Resonosity @ Resonosity @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

2

Comments

235

Joined

12 mo. ago

Same

Twist and tuck all day erre'day

I love that Bernie meme lol

I'm glad I'm on db0 and can still see posts from .ml, hexbear, and .world.

I can get a gauge of what people from all servers are saying, and I'm finding the gist that what you're saying is correct.

Lessons learned

I won't stop blaming politicians that just sit there and expect to be spoonfed perfect votes like toddlers, instead of understanding that people's needs and wants change over time as shit happens in the world.

Wages have stagnated. Civil liberties are being restricted. Immigration sucks now, where empires live or die by import of not only goods but laborers that fire up the economy. Harassment is on the rise, especially in cyberspace where there are no protections. Infrastructure is either crumbling or insufficient for how people want to live. Smog, pollution, and greenhouse gases are jeopardizing our future. People are having less children which will surely fuck up the economy at some point for those that age out of the workforce. Corporations control law and order beyond what science and research tells us. Privacy is eroding. There are TONS of issues that politicians could run on to galvanize non-voters, and yes anti-genocide is one of those.

Democrats on the other hand would rather uphold existing institutions, however neololiberal they are, and chase after Republicans than run on popular, leftist policies.

If Democrats don't do what their constituents want, they will continue to lose elections. I think people want change, and I don't think Dems (or MAGAts) are willing to give that. The politicians must change. We shouldn't have to settle with mediocre, half baked centrism when we are now seeing the Right completely undermine and shock the existing system. Why can't Democrats do the same, but in the other direction?

I approve this message

I've combed through the statistics for the 2024 election multiple times. Just check my profile.

The uncommitted movement were some 700,000 strong. Those numbers were on par with RFK's votes since he didn't pull out of the race by the time he endorsed Trump.

Democrats lost voters in 2024, despite the eligible voting pool increasing. Republicans gain voters ofc.

Why are you focusing on the voters when it's the politician's job to CONVINCE voters they're worth voting for? And are we forgetting the awful transition by Biden to Kamala, where she had 3 months to campaign? Are we forgetting how Biden said he'd be a transition candidate, that he wouldn't run for a second term but then did so anyway to the surprise of his staff?

We could have held a primary where the American people could have at least had the impression that they were engaging in Democracy (only for the DNC to pick their favorite anyways).

Pleaseeeeeee stop blaming voters. You're repeating the cycle where those in power never have to change.

W for Lemmy and dbzer0

Wish there was a good FOSS Acrobat/Blue beam alternative.

I use those tools for the majority of my work as an engineer.

There's also rentry.co/megathread

most of whom were arrested en masse without any process resembling justice—just tattoos, zip codes, or looking nervous.

That's the price they pay for letting their culture get that bad.

Why are you talking about tattoos here?

The person you're responding to highlighted some text from the article, pointing to injustice of the regime by believing tattoos automatically = jail.

You said their "bad culture" is the price they pay, implicitly grouping tattoo, zip codes, and looking nervous defined by the previous comment all under "bad culture" of those who do go to jail.

You then gaslight me for pointing out your fascism and disregard for civil liberties by avoiding any correlation with tattoos because you didn't mention them explicitly.

Every knows what you were talking about bro. The fact you asked this question makes me think you're a troll with no convictions for attacking modern fascism. Thanks for giving that away so all of us can treat you as such.

Tattoos are not a sign of a culture getting bad.

Your behavior of intolerance is a sign, however.

People like you are why I wish the US had re-education camps like China. You need to unlearn your bullshit.

I never liked tattoos and they're more-often-than-not an indicator of people that I should avoid.

I never liked bootlicking, individualistic, snowflake fascists and they're more-often-than-not an indicator of people that I should avoid.

I'm honestly ok with sending you to a concentration camp with no regards for your safety or wellbeing after that comment.

Tattoos are a form of free speech that applies to one's body, and should be afforded all of the protections of the first amendment.

I cannot believe we're having this conversation in 2025.

TIL

Both sides are bad. And by that I mean Democrats never represent the Left while routinely allowing the Right to exert their selfishness and greed. They are controlled opposition to frame American politics as a binary, when in reality an entire half of the political spectrum could be represented to widespread approval

If it's a straight line from Nixon to Trump as you say, then why claim Republicans are environmentalists with Nixon as your example?

He said straight line THROUGH Nixon and Trump, not straight line TO Nixon and Trump.

The former implies distinct and self-evident political differences, whereas the latter implies political evolution from one into the other where both politicians have a common set of political similarities.

I can't help but think at this point that we're reaching comprehension issues...

You say "it's too long ago when Republicans were different" isn't a valid argument.

He didn't say that. You did.

He pointed out your hypocrisy when you said that stating the fact that Nixon created the EPA must mean he's a Republican (and a MAGAt one at that), but then turned heel and said that any politicians from 50 years ago don't matter (likely because the political landscape then is not the same as the political landscape now, which is reasonably true - he makes this same point by saying 1860 Republicans are not the same as 1960 Republicans or 2025 Republicans).

You stated he's a Republican, then dissolved your own claim by saying support for past Republicans doesn't matter. You've closed your own logic loop.

Why can't stating facts just be that: stating facts.

Instead, people have to insert imaginations of their interlocutor's position so they can try to dish an "own" before asking them for clarification first.

And we wonder why discourse is broken in today's age