Some call it hypocrisy, others call it "survival instinct"

fwiw, the roads are constantly littered with accidents and the US has the highest pedestrian fatality rate out of all "western" nations

That's your prerogative, just recognize that if both options support genocide and block strikes, so you chose to vote for a non viable candidate, or to not vote, you're effectively disenfranchising yourself.

Your last point is very valid though. The DNC is very good at shooting themselves in the foot because they should know very well that people do get demotivated and just stop voting, yet continue to distance themselves from their voter base, resting on their laurels as "the only sane choice out of the two".

Supporting local candidates, where your vote also is more heavily weighted, is one of the ways to shift policy - the US govt isnt just the president, it's representatives and senators and state governments.

Voting for someone in an election in the US is not an endorsement of that person. You have effectively two choices in many of the elections due to how the system is designed. You vote for the best choice of those two.

Not voting, or voting for a non viable candidate, is a signal that you Do Not Care who is in power.

Voting is a tool, and a civic duty. It's one of the few ways US society allows direct input from citizens.

If you actually are against facism, don't use misguided idealism to encourage people to throw away the little political power they have.

It generally doesn't though. People who rent aren't suddenly going to be able to afford to buy. If you look at cities that do these policies, homeownership rates do go up, but the entire lower income community is basically evicted from the city. It's basically accelerated gentrification.

These types of policies also affect the types of units that get built. If rental units are a risky business move, then more construction will go towards larger single family homes, which are 1) less space efficient (fewer units), but 2) much more expensive (so the builder gets their money's worth)

The other thing is with rent control, housing stock will decrease because people will not move. If you are in a rent controlled unit, you're very strongly incentivised to never leave : because while your rent has been grandfathered to a low price, when you move you'll suddenly starting paying the inflated rates everyone else has been paying to offset the sub-market rents you had. Live in the same place long enough and this could be a 1000% increase.

The problem is raising rents are always due to lack of supply. I used to be very supportive of rent control but realized it's just a shitty band-aid on the real problem - lack of housing.

It will keep rents low for a bit, but won't fix the fundamental problem that allows high rents in the first place: and people will still struggle to find housing.

And you can bet your ass that any new will have massively increased rent or prices to compensate.

The real fix, like everywhere else, is to kick out the nimbys and allow building again

Overwatch disabled doubling up well after launch, and only because they couldn't or wouldn't balance the game such that a 4 tank no DPS comp didn't utterly cheese the game.

Lookup the history of gun control in the US. Now look at how cops react to white people with guns vs black people with guns. The cops would happily use the presence of guns as an excuse to commit massacres.

Niagra falls City has preemptively declared a state of emergency because of how much of a shit show this eclipse is going to be

The cops almost certainly don't feel anything lol. They decided it wasn't their problem.

Rich generally do pretty fine for themselves when the "economy" tanks.

Just look at how much richer they got during the COVID recession lol