trump unveils supreme court nominee list
- Thread starter Worgen
- Start date
Kavanaugh did at least have legal bona fides, and we already knew Republican politicians weren't that bothered by a bit of sexual assault here or there.
To be fair, neither are the Dems. Everyone knew Clinton did some dodgy sexual stuff before he was ever president. I don’t know why a minimum standard for all political offices is ‘not raping or sexually harassing someone’.
USA
She'd be better than Tom Cotton for sure. LOL
That is the guy who called poor people " moochers" called food stamp recipients "addicts"
He wants to use the military on the people, he voted against the violence against women act, against Native Americans being able prosecute non native Americans who commit crimes against them, wants to cut medicaid, medicare, food stamps, supported repeal of ACA without a replacement, so yea as a judge, he would rule against Medicare 4 all if the people managed to ever get it passed.
John Hawley is one of the better ones on that list, the others including Cruz, and Cotton are horrible.
Cruz is a sociopath who support Trump after they insulted his family for political gain, and Cotton is a racist and fascist.
Hawley, however, is just a slight right-wing populist, basically a welfare state for me, and people who look like me, not for people of color.
Congress and the senate especially are filled with bad people. 92% of the senate and 90% of the house are awful, and brought, and sold for.
Cruz is a sociopath who support Trump after they insulted his family for political gain, and Cotton is a racist and fascist.
Hawley, however, is just a slight right-wing populist, basically a welfare state for me, and people who look like me, not for people of color.
Congress and the senate especially are filled with bad people. 92% of the senate and 90% of the house are awful, and brought, and sold for.
The heavy politicisation of the Supreme Court is one of many things wrong with the way politics in the US works in any case. As long as the appointment of the justices lies in the hands of the president, they will remain political appointments and make a mockery of the independence of the judiciary. This is not recent. It goes back to the inception of the nation.
AT&T is actively making the user experience worse for people that subscribe to streaming services that AT&T does not own in order to push the streaming service they *do* own when they are the local monopoly of the ability to access streaming services *in general*.
I know that free-market conservatives are anything but, but still.
Are they making it worse, or are they just making theirs better? Was there ever a time where you could watch something like Netflix on a limited data plan without using data from AT&T, or any provider for that matter?
Hawley is no better than the rest of them. He voted against minimum wage increase, he is part of the GOP lawsuit to rule the ACA Unconstitutional which would not just hurt the ACA, it would kill chances for Medicare for all as well. I don't think there is anything good about this list.. not at all.
If one is better then the other is worse, and they own the ability to access it *at all*.
If you like a free market, you should be against certain companies being able to use the expressway for free while competitors have to pay up.
AT&T always makes everything worse.Their whole Uverse " upgrade" amounted to taking people's individual lines and forcing them to share their broadband with other people slowing yours down. My Dad had refused to do that forever and they kept trying to pressure him into it through all sorts of underhanded methods. LOL My family never did comply so they still have their own private line for less than the downgrade they overcharge everyone else for. The box is on my parents property and they have to get to it by going through their 4 giant angry farm dogs so they cannot change it without my Moms permission.
They called my mom ONCE since my father died and she really laid into them so they haven't called her back. My Dad would just argue with them and they thought that was bad, until they talked to my mom. LOL
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,960
- 3,835
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Is being intentionally obtuse a hobby or a profession?
They are deliberately making their competitors product work worse than their own by manipulating the internet infrastructure they have a near monopoly over
It's basically that old thing of taking a single large payment versus smaller payments with interest. It becomes a matter of the cost per episode/movie that simply makes their own option (AT&T own HBO) cheaper than the rival streaming services that get charged data still.
EDIT: Scrap of an old thought long gone was left in, whoops.
But they aren't making their competitors product worse, they're making their own better, and hoping the incentive of better product is worth the infrastructure hit they are allowing.
Like, was AT&T ever going to exempt every streaming service from data limits? No. So the end of net neutrality allowed them to make a better product without hurting anyone else other than in comparison. And like, streaming services are full of exclusivity agreements meant just to beat others by comparison, it isn't that unique. Now, if AT&T starts deliberately sabotaging other streaming services, I don't think we need explicit net neutrality laws to swing the anti-trust hammer heavily down on them. But this is the opposite of that.
Another reminder (as if it were needed) that the impact of a single election is not limited to 4 years, and that as such elections shouldn't be disregarded in the pursuit of purely hypothetical future gains.
In effect, that's the same thing. Consumers will weigh the relative merits of two products in their currents state, not the relative change of those two products since a previous time point.
In a competitive sense, that's the same thing. In total effect to the consumer, it's opposite trajectories. What's the sense in refereeing competition in the marketplace if effect on the consumer isn't the measuring stick?