JonEFive @ JonEFive @midwest.social

Posts

0

Comments

334

Joined

2 yr. ago

"Yeah, but that event was taken out of context!" Or "Well, yeah, he did and said those things, but that's not what he meant!"

It's all cassarole down here

Gulf of the Americas

Don'cha know

Cursed

Technically correct

Continuing to call it the gulf of mexico will piss him off more

Dems never have the balls to wield their power effectively. They could have a supermajority in both houses and still wouldn't even be able to create an honorary holiday like notional french fry day or some other meaningless gesture.

Hah... four. I see you're an optimist.

They want to purge all dissenters. They only want people in power who are loyal to the cause. Stop me if you've heard this one.

President Musk would like a word

Or that, in true democratic fashion, they belived that the populace knows best. Allowing it or remaining silent could have been intentional. When forming a new government to escape from corruption, you wouldn't want to create a situation that would outright exclude anyone that the corrupt government labels a felon.

They could never have imagined such vast distribution of misinformation and all three branches being so thouroughly compromised.

Reluctant leaders are often better anyway....

I was about to say "ExtremeDullard for president!" But realized people might think I'm a Trump supporter.

How much weed can one man smoke?

There is some twisted logic to this. Your'e right, the system is broken, but this decision potentially avoids the constitutional crisis of whether a president can pardon themself. It may also make an appeal less likely. In short, it may be the best way to make the conviction stick. Now, what good is a conviction if there's no punishment? The only thing I can think of that would have any impact on Trump is civil liability stemming from a criminal conviction.

Five months later I log back into Lemmy, so sorry for the ancient reply, but I wanted to thank you for correcting my misconception.

And look how many Linux distro producing companies there are that are the size of Google or that earn even a significant fraction of what Google earns.

Linux is a totally different ballgame. It started out with open source and free access in mind. Linux distros are often made by volunteer developers who do it for the love of the game, non-profit companies, or companies that have found some way to monitize it like RHEL. And companies certainly pay for support, standardization, and exhaustive stability validation. There's also the commercial use of Red Hat's customizations, and arguably faster responses to patching vulnerabilities.

I don't even know how to respond to this. It's filled with so much hyperbole that there's nothing factual to refute or discuss. All I can say is that I vehemently disagree with your opinions on the matter.

But if she doesn't the dems will blame those same voters, along with Greens (which, whatever) and any other third party voters instead of coming to grips with their many many failings

This is something that a lot of people don't think critically about. The republican party is largely homogonized. There isn't much diversity to their demographic at all. I had great hopes that Trump would fracture the republican party, but they're even more spineless than I realized. For all the "Trump isn't fit" gnashing that came before his win, even from the republican party, they sure fell in line behind him real quick. Republicans are all about party over country. They don't care about compromise, and in fact they don't want compromise. They will tank their own bills if they think the bill will serve any benefit for democrats. Party above all else, and that's what gives them so much power.

On the opposite side, democrats are in many ways a coalition of various groups of non-republican voters, each group with their own desires and priorities, some in opposition to others who fall under the same umbrella. If the democrats lose support from one of their many sub-groups, that leads to a loss at the polls, which is a win for conservatives and the country gets pulled Evac further to the right. So democrats constantly have a very fine line to walk to pull voters to their side without pissing off another of their constituent groups.

It sucks, it's not the way things should be, but it is the reality of our current situation. I'm not advocating for feckless Democrat leaders, rather, I am advocating against conservatives who will absolutely move the country in a direction away from my desired outcomes.

As opposed to? Conservatism? How do you expect that to be different? Because in terms of president, those are your two options right now.