Cyberchef does this and so so much more https://github.com/gchq/CyberChef

She literally said they were too ignorant of election law to be held accountable for signing and filing false documents.

That usually doesn’t fly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorantia_juris_non_excusat

I’ll begin by confessing that I also tend to apply philosophies situationally, but I’d be curious how you’d respond to the criticism that such an approach sort of gives away the game that philosophical applications are all post hoc rationalizations for our existing, non-rational preferences. I’ve found that to be the strongest criticism of such an approach.

Trump doesn’t care if he’s smart or not. Trump traded dropping out of the race and endorsing himself in exchange for HHS. Purely a political transaction.

I think you should stop writing post titles

I bet Chicago could use Bernie in the next couple weeks. Maybe dust off the old civil disobedience.

Volunteer work is also a good option.

sheepishly raises hand

Get an EV. Get a garage charger. Put panels on your roof. The future is now!

It boggles the mind to argue that because the president is charged with faithfully executing the law there can’t be a law that limits a president’s authority to arbitrarily fire officials. All of these protected positions can be removed for cause. If these officials are not faithfully executing their duties in accordance with the law, that would be cause to remove them!

Shit what? The Lorax going to give him a lecture and then fly away.

the end goal of the Dem party should be a complete overhaul and something like a parliamentary system.

On the one hand, absolutely yes. Trump has solid control of one of the political parties, but in general, is a very unpopular politician. Yet our political systems have become so dysfunctional that we run a serious risk of him destroying the rule of law and creating an authoritarian presidency. There’s no authoritarian-proof political system, but we can do a lot better than this.

On the other hand, I think any reform that sufficiently addressed our current problems would be the end of the Democratic party as well. Getting a political party to sacrifice itself for the greater good is a tough sell. Not impossible, but I think it would look more like a popular takeover of the Democratic party to be used as a disposable vehicle. The Democratic leadership and their donor class will absolutely be opposed.

The tea party and Trump have shown that seizing a party from its current leadership is not impossible.

I keep trying to eat meat but it just won’t cooperate!

Yeah it’s not that districted voting requires FPTP, but I think the point was that it has an effect that’s similar.

Even if you had RCV in each district so that the elected candidate was generally more preferred by the people in that district, you could still end up with an aggregated outcome where no members from a given party win any districts, yet still had some small portion of voters in each district. In that way the unlucky party gets no representation despite having a non-zero voter base.

So while I wouldn’t use the phrase “inherently bad” to describe district elections, I think the arguments in favor of districtless, proportional voting are stronger.

This issue is actually pretty weird. Racial gerrymandering is a violation of the voting rights act, hence illegal. Partisan gerrymandering is completely legal. In practice this seems to mean that it is harder to gerrymander in states where racial voting patterns align with party, e.g. whites vote Republican, blacks vote Democrat. In states where party lines do not predominantly fall on racial lines, you can hack up the districts to favor your party as much as you like.

Tit-for-tat is actually a good game theory strategy which encourages cooperation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat

I am willing to deal with a cheesy lisp if you play a good game of Terraforming Mars or Gaia Project.

Calling deleting metadata image processing is a bit of a stretch. And you can disingenuously clean images either client- or server-side, that’s true, but if we’re getting serious here about data privacy, one could independently validate, build, and sign an executable for users to run locally. I don’t know of any similar technique to guarantee what’s running server-side.

Which of these 23 links backs up the claim that “people only respond to violence,” or, paraphrasing, non-violent resistance is ineffective?

I tried to skim a couple, but the synopsis on one was simply a recounting of black power tactics from the 70s, and another was a wiki page about the radical flank effect, which actually referenced the book I linked to support the claim that having a violent radical flank appeared to have no positive effect. Other references sometimes found a positive effect, but I can’t really compare the merits of the sources.

Honestly, having a pile of obscure links to whip out in favor of political violence is, at a minimum, odd.

https://cup.columbia.edu/book/why-civil-resistance-works/9780231156837/

This is the work that’s often being referenced when talking about non-violent vs violent resistance, and the 3.5% participation claim.

I don’t see any references for your claims either.