Bush 1 administration, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama. It would be around 500-1000 people but of course the entire US Military would fight against it and end the world if it came to it. If a sympathetic US President decided to assist though, a new golden age would dawn.

Closing prisons is generally good, but even in the most glorious future, there are going to need to be places where people who choose to violate societies rules are kept away from society, i.e. a prison. If we don’t want to segregate these prisons by gender that’s a discussion worth having, but right now we do, so since I believe in feminism, I also know that a woman is just as capable of needing to be removed from society as a man.

This is of course a separate discussion from the conditions and expectations of our current prisons.

In the theoretical sense, you are right. But the big question is how do you give aid to those that need it in a country that is run by people who treat women as cattle.

I guess I wasn’t expecting an advocate for team america world police on lemmy, wild.

It seems like giving money to religious fundamentalists who treat women like cattle is probably not the best use of international aid.

The EU can and should ban government and business’s from using twitter as part of their official communications. But if private citizens wants to tweet, then sure go for it, even the EU with it’s less then stellar speech record, particularly with the labeling antisemitism, still allows freedom of association.

On here I’d 100% agree, though if some member here got into some kind of discord drama that you weren’t apart of, why would you choose a side? You’ll have incomplete information, and no doubt one of them will claim they were harassed while leaving out some important details.

the sane response is to go “wow that is awful. the gaming community does indeed contain some terrible people, i am glad to be one of the good ones and will distance myself from this behavior”

I’d say the saner response is none at all. This seems like a pretty niche community issue somewhere on the internet involving at most <100 people. I doubt anyone here is closer then 3 degrees of separation from anyone involved. Why would you expect any of the outsiders here to “take a stand,” based on incomplete information?

If base load isn’t required, where are these grid level storage facilities? Last I checked there were <100 and they are handle a fraction of a percent of the US grid load.

How many does china have? They have a much larger solar/Wind installation then the US so surely they should have hundreds of thousands, and yet?

In ths US as of 2022, 66% of natural gas facilities are for Base Load generation, something that you claim isn’t needed. Maybe you should let the engineers and grid planners know? https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61444

Can you provide a link showing the huge amount ofenergy storage that has been built alongside wind and solar? Surely such a huge undertaking would have at least a wikipedia page about it? Maybe a graph showing the increase in storage capacity over time? Afterall, base load isn’t needed anymore, this seems like a huge development in the past 10years! I’d love to learn about the inflection point where base load was no longer required.

Meanwhile in an alternate timeline where harris is also packing her cabinet with Pro-Israel picks.

“You can’t criticize this because trump would have been worse!”
“Oh sure they are just upset the FIRST BLACK WOMAN PRESIDENT is staffing her cabinet with standard DC insiders, what’s the big deal? Of course they will be pro-israel.”

Carbon capture is fossil fuel industry green washing. It doesn’t exist and completely ignores other greenhouse gases that are endemic to natural gas extraction and use. Again the purpose of base load, which is needed regardless of the propaganda, is to have a stable grid. The only way base load won’t be needed is if grid-scale storage both could be built (it can’t) and was built (it isn’t). So conveniently natural gas plants are built instead and now the US is the world’s number one producer of fossil fuels.

Isn’t that interesting?

If y’all were really worried about base load power, you’d be shilling for natural gas peaker plants + carbon capture which has much better economics.

Ah there it is. Another anti-nuclear shill for the fossil fuel industry. Sprinkling nebulous “economic” claims.
Storage at grid scale doesn’t exist, and probably never will, but natural gas peak plants exist today and are extremely lucrative for the fossil fuel industry. Every watt of solar or wind has a built in fossil fuel component that is necessary for grid stability. Nuclear eliminates the fossil fuel component, why would you be against that?

The purpose of nuclear power is zero-carbon emissions. That is the most important part. The economic value of them is secondary.

Doing something because it’s the “most economical” is why we have a climate catastrophe on our hands. Plus solar can’t actually provide steady power on it’s own and never will be able to. Exotic nation wide energy storage solutions do not exists at our current level of technology. Instead solar/wind has to be offset by natural gas power plants.

Indeed and they have to be. However an overly cautious evacuation order isn’t really a big deal. It should be improved, and learned upon, but lots of government needs improvement.

If you want privacy and you drive a car, I got bad news for you. Public Transit is privacy.

Emanuel is a veteran Washington insider, having served three Democratic presidents. He holds a reputation as a high-energy political operative who often uses colorful and profane language.

Sounds like the perfect man for the job of ensuring that nothing changes for the better within the DNC.

Withdrawing from NATO, I could see Trump entertaining that (wouldn’t actually happen).

Fire a bunch of the top leadership? For sure. That would both be something Trump could “order the military to do,” as well as something he might do, and it would also harm the US military’s capability to wage war.

Zero out Pentagon funding? Not possible for trump to do alone, but depending on the congressional make up, it could be done and would severely limit the ability of the US Military to wage war. They could even do it without affecting enlisted personnel enrollment. The Pentagon has their own funding 100% separate from military spending.

Could also deny all future discretionary spending for the military/pentagon.

Disband 20% of it’s career leadership.

Zero out pentagon funding.

Withdraw from NATO.

The more cynical among us might view this as a racket. . . Despite his electoral face-plant, he became an influencer touring the country for the Harris campaign. The Texas Democratic Party is replete with “organizers” such as these, who seem always to fail upward.

Oh word?

Replace Jewish with Israeli, or Zionist, and you are 100% accurate about what is happening.