Glimpse, but it died in 2021.

I truly cannot stress enough how utterly socially unacceptable it is to correct someone’s pronunciation of their own name. In this respect, names are different from other kinds of words. Please reconsider this embarrassing position of yours.

Any recommendations for a Hyprland refugee? Thinking of trying out niri…

https://www.ifixit.com/Wiki/Do_Not_Put_Your_Device_in_Rice

Cemex decision by the NLRB.

However, if an employer who seeks an election commits any unfair labor practice that would require setting aside the election, the petition will be dismissed, and—rather than re-running the election—the Board will order the employer to recognize and bargain with the union.

Got 'em!

I suspect it’s just an autocorrect typo for “beginning to work”.

Mmm, pseudorandom number generators!

Then the question still applies: in what way would a spoiler increase the count of either establishment candidate? My understanding of basic math is that it cannot.

Correct, and to claim otherwise would be absurd. Have I done that? The absolute count of votes is immaterial. Elections are decided by the proportion of votes cast for each candidate. That’s what admits the spoiler effect. Thanks, FPTP.

That’s certainly one opinion on the matter… coincidentally one perfectly aligned with a partisan propaganda viewpoint and, thus far, is nothing but alarmist hyperbole.

It’s no coincidence. This is the means by which the establishment perpetuates itself. Doesn’t mean both parties are the same.

I’m tapping out after this, but I appreciated the discussion. Have a great weekend.

Does voting third party or abstaining somehow increase the count of votes for Republicans?

No, I’m only describing the spoiler effect here.

Would this be more or less irrational than actively perpetuating the problems with a party and its candidates by guaranteeing them your vote for no reason other than they’re not as bad as a different party?

It would be more irrational, because if the “shoot me in the leg, I guess” party loses, everyone dies, and nobody gets to have opinions about anything ever again.

I think we can both agree that voting to avoid bad outcomes rather than to select good ones is fucked.

Of course, one has the freedom to cast their vote, or not, as they like. But I can’t fathom why someone would “choose” an impossible outcome that ultimately makes the fatal scenario more likely instead of moving the needle toward the survivable one. It strikes me as irrational, which I could ignore if it were mere self-sabotage, but this affects others too.

You have misunderstood the metaphor. (edit: Rather, the people you’re describing have.)

You cannot opt out. Someone will take the office.