I genuinely, honestly, 100% believe you should be able to option for physical punishment when being reprimanded for minor things. Pepper spray to the face, electric shock, mild caning, etc. Anything that would have little to no harm, even in the short term, but hurts like a bitch. I don’t think you should be able to sentence someone to pain, but that the person being sentenced should be able to choose pain instead.

Grain or labor, but one way or another you gotta pay the state your taxes!

Oh, sorry, yeah, I thought you were just asking about how those things with in general, not whether such a weapon could make someone confused. Yeah we don’t have anything that works that way.

Well, yes, but also if I actually had the power to make that change I would do it gradually through a market system for exactly that reason. One can dream, though.

Pretty much any power structure is going to coalesce into the “ruling” group and the “opposition” group, because doing so is strategically advantageous. But, proportional representation ensures that those two groups are made up of sub-groups that have to negotiate within themselves and can even threaten to change sides. Compared with an entrenched two party system, you end up with much a more reasonable government.

More like 70% of the US adult population if you include the asymptomatic carriers of both HSV 1 and 2.

Well, usually.

I wrote a whole thing, but honestly Wikipedia does a pretty good job on this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon?wprov=sfla1

If I could fucking ban pesticides and antibiotics for agricultural use I absolutely would.

Depends on the weapon.

Buck-twenty-Gs, baby!

💀

Gay people are generally fairly slutty. Image if ever guy’s dream slut was also just another guy. Well, they all have the same attraction to sluts, so they all end up being sluts for each other. Sluts for sluts.

Generalizations cannot be applied to the individual.

Slut.

Beans do be pretty good though.

I’m pretty sure it’s ridiculously hard to stop government projects in your backyard there. The best you can do is refuse to sell your land.

If you’re referring to the House of Representatives, single-member districts is a federal law, not a constitutional requirement. Congress could simply pass another law changing the old one, no constitutional amendment required. The method of representation in the Senate is codified fairly narrowly into the Constitution, but the House requirements are more lax and doesn’t forbid multi-seat representation. Technically the federal law allows for it too, but only if your state is grandfathered in. I’m not sure when the bill was passed or why that specific exception was put in.

If you’re talking about lower levels, multi-seat representation happens at the local level all the time. There’s a few states that have at-large districts in their legislatures, but single-member is way more common.

That’s fine if you don’t want to respond, I just want to make sure people reading have an opportunity to follow these links and realize that we do have plenty of multi-winner elections in the US.

The Florida reprocessing plant was an absolute mess. So many people were getting ridiculous exposure levels from that place and dying young.

The entire theory depends on ignoring the actual ideology on the ground and assuming Palin voters would just as soon vote for a Democrat.

It literally says the opposite, and there’s no assumption, it’s right there in the voting data. Begich beats Palin and Peltola one-on-one. I’m sorry that you’ve heard other people talk about this particular election in bad faith, but that’s not what I’m doing. We can talk about other particular RCV elections that had spoilers, if you like.

And you haven’t mentioned any other type of approval voting until now so yes that’s what was assumed.

I mentioned both regular approval and SPAV in my first comment. Maybe that’s where some of this confusion is coming from.

STV is also a multiple winner election system. Which is also incompatible with our Constitution.

Can you quote the section that prohibits multi-winner elections? At this point some of the things you’ve said have me believing you might an inauthentic account, unfortunately. I apologize if you’re an earnest American, but I have now have my doubts.

The entire theory depends on ignoring the actual ideology on the ground and assuming Palin voters would just as soon vote for a Democrat.

It literally says the opposite, and there’s no assumption, it’s right there in the voting data. Begich beats Palin and Peltola one-on-one. I’m sorry that you’ve heard other people talk about this particular election in bad faith, but that’s not what I’m doing. We can talk about other particular RCV elections that had spoilers, if you like.

And you haven’t mentioned any other type of approval voting until now so yes that’s what was assumed.

I mentioned both regular approval and SPAV in my first comment. Maybe that’s where some of this confusion is coming from.

STV is also a multiple winner election system. Which is also incompatible with our Constitution.

Can you quote the section that prohibits multi-winner elections? At this point some of the things you’ve said have me believing you might an inauthentic account, unfortunately. I apologize if you’re an earnest American, but I have now have my doubts.

The entire theory depends on ignoring the actual ideology on the ground and assuming Palin voters would just as soon vote for a Democrat.

It literally says the opposite, and there’s no assumption, it’s right there in the voting data. Begich beats Palin and Peltola one-on-one. I’m sorry that you’ve heard other people talk about this particular election in bad faith, but that’s not what I’m doing. We can talk about other particular RCV elections that had spoilers, if you like.

And you haven’t mentioned any other type of approval voting until now so yes that’s what was assumed.

I mentioned both regular approval and SPAV in my first comment. Maybe that’s where some of this confusion is coming from.

STV is also a multiple winner election system. Which is also incompatible with our Constitution.

Can you quote the section that prohibits multi-winner elections? At this point some of the things you’ve said have me believing you might an inauthentic account, unfortunately. I apologize if you’re an earnest American, but I have now have my doubts.