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/)RO
Posts
0
Comments
723
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • If only there was a term they could use referencing the use and threat of violence in order to achieve political gains. It feels like that's a word that should exist already, and that Republicans should all be considered the domestic version of whatever kind of person would do that.

  • Sure, but they're not asking you before they do it. If one candidate has gone on record saying a certain demographic should have their rights stripped, and there's a district that is populated by mainly that demographic, they don't need to poll the area to guess who's going to lose that district.

  • Because certain people with power find it advantageous to make it difficult for the people in certain areas to vote. If you know that district isn't going to vote for you, and morality is a thing that happens to other people, you could make the polling place too small with too few workers.

  • They're banking on their service still being better. In the short term they assume their particular selection of content will provide some inertia to your decision to move, and long term they expect all of the other options are going to do the same thing. Eventually, you'll only be able to stream with commercials, and they'll be back to the balance of their content being the only deciding factor.

  • It's not Insane, it's just wrong. People who can't afford bail can generally get a bail bond, which will front the cost in exchange for the defendant paying about 10% IIRC. The thinking is that people who aren't considered a flight risk, and aren't a risk to the community, shouldn't be imprisoned until there's a guilty verdict, and putting money on the line that they lose if they don't show up to court will encourage them to show up.

    On the surface, it's not an insane thought. It's just... wrong. It just doesn't really work. In practice it really does just disproportionately punish those who are already suffering, while also making it possible for the wealthy to further escape any consequences.

  • The real point here is that he was not in danger until he sought it out. He didn't suddenly find himself a bystander in a dangerous situation, he went out of his way to place himself there. He actively sought this situation out, placed himself in harm's way, put in active effort to get himself involved. He then acted like he was just defending himself when he found the exact situation he'd been actively seeking, just so that he had a convenient excuse to shoot some black people.

  • If he doesn't personally invade any countries, and calls for gun violence against "the undesirables" instead of gas chambers, does he still escape the Nazi label? I need to know what the line is exactly according to you, because he's already trying to put political enemies on an intimidation list and time may be short.