Literally, “water man” is correct. But I would translate it a bit more loosely as “water bearer”.

Most, if not all, names of zodiac signs in Dutchare are literal translations from Latin. But while most people understand that Leo means Lion, how many know Cancer is Latin for crab?

Clearly you don’t understand the first-past-the-post system the US presidential election utilises.

The chance isn’t just slim. It’s astronomical.

The chance of Cornell West winning is probably smaller than a bit-flip happening, switching your vote to another candidate. That’s how little chance your vote would have to make the country a better place.

On the other hand, every vote not casted for the only viable non-Trump candidate helps Trump.

I’m European and would love for you to have the option to vote for proper social democrats or greens (especially greens!). But please, every US citizen needs to do their part to not get fascists get hold of your country.

It’s sad to say, but if you don’t vote for the democratic candidate, you might not have a chance to vote 3rd party in 4 years. (I don’t like fear mongering, but it’s a real enough possibility)

No worries. I was hesitant to post both comments, knowing they might be misinterpreted.

Oh, absolutely. Was hoping for a “I am all Hamas on this blessed day”.

For the ones not in the know:

Speak for yourself

Yes, but why would you listen to what Hamas has to say?!?!

We’re younger than the US though.

By not voting, you are still, implicitly, voting for the candidate who you wouldn’t have voted for. Do you think he’s not supporting Israel?

Do you think he even has any moral standing?

That’s who you’re voting for by not voting.

You just want to absolve yourself of that moral responsibility.

That’s exactly what you are doing. You’re focusing on this one issue, retreating yourself from the binary decision because neither options stands for what you (or I, or morality) would prefer. Completely ignoring that withdrawing from the choice plays into the hand of the infinitely worse candidate. So by not choosing, you do nothing to stop the situation in Gaza, but might actually make things a lot worse for people all over.

You can virtue signal that you did not compromise on your believes, while actually helping your country make a worse place.

Would this not be considered as “providing comfort to insurrectionists”, as described in the 14th amendment. Even just promising pardoning them.

So even if they argue he supposedly wasn’t involved in it, it would still disqualify him from office.

I’m hoping they’ll rule against him as well, but these reasons seem way out there.

1. That’s assuming they believe he’ll go full fascist and execute them. They don’t. Even if they would believe that, ruling in his favour would prove their worth to him.

2. I see no way that democrats could dissolve the SC. They probably wouldn’t even if they could.

Do you see a subway on that picture?

You can’t have failing infrastructure if you don’t have infrastructure 👨🏾‍⚕️

Probably saying that neither conflict would have happened if he was re-elected/“the dems didn’t steal the election”.

They basically did this with Salazar, the Portugese dictator.

He was officially replaced while in a coma. He came out of it and lived for almost 2 years more. No one ever told him he was no longer in power.

When the call is coming from inside the (white) house…

(Edit: to be clear, back in 2020)

I chose to believe it’s a but using Musk’s LLM.

Which does make for a fun game:

Grok bot or Crack pot?

While I would agree under normal circumstances, that would just be abused in the current political atmosphere.

Republicans are now already trying to impeach Biden for some made up reason while knowing it will never stick in the senate. Can you imagine how much more effort they’d spent in it if it would prevent Biden from running for reelection.

Everything Trump has done should be enough to make him unelectable in the eyes of the voters, even if it doesn’t legally prevent him from running.

Most played artist on Spotify and Time’s person of the year 2023 vs… who? Someone whose name I recognise in the context of being a right-wing nut. Whether they’re a politician, musician, actor, podcast host,… I wouldn’t be able to say.

This is essentially a pro freedom of speech legislation.

It’s not though. It doesn’t just protect employers to call anyone whatever pronoun they want, it mandates that the preferred pronoun for trans people (and others) are not used.

It doesn’t just protect bigotry, it requires it.