AequitasOmnibus
Joined 8 years ago
Joined 8 years ago
It's a shame, because I think the idea of MARP is revolutionary, but in practice PowerPoint (or even free alternatives like Google Slides) is easier to use.
A protest to the tune of approximately $1 per photo. I love my 35mm SLR but shooting on it is extremely cost prohibitive. Digital photography doesn’t have to be inhumane, it’s more about the user than the technology.
Basically, the sitting president appoints circuit judges to a lifetime position. The judicial candidates are selected by senators from whichever state the judge is to be appointed.
Generally, a conservative president will only nominate conservative judges. The candidates will generally be even more conservative if the senators who nominated the candidates are also conservative.
Over time, court watchers can conclude how ideologically predisposed a judge is based on their opinions. Usually, judges appointed by conservative presidents tend to rule as conservatives (that is, side with Republican positions), and vice versa with judges appointed by democrats. This trend is so consistent that you can often predict the outcome of a case from the composition of judges hearing the case.
The Fifth Circuit is dominated by republican senators and has recently seen a lot of appointments filled by Donald Trump. As a result, the Fifth Circuit overwhelmingly rules more conservatively than its sister circuits.
In this case, the fifth circuit panel ruled against the EPA in favor of commercial plastic producers. This is in line with Republican goals to erode the power of administrative agencies. Nobody is surprised by this because the Fifth Circuit operates in service of the Republican Party. As we say, you don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
His statistical analysis is a fun way to follow political horse racing (even if his models aren’t perfect) but this post is the chef’s kiss of ham-fisted amateur political science. Appreciate the earnestness, but can’t agree with basically any of his unsourced “theory.”
Intellectually it’s obvious that society has to come to a reckoning over our current way of life if we’re going to get a handle on existential threats like climate change and endemic disease.
Emotionally it’s appealing to hear someone say that those hard truths don’t actually exist, and even if they do exist they don’t matter.
Societies are reactionary by nature. Until avoidance hurts more than denial we’ll opt for the latter every time. Argentina is by no means the first place where voters picked the guy peddling emotional comfort over the other candidates. The US may very well head in the same navel-gazing direction soon.
I wish the author had spent time addressing that theory specifically.