aelwero @ aelwero @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

322

Joined

2 yr. ago

What year is it meme

Absentee ballot. Did it for 25 years in the army. Voted in Nevada while in Iraq. Couldn't get any fucking ice cubes, but I could get a ballot to vote on local issues in my home state...

Generally not a fan of anything that challenges the ability to vote, but some of the shit that's presented as "challenges" in these types of discussions seem disingenuous.

let the evidence show what crimes he may have committed

Lucky they caught him before he was able to act

I mean...

Orwellian... no?

It's laudable that they intercepted the guy, but I have some minor concerns about exactly how they knew what he was thinking, and some serious concerns about the fact that they intend to prosecute him for thinking it.

May as well just overtly prosecute it as thoughtcrime and send the dude off to the Big Brother School of Rehabilitation for some programming...

Break what? Break dance?

Lol... "Study shows what we want it to show"

It's a comparison between drivers and riders using four cherry picked criteria that would most likely generate the predetermined narrative. It's science for hire.

Drivers run the gamut from tree huggy beetle driver to Ford f950 with the extra black smoke package and factory standard swastika paint job, and cyclists, while on a narrower scale (you'll never see mr super smoker on a Schwinn...), still have a similar scale and can absolutely be assholes.

The dissociation part is accurate, but it's not a matter of vehicle type or size, because commercial drivers are commonly on the same end of the awareness scale as motorcyclists. It's not about personality, it's about risk.

Emojis are a good way to try and mitigate the ubiquitous assumption of context that happens on text based forums.

Which is to say they've got a little upwards curve in indicating intelligence at the beginning prior to the plummet into dumpster fire territory you're associating them with... and I don't actually disagree with that, just a friendly addendum ;)

I'm using liftoff app. I see your emoji. I see new emojis in some comments but not others (roughly 80% success rate). The comment you originally replied to in this thread (two comments up I think) has popcorn and facepalm shown as emojis (the facepalm is not Picard though...it's apple/google/etc.), the rest are text.

You officially stated for the record that Obama wasn't the best option for you... that's how democracy is supposed to work... you voted correctly, ostensibly...

I understand you didn't think "pie in the sky" was the best option, but for the sake of argument, you operated the system of democracy in the correct manner by voting your "best fit" (with some liberties taken on context, with no malicious intent).

Every loss kind of actually is a failure to pursue centrism/moderation. The alternating between Dems and repubs isn't caused by people changing their ethos or core values every 4 years, it's caused by a rather small portion of the population that is centrist/moderate, and flip flops to try and knee jerk everything towards the center (and a portion who vote against the incumbent party because they don't like the status quo, which is different, but arguably very similar)

I don't believe that third party votes determine outcomes, and the very specific reason is because of the electoral college. Third parties did pull a large number of third party electoral votes, but even with all of them, Clinton still would have lost. Third parties "stealing" elections is simply not the reality (but the trump/Clinton race woke some bitches up... I was part of that and I'm pretty happy about it).

The "your vote did nothing" opinion you have about your Jill stein vote is the reality of fptp, everywhere. Even swing states (maybe more so if they're an "all in" state).

We think of America as being split by a fine line, but I don't buy that shit. I think there's a whole hell of a lot of people who would prefer a nice fat grey area, and I'm gonna hang out in that gray area no matter how thin it gets in the hopes that sensible people will join me.

JoJo was a better option than trump or Biden. Perot was. Paul was. The bern was. Colin Powell was (dude was pretty army though...). Id go as far as even Jill stein was. There's no shame in checking the block on that as far as I'm concerned, and I'm gonna continue to hope that more people will start thinking critically and voting for their best fit instead of what they think they need to settle for. It's your vote, that's supposed to be the whole point of democracy, your voice, not a collective compromise of voices.

I'll probably be voting RFK, and if you think about it objectively, If Biden wasn't incumbent from having had trump lower the bar enough for Biden to step over it easily, Dems would be running RFK on their ticket next year, because he's the best fit for the office (and for us, the people)out of the current pool (as near as I can tell so far anyway... could change, I'm gonna Google the hell out of all the runners and I won't be focused on their campaign webpages...). I'm not voting for "not this" or "not that", I'm voting to say what I think is the best idea... I don't give a shit how anyone spins that, and technically, that spin is illegal ;)

A pi to host an SSD and run a plex server would take up as much space as two pair of socks in a sock drawer...

Just depends on what "hosting an on site cloud" means. If it's just backup storage and a local-only Plex server for one or two tvs, you could get away with the socks ;)

I like fetterman :) Dems oughta put that dude on the next ticket if he's willing, he'd bring some much needed respectability and bipartisanship back to the POTUS position, and I'd put good money on him sweeping the swing states easily.

They're starting to realize the true cost of trump... orange man isn't red or blue, he's green, and in pursuit of more green, he offered political support for sale, and they bought it.

Some bought it for their religion. Some bought it for conservative values. Some bought it just to poke the blue team in the eye.

Without the shuckster selling them his snake oil, they're realizing they've become somewhat distinct entities who aren't really allies the way they think they are.

Jim Jordan wants the gavel for the sake of religion. As time goes on, and the "red team" discusses more and more, his support will wane among the more libertarian minded types that want conservative laws that favor liberty over all else (the ones that are arguably "racists"), and the only votes he'll keep are the religious types, and the ones like desantis and abbott that pretty much just want a blue team loss at any price.

I think they're completely fucked, which is why most are still entertaining trump as a best option, despite the absolute ridiculousness of that.

Vote third party if you don't like Biden :)

“I ache for him,” President Biden told reporters while chuckling when asked if he has a view on Jordan’s “current predicament” on Capitol Hill. “No. Zero. None.”

Glad to see POTUS being nonpartisan and not acting like it's junior high school politics... not... Kinda has a little more impact than just the shitty optics. I don't really give much of a fuck that the republican party is looking like a little tiny car with a whole lotta clowns in it, but I damned sure give a shit that it's having some collateral effects, and POTUS damned sure ought to as well.

This stupid fuck had 8 years as Obama's second, watching him react to situations just like this by telling people to be mindful of the consequences of their actions, or sometimes, just outright telling people to grow the fuck up... Biden could 100% have responded to the media with "republicans need to grow the fuck up" in exactly those terms, and cashed in huge returns in public and even legislator opinions of him, but he doesn't even have the tiny bit of sense it takes to understand that.

I hate literally all of these fuckers... I hate that theyve all become 12 year old children in their level of maturity, I hate that the majority of politics is focused on making anyone else look really shitty so their own shittiness seems ok, and I really really fucking hate that everyone is so absolutely fucked right now that trump is an actual viable fucking option. The bar should have never ever gotten low enough for trump to have a shot at it, and an actual second shot at it is just fucking absurdity...

Literally everyone in politics right now needs to grow the fuck up a little.

A CEO making 50x the average wage of their employees is taking home an average annual salary at their company every week. Exactly what are they contributing that warrants this? 50x is egregious. You can not convince me that an executive at any level is, every week, somehow equaling the annual production value of a rank and file employee.

On the other side of the coin, you can't reasonably expect legislation of any sort to compel a company to bump its payroll expense by 60% or so... (higher wages mean higher employer side contributions... a 40% increase in your pay isnt a 40% increase in what your employer pays). That's not sustainable.

This is both too much and not enough simultaneously. It's not a great approach IMHO. It does however beat the absolute shit out of doing nothing, so I'll give the bern some credit on this one :)

It will split both sides' vote, just like every other independent does.

He's traditionally a democrat though, and the most likely supporter is the person who's generally democrat but doesn't buy into the "blue no matter who" pilosophy that got Biden into office, meaning he's likely to have more impact on Bidens ticket.

Personally I'm hoping that the fanboy base behind trump has been been reduced by trump having disenfranchised some of the more centric types, leaving just the odd zealot base (and frankly, I simply don't understand that support base at all, it's just a weird ass quasi-religious cult that reminds me of jonestown) . Good chance we might see a lot of that come out as a record breaking indie vote, which would not really be the mechanism you're describing, but would be the outcome you describe...

I didnt vote for either of these clowns in 2020 (went with JoJo) and I'm sure as fuck not voting for either this time. I'll once again be part of the 1% that's willing to say that both options are bullshit when I hit the ballot box. Hopefully a lot more people go that route, and while a Biden win would be better than a trump/desantis/abbot (I don't really differentiate these...) win, I'm not gonna be party to saying Biden is acceptable. He's not. He's less shit than the current red team offerings, but he's not in any way not a shitty option...

Because a corporation can arrest, convict, and jail someone...

I think someone might be putting a little too much stock in a cease and desist letter

If they banned all alcohol for everyone, its indiscriminate, and I would not consider it to be discrimination (I'd consider it a bad idea based on the obvious). In your example, a ban on wine, but not whiskey, with the publicly stated intention of reducing alcohol intake among women, would be the equivalent, and I'd absolutely consider that misogynistic. In the case of a wine ban, yes, it would be immoral to impose that ban, because it would be targeted at women specifically.

They aren't banning cigarettes. They're banning menthols, and the publicly stated intent is to affect use of cigarettes among minorities. The policy is specifically intended to affect a demographic. Not because I say so, or because I think it does... it's what they're citing as the basis of the policy... they published it as such.

The pragmatic solution is to ban cigarettes. That would still affect the minorities disparately, but it's no longer an inherently racist proposal at that point, because it's about tobacco use period, not just the tobacco use specific to the minorities.

It's not a false analogy, it's just brutally logical and completely disregards the merits of the situation...

Logging is the deadliest occupation on earth. Banning minorities from the logging industry would greatly improve their odds of survival. It's exactly the same as banning their chosen cigarettes.

I don't really have a preference on tobacco bans at all tbh. I do think people should have options, but I don't disagree with the intent of smoking bans either... the issue here is, it's not a choice between those two for everyone, it's a selective ban that removes the options from a singular group, and the selection is based on race and orientation.

The merits of the ban are, in my opinion, not all that relevant. I don't disagree with banning cigarettes entirely, I don't disagree with onerous taxation as an incentive to reduce sales, I don't object to any measures that are indiscriminate, because I don't really care that much tbh, I switched to vapes in 2012.

I object to the specificity.

From another perspective, were talking about a ban on tobacco that selectively preserves tobacco use for straight white people... does that make it more clear why I object?

So it's totally fine to target minorities with a ban if it means forward progress in disincentivising tobacco use? I disagree on the ends justifying the means in this case.

No arguments at all on the merits of reducing tobacco use, just an objection to throwing minorities under the bus in pursuit of it. I would not actually object to taxation as a means. I wouldn't object to an outright ban even. My objection is to the specificity to minorities... that's not cricket...

So if we ban minorities from the logging industry, that's the opposite of racism? It's the deadliest occupation on earth...

Fisherman, truck drivers, roofers... ban minorities from all of it to save their lives, because that's the opposite of racism.

See the flaw in the logic here? Targeting a demographic is, by the simplest definition, an act of racism. Equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Banning minorities from entire industries would be to their ultimate benefit, and is obviously racist. Like Jim Crow obvious.

Your point is very problematical.