hydrospanner @ hydrospanner @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

886

Joined

2 yr. ago

A shutdown is the only thing the house leadership can accomplish that they'll think even might help them. And that's only because it's the only thing they can accomplish by doing nothing.

Unfortunately for them, we've been here before with this house and they aren't going to be able to simultaneously not do their jobs, cause a shutdown, and somehow successfully blame Biden for it.

Sure, of course some will eat up that narrative...but only the people who matter least in November. These are the voters who are already frothing at the mouth to go cast their straight ticket GOP votes anyway. So the only thing the house is doing is firming up support in a demographic where they need it least.

In every single other demographic, a shutdown weakens support for them.

Thanks

Just getting the opportunity to register an account to be included in the IPO presale event.

Thank you!

Right?

Like... It's not some great mystery. We see inflation at 5% and prices go up 8, 10...15%...and the companies say it's because inflation.

I got one a week ago.

I did some digging on who gets what when and over the course of about a week and a half they have three tiers.

I think the first was 200K+, then I think 50K+, and then 10K+ off the top of my head.

Polka, actually!

I feel like the only one who sees through the bullshit. I feel like I'm the only one who has realized that trump isn't a smart person nor good at speaking unless he has a script to follow that he can't diverge from because as soon as he does the crazy cat lady is on display.

Yes, yes...you very special and unique little unicorn.

You're the only one.

We're all here because we wanted to be a part of a different community than reddit.

False.

We're here because we wanted to be part of Reddit, but for one reason or another found it not feasible.

For my part (and I'm guessing many others, given the surge of new accounts around the same time) I had no desire to leave Reddit, until the API nonsense. So I was looking for something similar to or better than Reddit.

Not different. In fact specifically not different in most ways.

Certainly not "worse than".

That's not a fixed interest. There's nothing keeping most users here beyond a lack of options. I'm not interested in "building a space". The space is here it's just filled with recycled content from Reddit, narrow minded political extremism, and even worse of a hive mind than Reddit.

Your optimistic pep talk is all well and good but it's also somewhat naive and unlikely as well. You're asking a lot from people to show up to a shitty situation and just deal with it until hopefully, maybe, possibly at some future time it'll get better...and after being here many months, I've seen no change for the better and in fact I think it's gotten worse.

It's either that or we all ditch federated spaces and go back to reddit. Leaving the tankies and other toxic people to Lemmy.

Sounds good to me.

I'm pretty much there already, which is pretty sad considering I came here fully intending on Lemmy replacing Reddit for me completely, only to find next to zero content I'm interested in, no or dead communities for my interests, and awful comments when, out of other options, I turned to simply browsing defaults to at least read something.

I'm not fully there yet, but I'm about 90% of the way to accepting that Lemmy is a failed experiment, undone at least in part by the shitty community. To doing exactly what you suggest and leaving this place to the tankies and other toxic people...and of course the fatally optimistic folks desperately insisting it'll be great...someday.

If you or others who are being pushed away leave then the asshole : positive people ratio will only get worse.

Such a call to action only works if the people in question have some sort of a fixed interest specifically in the Lemmy community. Those on the fence about leaving (myself included, not that it matters) have no such interest.

I'm considering leaving because the community sucks. Why would I stick around based on the threat that if I go it might get worse?

That's like a manager telling an employee at a shitty job that they shouldn't quit because then the place will be short staffed.

Really nothing his actions could cause me to want for him is worse than being him.

I mean...I could want for him to be him...but without the money and influence and power over others and enormous platform to spread his ideas and cult like following and 4 years as the leader of my country.

He'd have to be one hell of a lot closer to a regular person before I ever wished anything positive for him.

Right?

The older I get, the more I realize how much I've been screwed by the older generations, and because of that, my positions on issues have sort of "forked", having both a "what I think should reasonably be our course of action as a democratic republic" and "what I'd do if I were supreme overlord"...but both of those forks skew further left now than they did when I was in my teens.

Grim acceptance of the reality of our current sad state of affairs has led some of my "do what's feasible and don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good" positions to be fairly moderate...but for every one of those positions, there's a "supreme overlord" opinion that basically consists of "they're a blight upon mankind and should be dragged through the streets to a public place where they're thrown in a pillory for a day or two then hanged, with their assets liquidated and the funds used to undo their damages".

What's the deal with people on Lemmy always trying to get people to "admit" shit? If you want to engage in conversation just do so. There's no need to try to paint another conversation participant as an opponent and corner them into anything, just say what you have to say. I'm not trying to attack or defend primaries, just making an observation, so there's nothing to "admit", so you can knock off with that angle.

Further, the primaries, despite what you may think, are not a part of the national democratic election process. They are a function of the parties themselves, a way for them to gauge their members and choose a nominee.

If a party wanted to, there's no reason they couldn't cancel their primary entirely and simply have party leadership meet and choose a nominee, end of story. That doesn't make the American process any more or less of a democracy. It may make that party's process of choosing a nominee more or less democratic, but each party is and should remain within their rights to choose their own nominee in whatever way they see fit.

I'm not aligned with or registered to any political party, and in my state, that means I'm completely barred from voting in the primaries at all. In my city, one party has held the mayor's office my entire life, so the primary for that party is effectively the race for that seat, and I don't get to vote in it. I'm not upset about that. I can still vote in the actual race, and as a non-party-member, I agree with their leadership that I shouldn't have a say in who they select as their nominee.

Does one preclude the other?

Right?

Like this person is saying all this and coming across as quite smug about getting people to eat something by deception that they wouldn't choose to eat...and acting like it's something to be proud of.

I can't imagine it'd be getting a similar positive reaction if it were about sneaking animal products into a vegans meal.

This is my thing as well.

If they had shrimp sized grasshoppers that came peeled and deveined, heads removed...with a nice sauce to go with it?

I'd at least try it.

It's not political...or at least it's more criminal than political.

Besides super low budget weekends away within 4 hours of home, I haven't had a vacation since 2010. If not for a friend with a way to do that cheaply, I've never had a proper vacation in my entire adult life.

I'm still alive.

I feel like I couldn't say the same if I went that long without food, water, or shelter.

Not saying I like the state of affairs, but clearly it's not the same category of "basic need".

When democracy sees them losing power, rather than adjusting their platform or working toward compromise, their decision has always been to subvert the system. Gerrymandering, voter restrictions, election fraud, insurrection, and openly courting the enemies of the country are all preferable to losing power, to these people.

In a country where democracy makes their kind a minority, it's democracy that must yield to them, not the other way around. They're only American as long as doing so gets them their way.

I could see her staying on the court even through Obama's first term, but when he won his reelection, that was the time.

And that's not just hindsight either, there was plenty of discussion about it.

Of course there's also the issue of McConnell's shitty stunt in the Garland nomination (and the reverse shitty stunt for Barrett) and I will celebrate the day that piece of shit dies for those, but the first year of Obama's second term would have been plenty of time to get it done.

But yeah, in a just world, a senator from Kentucky deciding for the entire country that he's going to go against his constitutional duty and refuse to take up the Garland nomination for a year and a half?

That's when he's dragged out off the Senate floor, out onto the capital lawn, and hanged for attempting a coup.

After that's done, everybody goes back inside and whoever is the backup Senate majority leader is asked to take up the nomination. At that point it's unlikely they refuse.