AWistfulNihilist @ AWistfulNihilist @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

263

Joined

2 yr. ago

You want to hold people accountable for having all of their time that they should be spending with their children, mandatory for living?

You are angry with a system that only awards time to the wealthy, you've put the onus in the hands of the exploited.

You want a better experience for children, start with supporting parents, not imagining ways to punish them.

Oooooohh, you've idealized a system that you've never experienced because you had shitty parents.

Yes, it would be nice if everyone's parents were responsible and prepared, it would be nice if everyone had an extended family around them. I think everyone agrees with that.

The reality of the situation is PARENTS most often lack the training and resources to raise a kid. Parents lack the support of family, both parents are likely to be to work to afford their family.

The system you want doesn't exist because nearly every member of our current system is engaged in capitalism, including the people taking care of the children for money, AKA daycares.

I see what you want, even if you don't realize it, I wish I had good parents too, I hated school, but at least there were examples of good people there to show me how to live a non degenerate life, unlike my parents.

This dude can't do anything right anymore. I'm thinking Elon help at this point is basically a dog whistle for well adjusted people to stay away.

Somehow when you add Trump's skin and Elon's skin together, it actually gets thinner, it's wild.

Thank you!!! And when was the NAACP formed. During segregation, where that word takes all it's American context.

Ah yes, South Africa, bastion of non racist glory! No one uses the word colored in a non racist context in North America. Brian Kilmeade is from New York.

The first word out of this dudes mouth to describe a group of black women being addressed by another black woman was by referring to them as colored. That's called showing your ass, he just showed us his slimy little racist ass.

Hell he might throw a Niki in there! This whole situation has taken me from being low key terrified to can't wait for what next.

Nothing says the shining light of democracy for the downtrodden like speaking for bankers at 250k a pop!

I don't want to hear a single thing from either of these nightmares. The party would do well to divest entirely.

Doing more research, candidates that were picked from contested conventions are absolutely less likely to win in historically.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/02/04/contested-presidential-conventions-and-why-parties-try-to-avoid-them/

So close enough with a candidate as strong with his party as Trump.

Actually the presidential candidate was selected on the day of the convention up until around 1970. They had conventions that would last days, they would lock the doors until a candidate was picked. Then ideally everyone stacked behind the final candidate.

I'm pretty sure there was actually almost a contested convention in like 1980. So no, this is objectively wrong and a bit of a modern convention.

Dude, absofuckinglutely. Robert's was never not on Trump's side, he just bided his time until the right decisions came through, like the one that makes the president a de-facto kingship based in court opinions with a huge amount of freshly minted psychos as judges.

Bold of you to assume this person has friends!

All the most interesting marvel storylines involve the mutants anyway. I know they killed off their evil Wanda, but House of M would make an amazing crossover series. I guess they're already working on secret invasion and dark reign would theoretically follow that. Which gives them both a new skrull bad guy and possibly kingpin.

All of that would be fantastic, just can't believe how bad they seem to have been screwed by this Jonathan Majors thing!

Ooooh thank you, every time someone tags me another angel loses their faith in the electoral system!

Yeah I referenced two articles talking about it in multiple ways.

You acting like it's a new thing that's never been discussed was what I was referring too. It's absolutely a thing! That's a bit of goal post moving on your part to go from "wow I've never heard of this before!" To "I don't think that's status statically true."

https://lemmy.world/comment/11132168

Like correct me if I'm wrong, this is you right? Are you also going senile?

You see it referenced all the time as a bit of democratic dogma. There was even a meme about it that hit the top of all/active like a few days ago on Lemmy. I like how this article from April puts it:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/2024-turnout-apathy-biden-trump.html

It's not necessarily true, let me be clear, but it's an active assumption. Higher turnout benefits Democrats. A reduction in turnout due to voter apathy will directly effect the Democrats more than the Republicans. The current propoganda campaign are targeting Democratic voters apathy rather than trying to switch a "swing voter."

This election will probably be at least as high as 2016, and like I think you are referencing, every election since 2016 had basically had record turnout over the last.

Imo this election comes down to the number of voters who are motivated by abortion and worries about the supreme Court, which is middle aged to older people, high percentage women, reliable voters.

He's an interesting one that talks about the enthusiasm vs apathy of voters but doesn't specifically turnout, which is against my interpretation. I struggle to understand the relevance of it in this context:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/07/02/biden-trump-poll-post-debate/74263315007/

Enthusiasm in this case would be turn out, actually getting butts out of seats to vote.

The existential threat that Trump poses no longer seems enough to motivate people to vote specfically against him. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the reduction in turn out by people who are not energized by Biden and aren't afraid of Trump has been a thing this whole time, it's not new.

Like literally the campaigns are targeting people to tell them not to vote at all, right? The fact that Biden is visibly spiralling gives those campaigns a lot of very effective ammunition imo.

Then again you got that x-ray shill vision.

Fair points, all of them, I've heard from a friend that the most recent episode is excellent. I'll keep giving it time.

What does this mean, you admit this particular show is not very good but might eventually be good?

This stupid woke/dei shit is just the culture war du jour, if the product that was being released was excellent, there wouldn't be as much fuel to call a show bad for whatever reason.

But as the previous poster noted, there have been properties that were celebrated on release because they are good. The first Mandalorian episodes meet a near orgasmic fervor.

Acolyte at best is maybe just ok to not very compelling imo, that's up against the other now recent star wars properties like Andor, which is and was critically acclaimed. The argument just falls apart when you use an objectively not very good show like Acolyte.

That's all you got to deliver today, hotshot!

You would think so, right? But funnily enough, whenever we find a new type of hominid that existed around us (neanderthals, denisovans, homo florensiensis), we find out that humans interbred with them and they are a part of our modern human DNA.

I bet humans learned to "other" things that look like humans so they could do things like avoid the sick and dead, dehuminize other tribes to kill them in war. All the very human things we do now.