Most voters do not favor discrimination against trans people, and, in fact, the only area of trans rights that a majority of adults in the U.S. do not support is transwomen playing on women's sports.

Because, it's a stupid reason to not vote for Trump or Harris when they really have little to do with the issue. The procedures were legal, they happened (California, for example, has said at least 20 surgeries have been done since 2017, https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalmatters.org%2Fjustice...), so what? I don't get why we were supposed to care. (I was a little surprised at the info I could find on inmate health care..but I am no expert on that subject, so there you go.)

I don't know you, obviously, and have no idea about your personal behavior or beliefs, but your willingness to lay a big part of the blame on: "IMHO, what killed Kamala's chances was the Trump ad showing the interview where she supported sex reassignment surgery for prison inmates"; feels like piling on a group that really just wants to be left alone to live their lives. They really don't need scapegoating for the election, too...blaming them for the election loss while claiming "no ill will"; yeah, heard that one before, just like before each one of my racist uncle's "jokes."

1) Her lukewarm support for trans issues did not make her lose the election.

2) It was the law, and it was the law under Trump. Medical procedures, even those on inmates, are private health information, so it is unlikely there are publicly available listings of the health care procedures performed on inmates. In any case, who cares? It's not like Trump (or Harris, for that matter) personally review the medical records of inmates and determine what care is appropriate.

3) Yes, the old "I have no ill will toward XYZ" while simultaneously taking stances and supporting actions that deny people in group XYZ access to things they need or saying negative things about them.

For many inmates, the best access they have to health care is when they are incarcerated. And given that many felons, once released, struggle to make it out of poverty, society would likely be paying for transition care anyway.

While most inmates in the U.S. are men, transitioning from woman to man is actually more common than men transitioning to women.

But if they are driving way more miles, then it probably is a net loss for Austin. Remember, the likelihood of an event is the probability of the event times exposure. Adding hundreds of cars driving around all day and all night, even if they are fairly high performing, will likely result in more damage and death than without them.

Such surgeries are rare and - gasp - occurred under Trump's first term. It was the law.

You might think that all inmates are monsters and do not deserve health care, but the fact remains that nearly all inmates will one day be released and if they are healthy and truly rehabilitated, then that is good for society. There is definitely a strong anti-trans movement in the U.S., but I don't think it was the issue that cost her the election.

Ah, yes, that critical of all presidential qualities, the sound of their laugh...

...you mean jobs such as, lawyer, physician, consulting, publishing, finance...those kinds of jobs (https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.brown.edu%2Fundergraduate-programs%2Fgender-and-sexuality-studies-ab)?

You totally nailed it. A company that has 2000 under-performing employees is a systemic company problem, not a "few bad apples" problem...

There's an old joke, where the guy who is getting married for the fourth time says something to the effect of, "you know, I'm starting to get the idea that this is my fault!"

A company that produces this many "under-performers" needs to do something about its culture, leadership, and management.

I do not care one bit where a film is made. Zero cares. With modern equipment and technology, it is easier than ever to make a great movie anywhere in the world.

That said, I DO care that the people who worked on a movie were paid fairly, were given a safe working environment, were not exploited or pressured into activities that they did not want to do, and that the movie production respected the environment and treated humanely any animals that were involved in the production. As a result, I am not in favor of tariffs based on where a movie is made, but I AM in favor of additional taxes, fees, or penalties for movie productions that violate these expectations.

Distros decided a long time ago that they'd rather play with the cluster that is GNOME than KDE, not for technical reasons because KDE has always been a well designed and implemented desktop, they chose GNOME over licensing FUDD and the fearmongering that Qt wasn't open source enough.

Distros like Debian barely do more than bundle the KDE packages that KDE releases. They've got more important things to do like make up Yet Another GNOME because there's something that wasn't addressed by the 20 other versions.

Of course it isn't just the school budget where the advantage of money is obvious. It's also in sports (the biggest predictor of getting a D-1 athletic scholarship is family wealth), in health (better access to healthy food, more opportunity for recreation, live farther away from pollution), and many other areas of life. And that's part of living in a capitalist society, that some have more and some have less.

But school is supposed to be about leveling the playing field, offering those who have the ability to maximize their potential, to transform lives and give those who have the drive and the ability to thrive and grow. But instead it is too often just yet another place where the wealthy increase their advantage by grabbing and holding a bigger piece of the pie for themselves.

How about better schools? Haha.

Changing society is very difficult. We need better leaders who care about the success and health of the population rather than their own ego and enriching themselves. We also need to be better neighbors and citizens ourselves, watching out for each other and being willing to sacrifice for the good of a stranger. We are a self-preoccupied society right now, and it's hard to make changes that require sacrifice when it's all about me me me me me.

Change is possible. There is a public school district near me that had problems with gangs, so they now have school-wide uniforms (basically khaki pants / skirt / shorts and a polo of a few allowed colors and no logos). Enforcement is a pain and the school board annually gets complaints and makes tweaks, (such as should there be limits on shoes, jewelry, sleeveless, etc.), but it works. It is possible.

Just like James Bond, who never misses a shot, is impervious to all machine gun fire, and always has a clever way out of every situation no matter how preposterous...why don't people have a problem with him as a "man boss"?

The other important thing to note when trying to figure out school quality is to recognize that the U.S. has some of the greatest schools in the world (some public, some private), that would be the envy of anyone in the world. AND, the U.S. has some absolutely terrible schools (some public, some private), among the worst in the world in comparison to other high income countries. Trying to make policy based on the "average" of these schools - some of the best in the world and some of the worst in the world - ignores this variation and hides the truth of what is happening. I would argue that yes, we need to spend more on schools, but what we are seeing with schools is as much a symptom of broader societal, policy, and cultural problems rather than the inherent failure of the schools themselves. For example, our communities and neighborhoods (and therefore schools) are increasingly segregated by income (and also by race / ethnicity). And when schools are partially locally funded, that makes disparities in school spending inevitable.

So at the highest levels, I do agree, that although many schools are perpetually under-funded and that increasing school funding can make a difference, we cannot solve all of society's problem by simply increasing school budgets. We have to change policies, systems, and society itself to really see wide-scale change.