zkfcfbzr

Are you thinking of Snowden?

Not to mention released the next day, and reportedly in good health and high spirits since. Like, talk about best possible outcome.

My attempt - it got there in the end at least

Hi, this is Andy here, the Founder/CEO of Proton. As former scientists, we don’t do what we’re doing to make the most money (otherwise we wouldn’t have picked science as a profession). There’s no price which we would sell Proton to Google or Facebook. We also don’t need to because thanks to the strong support of the community, Proton has the resources to thrive and grow as an independent organization. Safeguarding this independence is how we ensure that over the long term, we can always put user interest above all else.

-Protonmail Founder, 2 years ago, for what it’s worth.

And on top of that, they’re predictable hundreds of years in advance. We’ve known exactly when and where this eclipse was going to happen since before her grandparents were born. But somehow it’s a bad omen.

Don’t leave us hanging. Was the wolf hybrid on Christmas Eve too?

Kinda funny that William Henry Harrison managed 41st place, considering he was only president for a few weeks in 1841. Considering the rankings were voted on by “self-styled experts”, part of me wonders if they did that on purpose.

Also took me a moment to realize why the list includes 46 presidents (up to Biden) but only has 45 rankings. For anyone else who’s wondering, it’s because of Grover Cleveland’s non-consecutive terms making him both the 22nd and 24th president.

This seems like a strict improvement over the old situation, in a way that should be directly felt by lots and lots of people every single day.

I don’t get the urge to take a needlessly cynical take on news like this. Yes, the system is still flawed, but yes, it’s better than it was before. Take the win and move on to the next reform.

Was it even still around? I can think of a few times in the past few months where I’ve tried to find the cached link to a google result and failed. Most recently just two days ago, when a site I wanted to use was down for maintenance.

I saw the Youtube banner telling me it detected an ad blocker and wouldn’t let me watch a lot for about a week. Now it’s been over two months with nothing but smooth sailing on μBlock Origin. I’m even back to being able to block Shorts from appearing on my sub feed, where before it seemed like any YT-specific filters would let them detect the blocker.

This stance has nothing to do with anglocentrism and everything to do with making Lemmy usable. You set your languages in your profile so you’ll only see posts and comments in those languages. No one likes seeing lots of posts in languages they don’t understand, and that that only happens when people are too lazy to set the language indicator. I’d fully expect and encourage non-English speakers to downvote improperly tagged English posts in their feed as well.

I downvote non-English results I see on my All page as a punishment for not correctly setting the language on the post, which takes 1 second to do and would ensure it doesn’t spam the feed for non-speakers. I can’t imagine I’m alone - was the post in question not correctly tagged as Polish content, like your post is correctly tagged as English content?

If it was correctly tagged, then those downvotes were all from people who speak Polish.

I think this is true of traditional Republican voters - their ability to fall in line and unify, both as a voter base and legislative block, has been a strength for decades (notably less so more recently). But I’m not so sure this applies to Trump’s core voters. They seem much more of a “my way or the highway” crowd.

That said, I don’t think the reason they wouldn’t vote for Haley is because she’s a woman, more just because she’s not Trump, and is pretty openly hostile to him.

The only chance she has as the nominee is if Trump is literally dead. Any scenario where she’s the nominee and Trump is alive has him splitting the vote too much to give her any shot at all.

Honestly I’m not even sure if his core voters would go for her even if he were dead.

I wasn’t trying to say any restrictions on who can appear on the ballot are undemocratic - nor was I necessarily saying any state currently has undemocratic rules regarding ballot eligibility. It was more about hypotheticals, like what I said about Texas - in theory, does the constitution and body of federal laws allow for states to create undemocratic eligibility criteria that would withstand legal scrutiny?

It came from “the constitution empowers state legislatures to enact the rules for their own elections, including determining who should appear on ballots”, with the implicit assumption that the states could then determine this in undemocratic ways if they so wanted.

Your second point makes me think that you think we’re arguing or something. I really don’t think we are.

The third point touches on what I was asking about. When that determination is subjected to judicial review - which laws is it subject to? If Texas were to simply amend their constitution to say Democrats can’t appear on presidential ballots, would there actually be a federal law that would prevent them from enforcing that?

So taking your last paragraph at face value, you’re of the opinion that states could legally (in theory) remove Biden from their ballots for pretty much any arbitrary reason, as long as that reason was enshrined in state law by the state legislature or state constitution?

TIL “fascism” means “enforcing the 14th amendment against someone who literally attempted to end the peaceful transfer of power away from themself”.

Projection at its finest.

I didn’t read either link the person you replied to posted, and I have no opinion on the issue itself (whether it’s actually likely or just a conspiracy theory) - but I think the implication here is that they’ll be able to do it whether a real crime happened or not, if Trump’s removal stands. While Trump’s crime is undoubtedly real, he hasn’t been convicted for it - and that’s what sets the precedent they could use here against Biden. I have my doubts those attempts would survive in most courts. Additionally, I doubt “enemies” is a term that’s defined in any federal statute, which leaves the phrase “…or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof” extremely open to interpretation.

Merry Christmas!

The second line should be r²y on the left, not ry² 😉