Both the student loans and the ACA were actively gutted by Republicans, so they are a perfect example of why getting Republicans out is beneficial to you. You want student loan forgiveness? Get rid of the Republicans that are blocking it. You want single-payer or socialized medicine? Get rid of the Republicans that are blocking it. Both have been introduced by Democrats, both were voted on along party lines and failed due to Republicans.

You are missing my point: you are only hurting yourself and your goals with that strategy. Voting third party only helps Republicans and isn't seen as any kind of protest by anyone who matters. No one says you have to LIKE voting for either of the parties, but only one party is closer to your goals, is actively trying to achieve your goals, and has a chance of actually getting elected so your goals can be achieved.

Why engage with people you don't agree with? Because they will get you closer to what you want. What you want is voting reform, so vote for the people who are pushing for voter reform:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3313/text

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/5048

https://raskin.house.gov/2024/9/raskin-beyer-welch-bill-would-bring-ranked-choice-voting-to-congressional-elections-across-america

And not just federally, but locally as well:

https://fairvote.org/ranked-choice-voting-legislation/

It's no coincidence that these bills are being introduced by Democrats. If you want these bills passed, they also need support to get them passed. As long as the house and senate are split between the Democrats and Republicans, these bills will not get passed. Simple as.

I'm not saying that voting Democrat will make them reverse course. I'm saying that voting Democrat so they have enough control to get these bills passed will let them complete the course they are already on so that you can get what you want.

And what happens in the mean time? Third parties almost always take votes from the Democrats. (That is to say, most of the people who vote third party would have voted Democrat if the third party was not on the ballot.) This gives a huge advantage to the Republican party on close elections. The result is further entrenching of the party that has the larger vested interest in not reforming the system. As a result, any generational movement has no chance of succeeding because the party that directly opposes their goal is always in power.

(To expand: since Democrats lose votes to third parties, they are the ones who would greatly benefit from any kind of ranked choice voting, so they tend to support such reforms. Since Republicans benefit more from FPTP, they tend to oppose such reforms.)

It's all well and good to send a message, but that message will be received by the people who benefit most by ignoring that message.

The better method is to get people in power now who support election reform, get those reforms passed, then third party candidates become viable.

I would suggest doing so anyway. If they come across a firearm by happenstance then they at least won't panic and will know what to do to be safe.

According to Practical Engineering, tracks are no longer given a gap. The gap causes premature wear and excess noise. Instead, they lay the track under tension, and weld the joins between sections.

There is still a limit on how much heat they can handle before buckling, of course. I just thought that was a neat innovation.

Because the Republicans control Congress, and at this point only an act of Congress can restore it.

It comes down to this: a Republican president would veto any abortion protection law, but a Democratic president would pass it. But the law has to get to his desk first.

No thanks, I'm FIN.

Correct. Infant botulism can result from bacteria in raw honey that is otherwise harmless to anyone with a developed immune system.

I do not know Vivaldi, but I live and die by Tree-Style Tabs. It puts the tabs on the side and arranged them in trees that can be managed as groups. It's the add-on that has kept me on Firefox.

"By continuing to use the software, you agree to the new terms..." which is, of course, hogwash, but wouldn't stop them from say "Sorry, the new terms were released and you agreed, so pay up."

But do the terms you signed say they are allowed to change the terms at any time with notice?

Roughly speaking, there are three different ways people handle when something they enjoy is changed in a way they don't enjoy.

The first simply cut their losses and move on, abandoning the thing. Nothing wrong with that. Things change and it's okay to move on to something else. Companies that are causing harm to their user base should suffer the consequences of their decisions. Do this too much, though, and you may find you abandon your loves too easily.

The second just accept and bear it. Arguably nothing wrong with that as long as you still enjoy it. Just be careful that apathy is not taken for permission for further change.

The third will attempt to fight back in an attempt to preserve it. These are the type who still use Reddit even though they know it's broken. They do not abandon it because to do so is to lose it entirely. They are trying to work within the system to change the system. Nothing wrong with that either, as long as you know when the battle is lost. They obviously don't believe it has been lost yet.