You have two choices. There’s nothing anyone can do about that in the next 48 hours. If you refuse to vote for the “lesser evil” because of your “higher standards,” you end up with the greater evil. And in four years you might not get a choice at all.
Shove your standards up your ass and vote using logic instead of emotion.
Do you really think you’re going to get a more favorable result under Trump than under Harris? They are both likely to continue supporting Israel – Harris for political reasons and Trump because Israel can easily funnel money into his businesses to effectively bribe him.
So logically, if the result is identical either way, it becomes a non-issue in terms of who you vote for. You have to look to other issues in which there is actual differentiation in order to determine the best candidate.
Any sane person knows genocide is awful and would love a candidate who is willing to stand up to Israel. Any logical person recognizes that we don’t have that luxury and must therefore cast our votes based on other critical factors, of which there are plenty.
Supporting Harris does not equate to supporting Israel or their genocide.
I would also be willing to help if needed. I believe in a mostly hands off moderation style – allowing the votes to serve as the voice of the community. Common sense exceptions exist, obviously.
Makes me wonder if China isn’t pushing the whole thing. Get Mexico to just do the final manufacturing step so they can get around American tariffs on Chinese imports while still being the source for 98% of the parts.
I don’t actually know if that’s how any of that works. It’s just a thought.
Dogs are also as accurate as a coin toss. Essentially, it all comes down to what the officer thinks and their personal motivations, which is terrifying.
What a buffoon.
Yes, Trump did set in motion our plan to return to the moon – Project Artemis. But with the same order he ended the program that had us landing on asteroids, which was far more valuable in terms of learning about deep space, researching ways to harvest minerals, and testing ways we could intercept a large asteroid heading towards earth.
Did he do this for his love of space flight? No. He did it because the billionaires whispering in his ear want a shot at the commercial contracts.
Did he appoint an apolitical scientist or former astronaut to head NASA as has been standard protocol for ages? No, he appointed Jim Bridenstine, a Republican congressman from Oklahoma who has struggled to get funding approved because he won’t produce a detailed budget – only ballpark figures that would give him more flexibility to shift how funds are spent without approval.
Of course NASA doesn’t have any of the things it needs to get to the moon, so it’s almost all having to be built from scratch. A totally new lunar lander is needed for instance, and as you’d expect, Bridenstine is pushing for it to be completely outsourced. NASA (your taxes) will help fund the development, but the private companies will get to retain ownership of product. A bill to ensure NASA retained ownership of the hardware it’s paying to build was introduced and promptly went nowhere. Bridenstine ended up getting his way, of course, with initial contracts handed out to both Musk and Bezos.
Bridenstine hasn’t been TOO bad – he certainly could have done worse, but we deserve someone better.
So yes, on the bright side, more money is flowing into NASA and toward space exploration. On the other side, that money is going right into the hands of billionaires who create the products that they will then sell back to us.
The idea that Trump cares about space exploration is laughable. But what about Harris? Aldrin’s statement didn’t mention anything about her. Well, we don’t know about Harris because she’s never been president.
What we do know is that Biden appointed yet another politician to the top spot. Yay! But he also appointed a climate scientist to second-in-command, which is consistent with the party line that, at this time, the NASA budget should be focused on climate research over space exploration — not that anyone is listening to their warnings about the climate anyway. Biden has endorsed the Artemis program to return to the moon. However, Biden also “initiated an internal review” of the program in order to get an actual, realistic budget and timeline for completion. In summary, he really hasn’t helped or hurt NASA.
Neither candidate (or their parties) has shown significant care for NASA over the last eight years. With so many critical issues in the country right now, love for NASA has taken a back seat. That’s unlikely to change under a Harris administration.
That said, I’m voting for the person (and party) who believes in science, and who recognizes that the disastrous consequences of climate change are nigh, and who embraces concepts like “equity” and “inclusion”. Because at the end of the day, exploring space and protecting our planet are pursuits that affect our entire species, and the tools needed to ensure the long term survival of our species should belong to the people and not someone whose net worths is greater than some nations’. I’m voting for Kamala Harris.
Exactly, because if land determines votes, it gives them all the power.
Incite
That’s when you have inside knowledge about the person who said a quote. 😜
… after standing in line for four hours.
And how many of those won’t be able to get that time off work again or be able to get a babysitter again.
When Kris Kobach was able to go through Kansas voter rolls and remove “foreign sounding” names with no real consequences, I knew it would start a trend. Here we are.
Given this ruling I wonder what other voter registration purges we will see this week.
I’m tired.
Republicans banning birth control and criminalizing abortion actually seems worse than the door-to-door inquiries to me. Both are pretty disgusting.
Wrong. We’re here because the electoral college gives Wyoming voters 400% more weight than California voters; because of gerrymandering and the cap on the number of representatives in the House; and because of a FPTP system that always results in two-party rule. My “mentality” isn’t going to magically change that.
Ok, so yet again you can’t compare two things that are the same to make a decision. You have to use different criteria in order to tip the scale one way or the other.
And you think your emotional pleas on the internet are somehow making a difference? You think not voting will send some sort of message?
You have no strategy beyond making angry comments. I, on the other hand, casted my vote for ranked choice voting in my state, which will help third party candidates have a greater chance of winning state elections. I voted previously for a new method of dividing districts that avoids gerrymandering by any one party, and it passed. And I voted for the presidential candidate who believes in science and reality over the one who thinks windmills cause cancer. I’m making my vote count for the critical issues that underly the problems we face. I don’t get my way on every single issue, but that’s how democracy works.
If you want to throw away your vote, that’s your choice. But don’t act like it’s some morally superior act when in reality you’re not making any difference and you'll just end up with the worst outcome instead of the less desirable outcome.