“50-year-old Huong, who was reportedly told to leave her 200-square-metre (2152.78 square-feet) plot for less than the average pay for one year in Vietnam, told Reuters: “The whole village is worried about this project because it will take our land and leave us jobless.””
Only if you describe everyone left of center as liberal. There’s a whole liberal capitalist population who don’t want to make the changes required to ensure members of society are healthy and have the required care, because it would inconvenience them.
Right, but without districts you could have ranked choice voting so the farmers in central California can vote for candidates that they want to represent them and all of their votes should be able to elect those candidates. Meanwhile, people who vote in other regions should have enough votes to elect candidates of their choosing.
From reading the comments of others I’ll say it seems like I’m pretty uninformed about how the actual process works. But what i meant was that if there are 6 electoral votes and each candidate wins 50% if the votes in the state then they both get 3 electrical votes. If there are 8 electoral votes and someone wins 27% if the vote they get 2 votes, not all or nothing
Good point but for presidential elections, electrical districts don’t make any sense. You could just use the total votes for the whole state to allocate electoral votes. Also, if the districts are being manipulated to provide a skewed election result then are the districts really groups of people with similar needs?
Why do votes need to be done by district? Just do it statewide
So you marked this solved? Want to share the picture?
deleted by creator
Bird law in this country? It’s not governed by reason
He just voted to continue supplying Israel with weapons
128kbps mp3s are terrible
How many felonies does the president have?
deleted by creator
Who are you?
I’m batmouth
“The Gotham platform can link together various police databases and automatically analyze their contents. Critics point out however that the software is a “black box” – how it functions is not clearly known.”
I appreciate some of the points you are making, but I was responding to this statement that you made twice: “Her trying to parse out defensive vs offensive is a manipulation and a shallow sales job.”
You’re being deceptive if you are implying that AOC voted against reducing weapons to Israel and then tried to spin it by creating a distinction between offensive and defensive weapons.
AOC voted against the entire bill, rejecting all funding for Israel’s military.
MTGs amendment cut funding of Israel’s Iron Dome program. This is a defensive system, of course it is useful during war time but it is still a defensive system. AOC is not creating this distinction, it exists. I linked to the state department’s site which indicates that the funding is considered separate from other military funding for Israel.
MTG wrote an amendment that is progressive and that all progressives must support? BS
If AOC had voted against a stand alone bill to eliminate Iron Dome funding then everyone’s points would be completely valid and warranted. That’s not what happened.
This is incorrect. The United States provides federal military funding to Israel and specifically and separately funds $500 million per year for their Iron Dome program. This is the $500 million of funding that MTG was seeing to eliminate.
“Israel is the leading global recipient of Title 22 U.S. security assistance under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program. This has been formalized by a 10-year (2019-2028) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Consistent with the MOU, the United States annually provides $3.3 billion in FMF and $500 million for cooperative programs for missile defense.”
I see everyone’s point but without the bill there is no military financing and no defensive weapons. The fact that it’s MTGs amendment surely played a part in her decision.
It differs by 168 miles