The point is to seem like he’s got a plan for the migrant crisis by bussing them out of state.
And if he sends them to Blue states where services are better for undocumented migrants, isn’t that better for the individuals? Or would they really be better off in Texas?
Regardless, my point is, if you don’t try to understand why your political opponent is doing something, you’ll never be able to fix anything.
Hitler had a plan to solve the financial crisis by oppressing jews. Is it disingenuous to say the cruelty was the point? Should we actually be talking about Hitler’s terrible economic ideas?
Regardless, my point is, if you don’t try to understand why your political opponent is doing something, you’ll never be able to fix anything.
I agree, but there’s not much more “understanding” necessary when we’re dealing with child death. If nothing gets fixed after this, then what’s left to try to understand?
I’ve wondered how long we’ll go before universities across the country start refusing to accept Florida high school graduates because their coursework does not meet basic acceptance criteria. I can see the Ivy league starting first because they have a legitimate reason to want their incoming freshmen to have top-notch coursework under their belt so they can hit the ground running, and once the first domino falls I’d imagine lots of universities would rush to join the chorus. If Florida officials want their kids to learn that slavery was good and that rainbows don’t exist, then fine. They’re disqualified from attending tertiary institutions whose history and sociology instruction is predicated on those things being bullshit. It’d be no different from some crazy-ass wingnut homeschooler trying to get into Harvard after having taken classes like “Cell Biology and Jesus”, “Why God Made Calculus”, and “The Physics of Heaven” from their mom.
While this would make a big statement, the real victims would be innocent teenagers. Arguably we should be doing the opposite and trying to get as many of them out of that state as possible.
Meh. If it doesn’t directly impact them or their families, conservatives won’t give a shit. So I say make it very real for them, and make it clear their children are learning a version of history that significantly undermines their academic and professional careers. Harvard doesn’t owe them shit, and Karen McBurnaBook won’t pay attention to a word you say until little Annie can’t get into college and has to take remedial classes at the community college to qualify for an out-of-state 4-year institution. Maybe that way Annie will be forced to stand up to her parents’ bullshit antics when they show up at the school board meeting to call everyone a pedophile.
You want to make an omelet? Gotta break some eggs, unfortunately.
Why would you restrict the opportunities of children then? That fucks them over more than the parents, and speaking of which, there are also many non-conservative parents in Florida.
By not allowing them to receive the basic education requirements to attend college level classes their parents are the ones fucking them over, this would just be a consequence of that…
Furthermore, one of the top reasons for people to move to or away from somewhere is the quality of a school district. Families can (and do) make life-altering decisions based on where their children will get the kind of education that gives them an advantage in life. If Florida has decided it’s ok with the collateral damage to children’s future that comes with hitching their wagon to culture war issues, then I’m ok with collateral damage to show them how fucked up that is. Sucks those innocent kids have to go through this, but right now it’s either a) attend shitty FL high school and still get into college, b) attend shitty FL high school and don’t get into college, or c) don’t attend shitty FL high school. I’m not super keen on letting their kids benefit from their shittiness, but I’m also not in charge of college admissions.
I really enjoy how everyone on this platform circlejerks about helping the poor and then advocates fucking over kids who’s parents can’t afford to leave Florida
I listed very clear options for people in Florida. You didn’t refute or correct them, you just changed the subject to appeal to some kind of guilt, which is telling.
I. Don’t. Care. Florida citizens are very clearly and consistently voting people into office who support this bullshit. Until it bites them in the ass, they will continue to vote that way, because they have their cake and can eat it, too. It’s not my job to protect them from the pain either a) they’re inflicting upon themselves, or b) their neighbors are inflicting upon them.
A large section of Floridians do not vote for Ron Desantis and are subject to things like gerrymandering which prevent their votes from mattering in the first place. Most of the people who do vote for these policies are people who place no value whatsoever on education in the first place. Your policy would end up fucking over an entire state based on the actions of a minority of its residents.
A large section of Floridians do not vote for Ron Desantis and are subject to things like gerrymandering which prevent their votes from mattering in the first place.
Marco Rubio got almost 58% of the vote in 2022. DeSantis got over 59%. Moody got over 60%. Patronis 59.5%. Simpson 59%. All statewide races. 59.36% of FL House race votes went to Republicans. 60.07% of FL Senate race votes went to Republicans. Across the board and with remarkable consistency, 60% of your neighbors have voted to gut your education system and teach your kids fantasies. Don’t shoot the messenger.
Most of the people who do vote for these policies are people who place no value whatsoever on education in the first place.
So be it. That’s a problem for the people of Florida to sort out.
Your policy would end up fucking over an entire state based on the actions of a minority of its residents.
Majority. A clear majority. And it’s their actions that are fucking over your entire state, not mine.
Marco Rubio got almost 58% of the vote in 2022. DeSantis got over 59%. Moody got over 60%. Patronis 59.5%. Simpson 59%. All statewide races. 59.36% of FL House race votes went to Republicans. 60.07% of FL Senate race votes went to Republicans. Across the board and with remarkable consistency, 60% of your neighbors have voted to gut your education system and teach your kids fantasies. Don’t shoot the messenger.
This can be attributed to the fact that Democrats have completely abandoned the idea of campaigning in Florida and the fact that the Florida government is well-known to engage in voter suppression efforts.
Majority. A clear majority. And it’s their actions that are fucking over your entire state, not mine.
Nearly half of Floridians don’t even vote for various reasons including but not limited to voter suppression, so nah, it’s a minority of residents. I’m also highly doubtful that colleges not accepting high school diplomas from an entire state would even be considered legal, so I think I’ll be fine.
This can be attributed to the fact that Democrats have completely abandoned the idea of campaigning in Florida and the fact that the Florida government is well-known to engage in voter suppression efforts.
No. It can be attributed to the fact that 60% of the people who vote, vote for Republicans. It’s really not more complicated than that. If somebody stands in front of a lecture hall and screams, “if you vote for me I will poison your dog!”, and you still vote for that person, then it’s not the fault of the town veterinarian for failing to show up to tell you why that’s a bad thing and to vote for someone else instead. Every single statewide race had a challenger in 2022, and 60% of your neighbors chose not to vote for that challenger. At this point, I’m only left with the conclusion that they really hated the dog and wanted it gone.
Nearly half of Floridians don’t even vote for various reasons including but not limited to voter suppression, so nah, it’s a minority of residents.
Tough shit. Get off your ass or live with the consequences of your apathy.
I’m also highly doubtful that colleges not accepting high school diplomas from an entire state would even be considered legal, so I think I’ll be fine.
Colleges can accept whatever curricula meet their basic requirements. They’re well within their institutional legality to opt to refuse admission to students who don’t qualify, because…that’s literally what they do every single day. The fact that FL students (should) no longer qualify is a testament to the fact that their teachers no longer teach the truth, not the fact that the university suddenly changed their standards.
Stop blaming literally everyone except your neighbors. They’re the ones voting for this bullshit. The rest of us are just shining a light on our conundrum. Don’t shoot the messenger.
Aight, whatever then. You’re obviously not worth speaking to, but luckily, you’ll never be in a position to put your words into action, so I don’t need to. I’m gonna carry on with my day.
I'll sum up this hard truth with an analogy: "You must be this tall to ride this rollercoaster" has nothing to do with punishing short kids. It prevents injury to short kids.
The thing is, letting kids with sub-par K-12 education into higher ed isn't doing them any favors. It sets them up for potentially devastating failure. Many of them will be so far behind that they'll fail within the first year. It's not that they're not smart, or they're not hard workers. They simply lack the foundation that their peers already have. They'll need remedial coursework before they can even try to re-take the standard curriculum. Or they may be able to limp through some basic classes before failing a year later.
Imagine that scenario for all the kids in an entire state.
And to continue your point - you're right that poor kids are punished. They're punished all across the US, but it has nothing to do with whether they're admitted to university. It's because their K-12 schools are funded by local property taxes. Rich districts get good schools with better teachers, and access to better materials and opportunities. Poor districts have few resources, more (on average) parental apathy towards education, and poorer outcomes. Even the top ranked kids from poor schools may struggle when they reach college.
Florida is trying to expand that disadvantage to an entire state. The fact that out of state admission officers will look at a HS degree from Florida the same way they'd look at one from a homeschooled kid isn't a suggestion or a proposal. It's a fact.
I really enjoy how people like you feel self-important while doing nothing but complaining.
You want to help the kids? Overturn or undermine Desantis’s fucked up policies now, while those kids you’re parading around have a chance. Set up tutoring servers on Discord. Set up online libraries full of banned books and spread the links everywhere. Be the change you want to see in the world. But don’t you dare complain about institutions enforcing basic education standards on its students.
Institutions rejecting me because I got my diploma from Florida is a direct threat to my future. It’s not possible for me to do anything about Ron DeSantis other than vote and encourage other people to vote, all of what you’re suggesting involves time and effort which I don’t have and can’t give.
I’ve wondered how long we’ll go before universities across the country start refusing to accept Florida high school graduates because their coursework does not meet basic acceptance criteria.
This is exactly what DeSantis and his ilk want. Conservatives are scared shitless of their kids going off to university and finding out that their parents and schools have been lying to them their whole life.
Solution: Ensure no out-of-state schools will accept your students so they’re stuck in your shitty system forever.
I remember a homeschooled kid the first year of college. Their whole life was turned upside down. Couldn’t finish the year, then they enlisted. Never heard what happened after
Fuuuuck you with an umbrella. You didn’t have that right, you just used that bullshit idea to save yourself from rightful consequences. You only stopped that idea after the massive backlash, as always. You don’t get to act like the good guy uere., fuck you.
I can’t wait for Disney to go bankrupt and be split up in twenty normal entertainment companies
Do you have some reason why you think they will be bankrupt and/or split up?
I wouldn’t hold my breath for a bankruptcy - Disney has Gross profits of ~30 Billion a year and net profits of ~2-5 Billion a year. Even if their lawyers become completely incompetent and allow them to be sued for max penalties every month of the year, it wouldn’t even be a drop in the bucket.
So if we perceive a fetus as a person, self defense laws and stand your ground laws should apply right?
Like, if the threat is persistent and reasonably considered to be causing bodily harm, then reasonable escalating force, up to lethal, should be legal correct? Intent and innocence of the perps intentions does not absolve them in court of law… So if we consider the fetus a person and they are causing harm without stopping when prompted the mother should be legally afforded to defend herself, no?
If you think about it, isnt all law about creative and novel ways to twist wording to get around it?
If we couldnt bend the law to our will there would only be one law and it would be: ‘dont be a cunt’.
This is the truth. Not even a full grown person, not even your just-born child, no one can compel you to give your blood to save their life much less to keep them alive inside your own body for nine months.
If they think a fetus has the same right to life as any person, they are free to help it survive using their own resources, just get it the fuck out of my body first.
Would you be okay with charging a 5-year-old child with assault if a dad threw the kid at his mom without the kid wanting that? The kid didn’t choose to be thrown at his mom, but collided with her regardless. Similarly, the fetus didn’t choose to be conceived, but exists nonetheless.
What exactly is the fallacy here? The point is that if the child has done nothing of its own choice to harm its mother, then the fetus cannot be held responsible either.
I don’t understand why the five year old would have any charges against it in that scenario, they too were a victim. From the moment they were tossed, any forthcoming damages and assaults are placed on the person chucking said child.
Right, I agree. And so, would you say that a fetus, which did not choose to be conceived or sustained in any way in the mother, should be held responsible for any harm (however you define that) that comes to the mother as a result of the pregnancy? If so, then you should also hold the child responsible because it struck and harmed its mother, even though it didn’t do so by choice.
In that case, the child thrown at its mother is guilty of assault because it harmed her by colliding with her. The child would be subject to self-defense rules and could rightly have been shot out of the air like a clay pigeon.
So if a five-year-old can’t be held responsible and killed for hitting its mother by being thrown at her, because it was the dad who threw it, then how can a fetus be held responsible and killed for existing and causing harm to the mother, even though it never chose to exist at all and was conceived by another person?
Because a fetus isn’t a person. Until birth it is considered a part of the mother, specifically to prevent stupid and unsustainable rulings like this one. If your mother was killed by cancer, are you going to take her tumor to court and put it in prison? No, you wouldn’t, that would be ridiculous. Because a tumor can’t choose its actions. Neither can a fetus.
After development and birth, when the child can think and act for itself, sure it’s a person. Inside the womb? It is an organ, it acts and thinks like an organ (by which I mean, it doesn’t) and can hold no legal responsibility for anything because it is not a thinking being.
Do I find this to be sad? Sure, absolutely. I’d prefer every fetus in the world to be loved and wanted and born without complication into a life of ease. But you and I both know very well that that is not the reality of the world.
The entire argument here is that if we consider a fetus a person, then we should apply self-defense laws to pregnancies. I’m pointing out why “self defense” against a person who has done literally nothing is ridiculous. I was writing my previous posts under the assumption that a fetus is a person, the same as in the original post.
But I also believe that there’s no point in drawing arbitrary lines in the sand where a human organism/being/whatever you’d like to call it becomes a person. The minute you do that, it opens the door to whoever is writing the rules this week to decide things like “humans who are in a coma aren’t people anymore” or “humans without a certain level of intellectual ability aren’t people.” That isn’t a level of authority that I would entrust to any mortal human being. Would you?
Organs are components of an organism that support its life functions. A fetus is not a component of an organism, but is an organism unto itself. If it were an organ, then it would be something a woman is born with and develops naturally as she grows. Women are born with egg cells, true, but they don’t become fetuses until they are fertilized and undergo a degree of development.
The entire argument here is that if we consider a fetus a person, then we should apply self-defense laws to pregnancies.
That is certainly one part of the issue here.
Dont get me wrong here, I do absolutely understand your viewpoint here I think. Especially as regards the slope that lawmakers can use to slip down. This is a tricky and nuanced subject, which is why I’m largely in favor of leaving it the fuck alone. That’s kind of the context of the entire post that we’re debating in the comments of. If a fetus becomes legally declared to be a distinct person then suddenly half our legal code can be used in absurd and self-inconsistent ways. Currently that is not the case but some people very much want it to be that way.
Personally, I say a person becomes a person when they prove themselves an independent thinking being and they retain that status until their death. Babies, generally speaking, become independent thinking beings upon birth. Before that they are still biologically attached to the mother, thus not independent and therefore subject to the will of her person, and after that they move and think on their own and have become their own being. A person who is in an unresponsive coma is still considered a person because they attained personhood and have not yet died, but even today there are legal loopholes for family to decline further care for the comatose person. That probably won’t change. If your family has hope for you you’ll stay alive and if they don’t then they can order your death, I don’t really see how you get around that in a world where comas still happen.
Right now we have a shaky, but stable enough legal framework around this sort of thing that’s been put together over a couple hundred years of people thinking about this. But if we go poking at things that are core to the legal code, such as “what is a person”, things start falling off of it.
Bad analogy. The father would be charged with assault on the kid and the woman in your scenario. Also, no one reasonable thinks a five year old and a fetus are the same, which is why these laws are fucking ridiculous.
The discussion here is founded upon the assumption that a fetus is a person. The OP’s argument is that if that’s true, then self defense laws apply and the woman should be able to defend herself from the fetus by whatever means necessary to prevent harm. But the fetus can’t choose to do anything, so killing it in self defense would only make sense if you could also kill the five year old who was thrown at its mother.
There’s also the question of how a law that would criminalize an enumerated power could be constitutional as applied as. That’d be voiding the Constitution by statute rather than amendment.
Which would require the president to sign off on but could be weaponized against an incoming president if one party has the legislature and executive.
Jefferson did write he wanted it remade every ~20 years. But that was a personal belief of his not the general understanding when the constitution was adopted.
While technically true, countries with a proper constitution that is upheld by the judiciary, legislative and executive branch of government tend to be much more stable.
It is good to amend the constitution if necessary, but the principle of there being a constitution and it being followed, is a very important thing for democracy.
I guess that’s true and I certainly don’t have anything against the concept of a constitution, but as someone not living in the US I find it pretty strange that so many Americans treat the constitution like some holy religious text.
That’s true, but I don’t think it invalidates anything about the post you replied to. It’s not a question of who invented what. The case is that the job of the founders WAS to invent the constitution and the structure of the government and all that.
The second group’s job is to read what they wrote and follow it. And sometimes there’s wiggle room in interpretation and settling that is their job too. But they don’t get to make up new laws and amendments just because the result of doing so is desirable for them.
Brace yourself for a massive disinformation campaign against Harris as soon as they recover from the initial shock. Don’t buy into any crap you see about her going forward. Eat no for breakfast.
Don’t buy into any crap you see about her going forward. Eat no for breakfast.
This is the exact attitude that led Republicans into being able to believe that Trump is an upright and moral citizen…
No one should write a blank check of virtue for any politician. Valid criticism is important, without it we’re just going to be led around by the nose by those who have access to power.
If we don’t hold liberal politicians to the same standards we utilize for conservatives, then we will end up with the same type of shit bags they have.
There is a biiiig difference in the timing and source of the news. And especially in the short term every new bit of news about her should at least be treated as suspect.
No news should be taken at face value in the modern era, that doesn’t mean we can just tell people to just say no to any criticism about her.
For example… I don’t appreciate her little memo equating protesting a genocide to antisemitism. Is the memo she posted from her personal Twitter account just fake news?
Lol, yes the appropriate response to valid criticism…ignore it.
If you don’t agree with how Israel and America are treating Palestinians, whats the chance anyone is going to change their stance if you don’t even do the bare minimum of criticism?
I’m not telling people to not vote, or to vote for fucking Trump, I’m just saying there are plenty of things we should be doing better, and we should all be voicing that.
Just really really tiresome that the middle east drama is always injected. We know, it’s a horror show.
Now the first and most important thing is preventing don snorleone from taking the White House. Because if you think Biden is bad for the conflict there, I have a bridge I want to sell you.
The problem is there was Pro Hamas stuff at the protest. They have the pictures. Which pretty neatly traps most politicians into having to disavow it because Hamas does horrific shit too. Seeing those pictures, her statement absolutely tracks as correct.
I should have been more clear. I’m talking about what politicians are forced into doing. Not my personal views. We’ve spent 20 years demonizing the “terrorists”. Israel very successfully labeled all Palestinians as terrorists until very recently. Getting Americans to understand that the entire time we’ve supported Israel they’ve been doing 10 times worse to the Palestinians is going to take another big push. Understanding Hamas as an embattled resistance movement is a step too far for most voters right now.
So showing up with actual Hamas iconography and flags pretty much requires a statement like this.
Hamas cannot be rebranded like that because that is also not true. They are terrorists.
It would be good to stop with the unconditional support of the IDF because they are an extension of a radicalized government that has settler extremists in it.
So were the IRA under modern standards. So was the French Resistance. So are the Ukrainian stay behind units. So were the American minutemen.
The idea of terrorism being any one that harms civilians for political or religious gain is breathtakingly broad. For example the Taliban had far more in common with the French Resistance than they did with Al Qaeda.
When I said we’ve had 20 years of labeling people “Terrorists”, there’s a reason that’s in quote marks. It’s basically turned into anyone we don’t approve of is a terrorist and anyone we do approve of is targeting key government infrastructure in a wartime environment. Which is a really neat way to ignore all of the actual issues and push a conflict into genocide because you’ve made peace impossible any other way.
Over and over again you find these terrorist groups that are confined to one region or country are actually political entities operating on the same resistance model as the old IRA. Right down to the messaging about generational conflict.
And yes I realize this is incredibly intersectional and isn’t something most people are going to realize without a college level political education in conflict or two more large social movements. (One to lay the groundwork, and another to apply it to the region.)
I love how with the closing paragraph you directly call everyone plebs if they don’t see it your way.
Yes the conflict is more nuanced but I don’t agree to the equivalencies you make with several other organizations. Groups founded for terror might eveolve to do more, but in the case of Hamas that is just to nurture their human shields and keep them alive enough to Garner outrage when they get bombed.
College level is just a way to describe the level. It does not mean you need to sell your kidneys and get a whole degree. Hell in the US 75% of your classes don’t have anything to do with your actual field. Which is a rant for another day. I find most people online are capable of college level learning, they just need to find the free or cheap courses and time to do them.
Now here’s a fun propaganda bit, “they were founded for terror”. Were they though? Not even AQ was founded with the idea of going straight for violence. Let’s look at Hamas’ origins.
They were founded in 1987 during the first intifada. So right away we have a conflict (or a flare up of the long term conflict) going on. Their name translates as, Islamic Resistance Movement. Their founder had been doing charity work in the occupied territories since at least the six day war in 1967. He was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and according to him the intent of the group was to act as the local political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and to counter the rising influence of the violent PIJ. (Palestinian Islamic Jihad).
That doesn’t sound like a group that jumped on the terrorism train from day one to me. It sounds like a reaction to being occupied by a hostile force.
And what did they themselves put in their charter as their reason for Beiing?
Look I understand the situation there is waaayyy more complicated than brown people bad.
The whole region has over the past few millennia been home to people from almost literally all corners of the world. Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, and as a passthrough for trade even more.
I don’t have an idea how to solve the issue either. I would think that the 2 groups sharing the whole of the Israël and Palestinian territories fairly… no second class citizens… Open elections. But yeah…
But what I can also see is that the other groups in the region, namely Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are also not interested in really helping the Palestinians. Or at least are willing to let them suffer to make a point. Keeping their side of the borders hermetically sealed.
Oh, the destruction of Israel. which people take as a call for killing all jews but that isn’t in their charter. And in the update they replaced that with a willingness to settle for a connected Gaza and West Bank Palestinian state. I’m not sure what’s so controversial about saying you want to get rid of the country that’s occupying you?
The rest of your post is just way of giving up on peace. It’s always blowing up, We should do single state instead of the internationally and stakeholder agreed two state, and the neighbors don’t care so why should we?
None of that is helpful to the conversation. Some of it’s not even true, for example there were plenty of peaceful periods. And in the first half of the 1900’s the war that did occur there was brought by outside empires. And again the 1948 conflict was Europeans executing a coup to create an independent settler state. Neighboring countries are always loathe to burden their systems with refugees. And moving to a single state solution is an Israeli propaganda line meant to justify their occupation and settlements.
Nah it’s been fairly consistent that groups that use violence against civilian targets to gain political influence are labelled terrorists. What’s not been consistent is your personal sympathies towards people that use these tactics.
Which is a really neat way to ignore all of the actual issues and push a conflict into genocide because you’ve made peace impossible any other way.
That’s bullshit. People can always negotiate, if they choose leaders that are capable of negotiating in good faith.
I’m not saying everyone loves them. But the IRA was pretty popular in the US, and I’m not sure you could call the minutemen terrorists in an American bar without starting a fight.
The fact that the label is applied more as a political measure than as a fact finding is my point. It’s my entire point. Most of what Hamas does the French and Russian resistance units did in World War 2 and they get lauded as heroes. The one exception is the suicide bomb, but that’s no less villainous than a briefcase bomb in it’s outcome.
It’s you trying to both sides Genocide. Hamas committed genocide on October 7. You’re trying to normalize it by claiming Israel is also committing genocide.
It’s not a numbers game. Israel is conducting a war with the goal to bring back the people Hamas is holding hostage (which is a war crime BTW). Hamas attacked Israelis on October 7 with the goal to kill as many people as they can.
Oh good grief, don’t put words in my mouth. That’s not what I said and you know it. I said don’t buy the crap that we’re about to be flooded with. I never said you can’t criticize her. You can believe and criticize any valid reality-based you want to, but check the facts first.
This is the exact attitude that led Republicans into being able to believe that Trump is an upright and moral citizen…
No, not even close to the same thing.
Maybe you’re too young to remember, but Trump has a very long history of being a massive, racist, piece of shit. He is literally the archetype of nearly every movie and cartoon villain in the 90s (not even kidding, Some More News did a whole video on it, it’s actually insane).
He was notorious for not paying his contractors, and instead telling them to sue him, knowing there was no way they could afford to win a case against him.
He was notorious for blatantly racist housing policies at his properties.
He was notorious for taking out a full page ad in the New York Times basically saying we should still kill the (recently found innocent) Central Park Five regardless of their guilt (guess their skin color).
His first time making national news was when the Justice Department went after him in 1973 for violating the Fair Housing Act.
Black applicants for apartments in his buildings had the letter “C” (for “colored”) added to their applications and were denied based entirely on their race.
For over 50 years he’s demonstrated time and again that he’s a racist piece of shit.
Yes, and conservatives choose not to criticize him for being a shit head. My point is that it is the people’s job to hold their elected officials to a higher standard, and we do that with valid criticism.
It seems a lot of people here are conflating any criticism with disinformation. If you mention the war in Palestine people automatically roll their eyes.
They will do their silly ignorant memes, but they’ll also amplify the kind of valid criticism of her that left leaning voters raise themselves. That’s harder to handle, because there is a lot of valid criticism.
It’s still hugely important to vote against Christian fascists, but it doesn’t feel good to do when you don’t like the person you’re voting for. Conservatives will amplify that sentiment to get left leaning people to not vote or to vote 3rd party.
It used to be possible to have civil, open-minded discussions, not anymore.
Bruh I’ve been in the internet since 2001. My earliest memory was trolling the Yahoo Pool rooms. Later on was getting into heated geopolitical arguments with grown ass men on 2007 liveleak as a shitforbrains 15 year old
Internet has always been the same, we just have more idiots now. Civil conversations are possible in the right places I think
I know reddit was full of ask-and-you-shall-receive requests like this, and I’m not expecting it here on Lemmy - but does anyone on Lemmy have the ability to manifest this??
I hope there will be an investigation on how much foreign influence there is in this election. So much of the fake news and trash social media posts are Putin’s playbook. The attack on Ukraine isn’t the only war he’s trying to fight
My brother is ostensibly a liberal Democrat but he somehow believes that Ukraine is run by literal Nazis and that Putin (a “good guy”) was in the right to invade it. It’s literally just Russian propaganda but he accepts it as objective truth - he gets all of his political “information” from TikTok and podcasts. He also believes that all bad acts in the world are committed by the CIA and that Putin was installed by the CIA (which of course paradoxically means he’s a bad person), although he admitted he has no sources for that one.
It’s amazing how social media really allows the bullshit pipeline to be carefully tailored to each individual’s tastes, as opposed to the one-size-fits-all bullshit pipeline that traditional mass media was limited to.
Good luck, when the UK ran an investigation into russian influence on our elections they just never made the results public despite repeated promises too.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof
We can hope. If the media attention is “Democrats are in shambles 3 months before the election” it might not go so well. And Trump will definitely be making a lot of noise about that.
I hope the Dems will quickly rally behind a new candidate and show more of the bad side of rump in the political debate, not just Bidens age. I think this is a huge chance
I feel like the Democrats appeared more in shambles with him refusing to drop out. The party was all over the place on their support for him and he was just being a stubborn old man. Now they’ll hopefully all be able to come together and rally behind a single candidate.
Boeing made $76B in revenue in 2023. This is slightly more than 1 day’s revenue for them ($210M / day) or a bit more than 10 days profit for them ($21M / day). They will keep doing what they’re doing, but increase their spending on a PR campaign to improve their public image.
This plea deal helps them quantify the cost of safety lapses, which they didn’t have before. Now they know that they’ll only get fined a tiny bit, they know that it’ll be worth it to cut further corners if that helps them sell maybe 5-10 more planes in total.
Exactly. This is like if you charged the average person $1 for causing a major motorway accident.
It's a joke of a fine in the face of Boeing's profits - basically telling them they can get away with severe and wreckless disregard for human life in return for just over a week's profits.
No it isn’t, you were just replying to someone saying that it’s slightly more than their daily revenue (equivalent to a person’s income before taxes and spendings)…
They need to give both as many and as much drugs as they want. If drugs will somehow make them coherent, make it a requirement. I honestly don’t see a downside. They can even advertise for the drugs and everyone still wins
The Toke-Athalon - a three stage sport involving [some thing], a 1 gram rolling and smoking race, and a round of trivia.
Back in the day we had a regular civil disobedience event that had a game like this, but it was cannabis activism trivia, roll and smoke race, and more cannabis activism trivia. Surely there’s a better third event somewhere.
“Sorry Mr. President, the policies you enacted during the triple hurricane saved thousands of lives, but the drug test you took beforehand were positive for mood stabilizers so we’ve invalidated your policies and everyone who was saved by them has been taken out back and shot.”
This isn’t the fucking Olympics. But then debates are a terrible way to judge a president to begin with.
Debates where candidates debated the actual question/issue raised were useful. Whatever we have nowadays as they talk about unrelated things and try to find their 7s soundbite are useless.
I hate linking a probably right wing channel by the name, but it is a compilation of dozens of occasions just in the last two years. Biden is definitely not at the mental capacity to run a nuclear armed country. Neither is Trump.
And that should alarm everyone as they both are clearly put there as puppets to be controlled.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.