Voting isn’t actually a constitutional right like owning firearms is. There are protections about equality when it comes to voting, but not much about voting itself. States are generally given the right to decide who can vote and how they vote.
He has had some pretty bad senior moments, the worst one I can recall is the “Hey Jackie” one. In general he does talk pretty slow and just appears confused sometimes. He talks like he is really having to think about what he is saying, and that’s not just him, he didn’t use to be like that.
Most qualified and experienced for the job, regardless of race or gender
Our medical care isn’t limitless, there is only so much we can actually do. Look at how Biden has been progressing even with the best care in the world, he clearly isn’t in the best shape and it’s only going to get worse. It’s entirely possible he gets worse fast and for there to be nothing that can be done about it even with the best care we can give him.
Let it be based on the best person for the job. If that happens to be a black woman then fine, but the race and gender should not be a requirement at all. Saying that you will only choose a black woman is just as racist as sexist as saying you will only choose a white male.
I think a lot of the left agree with you, and obviously the right hates her, probably more than Biden. I also feel like the far left has grown a lot lately, the fact that Bernie even won some states in primaries just shows how big the far left has become.
I know he initially promised to pick a woman, but I’m pretty sure he changed that to black women, saying he has like 4 to choose from. Either way it’s bad taste to make such an important decision openly based on race and gender.
So we agree that nobody wants Harris as president? And that voting for Biden is how we might just end up with her as president?
He may not die, but I think it’s reasonable to think he will be deemed unfit to serve, or even step down voluntarily.
I personally don’t see that happening. To make any real drastic changes on the destroying democracy level you would have to throw away the Constitution, and I really don’t see that happening.
We also have a pretty heavily armed society, so with anything that crazy I would expect some fight back from civilians and military against the government, and hopefully that’s enough of a deterrent to not even try.
I can really see this going either way if Biden stays with his decision to run. I know every year people complain about having two bad choices, but Biden V Trump round 2 has to be a record for the actual worst options possible.
I think the issues with both Biden and Trump are fairly obvious, but another issue is that if Biden does win, there is a fairly good chance we will end up with a president Harris, probably the one person people like less than Biden as a democratic president. I think she lost so much credibility when Biden promised he would pick a black woman as a VP, basically cementing the idea that part of her qualifications for the role of VP was based purely on gender and race.
I hope you can realize this is a false equivalency, but maybe you can’t?
The workers get paid, they get value out of it, they aren’t slaves.
The company wouldn’t exist without owners, someone created it, someone started it, someone owns it. The owners are also the ones usually making the big decisions, they have a lot of skin in the game when it comes to the future of the company.
Look at a company like Blockbuster. With a better owner they could have changed their position to stay around as a company, but the owner made bad choices. If there was no owner what would have happened? It probably would have failed even quicker because there is nobody making decisions and most employees probably didn’t see the wiring on the wall until it was too late.
A good owner would have seen the direction the market was going and changed the company to prepare. Netflix has been fighting this fight for a while now, switching from streaming other’s content to making their own content. Without an owner they would have died a long time ago.
So take away ownership of a company just because it’s too successful? That wealth is mostly in company ownership, so are you really suggesting we steal away legitimate ownership in successful companies?
Yes to taking away wealth or the way to leverage it?
So all those times I’ve gotten mail about using my shares to vote, what was that about exactly?
Of course they do, I don’t expect a given employee who isn’t the owner or high level exec to have a larger fraction of ownership.
So what? What’s your point?
Employees are allowed to buy company stock and vote using it just like anyone else. Many companies even have employee stock purchase programs. What’s the problem ?
I don’t think the stock market should be determining if we take away companies from their owners, no matter how much it’s worth. Why does having more wealth than a certain size city matter? Especially if your company has more employees and customers than even a large city?
So what? We should take away that ownership because they can leverage it? Also the same people suggesting we tax wealth like this want to also close those “loopholes” of low interest loans on shares.
What’s your point? So because they can leverage their ownership of their own company we need to take away that ownership?
It’s my belief that the reason nobody has seriously tried to change the Constitution to remove or modify the 2nd amendment is that they know it’s currently impossible. Changing the Constitution requires a serious amount of working together and agreement between the state and federal governments, and that just doesn’t exist right now.
That’s why some states are trying to pass unconstitutional laws, it’s easier to do that and get away with it at least for a little bit than it is to change the construction.