rocket_dragon

If the women in other cities are getting rights, the women in your city might see that and start getting uppity and think they deserve rights too.

It's not about agreement, it's about keeping those women in line.

Fascism doesn't allow for two strong men, and both Musk and Trump think they are the next Fuhrer. One of them was always going to fall. Right at the end of the election Musk was in a dominating position, he was called the shadow king, and Trump the vice president.

Musk flubbed everything when he overreached with that Nazi salute. He was ready to claim his Fuhrer throne but he just tanked his company profits, and then cried about it.

Trump at least consistently grifts the right wing crowd, Musk did the most awful rebrand in history from Tony Stark-like futurist to Dark MAGA weird cringe Nazi.

Washington Post is, at best, a bunch of spineless cowards.

Still I'm not sure this late in the game, who could still possibly be on the fence about RFK. Either you know he's a grifting lying piece of trash, or you fell for the cult, and any strong condemnation from media based on rationality and logic will only make you dig your heels in stronger.

Zero? Sounding pretty gaslighty because there are definitely leftist accelerationists who were talking like trump was going to push America into some kind of socialist revolution, although they got really quiet after Trump actually won.

And if the liberals don't do a good enough job you just side with the fascists to teach the liberals a lesson?

Leftists don't have a person to rally around, and some leftists rallied around MAGA. So leftists either sat out, or sided with fascists.

What did you expect liberals to do in this situation?

Traumatic event > emotion > propagandized media response > wealth being funneled towards capitalists

Y'all need the get on the sigma grindset, when tragedy strikes, don't get sad, don't emotionally process, just figure out how you can use it to manipulate people and make money

/s

SO, Blackrock is suing because "the public backlash prevented the company from pursuing 'the aggressive, anti-consumer tactics that it would need to achieve' its earnings goals."

The "anti-consumer tactics" would be denying coverage on providing care. So, United Healthcare care was providing more care, and making less profit as a result.

Now I think the lawsuit is aimed at the earnings goals itself, and the communications around expenses, not the expenses themselves. "Too Much Care" is reductive, sensationalized, but it's not outright incorrect.

Remember that privatized healthcare is inherently broken, because your profit model depends entirely on denying people coverage.

Which part of it is fake?

What's the Russian bot agenda here? Make Blackrock look bad?

Is one of these murderous religious people in the room with us right now?

No they're just ruling some of the most powerful and genocidal despotic countries in human history.

That's kinda my line of thinking - it's all based on vibes, and AI actually has better vibes in the view of most people than your average CEO.

Yeah it's not gonna schmooze in the traditional sense, but it will introduce itself as the smartest and most competent amalgamation of the best and most successful CEO's in history, with none of the weaknesses or greed or vice of a human CEO.

I bet investors will jump on pretty quick for the first AI CEO, and more companies will follow after.

Just don't ruin the meat, we can eat that!