https://demographics.militaryonesource.mil/chapter-2-active-duty-personnel/
Military demographics.
Report showing that enlisted tend to swing independent more than officers.
Also, my own lived experience. I was enlisted, my father in law was a career officer. I married his daughter when I was just a young junior enlisted guy so I have spent a lot of time around both enlisted and officers, all the way up to General level.
Funny enough, typically the opposite.
The enlisted corps is a much more racially, ethnically, and financially diverse corps than the officer corps. Enlisted across the active duty is 66% white, 34% minority group, with 22% Hispanic or Latino, according to the most recent annual demographic release (2024). For officers it is 74% white and 26% minority, with only 10% Hispanic or Latino. This tends to bring in more diverse opinions as well. Officers tend to come from heavily white and upper-middle class households, which skew Republican. Enlisted come from all over, and more closely mirror the general population.
The enlisted corps also skews much younger than the officer corps, due to the revolving nature of enlistment. Most guys do a single 4-6 year enlistment and get out, while most officers are career. Only 25-40% of enlisted re-up, and only 10-12% make it to 20 years, while 60-70% of officers go beyond their initial contract, and 45-50% make it to 20 years. The average age of an enlisted troop is 27.4 years old, with 49.2% being 25 or younger and only 5.1% being over 41. For officers the average age is 34.3, with 22.4% being above the age of 41.
You’re also MUCH more intermingled in the enlisted corps. You’re in forced proximity to people that are diverse and get exposed to diverse opinions, whereas the officer corps generally stick to their own kind away from the enlisted and stay insulated.
That ends up resulting in officers being much more reliably Republican, and Republican specifically, than enlisted. Enlisted still skew conservative, but there are far more registered Democrats in the enlisted corps, and the enlisted are FAR more likely to identify as independent rather than with either party. Officers skew more conservative AND identify as Republican more than independent.
They’re not allowing appeal. That’s exactly what they’re saying. There hasn’t been an appeal at SCOTUS yet because when he requested one before, they said no they will not hear it. They denied his writ of certiorari. Once that happens, you generally get one single petition for them to reconsider it, filed within 25 days of the initial denial of writ, and the reconsideration is virtually never granted. That’s what this is. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/supct/rule_44
They denied his writ of certiorari the first time. This was his one petition to have them reconsider that, which they also denied. He will likely keep trying to file, because he is a manchild, but it won’t even make it passed the law clerks because he’s used his petitions. It’ll just get auto-denied.
This happens thousands of times per year. The Court denies certiorari for some 7000-8000 cases per year. We don’t get headlines for them because it’s extremely routine. We’re only getting this one because it’s the President and he gets clicks.
No they’re not. They pasteurized processed cheese product.
American cheese is actual cheese. Kraft has a real American cheese. It’s the deli deluxe stuff.
Her side doesn’t have to do anything unless SCOTUS grants the appeal. Which they have repeatedly said they will not. If they granted the appeal and agreed to hear it, yes her side would have to go argue.
At this point it is just wasting the Justices’ and their clerks’ time to do the paperwork saying they won’t hear the appeal.
The military is more democratic than you think… it leans Republican significantly, but only about 2:1.
This doesn’t inconvenience her at all though. The case is done and settled. This is just him requesting appeal from the Supreme Court and them saying no again. She doesn’t have to do anything about it. There’s no effort on her part.
You don’t know what you’re talking about…
The case is settled and he lost it. There’s nothing to dismiss.
This is him appealing the lower court decision, and the Supreme Court saying they will not grant his appeal. They still have to say no whenever he requests appeal on it.
Real. Just kinda misleading.
George Bush was still president for 19 days in 2009. Donald Trump was still president for 19 days in 2021.
At some point in all of those years you could in fact say that the president was born in 1946.
Also, places like Costco that sell $5 rotisserie chickens take a loss on them. They’re called loss leaders.
They get you in the door, and you end up spending more money on other things.
There’s no federal murder charge. This is the closest equivalent. It’s fundamentally the same thing and carries the same penalties. You can literally think of it as the same charge just worded differently.
Ok…. The federal charges carry a life sentence. So not sure what your point is.
The NY state law is extremely strict and this would kill the state case. That’s not opinion. That’s NY law.
Stalking resulting in death, is as close to murder as you can get with federal charges. There’s no federal murder statute.
They’re the same action.
Well the federal charge wasn’t just “stalking”.
It was “stalking resulting in death”.
There’s no federal murder statute. The action was crossing state lines to kill him. Federally that’s stalking resulting in death. NY state law that’s murder. Same action, different charges.
There are certain elements that can be appealed. Like the sentence, any constitutional rights issues, etc.
You can’t appeal the verdict, because it’s an admission of guilt. But there are plenty of other elements you can appeal.
New York has one of the strictest double jeopardy laws in the country. It applies to charges arising from the same action, not just the same charges.
It is in New York. Charges arising from the same action are double jeopardy, even if they’re different charges.
He was facing that regardless. With virtually zero chance of being acquitted, no matter what the internet wants to think.
By getting rid of the state case though, he stands a chance of getting the federal one overturned on appeal and being free, vs getting it overturned on appeal and then just going straight to state prison.
Correct. The charges are different, but they’re both for the same action, so they fall under New York’s double jeopardy law.
There’s no federal murder statute, but stalking that results in death is very similar. That’s what he plead guilty to, and it still carries up to life in prison.
But it gets rid of the state case.
Yeah the AP is really good at getting breaking news out, with just the bare minimum factual information. They don’t go into any detail or editorialization.
Like, they also mention the other case, where the $83M verdict was awarded, but don’t go into any editorial opinion on it. Just that SCOTUS hasn’t acted on that appeal yet.
So we are going to hear more headlines when they do review that petition here in a couple of months and probably be back where we are today with “Didn’t they just deny that a few weeks ago?”. When in reality it’s two different cases.