For the record, the Constitution requires that each state decide how its electoral college votes will be distributed. The federal govt has no authority to intervene.
What dems in federal govt could potentially do is some campaign finance reform, to add some transparency to all the money that flows into PACs since the Citizen’s United ruling.
Omniscient is a bit of an exaggeration, I think, this is more about a belief in a philosophy, it’s about opinions. You can certainly have yours, no question, I would simply be wary and make sure the same standards of critical thinking are being applied to things we like and find agreeable as things we dislike and find disagreeable.
Strive, yes. But thinking you’ve already arrived at such perfection indicates a fundamental weakness in critical thinking.
Thinking you are always right is one of the surest signs you’ve fallen down a propaganda rabbithole.
This is such a tired old line based on the aircraft carrier rhetoric from the 60s, outdated since the Iraq wars and our own airbases going up all over the region.
Also the idea that Saudi Arabia trades in dollars because otherwise Israel would attack them fails to take into account that much of the rest of the world uses them too, since people like a stable currency that everyone else already likes.
You guys really need to update your rhetoric.
Yeah, there’s definitely a hassle vs reward calculus that quickly gets figured. Usually the hassle side of the equation is a little too high unless its something that can be quickly and easily fixed. Like if they forgot something it’s very easy to just go “oh, and can I please get …” which usually immediately reminds them and they go grab it.
Or if the food got royally fucked then engagement can become worth it, even over something harder to fix. Like, if my steak is well done and I ordered med rare, I kinda want either a new steak or a comped meal.
Yeah, it’s always surprised me a little bit just how strong they still are. While the often-online do tend to shy away from it, it’s actually still a preferred platform for the less-online, due to how easy it makes coordinating real life events. Also not the sort of segment that usually cares much about data privacy.
it’s all about that bun
Who are you who are so wise in the ways of culinary science…?
Everything else is just a really good sear and not overdoing the toppings too much. Don’t even need fancy beef, just 80/20 chuck can deliver top notch results.
I actually agree with most of that, but the couple I’m troubled by are rather important.
The main one being these slants and key details you say are omitted. Before I go into it, though, I assume you’re talking about the historical context of the conflict?
The majority of feedback offered was that it wasn’t pro-Palestinian enough.
It’s pretty wishful thinking to think Proj 2025 and all the other MAGAs are going to fade away after the orange man is gone. Did you not see De Santis’ support before Trump entered the race?
tbf, before Oct 7th, things were a lot easier.
No, it’s “shunning” when they do it. It’s “cancel culture” when other people do it.
Proper manipulation of language is key to fighting a culture war.
…we should put more junior-high science posters above urinals.
An enclosed space can also get hotter than the “burning temperature” of whatever fuel you are using to heat it up. Because heat keeps accumulating if it has nowhere to escape to.
tbf, leveling secondary sanctions on both China and India would probably burn the global economy to the ground, and wouldn’t even accomplish the desired goal. They just don’t need us if they all have each other. We’re not as powerful as we pretend, unless you count our direct military capabilities.
Okay, when did I say they had unique knowledge then? Asides classified stuff, that doesn’t count. You keep saying that. I keep saying it’s not unique, you just don’t want to go learn it.
So, they sometimes actually do explain things, Katie Porter for instance was pretty well-known for going into detail. Did you ever try listening to her, assuming you’re American? Did you watch Biden’s recent State of the Union? He explained several policy plans he has, though not in particularly great detail, it was just a speech. Do you listen, ever?
The main problem is you seem to expect them to come to you, wherever your media bubble is, and teach you everything. That’s again, not their job. It’s not their purpose. All the time they spend campaigning, trying to convince Joe-schmoe to vote for them, is time they aren’t doing their actual jobs of governing the country.
Again, they’re not teachers. They’re not salesmen. We do not vote for people to teach us, we should not vote for them to sell themselves to us. We vote for them to make our rules. They already campaign way too fucking much.
When did I ever say they have insider knowledge that I cannot receive? I mean, for starters they absolutely do, they have access to intelligence reports and various classified things that would be illegal for me to see. But that’s mainly just to do with the military, so whatever.
But I haven’t been talking about any insider knowledge, just you have. I’ve been talking about issues, and the importance of having to actually work at getting an understanding.
There are only issues, and solutions. That’s it. Also known as policy ideas. Should taxes be higher or lower. What percent. Tiered or flat. Etc etc etc. It’s not mysterious or magical. It’s just complicated, but you can learn it all if you put some work in.
How about immigration? How about education funding? How about welfare reform? They’re just issues dude, solved with things like laws and policies. You need to learn them, not just handwave shit away as “ooooh insider knowledge is good/bad/whatever”. You want to generalize it seems, but you shouldn’t. Everything is specific, its own rabbit hole to be learned. Knowing one does not mean you know others. They’re like subjects in school. If you get really good at math, then you know a lot of math. You can even judge if a math teacher is a good math teacher or not. It doesn’t make you know history though.
That’s like a politician. If you know a lot about immigration policy, you can judge which politicians are good at it, and which are fucking garbage. This is smart to do, so you know.
You should know which ones are good and bad. If you don’t, that’s not their fault, it’s yours. That’s commonly called a “civic duty”, to understand the issues in your country. At least somewhat, you know? Nobody has time to become a real expert. But you can become fluent.
I’m not assuming anything. I have a broad knowledge base that I put a lot of work in for, over a lot of years, and I like a handful of politicians that vote as I believe a knowledgeable person should vote. I’m not “guessing” like some random kid would need to. I’m not using my feelings.
I’m against trickle-down-economics, for instance, because I’ve spent hours and hours poring through really dry, boring shit. So I don’t need to guess that it boosts corporate profits in the short term, but does not measurably improve life for the working class.
I don’t need to assume anything, because I put in work a long time ago.
When it comes to something I don’t understand as well, say, global trade, I just don’t keep a strong opinion. Then I vote based on those things I understand. Feelings and assumptions and trust don’t belong in politics. Facts and hard work and not having an undeserved opinion are what belong.
Note, I’ve never asked you to assume politicians are good or something, have I? I’ve simply described the necessities of the job. But you really didn’t like that I guess, you maybe think “a normal guy” could do better? And no “normal people” ever run or something?
Lets not forget that it’s about more than just that person. It’s about the massive pile of data on the internet that will be read in the future and trawled for chatbot training.