GreenSkree

No, they're asking about the case that did go through where he was found guilty of 34 felony convictions. The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump

He was supposed to be sentenced in September. Trump's defense asked to delay. Prosecution didn't object. Judge didn't want to stick his neck on the line and accepted the delay.

I have no idea what will happen now but probably nothing meaningful anymore. It should have happened in September. I don't know why the prosecution didn't fight the delay, but understand why the judge did what he did.

But yeah, I completely agree with your sentiment. The momentum into nailing Trump down on crimes happened way, way, *way *too slow.

Learn something from this...?

To what end? For what point? There isn't an "undo" button on fascism.

First, A lot of the far-left authoritarian users are in other instances, like lemmy.ml. Those communities are easy to avoid and users from there easily identified.

Second, I can only guess you're talking about Harris when speaking "a communist and a known war monger". Speaking as a former libertarian Republican (who left the party when Trump took over), Harris isn't communist or far left. That's 100% right-wing propaganda. America's Democratic party is pretty conservative compared to liberal and leftist parties in Europe and isn't that much to the left of the pre-Trump Republican party.

As for the known warmonger, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Could you imagine if the presidential candidates and their VP pick had to play Overcooked together for a few hours?

It wouldn't even have to be a competition on score. You could learn so much about them so fast - their communication, ability to adapt, and how they handle frustrations.

What in the world are you talking about?

This just may be the dumbest thing I've heard today.

My understanding of a patent (in the US) is that it's only for new, novel concepts, often difficult to design or conceive.

Prior art, in this context, are just examples of this concept already in use or demonstrated. If there are already examples of the idea in use by others, then your idea isn't new (and therefore not patentable).

If people want this to be acted on, then Dems need to win.

Oh, absolutely.

Both to campaign on and to act on, unfortunately.

I think there's a big difference between them making the small (but good) progress with legislation they've done this term compared to making climate a part of their campaign and bringing it up all the time. Idiots on the right will attack opponents on anything, but currently, I imagine most of the population is put off by the "she's gonna ban ur meat and stove!!1" weirdos. Sometimes not engaging is the most effective way to keep bad arguments out of the public sphere.

Plus, there's so much disinformation from the other side that you're apt to lose voters that consume any amount of that crap.

If something doesn't energize your base and it makes you lose votes from outside your base, it's a net loss to campaign on. It seems that climate change is currently one of those issues.

I'm convinced our media is hell-bent on promoting Trump at any opportunity.

I feel like Trump could do anything on that stage and the story pushed out by the media will be some weird criticism about how disappointing Harris' performance was.

Like, Trump could answer every single question with a rant about how cheeseburgers just aren't as good as they used to be and no-one would bat an eye. Then the story for weeks will be about how "Harris just wasn't detailed enough about how her economic policies. She didn't even mention how the Distiller's Dried Grains with Solubles (DDGS)/cash corn ratio would change per week over the next decade or two. Harris clearly is too light on the policy front."

I hope I'm wrong, but I've come to expect the worst from our media lately.

I have no idea either. I'm guessing it's only an "issue" because Trump (and therefore Fox) won't stop talking about it.

I guess?

I'm all for voting reform, promoting easy access to voting for everyone, breaking the grip of the 2 party system, and dismantling junk like the electoral college.

But we're a little more than 2 months from a major election. It's unlikely that these ideas are going to be picked up and championed as campaign promise. So it makes me wonder why they're being parroted now. I suspect it's to highlight that our system isn't always great and discourage people from voting.

They're not saying "my vote doesn't matter", but that's kind of the vibe it gives off, while suggesting an unrealistic, idealistic solution. 🤷‍♂️