politics
Monday, August 18, 2025
Comcast is spinning off a new company called Versant, which will include most of NBCUniversal's cable networks like USA Network, CNBC, MSNBC, Oxygen, E!, SYFY, and Golf Channel.
Complementary digital assets like Fandango, Rotten Tomatoes, GolfNow, GolfPass, and SportsEngine will also be part of Versant.
I don't see this being profitable at all, and assume it will collapse, unless bought by someone desperate for syndication
The death of SYFY will be sad
Tuesday, August 19, 2025
based
Just saw a lone woman in the business district holding a sign
Assumed she was homeless and was surprised she hadn't been arrested
Turns out it was a trump is a pedo sign
I feel like the uncontroversial position is there's no way for districts to be "neutral"
if they raise the number of house seats, it would be easier to make them represent a very specific area, and more states would have more varied reps
because that's all I really want, they redrew the VA maps weird last time
changed a bunch of vertical districts to horizontal for no real reason, and it split a bunch of places
I'm optimistic they will, but not in the next couple years
It should be ~100k/seat
senators can keep being celebrities like they want to be
neither
there would just be more of them
I think Republicans might technically lose on paper slightly, because of Wyoming
Lower the amount of seats
1 seat per state
China has 3,000 reps in their congress btw
votes are digital, and can be done from anywhere in their capital working area
so you have to be present, but you don't have to literally be in the chamber
Honestly, yeah
I agree with Spooky
Why not
I think having ~1M people per district is just stupid
your rep doesn't represent you or your town or your city
it's some random district drawn by the political parties that packs random people together
100k starts to get down to, very specific regions, townships, tri-city areas, etc.
it's not a magic number, it'll still be imperfect
but there's no reason to cap the number of reps, other than deciding that 435 is "big enough" for congress
Just make a council of 10 elders who run the country
if States had more power, than sure
the balance skews so heavily to the national level that state reps are mostly pointless
I disagree, because I think both sides would frame it as a win
same reason people generally like voting reform on paper, even if they hate it in practice
"more of my guys in office, less of those Washington bureaucrats"
until in practice, they all become Washington bureaucrats
also, even if you don't go to 100k right off the bat