but the people in this photo are doing neither. These people are just existing as people of color which only upsets people who don't like migration simply because it allows more people of color to exist in the u.s. The people who don't like migrants because of that are racists and a minority of Americans, at least I hope they are.
Ask yourself why is the second photo bad and the first one good?
If this was there normal fear mongering of "look at this ms-13 member who raped and killed 5 kids" then yeah a normal person would probably get scared at that and want trump for immigration. But this is just a bunch of black people chilling, they aren't brandishing weapons or rioting or anything out of order. This literally only caters to people who feel threatened by the mere existence of black people, ie. Racists.
I feel more comfortable walking around them, they never blow stop lights /signs, always go the speed limit, never honk (except when parking I guess) and are very patient. If they see a pedestrian they just stop instead of creeping forward making you question whether to walk in front of them and then getting mad when you won't cross in front of their still moving car like people.
Overall pretty promising results, but the one that baffles me is the majority opposition to cutting military spending. Maybe I'm in a bubble but who the fuck looks at current spending levels and thinks that's a good thing, especially now that we aren't even at war. I guess the new cold war is ramping up with China but last I checked were still spending orders of magnitude more then them.
I always thought support for military spending was shallow and manufactured by the military industrial complex, but these polls seem to show a lot of people actually strongly support military spending. Looks like age is the biggest contributing factor, with under 45 supporting cuts while over 45 strongly opposing cuts. Maybe it's a cold war thing, of nostalgia and pride for the Reagan / top gun era american empire.
I think he's pretty strategic, not to any specific state, but to rural Middle America in general. He grew up working on a farm, worked in a factory for a bit, joined the army then worked as a teacher and football coach, he's the salt of the earth common American vance pretends to be. Not saying he'll turn all the rural areas blue but even going from say 20% to 25% will help a lot in those swing states which have a large rural population.
How, all's she's done is express more empathy than Biden, but she still hasn't given any concrete policies that differ from Biden. All the above article mentions is her calling for a temporary ceasefire, which Biden has been doing for months. She hasn't mentioned anything about and still seems hostile to conditioning aid to Israel or promising to stop blocking the UN or ICJ or calling for a permanent ceasefire, those are what Muslim groups should be demanding for there endorsement, not fluffy words of empathy.
Why? Not saying they shouldn't eventually, she's still way better then trump, but you shouldn't give up your one piece of leverage before she's even given any hint of being better then Biden on Gaza.
This is the same candidate who filmed an ad where she is running with a bulletproof vest, a pistol and a rifle down the streets and then says "in America you can be anything you want, so don't be weak and gay" and tagged Andrew Tate on it.
It seems she's amping up the Marjorie Taylor green strategy of saying the most outrageous offensive shit to trigger the libs and rally her bigoted base.
As a west supporter I'm fine with this. Though I'm not fully convinced on the magnitude of the spoiler effect, eg. If 2% want to vote for west that doesn't mean that those 2% vote for Kamala if he's off the ballot, they'll most likely just not vote. The race in Penn seems really tight though so anything to get Harris over the line is good.
If you arent in a swing state ( eg. Margin bigger then 10%) and think Kamala's tacking too far right then id recommend looking into west. He and stein get a lot of slander on here because people are deathly afraid of spoilers but his platform is actually pretty good if you want to do a protest vote. Again in a non-swing state so everyone doesn't come after me for "helping trump"