![](/static/253f0d9/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
All three have one thing in common: named as potential replacements.
Media moves quick to burn.
All three have one thing in common: named as potential replacements.
Media moves quick to burn.
They wanted it banned. And they got it banned. They saw a chance to win, took it, and won. Simple as.
I mean this strategy is how we got Trump in the first place. Zero lessons learned.
They didn’t forget: they explictly and knowingly realized they could abuse the checks and balances and there would be no consequences. And they have so far been right.
Pritzker is the only name on there with the chops for it. Maybe Walz, but he is DFL so I can’t see the DNC even looking at him.
A year ago almost anyone with the endorsement of Biden would’ve coasted.
Yes, where Mitt Romney is popular Trump’s endorsement doesn’t have as much power. This was just as true in 2018.
Yeah those corpos tipping the scales for progressives. Such a thing.
Is a tree connected to its leaves?
Reading the word as ‘um’ or ‘uh’ in a sentence makes it easier to read. I think a proper editor of the commentary would have truncated excessive ‘like’ use as they would a stammer.
The straw purchase of the murder weapon the judge shrugged and tossed on a whim is something that can land you in jail for 10 years.
There was a parallel case to Rittenhouse: Andrew Coffee IV. He was acquitted in his case but the charge of his weapon possession is what got him 10 years.
But Rittenhouse’s judge figured hey, NBD, and everybody clapped.
Well no one in this chain of comments was saying nuclear is bad and shouldn’t be supported.
There is commentary on the kind of profit motives that result in things like: failed nuclear energy facilities and cobalt slave mining, though.
My guess is: pursuing bipartisanship with the right wing, relentlessly.
While I am inclined to agree: those upfront costs translate directly into time. Time that we don’t necessarily have. Solar and wind are deployable and much less complex of a facility to run overall. For me it isn’t about the best energy producer as it is whichever method gets us of fossil fuels the fastest.
Nuclear has long term capabilities and should be used, don’t get me wrong, but solar and wind are bridges, if you will, to when it can have all the time and money it needs.
Deep blue states can be this way as well. The primaries effectively decide the winner if there is a Republican or else it is a Democrat v Democrat election where its a referendum on the incumbent.
Nuclear disasters vs not producing consistently due to nighttime.
I do find it interesting the method of resource extraction matters for solar components, but rarely any other minerals mined inhumanely for energy.
Like human rights policies are inherent to a solar panel.
Lula’s Brazil had Bolsonaro handled within six months. Banned him from running until 2030 over his January 8th coup attempt in 2023.
The failure to respond in 2021 doomed us all.
Ah maybe it is. It does have that kind of meter to it.
looks at graph
Real wages are still below inflation. Nominal wage growth is what is above inflation.
Which means people are getting more money but it is worth less.
This means economic growth is down, and therefore the overall economy is demonstrably not in good shape.
*Edit To add from the article:
So… this doesn’t mean a whole lot then.