I would expect that to actually make you smell worse. Like the scent of a gamer who hasn't showered all weekend so you can blend in with the rest of your friend group but you're actually an avid gardener.
username checks out :P
I don't know what's going to happen, but focusing on what you're saying this early is only going to cause you panic when we need to be gathering our strength. We've seen from the MAGA movement that our democracy is fragile. The safeguards and protections that make everything "so difficult"^tm^ to change these past decades aren't necessarily that difficult after all.
I can see a few well established Dem's like Bernie and AOC jumping aboard a progressive party movement disguised as a blue wave much like was overtaken on the right. We see that there is room to capture voters that didn't turn out and from both parties, a small band CAN take over a movement if their dedicated enough.
It's just unfortunate that it was someone on the right who first abandoned party-lined politics and showed you can tame a party while speaking to the base (again, it was only like 20% of the population). It really makes me think that Bernie should've handled the fiasco in Nevada and South Carolina differently during the 2016 primaries. No blame to him, and I'm not sure what lesson there is to be learned besides authoritarianism and narcissistic tendencies are a way to brute force yourself into politics. But, I would've loved to see Bernie politely take the gloves off and took it to the people to back him up as well like Trump did with his group (just not, you know, all murdery and dark).
I don't know, I try to be a little more optimistic. over 250million eligible voters, only 70million voted for Trump. That's less than a 1/3 and could be lower if you included the entire population. People will spend extra time to pursue things that will benefit them directly, there just needs to be better communication about the good things that will benefit them for their time, not the things to be fearful of because people will tune that out (as shown by the voter turnout).
I really don't think that's true anymore. Maybe looking at decades of political party data but I think the games kinda changed with MAGA taking repubs extreme and Dem's going center-right. There are a lot of republicans who could find a home in the democratic party since we know 2028 will see a cult leader retiring and you know the Dem's are gonna run an old white guy out of fear. I'm hoping another party can cause a splash that election cycle but I see it going blue and hopefully the infrastructure for this third-party progressive moment can become solid in local with sites on national.
I'm no longer holding out for election change. Oregon just voted against RCV, the push-back from changing the voting system is just too much for our set-in-stone political machine we have running now. I'm definitely gonna look into the data about why that went down though, a lot of opposition from Dems and Repubs in Alaska and Maine so would be interesting to see what coalesced.
geez you weren't kidding
Several other Democrats who voted to censure Tlaib were among the top recipients of AIPAC funds in November, including Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz ($141,058) (link)
and that was in January. If it's any consolation, the evil is slowly draining her life away it seems.
2016 :
2023:
What is with this "They" pansy-ass scapegoat bullshit I keep seeing from all these political extremism comments?
I just don't get why they never learn. I thought you were saying this is spoofed and the real cover was in that article....but nope that's the really real image. The right LOVES images like this, it does nothing to inform the base besides giving a "cool counter that he's beating". Show pictures of him going down on the mic on stage, show pictures of how old and fragile he is, anything but the stupid mugshot/he's a bad guy motif that's done nothing for the past year.
Jesus, been scrolling for hours and finally someone has said it. It's why someone like Bernie trended so well and actually had a chance if the DNC would've ran him in 2016. He wanted to raise EVERYONE up, regardless of any identity or ideology. He came with receipts and actual plans that he non-stopped harped on every second he had a mic in front of him. This election cycle I didn't hear a single actual legislative plan fleshed out like they did with the healthcare for all in 2016 debates. You're not gonna win a mud-slinging contest of "he said, she said" when people just don't care.
A lot of people (white and/or rich mostly) also know that they have benefited from racial discrimination and opportunities stolen from other people. They saw their parents buying homes, getting loans and jobs. They vaguely heard how difficult it was for POC or displaced individuals, they don't want the system turning on them. In their bleak futurism that the right-wing paints, we will all be treated equally so everyone is a target. Instead of targeting voters concerns in an economical way, they went with a polisci approach like Harris's horrible housing innovative.
Harris proposes to provide $25,000 down-payment assistance to first-time homebuyers who have paid rent on time for two years, with more generous support for qualifying first-generation homeowners. .... The proposal stems from an idea the Biden-Harris administration presented earlier this year, which called on Congress to implement $25,000 in down-payment assistance exclusively for 400,000 first-generation buyers, or first-time buyers whose parents weren’t homeowners, and a $10,000 tax credit for first-time buyers.
You're parents had a shack? sorry. Get no economical support from parents but they effect your government support? sorry. Congress didn't pass it? sorry. We've decided to change the definition of a "starter-home". Sorry.
The piece of the pie was a perfect way to put it, I've seen so many shit takes from everyone on here I'm flabbergasted. From people "getting popcorn to watch everyone get their just desserts" to "maybe we shouldn't of ran a woman-POC this election cycle".
I have loved ones that I very much care for that I have to do these mental dances with. Certain groups or cultures of people may have a bias towards only looking at scientific evidence that promotes their hypothesis, well established institutions can sometimes be "stuck in a rut" but I would include people like graham hancock in that group. Science is a beautiful thing though, new data and experiments doesn't care what your belief structure is. Your germ theory is a beautiful example where thought was put into a hypothesis and was slowly formed over time with new evidence. Religious and spiritual aspects do not require this with belief. What was the last study done by a religious scholar that a deity exists? What was the last religious text that was changed due to discoveries or experiments that were done?
It's important to realize that scientific study is a rigorous system and not everyone follows it to the best of their ability. Slamming a label on like "whether you accept and believe scientific discoveries remains a subjective choice" is not a valid statement.
The basic difference between objective and subjective information is that objective information is based on facts, while subjective information, or a subjective perspective, is based on opinion, emotion, or feelings.
The very fact that you're using subjective choice to look at scientific data means you're not actually following the scientific method (explains how something goes from hypothesis-theory-law). It's ok to have a hypothesis that's different from mainstream, it's not ok to declare being subjugated because you aren't following the method to show your data and claiming it must be a law.
If you're going to dance around the science/spiritual circles you need to have proper respect for both parties when communicating directly (if you want everyone to understand what you're talking about). One example is "Energy", means two very different things when talking to an electrical engineer or a new age "star child". The distinction needs to be made for sound scientific communication that doesn't impede someones belief.
I highly suggest checking out "The Hidden Story That Defines Our Modern Era" from Like Stories of Old. This is a prime example of how you can bind modern communication and stepping into the religious/belief structures of our history while maintaining respect for everyone.
Geez. that timezone separation is more fucked than I realized lol. I've lived in different time zones but always near the center of it and I didn't know there was such awful cut offs that zigzag through states like that. Sucks that user stayed hostile though, not sure if they just want to argue about everything timezone related or just too embarrassed to gracefully exit.
Felt inspired. Be gentle, please make any salty comments or downvotes in comic form.
21
16
37
view more: next ›
This is like gameplay analysis mode atm, the lessons need to be learned and strategies need to be changed.
I'm actually thinking we might need to be throwing dignity out the window. It's just being used as traditionalism to keep the status quo much like we've seen with feudalism. A progressive movement should've been continued after the DNC chicanery in 2016, dignity be damned. I've watched Bernie bend the knee to a left-wing party that's been completely overtaken by big interests, if they didn't play fair he shouldn't have endorsed and went back independent immediately (it's all speculative though).
I do fear that jumping through too many hoops will land the democrats back to square one and they'll just continue the same path (Desi Lydic did a good bit on the daily show about the media's many conflicting critiques).