711
Sen. Elizabeth Warren's bill would end trading in water futures
(www.motherjones.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
711 points (100.0% liked)
News
23387 readers
2478 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
No. I’ll vote for somebody who wants to change it while in office. Surprised you would think otherwise…
Well now I'm even more confused, no you don't think a president's going to be the one to change first past the post, but yet you want to vote for someone who will? So you're just straight up saying you're never going to vote? This makes no sense.
When you stop letting anything excuse your apathy, maybe you'll be able to start understanding that to change first past the post you have to work at the local levels first. Which I'm sure you don't do because apathetic people don't get involved in local politics passionately.
It’s a constitutional issue if you knew anything. It can happen federally like Roe/Wade or it can be at the state level like many states have done. President can push to make it happen while in office. Not during this current election year.
It's absolutely not a constitutional issue. Nowhere in the Constitution anywhere is first pass the post mentioned. And even if it were a constitutional issue that wouldn't be something the president deals with that would be a Congressional issue or more accurately a state issue.
Electoral college in constitution
President can appoint judges and can bring attention to issues so people can vote on it. Same thing with partially why Roe/Wade was overturned. Trump packed the court with conservatives. RCV can be done at the state level, but reforming the electoral college voting system can absolutely be spearheaded by a president.
Very clearly said first pass the post which you've completely abandoned even though you're the one that brought it up I see. Still pointless though because a change of the Constitution is not done by a Judiciary it's done by legislators at the national and at the state level. If you truly believe the electoral college should be abolished all the more reason you have to get involved at the local level at the state level at the county level even. Which you won't do.
Also for someone who's worried about the president's ability to point judges, you seem to be ignoring the problem with allowing a fascist to be in the office.
You’re making some incorrect assumptions about me. A true first past the post plurality vote is fine. I have no problem with that. My problem is that the system we have restricts us to the red blue duopoly. I actively participate in local and state politics, just don’t have any interest in playing the presidential game at the moment.
There will always be a “Trump” in power. I voted in the 2016 election and Trump still happened. You gotta meet them where they’re at when that happens and play some hardball. They’re gonna move the needle a lot more so you gotta do a lot of work to bring that back when you have the chance.
I’m just sharing what I’m doing. You can do whatever you want. You don’t need to try and convince me otherwise. Who are you planning on voting for?
Didn't you hear? Not participating in part of a system absolves you of any moral responsibility for anything! Ever!