The goal of the NPVIC is to get states equalling or exceeding 270 electoral votes. At that point, it doesn't matter what other states do because 270 guarantees the popular winner gets the White House.

Now, I'm fully aware that reaching 270 entails getting states which are currently Republican-led to sign on as well. But legislative majorities and governors can and do change, sometimes very swiftly.

I'd like to see every state receive one Senator and then the other 50 would be proportioned based on population.

The whole point of the Senate was that it was supposed to be the more apolitical body of Congress, removed from the electorate's passions of the moment, hence they serve the longest term in all of government, 6 years.

That simply isn't true anymore, the Senate is just as partisanly driven today as the House - maybe a smidge less. Perhaps any reform of the Senate would also include reducing their terms to 4 years with states/regions having more than one, their voters would vote for someone every two years.

Harris is terrible in Strawlighter's eyes because she's spent her career putting people like Donald Trump in jail, not helping them sully the White House yet again to the entire world's detriment outside of Putin's, Orban's, and Kim's.

The EC was never an issue until Democrats started losing.

It became an "issue" the second it was conceived because it denied human beings any right of self determination, instead allowing the owners of said human beings political power they never deserved. The EC is completely anti-democratic in every sense of the word. Only a privileged, blind ignoramus would make such an intellectually vacuous claim.

Why not claim that no one complained about slavery too? It's as ridiculous as your assertion about the EC.

Can you cite one single national election in any other country on Planet Earth where the popular winner can be denied victory because of ancient fealty to an institution built to enshrine unearned political power to those who enslaved other human beings?

That is what you're defending, cretin.

I didn't say anything about the senate system.

It's the same argument: outsized representation for less populated states when calculated on a per capita basis.

That Williams' office has managed to bring two cases of this magnitude so close in time probably won't surprise anyone who's traced his "compelling biography." His resume is one of legend: Born to Jamaican parents in Brooklyn before moving to Atlanta, Williams attended Harvard, Cambridge and Yale Law School. And then he began his ascent to the tippy-top of the legal elite: clerkships for now-Attorney General Merrick Garland, who was a federal appeals court judge at the time, and for then-Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens; a stint at Paul Weiss, one of the country's most prestigious - and liberal-leaning - law firms; and a coveted position as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York, which encompasses Manhattan and the Bronx, along with six suburban and even exurban upstate counties.

SDNY, as the office is known, is also occasionally referred to as the "Sovereign District" for its historic independence, as well as its size (Williams supervises around 220 lawyers), the quality of its lawyers, and the sophistication of its cases. But even in the nation's premier U.S. attorney's office, Williams distinguished himself, focusing on "white collar cases involving corruption in financial markets and politics" before becoming the chief of the securities unit. And he was still holding that civil-service role - as opposed to retreating to a cushy law firm partnership - when President Joe Biden nominated him to be U.S. attorney. Upon his confirmation, he became the first Black person in SDNY's then-234-year history to lead the office.

There are a ton of people here on the DR who disagree with you.

Sometimes I think you miss the forest for the trees. To the degree you're noting, in my eyes, it started with Trump and his incessant marketing of what he still calls "the best economy ever," which it wasn't by any objective sense.

Politicians indeed have always run on the economy being good or not so good depending upon whether they're incumbents or an outsider.

We sit here today with a remarkable economic turnaround after the global effects of the Covid pandemic. Objectively - outside of global inflation - the US economy remains the strongest, most resilient economy on the planet. Yet, if you listen to Trump, we're inches away from 1929 - which is crazy talk. And most of his base refuse to become disabused of their false beliefs.

Do liberals and progressives now use the economy to credit the Biden/Harris Administration beyond their actual input in fostering current conditions? Of course. But they have to to blunt Trump's counter-narrative based on lies and false hyperbole that so many Americans believe, even against factual evidence to the contrary.

It is what it is.

Comparing storms 10,000 years ago to present day,

Please STFU and go play in traffic with the other brain-dead idiots.

Human or AI, you're scum.

That applies to Commondolt as well.

Prior to global warming, a large storm like this one had never occurred ...

at the frequency, size, and with the rapid intensification characteristics that we're seeing in today's storms.

We seem to continue to have 100-year storm events multiple times annually as of late. When you have 100-year storms every year - sometimes in multiples - they aren't 100-year storms anymore, are they?

It's just that people think oil production is like some valve a president has in his office...he turns in either way at will and POOF! prices go up or down.....and the president controls it.

I'd hope you know that I'm not such a person. Presidents have very little direct impact upon our economy, but one party continually markets that they and their presidents do and we know which party that is. And in many minds, perception is reality.

I brought up OPEC because it's my rationale for saying what I'm saying. I thought that I'd made it very clear over and over again. When one talks about the global oil supply, that is talking about OPEC because it has direct influence over it due to the very nature of its cartel. It's impossible for me to talk about domestic oil production without tying it to global oil production and OPEC. At one point, OPEC allowed the markets to become saturated and prices to fall below the threshold where US shale producers could turn a profit, so they shuttered operations until prices rose again. And today, with Russia deep into its war with Ukraine, and the Saudi's influence waning a little due to our surge in production, OPEC's appetite for trying to squelch US production doesn't exist like it has in the past.

Biden isn't currently trying to restrict US production even in fracking. He innately understands the relationship between our strong domestic economy, the price of oil, and particularly inflation. His priority coming out of the pandemic has been to let our domestic oil industries thrive while still trying to protect sensitive lands and waters from further drilling at this time, while still championing the new technologies emerging in renewable energy, hoping that innovation continues to lower its costs in relation to fossil fuels.

Not the situation....but you're cheerleading of it.

Show me where in my 20 years here that I've ever supported OPEC and its ability to affect global oil prices by manipulating supply.

I'll save you the time, I never have. I detest OPEC from the 1970s and my opinion has never wavered. Anything that lessens their power and influence is a good thing in my book. I'm also an American worker and consumer who drives a gas-powered car. While I understand our need to move from fossil fuels, I've never been an advocate for intentionally harming Americans in the course of doing so.

And lastly, the only time I mention domestic oil production is to counter the lying narrative that Biden and Harris have stymied current production when nothing is further from the truth. The industry is still growing, but even within it, if global prices drop too low, then domestic production will cease because it isn't profitable which will put more influence into the hands of foreign producers yet again.

That's the difference between Trump and Biden/Harris. If Trump had been president over these last 4 years, Robson nor any conservative wouldn't know of the US' supremacy in producing and exporting oil. Short term, this is great. Long term, we see storms like Helene go from barely a hurricane to almost a Cat 5 in 24 hours and we see the prognostications of those monitoring rising global temperatures tied to fossil fuel usage and innately understand that our current course has to change or the planet will become less and less hospitable for human life and safety.

So no, no cheerleading here but for setting the record straight against Trump lies and distortions. When you see emerging technologies take hold and become valued on a global scale, it simply makes sense for the country with the most diverse and nimble economy to take full advantage of the opportunity to be a leader not only today, but on into the future. That's what I'm actively cheering for.

kind of ironic.....

No it isn't. By and large Democrats not elected by progressive electorates are almost all pragmatists. Make no doubt about it, both Joe and Kamala would like to see the US move from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, but neither one wants to see US consumers and industries immediately harmed during any such transition.

The best way to keep domestic oil prices lower is to increase its supply and lessen Saudi Arabia's and OPEC's ability to set global prices through manipulation of its supply.

Domestic oil production is analogous to Biden's stewardship of the post-pandemic economy - being able to bring down inflation, increase employment and wages while simultaneously keeping the economy from sliding into a recession. Heretofore, no one of seriousness thought such a delicate balance could be kept, yet here we are today, with all economic indicators still pointing the right direction and the Dow Jones continues to set new highs week after week.

Yet according to polls, Trump is thought to be better for the economy than Biden/Harris. There simply is no rational evidence for such a conclusion when all evidence and reality objectively points in the opposite direction.

We dont need the Middle East oil like we did in 60s and 70s .... Kamala and Joe wasting America again.

Where are you living Robson? It certainly isn't in America today, or you'd already know this.

"I know a lot about overtime," the Republican candidate boasted. "I hated to give overtime. I hated it. I'd get other people, I shouldn't say this, but I'd get other people in. I wouldn't pay."

Right off the bat, there are still some political observers who like to pretend that the former president is some kind of ally to working-class Americans. It's against that backdrop that Trump thought it'd be a good idea to admit that he, as a boss, deliberately took steps to deny his own employees overtime compensation to which they were entitled.

But just as notably, a variety of analysts have explained that the far-right Project 2025 agenda, written in large part by members of Trump's own team, would also limit workers' access to overtime compensation.

With all of this in mind, Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign wasted little time in pouncing on the Republican for accidentally speaking his mind.

"Donald Trump is finally owning up to it: He's built an entire career on screwing over workers," Harris-Walz spokesperson Sarafina Chitika said in a written statement. "It's exactly what he did in the White House - trying to rip away tips and overtime pay for millions of workers - and exactly what he plans to do in a second term. Trump is a scab, plain and simple. He is selling snake oil lies in a desperate attempt to trick voters. He can't be trusted - workers know it, and voters know it. They'll elect a champion who has their back by voting for Vice President Harris this November."

Hope the Teamsters are listening to Donald telling the world how little he values those who work for an hourly wage.

This unequivocal, dispiriting truth - Donald Trump is not fit to be president - should be enough for any voter who cares about the health of our country and the stability of our democracy to deny him re-election.

Most presidential elections are, at their core, about two different visions of America that emerge from competing policies and principles. This one is about something more foundational. It is about whether we invite into the highest office in the land a man who has revealed, unmistakably, that he will degrade the values, defy the norms and dismantle the institutions that have made our country strong.

As a dedicated public servant who has demonstrated care, competence and an unwavering commitment to the Constitution, Ms. Harris stands alone in this race. She may not be the perfect candidate for every voter, especially those who are frustrated and angry about our government's failures to fix what's broken - from our immigration system to public schools to housing costs to gun violence. Yet we urge Americans to contrast Ms. Harris's record with her opponent's.

Over the past 10 weeks, Ms. Harris has offered a shared future for all citizens, beyond hate and division. She has begun to describe a set of thoughtful plans to help American families. Beyond the economy, Ms. Harris promises to continue working to expand access to health care and reduce its cost. She has a long record of fighting to protect women's health and reproductive freedom.

Most dangerous for American democracy, Mr. Trump has transformed the Republican Party - an institution that once prided itself on principle and honored its obligations to the law and the Constitution - into little more than an instrument of his quest to regain power. The Republicans who support Ms. Harris recognize that this election is about something more fundamental than narrow partisan interest. It is about principles that go beyond party.

Kamala Harris is the only choice.

because Trump ls calling Harris outrageous and crazy for opening our borders to criminal world.

Kamala Harris hasn't "opened our borders" because as VP she doesn't have any constitutional authority to do or order ANYTHING! Saying that she's personally responsible for border security would equally say that Mike Pence was responsible for family separation during the Trump Administration - which he wasn't.

And more importantly, not a single law was changed in how ICE deals with criminal immigrants or quantifies their numbers and presence inside our borders. Nothing changed when Trump was President either as the numbers continued to grow during his term.

You know who is not afraid to go out and about in Springfield? Proud Boys. Neo-Nazis. People handing out Ku Klux Klan fliers. Some of these people paraded swastika flags and rifles during our jazz festival. Their presence, and a torrent of threats, forced local officials to cancel the annual CultureFest celebration of diverse food, arts and music. These far-right groups clearly feel as though they have not just permission, but encouragement, from the Republican candidates. It is unsettling to live in this menacing atmosphere.

Mr. Trump and Mr. Vance hope to make every town Springfield, where the angry are emboldened by lies and the people they seek to punish live in fear. As someone who has lived through this transformation, trust me: You don't want to live in Trump's America.

How much longer can Republicans who aren't racist, who don't fear immigrants simply because of their color or nation of origin, and those who simply can't stomach Trump's repeated misogynistic pronunciation of his opponents first name - especially after she pointedly corrected him to his face, after which he never had the wherewithal to even attempt to say it once while in her presence; just how much longer can these supposed Christian people support an unquestioned evil violent man and his perverse and threatening candidacy?

And the loss for his entire presidency, start to finish, was 178,000 manufacturing jobs, not 200,000 or more as Harris said.

And that's something to hang one's hat on, losing 22,000 fewer manufacturing jobs than 200,000?

Must be what Trump considers a 'bigly win'.

Trump could adopt a North Korean-friendly name of, say, "Menta Lee Il."

My personal favorite is "Sic Koo Key".

"See, two years ago I wouldn't have had a fly up here. You're changing rapidly. But we can't take it any longer. We can't take it any longer. It takes centuries to build up the unique character of the United States of America. Centuries and centuries, it goes on forever."

No spokesflies were available after the event since the entire party congregated at the dumpster where Trump's overloaded Depends were placed after his rally.

Walz was a hit at the game today. They lovingly chanted 'Get out of here!'

What do you expect when Michigan fans were left standing in the pouring rain for 30 minutes to allow Walz inside before them?

Yea, I would not have gone with "perfect" in that sentence.

I think you missed that I used the word only as in a direct comparison to Trump's pick, JD., not in the sense that Walz is any more perfect than the rest of us imperfect beings.

In, THAT comparison, it's easy to call Walz a "perfect" choice by, and more importantly for Harris, namely for the very reasons you mentioned above added to my own: JD doesn't project a humane spirit - with his racist attacks on Haitians; he's visibly uncomfortable around regular people - namely because he doesn't see himself as one, so he can't help but reek of elitist superiority; and he's spent scant few months of his adult life helping or serving the public good and has no experience in government management outside of possibly his Senate staff - who's probably managed by his chief of staff. Yet he may end up heading the whole thing, something he's incredibly inexperienced to do.

I think you buried the lede - but thanks for this extremely important information being lost in the undertow of all things Trump.

A bigger deal than the indicted IRGC hackers in Iran. This man was here, working for our government.

The US can expect civil lawsuits.

Yet again, you prove how little you know about this nation and our laws. Numbers alone don't tell the entire story. And I've already corrected you once, yet you try again with statistics removed from context, conflating bureaucratic law and regulations as something reckless instead of the Congress-ordered reality of current US policy that one party continually tries to address and the other party refuses to just for politically convenient exploitation like you're doing. Read this as many times as it takes to sink in.