I guess they back either other up. Like archive.is is able to take archives from archive.org but the saved page reflects the original URL and the original archiving time from the wayback machine (though it also notes the URL used from wayback itself plus the time they got archived it from wayback).
While this would almost certainly work, it would be nice if the root cause can be discovered and either fixed or worked around. Having to reinstall everytime one needs to free up disk space is … less than ideal.
Alas, NATO stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organization - the A doesn’t mean American. That’s why Canada and the UK are members but Australia and New Zealand aren’t.
Likewise, EU membership requires being a European country. There is precedent for this, as Morocco was denied when it applied to join for that very reason: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-07-21-mn-5339-story.html / https://archive.is/hlOdB
Still, maybe Canada will luck out and that Europe thing will turn out to not actually be a requirement for joining Schengen or to join the EFTA. One can dream.
Without naming them explicitly, the article is trying to draw up sympathy for Gaza over the occupation by Israel. It makes some very good points.
Hmm you are right, but AFAIK all of them are EFTA members and theoretically eligible to join the EU if they wanted. That is, based in Europe.
I’ve love for Canada to join Schengen but as Canada isn’t eligible to join the EU…
I love that idea too - but how would this work? Can Canada be a member of Schengen without also being part of the EU?
Yep, but this reminds me of the “They’re the same picture” meme: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/theyre-the-same-picture
Assuming there even is one - remember that the President elect has stated he’d want to run again a third time.
Hmm… I understand the that last line to mean that every State should have the same number of Senators in the Senate.
But from https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/56523/can-the-us-senate-be-abolished-without-unanimous-consent-of-the-states it sounds like a workaround is simply to set that equal number to zero. Meanwhile there’s no prohibition on adding a new, third House to Congress - so maybe we reply the Senate with the House of of State Peers or something.
Alas, it looks like we’re screwed now.
Agreed, but does it require every state to agree? If enough constitutional amendments could be passed and ratified by a two thirds majority on all levels, then the Constitution could simply be amended to implement those changes (and the authors behind the paper for this proposal expect that this is exactly what will happen once the plan is executed successfully - rather than Dems abusing their power or DC enacting minority rule over the entire country, they’ll cooperate to design a better, fairer, and reformed system)
Would it be unreasonable to ask to move to another country?
Hey, same here. And you know what? There’s hope - at least one pollster is predicting a major blowout for Harris, https://app.vantagedatahouse.com/analysis/TheBlowoutNoOneSeesComing-1
Wanted to add - not directly related to the above article, but kinda confirming the general environment:
“She hit me the other day,” Trump said. “I was going to say to my people, ‘Am I allowed to hit her now?’”
“They said, ‘Take it easy, sir,’” Trump said.
“Well, what do you mean?” Trump replied to himself. “She said bad about me. I can’t hit back?”
The conversation continued with Trump’s imaginary staff pleading with the former president to “just relax.”
This is from https://www.rawstory.com/michelle-obama-vs-trump/ but it’s a series of direct quotes from the guy himself.
This is exactly why I like the 127 DC states plan so much, https://www.vox.com/2020/1/14/21063591/modest-proposal-to-save-american-democracy-pack-the-union-harvard-law-review
Need to drop the filibuster to pass the required laws to implement it, but once that’s done, Dems have not only a permanent super majority in the Senate, but the required two thirds majority of House, Senate, and even States to pass constitutional amendments. So as soon as its removed, the filibuster can be re-enshrined via a constitutional amendment as a permanent fixture (preventing the GOP from taking advantage once they inevitably retake power).
She was predicted to win the popular vote…And she did.
But this article is saying it’s based on the EC,
Nate Silver’s latest forecast now gives Vice President Kamala Harris a slight edge in the Electoral College
The model shows Harris securing 271 Electoral College votes to Trump’s 267.
Well, this is a hurdle though: https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2016/07/19/gerrymandering-republicans-redmap
Bill Clinton, who won in 1992, was from the midwestern state of Arkansas. I think this trend started long before, and has to do with the center of the US shifting differently from some of the more populated areas of the US.
When we ran a young charismatic candidate with a progressive campaign in 08, it was easy to get voters on board and red states became blue, it even carried over to flipping state governments
See https://lemmy.world/comment/12409521 - but the TLDR is that 2008 isn’t comparable, since a major gerrymandering effort by the GOP took place in 2010 that took Dems by surprise - and this gerrymandering made the above virtually impossible to repeat (by design, I might add).
So I just answered my own question. I was confused by this,
Because I thought the Safe Third Country Agreement allowed them to be sent back with no right to be heard for asylum (unless they stuck in and evaded detection for 14 days).
However, according to https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/safe-third-country-agreement-expansion-causes-asylum-seekers-explore-new-routes
So I guess to get into Canada they’d leave the US and fly in from another country somehow.