That’s a very capitalistic form of democracy. Candates need to pull themselves up by their boot straps.

While the Republicans promote socialistic politics, giving candates universal basic airtime.

I get it now.

Here’s all the changes.

Literally anyone could’ve been a contender. We don’t know who they are, because the party never wanted to seriously entertain anyone other than Biden.

Contrast that with what the Republicans did. They had several debates with anyone who felt like giving it a shot. Trump decided he didn’t need participate, and was right. The Democrats could have done similar but refused to.

Biden is too elderly. Trump is too many kinds of wrong. Most people know this. If the Democratic party figures out that Biden is almost the only candates weaker than trump, they’ll be able to win.

Who said first?

The early primary states were specifically changed to states where Bidens poll numbers were strongest. And yes, the early primary winners carry that momentum into states where they might be less popular. They didn’t have to change the primary order, but chose to, to help Biden.

Wait. I thought is was a federal tax system. Does it do state taxes also? I missed that.

How can we know there were no strong candidates, when they don’t get a real chance to run? They (and to be fair, most) simply assumed the incumbent was the best, because that’s the way its been forever.

The party literally refused to hold any primary debates, or even primary elections in several states. They gave people no chance to even consider other candates.

Just be careful you’re not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

FPTP is absolutely the worst. Anything else is a massive improvement.

It doesn’t usually much more than, “I’m not going to talk about that.”
After repeating that a few times, when people ask or talk about something too personal, they’ll give up.

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.

-Robert Frost

That’s the other way of saying the same thing.

If you’re going to wait to fix climate change, until after you’ve replaced capitalism first. You might as well work on taraforming Mars and sending billions of people on rockets instead.

For now there is the web app. It works well on mobile.

There are some genuinely terrible things that could be considered “a person’s personal love life”.

You’re not alone.

On a good large screen, 1080p is a noticeable upgrade from 720p.
But the distance you’d have to sit at, to get much out of 2160p over 1080p, is just way too close.
However the High Dynamic Range that comes with 4K formats and releases IS a big difference.

On the other hand, storage is pretty cheep. A couple cents per GB really.
But you’re talking more about bandwidth, which can be expensive.

But yeah. You’re not alone.

Kapersky is the example you want to point at for an example of a bad actor corp capturing classified data and sending it to an adversarial government.

Not talking about collecting or sharing data.

TikTok just trended anti-political messages for a few different popular politicians and lit a match as a result.

There’s no real evidence they did.
Even if they did, that’s not a good enough reason to cut them off, though it is the reason many politicians want to; That, and the Israeli apartheid / genocide stuff.
But again, there’s no evidence ByteDance and TickTok is doing anything about those topics.

Did you read the article I linked to?
It is the NYTimes, I get it if you didn’t; Their paywall’s annoying.
Here’s a Kagi summary:

A report from the Network Contagion Research Institute at Rutgers University found that topics often suppressed by the Chinese government, such as Tibet, Hong Kong protests, and the Uyghur population, are unusually underrepresented on TikTok compared to Instagram. This raises concerns that Beijing may be influencing content on the popular video platform, which is owned by the Chinese company ByteDance. TikTok disputed the report’s methodology and claims of content suppression. The Israel-Hamas conflict has reignited scrutiny of how social media platforms like TikTok moderate content, with some Republican lawmakers calling to regulate or ban the app. Researchers have been urging TikTok to provide access to data to study the spread of information on the platform.

To defund healthcare you have to defund the arts.
To defund schools, you first have to defund the arts.

Why are the arts required to be done first, or at all? I’m not seeing it. They seem separate, and doable in any order.

I would think so.
It’s hard to say really, because they didn’t explicitly state “this is the only way to take someone’s gun”. But, it is a pretty straight forward interpretation of what they did say.

So yah, I would guess that they’d let Trump keep his gun also. [At the risk of reading into your question a bit.]

Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized in his majority opinion that the justices were only greenlighting taking guns away from people who had first been deemed by a judge to pose a danger to others.

Roberts bent over backward to stay silent on other scenarios not involving judicial findings of dangerousness.

“[W]e reject the Government’s contention that Rahimi may be disarmed simply because he is not ‘responsible,’” Roberts wrote. “‘Responsible’ is a vague term. It is unclear what such a rule would entail.”

They narrowly defined the situation where it’s ok to take someones gun rights away. It specifically only applies when a court decides the person is a danger to another. Someone being irresponsible (ie drug user), isn’t a good enough reason to take their right to have a gun.

So on Hunter’s appeals they can point to that. And if the Supreme Court eventually hears the case, they set them selves up to confirm he should have been allowed a gun regardless of any drug use at the time.

I’m stupid. That’s obvious in retrospect. Thank you