[–] 1 point 4 days ago

For the primary the Party can choose to disqualify a candidate from being able to run in the primary, but obviously that has to be done before the primary, once that happens it's too late and there is no mechanism to remove a candidate once the general ballot has been certified.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

    This is partially true. State Parties do own party affiliation on a ballot. Many states have codified party affiliations so you can only run as Hitler (D) if you have won the State Democratic Party Primary. But if you don't win the Primary, you can still appear on the Ballot, you just have to run as your own party, or (I) or whatever. You can certainly still call yourself a Democrat, or a Republican, or whatever, but how you will appear on the ballot won't be under the democrat ticket.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago

    No. It's not that she was a "secret republican" it's that there isn't a difference when it comes to supporting Israel, or being owned by a Capitalist. Sure maybe she doesn't think gay-people should be burned at the stake. But she is absolutely in support of public-private markets, which is the only thing that capitalists give a fuck about. No one is getting paid to be a bigot, but if they were, people like Steven's would absolutely be trying to get in on that.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 12 points 1 week ago*

    While one could argue the efficacy of taking out drones with a shotgun, the reality is that if you shoot at ANY drone with a firearm you will have every police force that has jurisdiction chomping at the bit to charge you with a felony. Drones (for now) should be handled with collective passive action. The easiest method that is legal in most places is to tether balloons/kites up to the maximum allowed FCC air space (typically 400feet above ground). A neighborhood of homes all with their own tethered balloons basically creates a no fly zone for drones. And most importantly it's not a felony.

  • source
  • [+] -9 points 3 weeks ago

    Extremely performative and ultimately pointless. Why celebrate one group of colonizers, yet condemn another? Simply because the latest colonizer has written records of their "crimes" ?

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    Broadcom bought VMWare and tried the enshitification strategy that works so well with normal consumers; put the product on life support, increase licensing costs by hundreds of percent, Profit. But unlike Disney IPs and shit-eating consumers, the only thing keeping larger orgs on VMWare was no catalyst to switch. It was just the cost of doing business. But when you jack up prices so much and assume companies are just going to suck it up, all you end up doing is killing your golden goose. My company is changing to Openstack (a good decision even in a vacuum), all they needed was a little motivation to actually do it. I'm sure any company with a few competent engineers and a few managers that can look beyond the next quarter will do the same.

    In summary: If you have any $AVGO sell it, or at least write calls.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    A one-time money infusion is terrible policy. I support it because taxes should be re-distributive, but there is no way to budget a sustainable social policy that way. If the tax policy was more progressive and most importantly assessed annually (and nationally) it would be a huge win.

  • source
  •  

    The idea of "student loan forgiveness for entrepreneurs" is something I noticed 10 years ago during Hillary Clinton's uninspired campaign for president, even before Trump entered the arena as a serious candidate.

    Looking at a few search-engine hits filtered for only 2015, and I see the following article. There are a few other derivative articles with same idea.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/better/careers/helping-millennial-entrepreneurs-conquer-student-loan-debt-n408636

    But basically the idea of this group of young "entrepreneurs" who were saddled by student loans deserved special government attention. Especially from the Clinton campaign.

    Kind of weird, but they had a campaign full of weird shit, like Russian Drone submarines, or a no-fly zone over Syria, or the declaration that universal health-care "will never ever happen."

    But then 4 years later after Clinton was humiliated, we have her heir-apparent Kamala Harris talking about the same oddly specific policy: "According to her plan, Harris intends to give student loan debt forgiveness to Pell grant recipients who successfully open businesses in underserved communities and operate those businesses for three years."

    https://psmag.com/news/kamala-harris-student-debt-forgiveness-plan-part-of-proposal-to-support-black-entrepreneurs/

    And now it's 4 years later, and we have a very old representative of New York City, Nydia Velázquez introducing the same policy!

    https://democrats-smallbusiness.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=4769

    Who the fuck is pushing this policy? Who is it for? Why are Democratic Politicians so fixated on this fucking worthless extremely narrowly targeted policy? It's been 10 years, and this policy keeps coming back almost as a slogan. Why?!

    view more: next ›