Wow way to infantilize this person. All you see is her gender, huh?

We just had 128 Democratic reps vote against impeaching Trump too.

https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2025175

Yeah buried down below the headline in small font. We all know most people only read headlines and then walk away. Why even put that garbage in the headline if the body of the article refutes it?

$100 says this guy is friends with police.

Its misinformation at best. So what if SA victims didn’t testify directly in the grand jury proceedings? This would be like reporting “No murder victims testified in Ted Bundy grand jury proceedings - only investigators”

A grand jury’s only purpose is to see if there’s enough evidence to proceed with charges and an actual trial. Their headline and byline are worded as if they were charged based on manufactured claims made by government employees. As if some egregious violation occurred here rather than standard procedure.

They’re lending credence to these conspiracy theories by reporting on them as if theyre real news and not just bullshit made up by a certain guilty party that happens to currently be president of the United States.

Especially the part where you started yelling in the office about how you’d asked for a virgin but didnt get it.

So does that mean the NY Times is a Trump supporter since they’re also pushing this conspiracy? It’s quite absurd how often they find themselves on the wrong side of history while still maintaining a “prestigious” reputation.

I believe it’s $15 for state filing but free otherwise. Even this free IRS program would have you file state taxes separately.

I used CreditKarma the entire time they offered their program and tried CashApp after they bought it from CK. I believe it’s still completely free but the process is annoying as you have to at least partially use the CashApp app on your phone to log in.

You knew it was going there because the Democratic party refuses to listen to reason and continues to drift further and further rightto the point that we just had two candidates promoting genocide, attacking immigrants, attacking the poor, and palling around with Dick Cheney. It’s funny that you’d rather attack the critics than dare speak out against the actual perpetrators of this abhorrent behavior. Attack the victim not the victimizer.

Democratic sycophants are becoming almost indistinguishable from their MAGA counterparts these days. You guys are all using the exact same language.

Get.Yourshit.Together. If you can’t bring yourself to vote for the DNC, and you can’t get anything else going, you’re wasting your own time and sinking the rest of us.

And what will you be doing in the meantime other than attacking those who actually want things to improve?

My whole point was about primaries, but even still he’s polling well in the lead. If he wins will you admit that it can be done?

Winning a primary doesn’t mean much if the party crushes you in the general. I hope he wins and I would be happy to admit I was wrong if he makes it and actually lives up to his word once in office.

Okay, what’s your point? That the same population that’s too apathetic to vote in a primary are going to what, pick up arms and take to the streets? Organize behind and promote a minority party? How do you plan to build a coalition behind an objectively more difficult and unlikely strategy? You don’t.

Mamdani, and several other leftist candidates have been running exceptionally successful grassroots campaigns through social media and hitting the streets. We live in the information age, viral community-driven campaigns have the potential to reach more people than legacy media. And again, what alternative do you propose that will face less corporate opposition? You think the DNC is going to stay silent on third party candidates competing for their votes? You think corporate media is going to stay silent on any attempt at actual revolution? If the machine is so powerful, what action are you suggesting that can actually overcome it?

My point is that you’re advocating for people to try and fix the system from within the broken system itself. Democratic and Republican primaries are completely controlled by these two private organizations not some overarching organization, people, or law. It’s naive to think that you can somehow outplay the DNC (or RNC) leadership at a game they crafted and rigged themselves. It’s like thinking you can outplay the house at a casino if you just use the right strategy. Even if you do somehow find a winning strategy, they’ll just refuse to pay you, take you into the backroom, beat your ass, and then have police come haul you out for trespassing because the house always wins. You won’t get better candidates by picking from the handful of predetermined candidates that the DNC offers you in their primary race whether 15% vote or 100% vote.

I don’t know what the ‘correct’ approach is but I know it isn’t this. Perhaps some actual grassroots organizations can put something together or an existing third party can take their placr, but regardless of what it is, it’s not going to be something internal to these organizations, it has to come from the outside.

No I dont think the DNC or corporate media will ignore these events, they’ll come out swinging like they did in 2008 with the Occupy Wall Street protests. They’ll paint these outsiders as kooks and extremists and make them look like a joke on TV and the internet. You speak about the information age as if everyone is somehow more enlightened than generations past, yet we see people as a whole getting dumber and less informed as time goes on. We see the powerful using social media to spread a bunch of lies and disinformation. We see the truth being cast aside or drowned in a bunch of noise.

So long as elections in this country are FPTP, and leftists don’t show up to primaries, and Republicans keep pushing Christo-fascism, then they are correct that it is the best option.

How are these people “the best option” in hindsight when we know for a fact that they lost the election? I find statements like this so utterly insane. You’re referring to the very people that we unquestionably know weren’t the best option by virtue of them losing these elections to a buffoon. This party of “the best options” were so ‘good’ that the Republicans control the entire government now.

Splitting the anti-Republican vote just helps the Republicans, and by extension the Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society. Personally, I’d rather have a Neo-Liberal government than a Christian Nationalist one, and there aren’t any other options right now.

This is just the “vote blue no matter who” mentality i previously referred to phrased another way. Neo-Liberal governments have driven us to this point alongside the Christian Nationalists. They’re both responsible for this and they’re the ones determining the options we have. I legitimately cannot understand how someone like yourself can agree that we have terrible options while simultaneously arguing that we need to support the people determining said options. It’d be like going to a grocery store filled with rancid food and telling yourself that you need to choose something off the shelf because that particular store left you no other options. Why would you do that? Why reward that store with your hard earned money? It’s such incredibly closed-minded behavior that harms your own self interests and not only are you advocating that you should shop there personally, but everyone else should too.

No disagreement here, but where’s the incinerator and the power to throw them in it? If I had a magic wand that I could wave to erase both parties, I would. But I don’t have that kind of magic wand, and neither do you. We have to operate in the environment we actually exist in. Idealism doesn’t get us any closer to material change. Voting against the worst option is the best choice we have at the polls, until we can get seriously organized. Serious organization takes a lot of time and effort. Ignoring the material present for a vague idealist future is a massive strategic blunder.

The incinerator is your vote and what you decide to do with it. The environment we exist in isn’t limited to these two private parties. That’s just what they want you to believe. Sacrificing your ideals just to be disappointed and have things get worse because neo-liberals don’t serve the American people isnt going to bring material change either. Doing the same thing every election isnt going to bring about change. Constantly “voting against the worst option” just means the next worse option can safely ignore you and refuse to improve things because they have you convinced that they’re your only choice and therefore have no accountability to anyone. I’d argue that someone in your position is “ignoring the material present for some vague idealistic future.” You think if the Dems can just win this next election they’ll turn things around and eventually the Republicans will scurry off somewhere, but we’ve seen numerous times that even with a Democratic supermajority, they have no interest in fixing things and Republicans aren’t going anywhere because they’re doing the exact same thing to their base.

It’s a lot harder to organize as a political prisoner in a concentration camp.

And regardless of which party wins any given election, we’ve been steadily approaching that reality with each passing day. Seems like a great wakeup call that some actual change is needed, no?

I just now realized you’re referring to a personal deduction for a home office and not a corporate deduction for the home office. I see what you’re getting at now and wouldn’t be surprised if that were the case.

Wouldn’t that be a business expense as well? I agree it’s the more sane option, but they’re both still insanely hypocritical options when compared to allowing remote work.

What’s even more funny is that he was approved by E-Verify in March under this very administration, so it’s not like they can blame it on Biden and his “open borders” even though they’ll still probably try to.

They put their thumb on the scale with Mamdani and he won anyway.

He won a primary but has yet to win the election. This is the same party that also produced Trump supporter Adams and sleazebag Cuomo. The same party that just ousted recently elected party leaders for wanting to primary candidates like Adams and Cuomo with candidates like Mamdani. They’ve demonstrated time and time again that they’d rather have someone like Trump win than allow someone like Mamdani to take office and that’s what he’ll be facing in the general election.

Because primary turnout is something like 15% of eligible voters, who are disproportionately old and “centrist”.

Because people have been beaten down with the same club for so long that they’ve given up. I can say with almost certainty that a majority of people these days are just voting against the other candidate rather than voting for someone, so how do you build a coalition of people behind someone in an environment like that? You don’t.

I’m just saying it wouldn’t matter if we quit the infighting, rallied behind a good prospect, and actually showed up to vote for them as the Democratic candidate.

I completely agree that’s possible in theory but then it brings us back to square one where the DNC won’t give them any support, puts out attack ads about how they’re “too radical,” excludes them from debates, and corporate media gives them no coverage. You’re asking for a machine to produce a product that isn’t wanted by the people actually running the machine.

People here and on Reddit will tell you election after election that it’s on you to compromise and meet these right-wing Democrats where they stand. That “now is not the right time,” that you should “vote blue no matter who,” that “everything is on the line this time” as these very same candidates lose election after election. If you argue with them you’re just met with a bunch of thought-terminating cliches like “bOtH SiDeS” or “Russian plant” and treated as a scapegoat for not compromising to their disgusting and ineffective values, meanwhile they act like said loser candidate was “the best option” in hindsight despite the fact that they lost yet again.

At this point I’d be perfectly happy to throw the Democratic party in the incinerator alongside the Republican party and just starting over from scratch. They only exist at this point to act as controlled opposition and kayfabe to give the appearance of two opposing sides.

It was widely expected that Chirac and Lionel Jospin, the outgoing cohabitation Prime Minister and nominee of the Socialist Party, would be the most popular candidates in the first round, thus going on to face each other in the runoff, with opinion polls showing a hypothetical Chirac versus Jospin second round too close to call. However, Jospin unexpectedly finished in third place behind Le Pen. Journalists and politicians claimed polls had failed to predict Le Pen’s second-place finish in the general election, though his strong stance could be seen in the week prior to the election.[citation needed] This led to serious discussions about polling techniques, the climate of French politics and especially the high numbers of candidates from the left-wing.

Although Le Pen’s political party, the National Front, described itself as mainstream conservative, observers largely agreed in defining it as a far-right and nationalist party. As a protest, almost all French political parties called for their supporters to vote against Le Pen, most notably the Socialists, who were traditionally billed as the archrivals to Chirac’s party. Chirac thus went on to win in the largest landslide in a presidential election in French history (greater even than that of Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte in 1848, the first by direct ballot), winning over 82% of the vote.

That sure sounds like a carbon copy of US politics (or vice versa). You have politicians and journalists spinning a story about how things will turn out, and when they dont turn out that way the leftist candidates move to the right to find ‘solidarity’ just before the right sweeps the entire government.

That doesn’t really make sense because they’re still spending that money. A $1M/yr business expense on a new office that gives you a $1M/yr tax deduction isn’t putting you ahead financially.

What you’re missing from the “no deduction” side is that they’re also not spending additional money on new offices.

Except when the DNC doesn’t like that candidate so they put their thumb on the scale to ensure they don’t win. Why else do you think we keep getting the same handful of candidates? Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama, Obama, Clinton, Biden, Biden, Harris. Do you not see the pattern here? They want a dynasty in control not the people with the best ideas.

As I said those people can already have an interlock device installed in their car without any special “interface” mandated into every car by the government. This is just the “it’s for the children” propaganda repackaged into something else.

$150k a year income is far from rich. I’m not arguing that they aren’t better off that a household earning $50k but it’s not all lollipops and roses like you’re assuming. Tax wise, these people get hit the hardest because they’re earning enough to pay high tax rates but far from enough to hire fancy accountants or structure their money in a way to pay lower rates.

This doesn’t even account for CoL where some places like the bay would classify $150k as “low income.”

It doesn’t make sense because none of the other corporate employees are going to be there with him meaning it’s no different than if he (or they) just worked from home to begin with. It’s essentially the same as if they turned his home garage into an “office.”