TheSanSabaSongbird @ TheSanSabaSongbird @lemdro.id

Posts

0

Comments

625

Joined

2 yr. ago

Democrats do not have the equivalent of Fox News on their side. A lot of people think they do, but they are ignorant. It's an objective fact that there is no Democratic equivalent to Fox News, OANN, NewsMax, Sinclair or right wing talk radio. There just isn't. Nor do I think there ever could be given that the Democratic party is really a collection of very disparate political views whose only real common cause is opposition to what the insane GOP has turned into.

This logic only makes sense if you don't understand basic game theory, which you obviously don't. By voting 3rd party you are guaranteeing the worst possible outcome. You are responsible for that in a game theoretical sense whether or not you are responsible for how other people vote.

Somebody doesn't understand basic game theory. A 3rd party will guarantee the worst outcome. The system does need to be reformed, but you can't do it that way.

Right? How is this not common knowledge? Putin is doing the same thing. Do people on Lemmy not follow the news?

And your point is? We can't change the past, all we can do is try to make a better future. It sounds like you just want to give up because you didn't get your way in 2020. That's pretty childish.

That's not what's happening at all. If anything it's the opposite and the Biden people are being much harder on Netanyahu behind closed doors than in public. All of the reputable reporting and analysis indicates this.

I believe the electoral college is blamed for HRC losing. Sure, it wasn't the only factor, but it's a pretty big deal that you can win the popular vote and still lose the election.

It's no secret that he's allied with the Republicans, no speculation required. I thought this was common knowledge.

But his opponent is also unprecedentedly unpopular, so we're basically in uncharted electoral territory such that the past isn't necessarily a good guide to the future.

Anyone who says they know how this all plays out is either a liar or in denial.

Sure, it works great if you're a single person who doesn't have all that much to buy, but here's the thing; if you're shopping for a family or a multi person household or whatever, and you have to buy a lot of things at once, your self checkouts just plain suck ass because pretty much no matter what you do, you'll get dinged with an error message every ten or 12 items and have to wait for the overworked and underpaid attendant to come free you up so you can keep going until the next inevitable fuckup.

Self checkout is fine if you have something like 15 or less items, but anything more than that and it's more trouble than it's worth.

It's an ugly fact of human nature that we see way higher levels of social responsibility in relatively ethnically homogeneous societies like Japan.

Yeah, I have one of these for backpacking. Works great.

They've become increasingly common in recent years. I don't think there's as much of an aversion as you appear to imagine.

Fuck! No, I fucked that one up too and accidentally picked a crazy Haight-Ashbury 1967 hippie together with a seriously damaged Vietnam vet, the two of them getting involved in weird cultish shit long before I was born.

It was a poor decision on my part. No one to blame but myself.

You have to wonder if they've ever actually met any Taiwanese people.

I even specifically said as much in my comment.

Yeah, me too. I pat myself on the back for this one nearly every day. Probably the best financial decision I ever made.

Accidentally buying a modest house in what at the time was a "distressed" neighborhood because it was all we could afford. 15 years later the neighborhood has been gentrified and is highly desirable. The property has tripled in value and the land is now worth more than the house itself.

Anyhow, it was dumb luck on my part and again, mostly had to do with the place being affordable and relatively close to my wife's parents.

Yeah that's bullshit.

The Intercept? Are you kidding me?! They are openly committed to advocacy journalism. They don't even make a pretense of trying to be fair-minded, objective or operating in good-faith. Greenwald is an attorney who's openly said that he approaches journalism the same way he approaches a case as a litigator.

I am a journalist by formal academic training --though I don't really work in the business anymore-- and I can tell you for a fact that The Intercept is basically a case study in how many different ways a publication can violate SPJ's code of ethics. They are a fucking disgrace to the profession and it's galling that people like you take them seriously.