HuntressHimbo @ HuntressHimbo @lemm.ee

Posts

4

Comments

301

Joined

2 yr. ago

I mean the administration is still debasing itself daily to keep arming a genocide. They're not working very hard to harden things against trump, but they seem to still be hard at work making sure Israel has plenty of bombs. Maybe the centrists should have listened.

I understand not being from here you aren't as familiar with these slogans and their context. Black Lives Matter as a movement is a movement against police violence that disproportionately impacts young men who are African Americans. Hispanic men and other minorities are also targeted by police, but to a lesser extent.

https://usafacts.org/articles/what-the-data-shows-about-police-use-of-force-by-race/

So the slogan Black Lives Matter is a specific condemnation of this situation. Black lives are disproportionately fucked up by police violence, they matter, ergo we need to do something about police violence.

All lives matter as a phrase, wasn't used as a slogan or anything until after Black Lives Matter. It exists almost entirely in the context of Black Lives Matter, and is used almost exclusively to advocate against reforming the police and lowering the use of force against Black Americans. Its sole purpose is to try and discredit the motives of people advocating for less police violence in Black communities, by implying that by singling out Black lives is not ethically correct. The police act as though Black lives don't matter, so by responding to that by saying All Lives Matter, all you are doing is trying to paper over the problem.

With those explanations out of the way, I think that Dems should not be saying All Lives Matter. It may work better among young white men, but you do so by ignoring a very real and dangerous aspect of the problem. If the Dems want to reach those young white men, I think the answer isn't to water down the existing slogans, but to add legs of the platform to address separate issues.

Show young men how police corruption fucks their lives too. I remember growing up hearing how much worse ticketing and traffic stops are for young men, so that could be a way to push back. Police will do violence to your black friends, and on top of that they issue tickets to men at almost twice the rate they do to women. If that isn't an in to get young men on board with police reform I don't know what could be.

Please don't take that as me saying women have it easier in traffic stops. Cops are horrible, and when cops are sexual predators they are just as dangerous as other predators but alsoalso have state authority to abuse. There have been stories of cops using police databases to stalk women and more, but that doesn't mean you can't bring up men's issues here too. Black lives matter, women need to be protected from cops abusing authority, and men shouldn't be unfairly burdened by traffic tickets. Dems need to learn to find those parts of the problems and speak to them because all three problems can be tackled together.

Stupid sexy golem

I looked back over the 2020 primary data and Kamala dropped before she even got to the first vote, Warren continued to pull small groups of delegates after super tuesday. In a very real sense Elizabeth Warren beat the pants off Kamala in terms of the primary. I was really pushing for her early in 2020 because I felt she was a consensus candidate between the further left Bernie types and the centrist Buttigieg types.

It feels like a recurring pattern of getting momentum then giving up before the fight and declaring that the only way forward is to compromise with the GOP. This pervasive self-defeating attitude that people don't want good things constantly undermines any attempt to sell a democratic vision. If you pre-emptively declare that centrism is the only viable path and attack anything that you think threatens your appeal to the center you will only ever be hurting your own position. To govern effectively you need to sell people on your vision, you have to have an idea of what you want the future to look like and then you have to convince people that is the right way. Going in with the only goal being to win, and adopting whatever mishmash of policies sounds popular to get there will never speak to people, and actively attacking the people with ideas and vision for being too "unelectable" is just self sabotage.

She could have held to her no-fracking stance, broke with Biden over Gaza, not promised to build a border wall, or not promised to put a Republican in the cabinet. Any one of these might have made the difference

Nothing but the boring one other States use at my polling place, the disappointment is immeasurable

An illogical and faint hope that Harris's campaign will commit to being less cartoonishly evil in the Middle East if they see their Michigan numbers are looking bad enough and also my polling place is close, quick, and convenient.

This is an aspect that makes me irate. People will say that its pure electoral pragmatism to support Israel, but how is losing Michigan over it pragmatic? I have seen no convincing argument that an arms embargo would be more dangerous for her electorally than continuing to tripple down on supporting Israel. If its not taken as a given that genocide is a pragmatic approach, then it seems obvious that the choice that leads to less genocide is correct, but Harris won't take it.

This is where I'm at. I've been open that I'm voting for Kamala, but people are literally posting that she has "no scandals" unironically, and will call you a Russian bot or a Trump supporter for disputing that. It's absolutely unhinged, and does nothing for her election.

You are so spot on with Dead by Daylight. If the survivor chosen to get "rushed down" has a couple specific things in their build or their team can play around it, it becames a huge uphill battle for the killer to get anyone else, but in public games often the teams aren't coordinated enough, or the survivor chosen isn't skilled enough to stall it out

And nothing else? You sure about that? No statements on how chaining prisoners to the floor is totally fine and normal?

Luckily someone already got your number in the other thread you made:

https://sopuli.xyz/comment/12666383

Call it harsh if you want, but they react to my identity and my beliefs with violence. I'm not going to put myself in that situation and frankly they don't have anything interesting to say. Why continue a relationship in which I would either have to lie completely about who I am, or tolerate hate speech directed at me or my loved ones? I don't get anything out of being connected to them, its actively detrimental to my well being. The ones who were family I made it clear that they would not have a relationship with me if they kept at it and they did, so they chose hate over me.

I cut them out. Don't remember where I heard the quote but there was one that goes something like "Our values are so different that any relationship we could have that doesn't fall to violence cannot be a genuine one." Essentially we care about things that are too different to be able to talk to each other honestly and get along.

Because being VP in an administration lying to continue arming a genocidal dictator is not a "scandal"

Sure wish centrists had pressured her to flip on this when we first started saying this would happen almost a year ago, but instead they called everyone who saw this coming Trump supporters and Russian bots. I'm sure they will all turn around and blame leftists and Arabs for this, but I hope they remember that they sold out the Palestinian people for nothing.

I was lucky enough to have a friend send me an invite to the playtest. I'm not sure if that is the only way in or not

Been giving deadlock a shot, still playing dead by daylight, and for solo efforts I have Total War, Tomb Raider, and Rogue Trader going

I'm sold!

Yes, generally I will look in my county newspaper for the less high profile races because they run short interviews with a lot of the down ballot candidates. Higher office candidates I'm generally familiar with long before the election