- 545 Posts
- 964 Comments
31·5 days agoIt is not an eventuality, it is a possibility that he tries
Thinking that everything is 100% certain to happen is how we get ourselves too paralyzed to act. We can reduce the odds of many things from happening by showing up and building pressure
Join protests, boycotts, strikes, etc.
EDIT: or maybe I apparently have misunderstood how the word eventuality is supposed to be a synonymy of possibility. My bad on that one
Musk will likely control elections going forward
Elections are run by the states themselves even for federal office. Notable race in particular for Musk was the Wisconsin Supreme Court race earlier this month. Musk poured millions to try to make it go the other way and tried to bribe voters with $1 million lotteries if they “signed a petition against activist judges”. The Musk backed candidate still lost by 10 points
Don’t do his dirty work for him and suppress the vote before anything happens. The fight ain’t over till it’s over
Lopez-Gomez was reportedly released Thursday evening after protestors gathered outside of the Leon County jail, where he was being held.
In good news, they were released after public backlash and protest. Protesting can work, boycotts can work, and so on. Don’t let anyone think we can’t act because we the people can
They want to take our rights, but we are not powerless to stop them. Fight back!
Don’t give into the doom that Trump & Musk want us to have. They want us thinking we’ve already lost so we don’t try to stop them, but the fight ain’t over till it’s over. We the people have power if we’re willing to use it
Join on the streets, take a part in boycotts, join strikes, etc.
Don’t just hope, join the fight back! April 19th is the next day of nationwide protests
Don’t play into the doom that Trump & Musk want us to all have. The fight ain’t over till it’s over
19·7 days agoIf the Marshall Service does not enforce contempt, it is possible for the courts to appoint others to enforce for them if they are willing to do so. It would be unprecedented, but well within the bounds of what the law states
The rule begins in section (a) by instructing that, as a general matter, process “must be served by a United States marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed for that purpose.”
[…]
Thus, by its plain terms, Rule 4.1 contemplates that the court may appoint individuals other than the marshals to enforce civil contempt orders.
[…]
Even a rogue marshal’s service, in other words, is not an insurmountable obstacle to courts enforcing the rule of law. If courts have the courage, the legal tools are there.
14·7 days agoJoin global protests against Tesla in much of the US, various parts of Europe, part of Canada, etc.
(and there are multiple upcoming across the UK, if you are in the UK and disappointed at this graph)
They aren’t just protesting Trump here? I mean the tour itself is called “Fighting Oligarchy” which is about a system
3·12 days agoStrange indeed, but this has been part of a long push. Didn’t happen by magic
Edit: On a closer reading, it looks like it might actually mean “if you use AI/other non-animal methods we’ll let you skip some safety testing” (“”“streamlined review”“”). Less animal murder so still good ofc, but :/
Their 11 page roadmap document does not read that way at all. Looking the FDA press documents look very different than the implementation details documents. I mean part of their roadmap is actually to encourage people - if already doing animal studies - to perform additional non-animal studies at the same time and submit that along side to get better data about accuracy and such
* for press releases and announcements
Headline makes it sound like internal communications, but that’s not the case at least currently. Still, we shouldn’t rely on third party services for important info - especially one that sometimes requires login to view
I think it’s unlikely they will do so directly given their other actions. Senate Majority Leader Thune has been pretty adamant about keeping it even stating he wanted to keep it in his very first speech this year as the new senate majority leader. I think the bigger threat to the filibuster at the moment is Republicans abusing reconciliation beyond what is supposed to be in there. Republicans appear likely to test the waters with bending the rules in the near future. This would be one of those piece by piece kinds of things, so more of a medium-term to longer-term issue
Reconciliation is supposed to be strictly for budget related policies and allows a strict majority vote without going through the filibuster and is only allowed to be used a limited number of times among other restrictions. The senate parliamentarian is the one who is supposed to interprets the senate rules and procedures including what’s allowed in reconciliation. One of the requirements the Byrd Rule gives to reconciliation is that the bill passed through the senate it may not add to the deficit overall.
Republicans appear likely to ignore the senate parliamentarian and declare by themselves that extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts for the rich that will expire are “current policy” and not counted in deficit computations. By itself that doesn’t sound that interesting, but the reason that’s a little concerning is that the senate parliamentarian is also the one who decides if the bills are strictly budget related. For instance, in 2021 the senate parliamentarian was the one who frustratingly ruled that a minimum wage increase to $15/hr couldn’t be included via reconciliation. If ignoring the senate parliamentarian becomes the norm, they could stuff non-budget thing into these massive reconciliation spending packages without anyone to say no
(It’s also possible the Senate parliamentarian rules in their favor and they don’t override what they say)
Before we preemptively doom about it, it also needs to pass the senate filibuster meaning 7 senate dems need to vote in favor. Call your senators and tell them to vote against it
The bill appears to face long odds in the Senate, where it would need 60 votes to overcome an expected Democratic filibuster.
[…]
“I am leading the fight in the Senate to push back against this effort to disrupt our already safe and secure elections. This bill cannot pass the Senate — and I will fight every step of the way to block it,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in a statement.
[…]
Last year, the House passed a similar bill but it stalled in the Senate and then-President Joe Biden vowed to veto it
Passed the house not the senate. The filibuster in the senate is the main hurdle for the bill. That’s what requires 60 votes meaning it’d take at least 7 votes from dems
Dems have shot plenty of things down this term via the filibuster though the CR was a notable horrible exception. For instance, they successfully filibustered an anti-trans legislation earlier in march. There is no threat of a shutdown here if they don’t let this bill get through. It’s a tall order for it to get through. Still call your senator and tell them to vote against cloture for it
Yes, what they are trying to do is bad, but note that it needs 60 in the senate to pass the filibuster
Senate Dems were pretty vocal against it last year when they tried to get that through. Still make sure to call your senator and tell them to vote no on cloture for it, but don’t preemptively doom about it passing the house
Hope does live on - with the people. That’s where the power has always lived if we the people are willing to use it
Right now they’re thinking the 5 million protesting last Saturday was a fluke. Let’s show them it’s not. Sat April 19th is the next day of nationwide protest
Next day of nationwide protests is April 19th. 5 million showed up last Saturday. Let’s make the next one larger
7·15 days agoFor the moment in the current AI boom, but not expected to in the long run. Just make the progress less fast. Still not ideal, of course, but don’t get into the mindset that we can’t make any progress at all when we still can and are doing so
From the article
Ember’s report shows that clean generation growth is set to outpace faster-rising demand in the coming years, marking the start of a permanent decline in fossil fuel generation. The current expected growth in clean generation would be sufficient to meet a demand increase of 4.1% per year to 2030, which is above expectations for demand growth.
It is worth noting that you can already beat meat on price with things like beans, lentils, chickpeas, etc. Plant-based meats specifically are just more expensive because they’re building the economies of scale and putting some of their research costs into the price. Plant-based meats are also already cheaper than animal meats in some parts of the world
But yes, once that becomes much prevalent, sales will likely increase substantially
As a related note: this is also encouraging that a number of coffee chains are now dropping their non-dairy milk up charges after pressure from activists. Once they got Starbucks to do so, it’s spread to tons of chains. Even the worst plant milks are way better across all environmental metrics compared to dairy (yes even water weighted by scarcity), so it’s going to be good for the environment
Oh hmm, maybe I had just heard people misuse it in the past? Had only heard it being used as a synonym for possibility in the context of “every eventuality” but other times meaning something definitive. Looking it up I see that it’s supposed to just always refer to possibility