I'm not sure about that for the UK at least. My British friends say Labour is going anti trans

I'm glad he's taking it seriously. It looks like the next few events he does are going to be really important in determining his next steps. If they go badly, I think he drops. If they go well, he'll probably stay in.

I also 100% believe that Biden is fully aware of this article and likely encouraged the NYT's source to approach the media. Part of evaluating this whole thing is going to be gauging public opinion and testing the waters.

People will call this sort of thing performative since the legislation will be dead in the water, but you're spot on. An important part of politics is virtue signaling. You're telling your supporters what you stand for and that you're at least trying.

Whether it's progressive or moderates doing so, it's an important political tool, and sometimes the only tool at their disposal. Showing people you're willing to fight, even if you know you're going to lose, is a big deal.

Is it the only point in time where they're able to be visible, or is it the only point in time that they choose to be visible? I'm of the opinion that it's the latter, and it's because of a terribly flawed philosophy.

Third parties have been trying to gain visibility through presidential elections for decades, and it's been completely unsuccessful. They're arguably in a worse place than before, since Perot was able to get at least >5% with Reform. It speaks volumes that the third largest candidate behind Trump and Biden is RFK Jr, without any contest at all.

Let that sink in. A party that RFK Jr established at the beginning of this year is polling significantly better than the Greens, Libertarians, and anyone else. I wager the others combined aren't even more than RFK Jr. It's very clear that whatever they're doing isn't working. It doesn't matter how engaged their supporters are if they're pursuing an objective that has demonstrably been a failure.

This is something I think about a lot. The best way to defeat fascism is within the process with democracy -- because if we start playing by their rules to stop fascism, we prove them right in a sense. It's preferable to actually letting fascism happen, but it would severely weaken our democracy.

If voting is not enough, then the next best option would be for Biden to pull his own Jan 6 and refuse to certify the results and call in Seal Team 6. And then after doing so, order his own arrest for violating our laws and norms. The only way to preserve democracy after taking steps outside of democracy is to fall on your own sword.

It's like an alternate universe within the DC universe -- the Joker goes too far and Batman snaps his neck. When he arrives at the police, he carries the Joker's body and tells them to arrest him. Batman knew it was necessary to kill Joker, but he also knew he had to be held accountable for doing that. Any group which uses violence to end the fascist threat needs to turn themselves in afterwards to preserve peaceful democracy. It would be incredibly unfair to them, but it's necessary to prevent a new normal of violent anarchy.

This isn't a bad 4D chess move. Trick Republicans in Congress to heavily limit the power of the president to neuter this decision.

She should focus solely on the environment and climate change then instead of "WiFi causes cancer" and promoting vaccine hesitancy. She should also develop a facts based viewpoint on nuclear energy instead of fear mongering.

We have modern reaction designs that can consume existing nuclear waste. We literally have more nuclear waste around than we would if we were doing more nuclear projects.

Not to mention, a third party did get 5%+ with Perot and the Reform Party. But I don't think Reform even exists anymore, and if they do, they've done a terrible job of making themselves known.

They've been trying their strategy of "get our name out during presidential elections and hit 5%" for a long time now, and it's clearly a losing strategy.

Oh I think about them a lot more often, especially when I look at my midterm ballots and see the occasional third party candidate for a local race, and there's been absolutely no campaigning nor advertising effort. Or, when I see a race that a Republican is running unopposed, and third parties have wasted a perfectly good opportunity in running a candidate there.

If third parties want to win, they cannot rely on people doing personal research beforehand. I like to do so, but I'm certainly in the minority.

Just like the two main parties are not owed votes, neither are third parties owed votes. If a Democrat has to earn my vote, then so too do third party candidates. And they've done an incredibly poor job of doing so.

Don't get me wrong, you have a good point. I just find the third parties to be completely unserious and not at all focused on actually making a difference. I would prefer for them to be more effective and to actually try to earn my vote instead of just running on "I'm not the other two!".

It's my opinion that the FPTP system not only disadvantages third parties with game theory, but it also leads to batshit insane third parties that really aren't serious.

Third parties should be running House candidates and putting ads on airtime for them. You aren't going to win an election if it's based on people doing research instead of you doing heavy advertisement.

Third parties should try doing anything noteworthy to get attention. The parties and their candidates don't deserve anything intrinsically.

Those are perfect races for third parties to get into