I’d be fine with a conviction for armed robbery in either of those first two scenarios (and would excuse the store clerk from any charges because they didn’t know the weapon was unloaded so it’s reasonable self defense), but not murder. If we make everything a murder charge it just increases the incentive for robbers not to leave any witnesses.

(On the other hand, if you rob someone with a loaded gun and just say you never intended to actually hurt anyone I could probably be persuaded to call it attempted murder).

Meanwhile, because she’s black in Texas prosecutors are still trying to throw Crystal Mason in prison for an actual innocent mistake all the way back in 2016 - https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/civil-rights-attorneys-urge-court-to-uphold-crystal-masons-acquittal-in-fraud-case/3684918/

Rob a liquor store with an unloaded gun but someone present has a heart attack? Murder.

Rob a liquor store with an unloaded gun but the guy behind the counter pulls out a loaded one and kills your accomplise? Also murder.

Buy some heroin for you and your partner to use, leading you both to overdose, but you survive? Believe it or not, also murder.

e; Whether or not you think these make sense is beside the point, it’s an obvious double standard when the lack of intent doesn’t matter for these crimes but it gets this guy a walk

Or maybe just people unwilling to support Harris because of her refusal to commit to stopping Palestinian genocide who are sick of hearing they’re Trump supporters

Is it too late to switch the nomination back?

deleted by creator

Maybe the fact that every time Kamala says she wants to appoint Republicans to her cabinet and sign Republican immigration policies into law she slides in the polls a bit should tell us something

I don’t think America’s electorate on the whole is any worse or better than any other country’s, we just have an incredibly anti-democratic election system and a lot of tax code and finance law bullshit that’s allowed people to get wealthy through grifting and genocide and monopolies then pass that money down to their shitty children who have nothing better to spend their time and efforts on than making sure things stay broken

Until producers stop giving him money and actors refuse to work with him he’ll continue spreading hate, the guy has been an obvious bigot and moron his entire life

this particular hatred

History has repeatedly shown us they’ll just move on to a new target for their bigotry because that’s the only way they can come close to getting a majority of voters to back their economic plans that only serve a wealthy few. Like, trans people right now are just what gay people were for their party 10-20 years ago.

Founded in 2006 as a division of the Russian media holding RBC Group (abbreviation for “RosBusinessConsulting”), but in 2010, the agency “RBC-Ukraine” left the composition of the Russian holding, and in 2015, it completely came under the control of Ukrainian media businessman Yosyp Pintus. On January 29, 2016, the Russian holding “RBC” tried to challenge the use of the “RBC” brand in court, but lost the case

[Bolding added]

Good to know, thank you! Relatedly, I feel like a dummy for not thinking to check Wikipedia first

Huh, does this RBC Ukraine publication have any connection to RBC.ru? My disinformation senses are starting to tingle (although it seems like basically all the factual claims they’re making have been backed up by other reporting).

e; turns out they broke away over a decade ago and had to fight their former owners in court, so they seem pretty independent of RBC .ru

I feel like a cap on how much campaigns are allowed to spend would be easier to enforce

Relatedly, here’s a research paper I saw a few years ago that found that just being stopped by police shortly before an election had a statistically significant association with being less likely to turn out in that election (archive link).

One of the researchers of that participated in a reddit thread that was really fascinating which you can find here - https://archive.is/oDSkv

They also wrote up a summary for a magazine (archive link), which has these two paragraphs that I think explain a lot of why we have red states in this country -

These results make clear that the collateral consequences of policing—including worsening outcomes for economic security, educational attainment, and health—also extend to political participation. If the communities who are most frequently subjected to policing are also discouraged from voting as a result, it could create a vicious feedback loop of political withdrawal.

Why would traffic stops make people less likely to show up to the polls? Past research has already established that the most disruptive forms of criminal legal contact, like arrest and incarceration, discourage people from voting. Our study shows that low-level police contact matters in the same way. If a traffic stop makes a motorist fear that the government will harm them, it can prompt a withdrawal from civic life that political scientists call “strategic retreat.” Motorists might worry that a routine traffic stop could escalate into police violence, a more common outcome for Black people in particular. Beyond justified fears of violent victimization, voters might also bristle at the perception of being targeted to raise revenue through excessive ticketing. Accordingly, if incarceration ‘teaches’ would-be voters that their government is an alienating and harmful force in their lives, traffic stops could catalyze a similar form of ‘learning.’

There are 19% who give so little of a shit about democracy that they won’t even try to hide it, there’s definitely more who feel this way but won’t admit it

There’s also a simple reason Harris might be reluctant to discuss the expiring Trump tax cuts: She’s promising to keep most of them. …

With little coming from the candidates themselves, pro-business groups are trying to fill in the blanks for voters — and for members of Congress either facing re-election or simply unacquainted with the tax code’s intricate details themselves.

a) I truly cannot emphasize enough how much I despise both of our political parties

b) At least once every twenty four hours since I’ve listened to it, I’ve seen at least one news story that makes me think of this interview the Know Your Enemy podcast did with the authors of “The Hollow Parties: The Many Pasts and Disordered Present of American Party Politics” and how I need to get around to reading that book

I don’t expect any politician to speak against an issue that a majority of the public supports

This is way too simplistic and totally misunderstands the power of political leaders in democratic societies to shape public opinion. Like, the only real explanation for why public opinion on migration tanked is because Democratic lawmakers realized after 2020 that talking about ICE and CBP’s deeply institutionalized problems made Biden look bad instead of Trump, so they stopped sticking up against them when more border problems inevitably came out and started blaming those on the migrants instead and the opinions of Democratic party voters followed.

then we have the Republicans trying to ban abortion. I guess we’ll see how that works out for them

Reproductive healthcare is more restricted than it’s ever been in my lifetime and there’s no indication that we’ll be overturning the court rulings that made that happen anytime soon. Also, all these political campaigns are sucking up all the donor dollars that reproductive healthcare funds still really need.

Makes sense when neither of the two major parties is willing to speak against it. If Harris made opposition to draconian treatment of migrants a consistent part of her campaign those numbers could change, but Democratic politicians only try to lead on issues their donors care about and just weather-vane themselves into Republican-lite irrelevance on everything else.

Last month, several Democratic groups circulated a memo warning that Trump is peeling off support among those constituencies. The memo concluded that underinvestments in digital communications with those groups was a major problem.

But it turns out that a good deal of this angst was directed at Future Forward in particular. Democrats familiar with internal party communications say that the PAC—which is widely viewed as a conduit for powerful White House adviser Anita Dunn to exercise influence over party messaging and resources—is operating from too traditional a mindset. The PAC, they say, favors ads on broadcast television aimed at broad audiences—when reaching young and nonwhite voters requires a more targeted digital approach because their media sources have grown so fractured.

Switching to Harris really starting to feel like throwing a new coat of paint on a car with a rusted out frame

when its not important

It would be grounds for his impeachment if we had a sane government