Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)CO
Posts
1
Comments
533
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I think this is where the specific definition of “nice” is crucial. I think it’s very possible to still be “nice” while also being confrontational or standing up for things, and in fact, doing it nicely but without backing down can sometimes be extremely effective.

    I know the “nice” you are referring to, where someone uses it as a shield for uncaring, selfish behavior. I’d of course rather have someone who isn’t so “nice” who earnestly tries to do the right thing than that kind of nice.

  • Why would Biden publicly announce that he wants to pack the courts, and get all of the negative political consequences of that, while at the same time having a 0% chance of adding even one Justice, therefore getting absolutely none of the benefits?

  • It makes perfect sense why we only have two parties while many countries in Europe have lots of parties. It’s not magic and it’s not because our parties are just so good at stopping third parties.

    The reason we are like this is because our voting system punishes similar candidates who run against each other. This results in parties that are more like coalitions, each made up of various factions that would be separate parties in a better system, who run a primary to pick one candidate to send forth, so that they don’t cannibalize each other in the general election.

    The bad part is that even the primaries generally have the same flawed first-past-the-post voting scheme, so similar candidates often have to strategically drop out or not run at all.

    This voting system desperately needs to be fixed. But you can’t fix it by simply acting like we just have to decide to have more parties, nor can you fix it by voting third party and screwing over one of the parties. I think this idea of voting third party in this election is appealing to some because it makes you feel like you’re doing something to fix it. You’re not.

    In my view the best hope of fixing this is pushing for election reform locally and winning over communities to the idea. There are some parts of the country with better voting systems in place. We should build on that.

  • I think you’re right but I think it goes further in that he genuinely doesn’t grasp the concept of reality. I think for him reality is whatever he wants it to be in the moment, and anyone suggesting it is anything other than that is lying, unfair, disloyal, and so on. So even if he does remember it, it doesn’t matter.

  • In a version that doesn’t even fully make sense. With databases there is a well-defined way to sanitize your inputs so arbitrary commands can’t be run like in the xkcd comic. But with AI it’s not even clear how to avoid all of these kinds of problems, so the chiding at the end doesn’t really make sense. If anything the person should be saying “I hope you learned not to use AI for this”.

  • In the primaries, sure, that’s your chance to send your party a message about who you really want. In the general election? You are just a vote and you don’t get to decide how that is interpreted.

    Are the Democrats likely to look at the results and say “oh the libertarian vote is gaining ground, we need to move our platform to the left”? Or will they see themselves losing ground and try to appeal more to the center? Or will the Republicans look at it and say “we need to be even more anti-government!” Or any number of other things that could be antithetical to the change you want?

  • You're saying "vote for my guy or else" and then acting like it's my fault hostage takers are going to execute me.

    I did not say who to vote for or even that you should vote. I only made the point that it’s the people’s responsibility to educate themselves on what is possible and the best course of action. (Then when you said you hated the country I asked if that includes the people.)

    But also, that's complicated by the fact that America is a blight on the world. The world would literally be better off if this shit hole declines because it can't fuck with everyone else in the world anymore.

    This is embarrassingly naive. Do you think if the US gets turned upside down — aside from the people living there who don’t deserve to suffer — do you think that the US is going to just tuck away in a corner and the world will be a better place? It would take decades and an incredible amount of suffering before you’d have a US that could not fuck with anyone anymore. If you want to see a former superpower in decline, just take a look at Russia. The more they decline, the more they lash out. The more Putin consolidates power, the more suffering that is caused by the whims of a desperate madman.

    You’re deluding yourself because you desperately don’t want the options you see ahead of you to be the only options. I don’t like the options either. But there’s no magical way to have the US get better fast or go away fast.

    You make whatever choice you want. But at least try to be rational about it.

  • If the person who is better for the country loses then it is all of our faults. In a democracy it’s up to the citizens to know the candidates, understand the system and what people can and can’t do, understand how the election system works, and be aware of what the stakes are.

    Political campaigns attempt to hold your hand and pull you in a certain direction because it’s in their best interest to do so, but the blame for what happens in January 2025 rests with all of us.