And did that selfless doctor use medical billing codes that would charge the least amount to the patient? Does that doctor take a modest pay compared to the other medical staff who also play a vital role in the saving and preservation of lives. And how much time does that doctor spend with patients compared to the rest of the medical staff?
What does this have to do with anything that is being discussed in the article?
Can’t tell if bot or posting to the wrong thread…
Please expand because the article is about “protest votes” and the top level comment I responded to is seemingly about how the doctor who wrote it should have earned less money. It seems completely non sequitur.
The vote ratio suggests a botnet, but what do I know? I’m just some Internet rando.
Why don’t democrats invest in actually bringing people to their movement instead of wasting their time on shitting on 3rd parties? Let people vote who they want to vote for, and who they feel voices their opinions the best. That’s what democracy is at the end of the day.
Why don’t third parties get out there and win some local elections and then build their way to the state level instead of wasting their time shitting on democrats? I’m not saying there’s not plenty of good reasonsto shit on democrats but if any third party wants to be taken seriously they should start acting like it.
Because people are clearly unhappy with the democratic party, so there’s obviously a market for it. People that would’ve otherwise stayed home instead of voting for the democrats now have a voice. That’s what democracy looks like, at least in most European countries that is. It’s fairly normal to see smaller parties pop up that better represent a subsection of the electorate than to see huge monolithic parties that try to encompass everything.
Because people are clearly unhappy with the democratic party, so there’s obviously a market for it.
There isn’t though. No third party has ever won the presidency.
In Congress, there has never been even 1% of them being third party. Same with the senate.
Where exactly is the market, and why is it not at all reflected in any part of the elected government?
Is it perhaps because it doesn’t exist?
Oh the paradox of the third party. They’re too weak to make a dent, but also the root of all evil. This sounds like fascism to me.
If they’re so harmless, then why do you care if a very small portion of the electorate votes for them? After all it won’t make a dent, right? :)
If they make such a big dent that the democratic party needs to run smear campaigns against them, then how come they’re so harmless and underrepresented?
To me it looks like you have a dysfunctional system. They are popular enough to be voted by a huge chunk of the electorate, thus hurting the big legacy parties, but your system is built in such a way that they end up being underrepresented at the national level.
LA Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for LA Times:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
