Yes, and you abolish FPTP and now you elect a president how? I'm interested in your proposal, because it's incomplete to say get rid of FPTP... Otherwise top vote getter, who gets maybe 30% of the vote leads the country which is also an abomination as 70% didn't vote for that person.
Abolishing FPTP requires doing something else on top of it, ranked choice or run off would be better than the highest count.
Let's say the breakdown of votes looks the same as the Swedish breakdown. There will be more people that voted for a different candidate than the red one (Social Democrat).
This then requires a run off system like france, or a ranked choice, which is also fine to propose, but you can't hold up a visual of a parliament and say the system is so much better, when we talk about one singular office.
The post compared two things that have different end goals
So say 100 people work at this company, the other 98 not involved don't want to listen to you rant and rave either. They might understand, but the more you escalate the less they want to deal with your shit either.
Well, then maybe we will be cured of the republican problem when boomers die and younger conservatives sacrifice their children to their emperor via antivaxxing.
Very few manufacturing facilities for the US would not also carry European approval. Generally speaking you can expect the medication to be as safe as it was before.
Obviously some firms perform better than others at inspections and not all drugs are in all markets... But it won't be the wild west.
Imagine you're a deer bear. You're prancing along, you get thirsty, you spot a little brook, you put your little deer bear lips down to the cool clear water... BAM! A fuckin bullet rips off part of your head!
I'd like to see this on county level like voter maps.
Curious how cities and rural look compared to each other within a state, and how rural in low average states look across.
For example is LA just so skinny and populous it hides that rural California is as bad as rural Oklahoma?