Recent Posts

Show posts from buddies only

It would be so Libertarian to nominate NOTA and lose ballot access almost everywhere.

Why does NOTA lose them ballot access anyway, because it's not an actual person? This year it seems like it would genuinely be their best choice for a nominee.

A lot of states have it so that a party with existing access that hits a certain threshold keeps it rather than having to regain access through petitions etc. Way easier to keep access that way than regain it the hard way.

I still don't follow. Does nominating nobody lose the ballot access they gained from 2020? Or are people afraid it will lose them ballot access in 2028? Because if it's the latter, I don't know why anybody is worrying - there's no doubt in my mind "none of the above" would poll better than any of the nobodies who might actually be on the ballot.

What the hell is that racist rant going on in the background?

So now we know what they say when they think nobody is listening.

Admittedly, that was just one guy, maybe the other if he agreed. I doubt Chase Oliver is like that, as an example.

What the hell is that racist rant going on in the background?

So now we know what they say when they think nobody is listening.

What potential events could lock up the election for either candidate?

Trump doing terribly at the second or last debate.

Trump saying something absolutely insane next to election day

a right wing attack of some sort in October turns the election blue.

The economy suddenly heating up in September - Oct and prices falling would lock it for Biden.

What the hell is that racist rant going on in the background?

Edit: Right on que. Also, McCurdle or whatever her name is sounds tired as hell.

What potential events could lock up the election for either candidate?

Biden flopping as one would expect in the June debate. As long as he’s not ‘medicated’ like he usually is (SOTU, anyone?).

Biden is in a tough spot - Trump is very close to blowing the race wide open, the debate might just do it. Biden needs to both perform and change the narrative.

You expect Biden to flop, therefore if he doesn’t he must be medicated. This kind of “logic” would earn an F in any Critical Thinking class.

It would be so Libertarian to nominate NOTA and lose ballot access almost everywhere.

Why does NOTA lose them ballot access anyway, because it's not an actual person? This year it seems like it would genuinely be their best choice for a nominee.

A lot of states have it so that a party with existing access that hits a certain threshold keeps it rather than having to regain access through petitions etc. Way easier to keep access that way than regain it the hard way.

Graying culture warriors don't care what happens in the future so long as The Party wins the next game.

Or, at a bare bare minimum, expanding Medicaid access further.

He already supports that. Problem is it's a state issue, and some red states just aren't going to do it, to spite him and Obama.

But since Medicaid is a federal program, couldn't he get Congress to say, expand eligibility by income for instance?

What I'd like is a comprehensive mental health bill also, creating mental health community centers that are similar to Urgent Care services, but for mental health, also changing the mental health industry so that antidepressants are no longer incentivized as a cure-all for every patient.

Feel so bad for this chairwoman.

She's a part of the white nationalist Mises Caucus wing so don't feel too bad.