That is my recollection as well

Adding context to context, there was a movement to change the constitution to allow him to run for president around then too

but just looking and seeing some truly cosmic stuff in front of your unassisted eyes hits different.

It’s so true. I’ve gotten to see them before, way up Maine, but not as brightly as this evening and it was breathtaking. Our whole dead end street was all out at the same time, we could hear each other marveling at it all

I’m so glad you got to catch it this time!

From my wife’s coworker who lives nearby:

Tbh I’m fine missing out on it if it’s as dismissive as the reply to @alyaza’s direct firsthand experiences working with a local politician who faced issues campaigning which are completely germane to this conversation.

They’ve had the power several times over the last 16 years to make life better for the working class and the poor, and they seem to always elect to protect and promote the lives of the billionaire class.

Someone took the time to politely correct this misconception a few days ago, their reply from then is pasted below:

In the past you have stated that the Democrats had control of Congress and the presidency under Biden and Obama, yet they were unable to do things like get a public option in the ACA or codify roe v Wade. However this continues to be a misunderstanding of the situation.

https://19thnews.org/2022/01/congress-codify-abortion-roe/

While I can agree I am disappointed in the inability to get these things done, and Obama saying it was no longer a priority, I don’t see how you can pin this all on the Democrats as some kind of monolithic entity.

The fact of the matter is during Obama’s terms, there were anti abortion Democrats. These Democrats were enough to keep abortion access out of the ACA and prevent roe being codified.

Fast forward to Bidens terms, and we now have a filibuster rule that requires 60 senators in order to pass stuff in the Senate. There were not 60 senators who supported roe codification when the Democrats “controlled” the Senate.

__

The fact that there are still anti choice democrats in our legislatures is a failing on the part of all the left-leaning voters in their districts and states (myself included) to organize and replace them with people who will advocate and vote for our policy goals. Alternative parties could capitalize on those races by representing the wants of those left leaning voters in off election years but choose not to.

I, and many others, do not blame other parties when the dems shoot themselves in the foot, we blame the dems for their poor decisions. Likewise, we blame the green party for running a quadrennial grift on the disaffected leftists who know enough to be upset but who wrongly believe the extent of their voting power is only this one race.

Most local candidates have to work to live, and making outlandish statements to these effects weaken a person’s rhetorical standing. From the article you posted:

While they have little infrastructure in the county, within the last decade, Madison has nevertheless elected 10 Green candidates to different sorts of local office, more than almost any other city of its size in the nation.

Across the country, the Green Party barely has a footprint. It has little money or political organization, no members of Congress or statewide officeholders and just a few local ones. Every four years, though, the Greens run a candidate for president

In fact, they’ve [the Greens] pursued the opposite tack — they’ve directed efforts toward close battleground states where the party is sure to get more attention.

The Green party could clean house in Maine where we’ve actually got Ranked Choice Voting and they could win seats, but we’re not a swing state and the greens don’t act like they’re interested. Neither does the Socialist party, or SocDems for that matter. But I do see their campaigning in battleground states, promising things out of their presidential candidates that are squarely the purview of congress, in which they’re clearly not interested in having representation.

Being frank, the Green Party and Socialist Party do so little organizing when it’s not a presidential election year that it ought to be a joke among all leftists. They aren’t doing the outreach or work necessary to implement any of their grand promises made every four years, because they’re not getting local party members elected in downballot races. I’ve been on both party’s mailing lists for 22 years and in three different states and have almost never seen anything come of it. Well… besides fundraising emails every four years.

My wife has gotten used to this but some of the neighbors still judge a bit. Then again, we’re the house with the hummingbirds and tons of other nesting migratory birds as well as the house with lightning bugs

Push for it in your state, first. We’re still in the first few cycles using RCV in Maine (I like STAR better) where folks are learning to love it, but there’s no time like now to get that ball rolling. More people need to experience it to shift the national conversation of “whether we should” to “which should we use”

Henry Agard Wallace

Just don’t compare mine to Marth’s …

• Rosalina, teddy bear / sm red wheels
• Lucina

Defense attorney is technically correct, they didn’t conspire against the Democrats on the bus because they thought some different Democrats were on it instead.

MH4U on the 3ds was my first introduction and I actually kinda miss being able to quickly tap the items that were up on the touch screen to use them. World on PS and Rise on the switch scratch the itch but I was visibly upset that tracking didn’t make it into Rise; it was just a great mechanic and it felt extra satisfying to build out the monster knowledge, and it added some wonderful depth to the gameplay.

I’m not really all that crazy about the fort defense mechanic in Rise, I’d genuinely skip it if I could.

As much as I enjoy the series and still play it, there’s a certain amount of ennui that I’m experiencing when it comes to hunting Jaggis and the rest of the same monsters every time. New mechanics help to make up for it by having the hunt be slightly different, but wow what I wouldn’t give for a totally new experience playing Monster Hunter.

You’re moving goalposts again, as I provided the excerpt from the article that you asked for in your prior comment.

The truth of the matter is that each of the racially motivated hurdles to voting I’ve previously noted follow a clear pattern of aiming to prevent certain groups from voting and this latest one is no different. No fluctuation of strawman arguments will change that

3rd paragraph in:

Some Democrats contend the measures could create hurdles for legal voters, are unnecessary and lead people to believe the problem of noncitizens voting is bigger than it really is.

Legislatures pass bills. Sometimes they are called resolutions, or other names, but the items that are voted on are bills. Prior to the passage of these bills, only citizens could legally vote anyway. Noncitizens face fines, jail, and deportation for an act that has no mathematical influence on these elections even if it were to happen, which it generally does not.

By changing the language from “all citizens”, it sets up opportunities to selectively disenfranchise those citizens who are able and registered to vote. This selective enforcement will fall disproportionately on those people who belong to the targeted group - in this case, those who look like the people immigrating across the southern U.S. border - similar to how poll taxes and literacy tests were used to prevent other groups from exercising their legitimate right to vote. And that’s by design, else these measures would not be coupled with fear mongering about these people.

This article is referencing new bills that will disenfranchise legitimately registered voters, and is not about bills loosening current voting laws. Current voting laws, as you yourself have stated, are clearly working.

Hear hear! Vote, and then keep organizing to achieve better with the next vote.