Polls: Society & Politics

Let's say you see a Tweet or post about a politician you don't like, and it makes that politician look bad, do you automatically share it, or do you see if it's true first?

Obviously certain media outlets favor certain parties. But in an ideal world, should it all be equal? This is a hypothetical question of course (if you don't do well with hypotheticals, just ignore the question).

Youngkin mandates all paper ballots for presidential elections in Virginia - https://t.co/isnp9WfaXj

Japan nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize.

Robert E. Lee said "Never fight up hill, me boys." & "Boy, that was a mistake" about Gettsburg.

India & Pakistan asked him to mediate over Kashmir

He had the greatest economy ever.

Mexico was going to pay for his wall.

Inflation is higher today than ever.

He literally said it did not rain on his inauguration, but it clearly did.

Sharpiegate

the head of the Boy Scouts” had called him to say that his address to the Scouts’ National Jamboree was “the greatest speech that was ever made to them."

The US had a $500 billion trade deficit with China.

The US never won at the World Trade Organization before he was President

Foreign countries, not consumers and importers pay tariffs.

All the people who come to him with "tears in their eyes" and call him "Sir."

He had no knowledge of the payment to Stormy Daniels

He got Veteran's choice passed.

Windmill noise may cause cancer.

The White House doctor said he was in better shape than Obama

The price of bacon has doubled

The main cause of inflation is energy prices.

Louisiana became the first state that can order child rapists to have their testicles removed if the victim is under the age of 13.

The law, which went into effect on Aug 1, only applies if the offender is older than 17 years old.

I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand I believe in eye for eye, tooth for tooth. But what happens if it's a false accusations? They would have just mutilated a guy for life for something he didn't do.

Please note: Puerto Rico has 3.2 million people which is LARGER than 19 other Republican controlled states.

There are several reasons why Republican Senators oppose Puerto Rico statehood:

Political concerns: Republicans fear that Puerto Rico statehood could give Democrats additional seats in Congress, potentially four new senators and representatives. This could shift the balance of power in the Senate.

Ideological opposition: Some Republicans view Puerto Rico statehood as potentially enabling Democrats to push what they consider a "socialist agenda".

Cultural differences: There may be underlying concerns about incorporating a predominantly Spanish-speaking territory with a distinct cultural identity into the Union.

Procedural obstacles: Even if Democrats control the Senate, the slim majority would likely allow Republicans to block statehood measures using the filibuster.

Low priority: Some analysts suggest that even with Democratic control, Puerto Rico statehood would not be a top priority for the administration.

Alternative preferences: Some senators may prefer other options for Puerto Rico's status, such as enhanced commonwealth or independence.

Concerns about implementation: There are questions about the economic and political implications of admitting Puerto Rico as a state.

Are your reviews mostly for negative service or do you give glowing ines too?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement

What a great VP he will be.

And not the legislatures, which could be gerrymandered?