So if they re-circumcised their penis then it’s back to autism?

Why can’t England be part of the Irish Isles?

Do it in Tallahassee. It’s basically Florida’s last blue city so you’d have a decent chance to get s fair jury

He’s shown the opposite. He can do what he wants because his party controls both Congress and the Supreme Court. You’d have to reverse that entirely. Basically if you control all three branches of government you can do what you want, but you also need all 3 to make reforms too.

Flipping the Supreme Court alone could take decades

Right that’s the issue. Only 56% support stricter gun laws, but that could mean anything from background checks to semiautomatic weapons bans. However that 56% is not evenly spread. “Blue” states will have higher support and “Red” states typically have lower support. The issue is a state like California that has the highest population gets the same representation in the Senate as the smallest state Wyoming. Both California Senators can support a ban and both Wyoming senators can not support a ban. So just like that a state of 300,000 people negates a state with 40 million people. That’s a big flaw in the Senate.

But even with 80% support the Supreme Court could strike it down. Meaning either 2/3rds of congress or 2/3rds of states have to support changing the constitution. But if that 80% isn’t evenly distributed then senators from smaller states could block the whole thing.

It’s a terrible system that fights progress

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the American system of government. Unfortunately due to the flaws in our constitution it’s functionally impossible.

You’d have to get the majority of Americans to support reform. Which will be hard, but not impossible. Now you can try to make it a law. If the Supreme Court rejects that law based on the constitution then you have to wait. The movement would have to continue for decades waiting for Supreme Court justices to die or retire until newly appointed judges that support the law are appointed. This is a long time for a movement to sustain power. Alternatively you can have 2/3rds of congress or 2/3rds of states make an amendment to the constitution. That would be nearly impossible.

This system is actually what makes Trump so dangerous right now. He basically controls Congress and the Supreme Court giving him a blank check to violate the law.

Talk about a flawed system

Unfortunately that could only happen by a full dissolution of the government by force or 2/3rds of states agreeing to a constitutional convention followed by the ratification proccess.

Option 1 is likely a brutal, bloody, and global war. Option two probably will never happen. It’s a pretty broken system

That’s because Republicans have stacked the Supreme Court in their favor. They also control the means to remove the president.

Basically everything that has empowered Trump also works to empower true gun reform from ever occurring.

Any president that tried would not get it through congress. If they tried illegally they would be removed. You might wonder why, and the simple answer is congress. Republicans will not vote for total gun restrictions, that’s part of their brand. Many democrats also can’t vote for it if they want to retain their seats. A good example is the state of Georgia, it’s 2 senators are currently democrats, but the state had leaned heavily republican form years. They barely held their seats. Georgia is also extremely pro-gun and has more relaxed laws than even Florida. If these senators voted for sweeping bans they will lose their seats next cycle. That’s not a question but a garuntee. They would likely be promptly replaced.

This current political situation would take decades to change.

Unfortunately that’s not going to be easy. It’s basically political suicide for any party that tries, but additionally would require reworking the constitution. Due to the document’s flaws you would need 2/3rds of states or 2/3rds of Congress.

Functionally it’s impossible due both to the average American voter and the constitution.

I know people thag commute 30+ miles a day. Don’t know if an e-bike will fix that.

If their goal is to lose weight eating sugar doesn’t matter.

When I lost a ton of weight personally I just counted my calories. There were some days around holidays I just ate sugary junk, but kept it within my daily calorie limit. I was a bit hungrier those days but it was fine.

Now talking long term health monitoring sugar intake it important but worrying over fruit is silly. Like you could eat as much as you’d want until you couldn’t eat any more watermelon and still be below the amount of sugar in a can of coke

Nope, 65% of what I make now is barely subsistence. It would be nice for a few months, but quickly become boring

What extensions do you use?

I’d much rather fight a billionaire than the local baker or the owner of the local pizza shop.

All buisness is exploitative, but our modern world has definently changed the scale and in many ways reshapes the face of the enemy.

Put simply I don’t hate an individual that owns a local buisness. They could probably be reasoned with if we got a proper revolution. These are people just trying to survive against the system. Like us all. They don’t possess the capital to influence our elections.

I think capitalism has become so unrestrained we have to truly consider who the enemy is again.

Depends on the subfield. Archaeology is in high demand due to historic preservation laws.

But yeah capping out is annoying, but also common in a lot of fields.

There’s a lot of jobs in the private and public sector for people with anthropology degrees. In the US, anthropology is taught as a four field approach encompassing Biological Anthropology, Cultural Anthropology, Linguistic Anthropology, and Archaeology.

Each of the subfields have different levels of hireability based on a bachelor’s degree.

I personally only have a bachelor’s and live well. I have a home and live comfortably. But, to your point, I have essentially capped out my earnings. I can’t make more without obtaining a graduate degree.

This explains why people gave me a hard time for getting an anthropology degree…

In your scenario Vance would be the successor and MAGA would use the war to further their agenda. Kinda straightforward.

I’m unfamiliar with Russia’s succession rules but Putin has been consolidating power and murdering anyone with potential to be his successor for decades. I could see how that would destabilize Russia more than the US.

Plus the Russian war machine ia not doing great in Ukraine. Doubt they could threaten western Europe or the US in any meaningful capacity. Nukes are always an option

So main issue with this comment is the UK system allows for more than 2 choices.

My city owns all our utilities. Works the same, arguably more reliable