They didn’t have a Project 2025 game plan going in like they do now.

The Republican Party has the will of the Supreme Court. That means they can rule for, or against constitutional changes unilaterally.

They have already ruled that the President is immune to the law if they are acting in ‘official capacity’, which they have left to themselves to decide if its official or not.

The presidential candidate has said he wants to go after the ‘enemy within’ directly referencing his political opponents.

He can go out and round up anyone with significant pull from the Democratic party, detail them illegally, (but now legal because its in an official capacity)

Anyone else who speaks out against the brutality will summarily be included in that.

How far off is that from where Putin has established himself, where elections are things they say the have, but is really just a form of performance art?

And I’m sure the Germans who “never supported the Nazi’s” were proud of their acts of abstinence after the fact.

Its a terrible system with FPTP for sure, but doing anything that makes it easier for really bad guys to get in power is enablement, full stop.

Will the really bad guys care about a protest vote? No, they’ll thank you.

Will the not so bad guys care about the protest vote if they get elected? Not really, they got elected while ignoring the voice of the people, so why change?

To fix the system you need to get the least worst option elected, and then get out and protest, and cause as much pain for the elected officials as possible to get anything changed. Means protesting at a level that is significantly impacting the economy.

Don’t fuck around with a ‘protest vote’ that’s going to do as much nothing as electing the Meh option.

No, its not like that at all.

It doesn’t matter who Meh and Oh no are for that voter. The results are the same.

If you have a Meh candidate, and Oh No candidate, and a Please Something Else candidate, and you vote for something else, its now easier for Oh No to get elected, because Meh has fewer votes.

I don’t know what part of the world you grew up in, but that hasn’t been my experience at all. All the women I know have been brought up to know this is the old way, and any man who thinks along those lines is a man to avoid.

It’s relatively easy to self host your own git repositories.

It’s just that Github adds a lot of extra value added features that help streamline things for larger projects, and this is why many people use it. For most people, the value they get far outweighs the inconvenience when it goes down for 10 minutes here or there.

Using git (or equivalent) is pretty important. Using github is pretty optional.

No, its a consequence of increased security and the inconvenience of have to sign out and create a new account when reselling the phone was an acceptable compromise, rather than an intended ‘bonus’ side effect. A lot of times companies do do that, but this wasn’t one off them.

This was your friend’s fault, and yours to trade cash before understanding how the system worked.

A single key is also a loss risk if you take anything out of a pocket. I’m always nervous about a single key. And then there’s the ‘where did that go’ when you change without emptying the pockets because its so small you forget its there.

If someone doesn’t like how I look, oh well, that’s life. Seems this is a lesson most people learn in grade school - some people aren’t going to like you, you’re not going to like some people.

You’re not entirely wrong, but you’re also totally missing the fact that people are 100% judged by stature and not just in attractiveness, but in their value period.

The taller you are, the higher salary people will assume you already are making. During hiring, this means you’ll be offered a higher starting salary to try and make the offer more appealing to you.

Here’s an article that references the study I’m thinking of. https://merryformoney.com/height-salary/ If you care ,you can maybe dig up the original study somehow.

This sort of bias is pretty inescapable in our culture and will be I think regardless of our language. Preferred body shapes do change over time, even within the span of a single generation. Maybe tying more positive words around these words is part of that change.

This seems like a poor analogy.

“I don’t have experience with the ‘Megamart Pool TM’ brand of pools, but I’ve got my Lifeguard certificate through a training program that operated at a nearby lake.” Oh sorry, we want our applicants to be familiar with our specific pool with 50+ hours of paid visits logged. Please come back next year after you’ve gather this.

Depending on where you live, how has home insurance gone in the last 10 years? Trust the money.

Statistically speaking, employers don’t.

This is why the UAW are asking for 40% raise, because that would bring their pay back in line with what they were making in 2008 in terms of inflation.

Virtually no one is going to give up extra time of their live to abuse this unless they have been convinced you are worthy of the abuse.

Then it’s personal.

So my question is if thats your default stance, how much do you abuse your staff? And call it fair because its what everyone is used to?

Or the third option, changing to a better employer.

Since everyone seems to think no one wants to work anymore, maybe theres a lot more better options out than than the shitty employers realize.

Sounds like a simple choice. Moving house to be closer to where jobs are is getting more and more expensive.

So that leaves moving jobs.

I wonder why so many employers are complaining ’No one wants to work’.

Easy to dump the burden of the commute on the staff as the cost of living close to city centres keeps climbing way faster than you’re raising their pay.

Times change, and the old standards don’t make sense anymore.

You want me to give up 10 hours of my day to get paid for 8 hours of work? No thanks.

Sitting in traffic still keeps me from living my life. I’ve got a limited amount of time, so Im not giving it up cheaply.

Remote work where possible is the best option for both parties. If only employers could believe it.