top 18 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 113 points 1 year ago (3 children)

"His crusade is far more about fighting gerrymandering than party preferences."

Complete blatant outright utter lie. If he gave a tiny shit about gerrymandering he would ahve fought Texas, more than just "criticize" them. Sanewash the Nazis some more whydontcha.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    I was thinking about this recently, but it's actually shocking that our country isn't already far more gerrymandered than it is. Because there are very few laws against gerrymandering, and so, since the average politician has no conscience, there's really nothing stopping them from gerrymandering as much as possible.

    That's the current rules we're playing with.

    To use a sports analogy, it's like in basketball, everybody knows that fouling the winning team at the last minute can be a way to catch up, especially if the person being fouled is bad at free throws. So that's why the losing team always starts fouling at the end of a close game, even though it seems like a sort of a cheap tactic.

    But in the case of gerrymandering, it's like everybody knows fouling is the way to win, and almost nobody is actually doing it. It's hard to imagine.

    And to continue the basketball analogy, if you wanted them to stop fouling at the end of the game, you could fix it by changing the rules for the next season. You can't just rely on the goodwill of the teams to stop doing it. Similarly, we can fix gerrymandering through either federal laws or constitutional amendments.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    I think you're quite underestimating the extent of gerrymandering. The reason they haven't gone all out prior is out of 2 core reasons;fear voters would vote against them if they do and fear the other party would retaliate with similar measures. Option one is obviously been found to not be an issue, and now that they think they can seize permanent power with it, option 2 is also starting to be ignored by Republicans --but the dems are following through with the ever present implicit threat

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 52 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    We need a 100% wealth tax on everything over $200,000,000.

    We will give you a medal stating that you won capitalism and then it is time to move on to a different hobby.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Because wealth over that value does little to improve your quality of life (actually far less than that, but this is a generous cap).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago

    Munger is a Republican, but his crusade is far more about fighting gerrymandering than party preferences.

    Interesting that we're not hearing about him pouring his vast wealth into opposing the heinous gerrymandering in Texas and other red states.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    How long until news breaks exposing him as a pedophile?

  • source
  • [–] [S] 20 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    US is a sham democracy, an oligarchy ruled by the rich much like banana republics. Citizens are nothing but subjects swaying to the whims of the rich.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    They're not Newsom's plans, they're the plans of low level state politicians in Cali who put the work in and made this happen.

    Don't let some shitbird transphobe take their credit.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    Let him waste his money. It’s a done deal.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    If I’ve gotten a single one of those ads I’ve tuned it out. I do get a ton of pro-prop 50 ones though.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Probably Asshole Berkshire.

  • source