a lil bee 🐝 @ alilbee @lemmy.world

Posts

2

Comments

407

Joined

2 yr. ago

Not doing this with you. If you can't follow the logic between the post topic, this thread's OP, and the common experiences of anyone on the internet, that's fine, just don't discuss. Not going to do the thing where you're "just asking questions" and critiquing every pedantic little point along the way. That's sealioning and it's tiring and lame and why half of the people here don't want to discuss the issues they're bringing up. The only one here who can't seem to follow the logic is you.

Yknow, it's really something else to come into a thread discussing topics people don't want to talk about because they get treated to shitty behavior and sealioning, and proceed to sealion on one of those topics.

See, I think this is what they're talking about though. I hate Christianity. I was raised Protestant and because of other factors in my life, Christianity effectively ruined large swathes of my lifespan. It's still an active threat to me, and likely will be for my entire life. I'm likely to be a fairly stringent atheist forever.

All that said, edgy internet atheists are one of the most annoying archetypes to run into online. If even a whiff of a religious topic comes up, they pounce and nip and bark. They satisfy almost every stereotype the religious people have of them because they often seem to delight in the cruelty of knocking on beliefs. Like, my whole top comment still being relevant, religion has a reason to exist. It gives people feelings of hope, love, and belonging. Anyone who has experienced a lack of those can understand why people fall into religion and why it's like any other addiction.

I'm breaking one of my rules right now, talking about religion on social media, but I figured the "meta" aspect of this thread would make it productive. I hope I don't regret it.

We've obviously seen a lot of studies about the proliferation of microplastics. They seem to be in practically everything and everyone to an almost cellular level. Are there any modern studies or even just hypotheses for what the actual effects are? Has it just not been long enough for us to gather data?

I think there are definitely good reasons to criticize Biden. I also think when it's all you do, it starts to look very sus. We need nuance in our criticism, realism in our strategies. And you're right in that I think during an election season, I would be thinking about where my priorities are with airing my criticism in public places, if you are actually laying out the odds for harm reduction.

Not everyone subscribes to harm reduction though, which I disagree with, but hey you can't win them all.

Edit: Also, sorry for double responding. Just two separate topics in there.

I should block them, but it's really frustrating see them post nothing in the way of facts or sources. It's always just a generic, leftist-flavored response to the most uncharitable reading of every comment. They will flat out just ignore the parts they don't want to respond to. It's just like arguing with the maga people, but with less discrimination. I'll give them that, I guess.

So why are you talking about a 5k limit?

I'm not going to answer any more questions you can answer by reading the bill.

None of what you're saying makes sense, it's just "your team" so you defend it.

Not sure what "team" you're even implying I'm on? I haven't given a single political opinion other than saying "not sure I agree with that" in response to the asylum claim threshold. I've only corrected factual information in regards to the text of the bill. In fact, I have less than zero desire to get into any sort of political argument with someone who won't even put in the 10 minutes it would take to read the section by section.

No, it's discretionary down to a limit of 4k, which is also in the text of the bill. I really think you should stop commenting strongly on things you haven't even read. It's not a great look. You can find the section by section and full text on Lankford's site. He led the bipartisan team that introduced the bill, but I'm sure you can find it elsewhere.

Quite a bit. Have you read the bill? Section I is doing a lot of hiring and training changes for border personnel. Section II is entirely centered on enhancements to the asylum review process. It's mostly minutiae like streamlining certain bars for entry and such. There is also the contentious 5k/day (likely to be 4k under an R admin since it's discretionary) threshold in Section III that triggers a full stop to entry until some of the backlog is cleared. Not sure I fully agree with that one but it will indisputably have an impact on the backlog.

While your general thought is true, that example is from almost 100 years after the founding fathers era and in the leadup to the Civil War.

I'm a scum bag for not wanting to get into a debate with someone threatening suicide in lemmy comments? If they're telling the truth, they need to talk to someone qualified, not random idiots on lemmy. If they're using it as a debate tactic, it's beyond fucked up. Either way, not sure how that makes any sort of statement on me. Lost a friend to suicide not even a month ago so fuck me for not wanting to engage with this right?

They do a straight comparison of sympathies between Gaza and Israel further down the article. Look for the graph with the title "Sympathies in the Middle East Situation, by Party ID and Age".

It's been an exhausting day for me on this thread and frankly, it's not worth it anymore. I've had a person threaten suicide multiple times, a person just randomly start belittling for no reason, and a large chunk of people who just refuse to read articles. Gonna tap out of this one, so you all take what you will from the articles and I'll just leave it there.

Call a suicide hotline. Nobody here can help you in this forum and it's very clear you need to have a discussion with a therapist. You're in no place to be on Lemmy having discussions about anything, much less heated political topics. I'm going to block you after this, not because I dislike you, but because I want you to not have any incentive to respond. Go get some help friend.

I'm confused, did you not read the stats I linked in the comment above?

I did not play prior to this release and my group has really enjoyed it so far. I highly recommend for anyone who is interested in the idea of a survival crafter set in an SCP/Control -style facility.

Not sure you've been "having to explain things" to me as much as just having a discussion with someone. I'm not really sure why you felt the need to get so dismissive and rude to someone who has clearly just tried to talk to you about something we both care about and approached in good faith. I really don't need any "help" and I'm not sure what you even mean by that last statement. I hope you have a good rest of your day?

Then what demographic do you think it is?

Older white men, the core republican demographic. Inside of the general democratic camp, it would likely be older Latino males right now, but I would need to refresh my stats.

Not for Obama.

You're joking, right? Ask any young person today what their thoughts on Obama are and you're gonna hear "drone strikes" first thing. The electoral politics of 2024 are vastly different than the ones in 2012, especially with young people. The way social media delivers news and raw footage to people, especially the youth who know how to operate it best, has completely altered the relationship between foreign policy and PR at home. Obama would be skewered today, and I'm surprised that someone on the left is even holding him up as an example for Biden to follow in foreign policy maneuvers.

Historical the youth vote is very important, we can't just give up on the whole demographic because they don't like moderates. They're the fucking future of the party, we need to actively go after them. I don't expect Biden to bust out a sac solo live on MTV like Bill did.

Totally agree, but I do wish we could get the sax solo. (Sac solo is also a hilarious typo given the Bill Clinton proximity)

But he's not trying to reach out at all.

Don't agree, and here's exhibit A of my comment above. He has forgiven as many student loans as seemingly possible with the current court structure and he has made climate change a high priority. Those are both targeted directly at the youth. He's trying. Now, he might be failing, but why? Because a crisis has occurred that the youth feels incredibly strongly about, and they are one of the most uncompromising demographics. Most other demographics will remember those earlier wins and put the ones they lose in larger context. The youth is uncompromising, which is both their largest strength and weakness.

For what it's worth, I'm not trying to argue with you on the broader topic of whether the younger demo is worth pursuing. Technology and political degradation is just going to consistently put the youth demo at odds with the raw math of campaigning, and that's something I worry about. I don't want any of what I'm saying to be true, but I worry that it is.

The demographic Biden struggles most with isn't young people and beside that point, every demographic is unique. Young people are impossible to please. Not individually, but as a demographic, they are inconsistent, fickle, wrathful, and fairly apathetic. I'm still in this demographic and it wouldn't be my first stop for a reliable election winner. Then look at the Gallup poll I sent and think about this purely from a campaigning perspective. How does playing to the youth on Gaza win you anything? Frankly, it looks like the math is stacked against us on this.

I still think we should fight for this. I still think there should be protests, demonstrations, campaigning for more ethical candidates. I no longer think trying to win this through selling it as a carrot or stick for winning the election is going to work though. The electorate just cares way, way more about economics and Biden (from a campaigning perspective) would be much more well-suited to focusing on that.

I think it's really lame to set up a false dichotomy for people between asking you to vote in the presidential election and asking you to kill yourself. That's not productive discussion at all and really injects a gross tone into the whole thing. Can we not trivialize suicide as some sort of debate tactic, please?

They were responding to me instead of you and just clicked the wrong comment I think, just to give them some grace. I would wait for a comment addressed to yours specifically because they may have a different framing.