I think a lot of these men are bisexual but heteroromantic, thus why suppressing their sexual desires are easier.

Could it happen, maybe. Did it happen, unlikely but possible.

The face of a man that’s in too deep

No need to come at me, the fact of the matter is the majority of people won’t take time. I take the time, but most won’t. If you want the biggest impact you’ll always draw the largest crowds on a weekend.

I don’t disagree with you I’m just being pragmatic. A protest of 1,500 is a bigger deal than a protest of 200. That’s the typical difference in my city with weekend vs weekday protests

I think the lead brained boomers are a lost cause.

The group to convince are the unengaged or those that just vote a certain way without putting much thought.

At least in my city we are fortunate that the government buildings are located at a key intersection. Weekdays we usually just get heckled by lead brained boomers. Weekends there are way more cars, a more diverse audience, and more support in general.

It just simply won’t have the same turnout. Frankly I think weekend protests are more visible since the average person is more likely to be out and about and not at their job.

I think making the people see it and then you pressure the politicians. The politicians don’t give a fuck if thousands of people are gathered outside a building.

I attend my local protests and take the time off to do so. The last no kings protests pulled well over 1,000. Other weekend protests typically pull around 300 - 400 people. Weekday protests typically pull barely 100, if we’re lucky 150 people. It just has less impact.

The other third isn’t paying attention and will celebrate anyway

Why have an armchair? Just roll the gaming chair over

1 day if you’re an archaeologist

I still cannot fathom why they scheduled on a weekday for the next one. If you want turnout schedule for the weekends.

I know people should go out regardless, but they have bills to pay. A lot of people can’t afford to miss a shift and vacation time is far too limited

Be more considerate, allow them to at least cup their hands first . Then they at least have something to sip on

That’s the house, and only because it was a bill passed back to the house, after previous passage, to review senate revisions. Otherwise they would have been allowed to debate much more if this was the first time the house had the bill.

I mean yeah, dying in a war isn’t high on my list of activities. The only way to fix this will probably be armed conflict, but I don’t see you starting the revolution right now either

If there was a god none of this needed to happen

How lame, I hope the people of Alaska aren’t dumb enough to vote for her again.

Or at least if we have elections again

Although if the house edits it the senate would have to vote for it again.

Ironically some of the house hardliners may kick the bill back because the senate changed some of the things the Trump wanted

We actually did, his name was Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Sure if we hold him up to today’s standards not a progressive by any means, but he campaigned on working class issues and helped steer the country out of the depression. He created virtually all our modern safety nets or their predecessors.

He was so popular a president that Congress amended the constitution to ensure no other president could have more than 2 terms. He was so popular congress was afraid it threatened the power of their branch of government.

Running on and actually accomplishing worker centric policy works.

And to fend of the inevitable yes he was not that progressive by today’s measures and had a mountain of flaws. But his accomplishments were revolutionary for the country in his time.

You’re wrong there. A senate parliamentary can be removed by the majority leader.

To amend the constitution take a 2/3rds majority vote, 2/3rds of states ratifying an amendment, or a constitutional convention being called and amendments voted on.

Of course these are just the legal means. Ignoring it and doing what you want seems to be working just fine for them

You don’t have to convince me you must convince the voters. That’s the whole point of this thread and the data makes it clear that to get people to show up and vote you have to demonstrate how you’re going to govern in ways that improves their lives. Crazy concept i know.

Also how fucking crazy to suggest the “non-voters” should be held responsible for not voting. That’s Trump levels of anti-democracy behavior. Best get those pesky 3rd party voters punished too, you thinking camps or a simple banishmment?