Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:35 pm
That would mean that the Bernie Bots and Naderitres having to take “yes” for an answer and not making ‘perfect’ be the enemy of ‘good’.
I’m not optimistic.
I’m not optimistic.
Page 58 of 60
I’m not optimistic.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:52 pm
yea, that’s part of it.
But it would also mean dems making some appeal to the “bernie bots” and other progressive types
beyond whatever it is dems did to Bernie’s campaign in ‘16
not to mention these attempts to guilt trip anyone who doesn’t vote for the establishment.
But it would also mean dems making some appeal to the “bernie bots” and other progressive types
beyond whatever it is dems did to Bernie’s campaign in ‘16
not to mention these attempts to guilt trip anyone who doesn’t vote for the establishment.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:53 pm
And?
(You realize there a lot of left-leaning voters who care about a lot of left-leaning issues besides just the war thread…right?)
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:54 pm
I go off the grid camping for a few days and come back to see you mentioning me by name in my absence.
Missed you too?
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:57 pm
Please go back "off the grid".
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 2:05 pm
Yea, hoping to get more backpacking in by the end of the summer.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 2:08 pm
Play the tape forward, man.ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 1:53 pmAnd?
(You realize there a lot of left-leaning voters who care about a lot of left-leaning issues besides just the war thread…right?)
If one did NOT want the American center and left to come together to defeat Trump, one would want to do what exactly?
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 4:53 pm
If one did NOT want the American center and left to come together to defeat Trump?
one could do what Dems are doing:
keep trying to guilt trip the left into voting for the geriatric establishment kook the left never liked to begin with.
For real, dems seem similar parts incompetent and complicit.
one could do what Dems are doing:
keep trying to guilt trip the left into voting for the geriatric establishment kook the left never liked to begin with.
For real, dems seem similar parts incompetent and complicit.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 5:25 pm
I am not surprised that you did not answer, "One would divide the anti-Trump bloc against itself, on an issue-by-issue basis, using mis- and disinformation."
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 5:45 pm
As long as there’s a critical mass of left-leaning voters who insist on ‘The Purity Test’ we’ll continue to have outcomes like 2000 and 2016.ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 4:53 pm If one did NOT want the American center and left to come together to defeat Trump?
one could do what Dems are doing:
keep trying to guilt trip the left into voting for the geriatric establishment kook the left never liked to begin with.
For real, dems seem similar parts incompetent and complicit.
The Right’s motto is straightforward. They have no morals (even though they claim to be the Moral Majority and Family Values Party), that they would vote for a confessed sexual assaulter and known charlatan (cf, Sen Graham, ca 2016).
Unless the young people show up to vote, like they did in France, and vote to keep the fascists out we’ll be doomed to another Trump presidency.
The best month of a Trump term is still worse than the worst month of a Biden term.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:04 pm
good post.
I agree "The Purity Test" is risky. But I also think the purity test should be weighed against the Lesser Of Two Evils test. I think shaming someone for not being pure enough is similar to shaming someone for not holding your nose and voting in lock step. Let's just try having one or two halfway decent candidates for once.
I agree that young people showing up could very much decide the outcome of the election. But I think young people should also have something, or someone, that inspires them to show up - beyond yet another sad iteration of kooky old doods and "at least I'm not the other guy" sorts of appeals.
I agree "The Purity Test" is risky. But I also think the purity test should be weighed against the Lesser Of Two Evils test. I think shaming someone for not being pure enough is similar to shaming someone for not holding your nose and voting in lock step. Let's just try having one or two halfway decent candidates for once.
I agree that young people showing up could very much decide the outcome of the election. But I think young people should also have something, or someone, that inspires them to show up - beyond yet another sad iteration of kooky old doods and "at least I'm not the other guy" sorts of appeals.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:10 pm
If not stoping a fascist like Trump isn't motivation enough to show up and vote, everything's already lost. And good fucking luck with your future in the Christo-Fascist hellscape you're left with where luxuries like birth control, IVF, no-fault divorce, and abortion are mere nostalgic remembrances of the bad old days when your votes were just too, too precious to "waste".ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:04 pm good post.
I agree "The Purity Test" is risky. But I also think the purity test should be weighed against the Lesser Of Two Evils test. I think shaming someone for not being pure enough is similar to shaming someone for not holding your nose and voting in lock step. Let's just try having one or two halfway decent candidates for once.
I agree that young people showing up could very much decide the outcome of the election. But I think young people should also have something, or someone, that inspires them to show up - beyond yet another sad iteration of kooky old doods and "at least I'm not the other guy" sorts of appeals.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:51 pm
and those are just the likely immediate repercussions
free and fair elections?
a free press?
a free and open internet?
free and fair elections?
a free press?
a free and open internet?
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:02 pm
Holy fuck. If Ousdahl has less jerking off time, does that mean he spends more time here?
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 10:30 pm
It can all be so bloodless. At first.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:19 am
Russia orders arrest of Yulia Navalnaya, widow of Putin’s nemesisKUTradition wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:51 pm and those are just the likely immediate repercussions
free and fair elections?
a free press?
a free and open internet?
something to aspire to
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:39 am
One easy way to smoke out a bad-faith R is to ask them if they would be ok with the Supreme Court's immunity decision if the Court comprised six Ketanjis and three Clarences.KUTradition wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:19 amRussia orders arrest of Yulia Navalnaya, widow of Putin’s nemesisKUTradition wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:51 pm and those are just the likely immediate repercussions
free and fair elections?
a free press?
a free and open internet?
something to aspire to
Sometimes they will say "yes," which is patently absurd on its face, and not worth any further engagement.
But, instructively (here and across other threads), you will ALSO sometimes hear that the immunity decision is a leveling of the playing field; "this is what the Biden Crime Family and Biden DOJ have already been doing, you're just mad that the tables are being turned." Of course this is ALSO patently absurd on its face; Hunter Biden, for example, says hello.
I say this in response to your post, only because it comes back to just how susceptible we are to being worn the fuck down by gaslighting, by systematic, constant lying. To just giving up, in the face of brazen, confident, unending non-truth.
I am not afraid we'll descend into some Civil War hellstate. I am deeply afraid we will end up in a Russia-style uncanny valley of a society - where we make all the right sounds and motions and proclamations and signifiers...except none of it is real. And we meekly just accept that everything is going to be in a permanent state of wrong.
I have this image in my head of being effectively forced to drink like Freedom Cola, which will be the white-labeled, expired K-Mart cola that the Trump Dynasty stands up (somehow enriching himself or his cronies) after, like, crushing those DEI woke corporate overlords at Coca Cola and Pepsi.
That sort of thing - just an across-the-board degradation of our quality in life, all basically because (1) some rich people want to shave functionally meaningless amounts off their tax bills, and (2) we are wired to hate and fear people who do not look, sound, worship or act like we do.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:49 am
Very well said. This echos many of my concerns about our current state as well as the path I feel we will be on if Trump gets elected again.jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:39 amOne easy way to smoke out a bad-faith R is to ask them if they would be ok with the Supreme Court's immunity decision if the Court comprised six Ketanjis and three Clarences.KUTradition wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:19 amRussia orders arrest of Yulia Navalnaya, widow of Putin’s nemesisKUTradition wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:51 pm and those are just the likely immediate repercussions
free and fair elections?
a free press?
a free and open internet?
something to aspire to
Sometimes they will say "yes," which is patently absurd on its face, and not worth any further engagement.
But, instructively (here and across other threads), you will ALSO sometimes hear that the immunity decision is a leveling of the playing field; "this is what the Biden Crime Family and Biden DOJ have already been doing, you're just mad that the tables are being turned." Of course this is ALSO patently absurd on its face; Hunter Biden, for example, says hello.
I say this in response to your post, only because it comes back to just how susceptible we are to being worn the fuck down by gaslighting, by systematic, constant lying. To just giving up, in the face of brazen, confident, unending non-truth.
I am not afraid we'll descend into some Civil War hellstate. I am deeply afraid we will end up in a Russia-style uncanny valley of a society - where we make all the right sounds and motions and proclamations and signifiers...except none of it is real. And we meekly just accept that everything is going to be in a permanent state of wrong.
I have this image in my head of being effectively forced to drink like Freedom Cola, which will be the white-labeled, expired K-Mart cola that the Trump Dynasty stands up (somehow enriching himself or his cronies) after, like, crushing those DEI woke corporate overlords at Coca Cola and Pepsi.
That sort of thing - just an across-the-board degradation of our quality in life, all basically because (1) some rich people want to shave functionally meaningless amounts off their tax bills, and (2) we are wired to hate and fear people who do not look, sound, worship or act like we do.
Watching Trump and his followers try to reshape our nation is like the cast and crew of Jersey Shore do a remake of The Godfather.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:56 am
it's interesting. every election that this great country has held so far, in the 21st century was/is billed as "the most important election in the history of this country. everything is at stake."
makes me wonder.
makes me wonder.
Re: SCOTUS
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 10:08 am
Every Presidential election since 2008 has had life changing impacts to a not-insignificant portion of our population. Maybe we'll get back to a little less drama in a few more cycles once all the women/minority glass ceilings have been broken through and the demographics of who is elected stop being so polarizing.
One thing is for certain, the era of Trump has taught the GOP that fighting dirty is their best chance for survival and a large enough portion of their voting base seems OK enough with that for now so they aren't going to disappear without the dirtiest of fights. Eventually, the pure volume of disgusting behavior they justify to get what they want will take it's toll and erode their base enough that they won't be able to sustain it but we're unfortunately several cycles from that still.