@pusher_robot's banner p

pusher_robot

PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 23:45:12 UTC

				

User ID: 278

pusher_robot

PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 23:45:12 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 278

I'm confident they'll find a way to criminalize it

It's not just the criticism, it's the ratfuckery. We're talking about constant escalation. You think it's a uniquely anti-Trump phenomenon but that doesn't seem plausible to people who've observed nothing but continual escalation this side of the millennium.

I agree, I think a lot of people are serious denial about the degree to which these opinions have broken social media containment and bled out into the real world. I'd guess mostly because of TikTok, but that's just speculation.

Agree with all of this - especially that hanging out in a not-very-goal-oriented environment is key. I would recommend checking local gaming clubs or hobby shops, and find an IRL weekly tabletop, card game, board game, or D&D group looking for recruits. Then you just have to show up, bring some snacks, and play some low-stakes games.

We talk a lot on this board about dangerous precedent. Letting an interest group invalidate an election by storming the legislature is particularly bad.

We allow protestors to storm government buildings and interfere with proceedings all the time with little or no legal response. This seems like special pleading to me.

One additional distinction I want to draw that I personally adhere to, but that doesn't seem to be the position of most election "deniers" is that I don't think the cheating is mostly the proverbial deep state conspiracy, I think it's about dispersed efforts to push, bend, and break rules among people that don't need some grand organizer to tell them which way they should go.

The "deep state conspiracy" part of it is the general unwillingness of the actual upper-level state and federal officials to seriously do anything to prevent the low-level rigging that advances their party interests. If rigging happens and investigators slow-walk inquiries, evidence is "accidentally" disposed of, and prosecutors sit on their hands, what recourse actually exists?

Party in the USA seems like an obvious choice.

  1. It has USA in the title
  2. It's at least somewhat positive about the USA in the lyrics
  3. It's singable and upbeat
  4. The other major theme is parties, which are also popular

I think part of the reason it doesn’t get the fanfare is because it doesn’t create 12 figure networth people. Its a constant costs business versus most building business. Of course if the businesses are not as profitable then the surplus value went to consumers in the form of lower energy costs. Also likely led to America not needing to write giant checks to the Saudis which meant are trade deficit could fund other things and those depend more on price leading to the strong dollar. People working in constant-costs businesses (farming, manufacturing, energy) tend to vote red people working in wide moat with ability to extract economic rents or winner take all markets tend to vote blue.

I think a bigger factor is that this success goes directly against the carbon-reduction platform that is important to much of the Democratic party base. Democrats are not too keen to paint any fossil energy extraction as anything but an economic negative and ate a lot of criticism over things like blocking Keystone XL, even if from time to time they quietly throw their environmentalist base under the bus when it comes to opening federal lands for drilling. But politically, fossil fuels are "bad", and good things can't be caused by bad things, therefore shale oil and gas can not be responsible for positive economic developments. Lucky for them, the press is generally fine with not talking about the double-think taking place because stoking environmental panic is good for their bottom line (and some, I assume, are true believers).

"As many as are necessary, and no more."

I think there is an unstated premise that all (or most) casual sex is rape, but sometimes women allow men to get away with it.

legally required to prioritize a profit for their stockholders.

I don't think this is correct. Forbidden from fraud and malfeasance, yes, but with disclosure they can pursue whatever ends the board approves. Many public companies never turn a profit, plowing everything into corporate growth. Others explicitly pursue goals other than profits, e.g. the whole ESG movement.

No, but that is a different set of criteria than who will appear on the ballot. For example, there's nothing in those requirements about having to get a certain number of verified signatures of support, which is a near-universal ballot access requirement. The suspicion is that a conviction will be used to prevent Trump from being on the ballot in at least some states despite him being eligible to be President if he was elected anyways.

That would work too. The critical goals are (1) to regularize appointments so that there is a more linear relationship between winning the Presidency and influencing the Court that is less based on luck, and (2) taking Court-packing off the table completely.

My first guess was that it meant skepticism of fiat currency.

I don't think that's clear, and if that's the case, the obvious political move would be to nominate somebody who leans conservative on most issues except Roe to reduce the expected payoff of the gamble they were taking.

I wouldn't know. I can basically never remember my dreams unless I'm startled awake or feverish.

Black Americans are, well, American. It's not a symbol of Americans being replaced by foreigners, at all.

Kind of. They are Black Americans, with a society and culture distinct and separate. A kind of parallel society, and one that seems antagonistic to the other Americans. Similar to South Africa, really.

CO2 is not relevant in this case. Death is due to hypoxia, not CO2 poisoning.

Just a virulent bronchitis, I think. I and everyone I know got it, and the cough persists for weeks if not months.

but your average ‘moderate’ undecided blue-leaning voter doesn’t think DeSantis is near as much of a fascist as Trump

What are you basing this on? Is there polling on this?

I've been watching a number of films from the 70's and it's remarkable how many end with the protagonist failing to accomplish their goals in a meaningful way.

  • Blowup: the protagonist fails to stop the assassination conspiracy and his girlfriend is killed.
  • Marathon Man: the protagonist foils the criminal conspiracy, but at the cost of both his and his brother's lives.
  • Network: the primary protagonist loses his girlfriend, his wife, his job, and all influence and the secondary protagonist is assassinated live on television by the antagonists
  • Parallax View: the protagonist fails to stop the assassination conspiracy and is killed
  • The Conversation: the protagonist fails to stop the assassination conspiracy he uncovers and is left paranoid and alone

I think there is a lot to the theory that the JFK/RFK assassinations deeply traumatized the Boomer generation in a way we may only be slowly recovering from.

Have you never grilled out and drank beer with friends on a nice green lawn?

To sum it up, the only real question is... Why are they like this? Who hurt them?

The answer is bums, hobos, panhandlers, psychos, perverts, buskers, criminals, litterers, and generally obnoxious people, and the leaders that do nothing effective to stop them from shitting the commons.

Curious, what is the source of this legal authority? That sounds facially implausible to me. Constitutionally, the President is not just nominally but actually the ultimate source of executive authority. He can't order the executive agencies to violate valid laws, but I don't see how Congress could Constitutionally constrain the executive the way you describe, and in fact I'm not aware of any such authorizing statute.

Why, if it does no harm?

The harm is the complexity of creating a policy that allows innocuous things but does not permit obnoxious or offensive things. The bureaucratic burden of having to decide that, say, posting pictures of a ski trip is fine, but posting pictures of a religious retreat is not, pictures of political protesting, or posting pictures of a gay wedding reception - it's all just so tiresome. It's a given that there are people who constantly push the limits of any policy in an obnoxious way, so it's entirely reasonable to set a simple bright-line rule that veers widely on the side of inoffensiveness.

Of course, all Republicans are "fascists", but do you truly not see a difference in the tenor and hyperbole over Trump?

Not really, no, just the effects of increased polarization driven by other factors, mainly social media. I absolutely think the polarization would be no less with any other Republican.