Jump to content

may be rude

Knob Twiddlers
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,989

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    8

 Content Type 

Posts posted by may be rude

    WAPP480

    in Aphex Twin

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    21 hours ago, cern said:

    all that talk about the Analord wav's make me think of his Soundclound how he always uploads the masters there. 
    I checked on Love 7 but no download option for that one 

    It is a myth

    we got digitals for those, you know. they're out there. just not sold anywhere, anymore. those 64 tracks are really good to shuffle through.

    • Like 1

    WAPP480

    in Aphex Twin

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    2 hours ago, cruising for burgers said:

    what's with this new trend of calling digital vinyls to digital files (wav, flac)? or am I missing something?

    what should i call it

    • Burger 1

    'Global Warming's Terrifying New Math'

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    13 hours ago, Fade Rhombus said:

    Yes there is global warming, but only because we're coming out of an unnatural mini-ice age. It's not a crisis.

    the rate of change is different. it's not that. there's nothing mysterious about greenhouse gases or their impact. the observations match the predictions. greenhouse gas causes warming. it's not remotely controversial.

    13 hours ago, Fade Rhombus said:

    industries for the greedy and the avaricious to make bank on. Its all lies and deception.

    it sounds like you would be really unhappy to learn about the most powerful industry in history, oil, and the deceptions they trick or pay people to spread...

     

    since you're so interested in the arctic ice extent, here: 

    Graph of September average sea ice extent in the Arctic from 1979-2022

     

    i am informing you that the most recent image you posted (on the last page) is misleading because it compares the minimum ice extent for one year with an image that is not at the minimum extent of another year, 2017. it seems like the only people who would put a comparison like that out are people intending to mislead. here's 2017:

    Arctic_seaicemin_2017_HD1920x1080.gif

     

    why are you posting so much inaccurate information that is so easy to disprove? and where are you getting information that is so basically wrong? it's honestly hard to be mistaken on such simple things as whether or not greenhouse gas causes warming, and whether or not the arctic minimum ice extent is shrinking dramatically. 

    • Like 2

    'Global Warming's Terrifying New Math'

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    24 minutes ago, auxien said:
    1 hour ago, trying to be less rude said:

    but there's plenty we can do now.

    all the middling things we can/are doing are a good, but they won't be near enough to make any significant changes quickly enough. we've been talking about solar panels in America since at least Jimmy fucking Carter put them on the White House, and by and large they're a good. same for all kinds of wind power that's grown, etc. but unless we stop dredging up oil, stop billions of people driving/flying everywhere constantly, stop expanding our population, there's not enough solar panels/wind power/other 'green' tech that's going to save us. 

    a greater sense of responsibility for waste among individuals i think will be an unavoidable social norm of the future.

    establishing alternatives has major obstacles. stopping use of fossil fuel requires establishing alternatives, first. wind and solar don't simply stand in, it's not that simple. major legislation is necessary, in order to solve the problems in a managed way. it's going to have to fall under some agency. and we can't have republicans like trump coming and gutting the EPA like he did. the necessary solution consists of the public awareness moving and consequently public policy moving. that's why i'm out here. posting on watmm is something you can do.

    24 minutes ago, auxien said:
    1 hour ago, trying to be less rude said:

    please don't voice these paralysis narratives that paid posters are whispering in people's ears

    it's not a paralysis narrative, it's the truth. solar panels and electric cars and whatever else is going to be nothing in the long term. we should still be actively doing all we can in that direction, but it's going to amount to not much/nothing. in 100 years, do you really think the population of 10+billion are going to be all like 'wow, i'm sure glad in the 2020s that 0.5% more of Americans used solar panels and a total of 6% of the American population used electric cars!* that was really the trigger that got things rolling to save the world and allow for our current utopia!" if there's any narrative it's that the changes need to be exponentially more sweeping and implemented immediately, without fail or reason or recourse. this would would lead to suffering/harsh changes/likely lots of deaths in the knock on effects, but it's better than the alternative which is to keep the status quo but 'oh, i'll buy the eco-friendly 7% recycled plastic ziploc bags instead'

    your statement was so simplistic it was nonsensical. the situation is not as simple as "there's nothing we can do until we contain existing practices." yet there you are telling people there's nothing to do. why are you doing that?

    the best things people can do now are raise awareness and organize for political action. it's possible to achieve impact in election results, and election results make a difference. right now we're bottlenecked by policy. proportionality of solutions is important and it's one of the central things of gates's book that i link above.

    24 minutes ago, auxien said:

    and i'll say whatever i want, but thanks for suggesting otherwise. there's no conspiracy infiltrating watmm ffs.

    kind of seems like a deliberate strawman, which i don't appreciate. 

     

    24 minutes ago, auxien said:

    but i'm not talking about realistic solutions to the problems, i'm just talking in the broadest sense that putting bandaids over a growing wound are useless. you have to stop the source of the wound, of the bleeding, which is population growth/hypermodernization of that ever-expanding population within a finite amount of planet. i don't expect to see this happen. we'll see just decline, suffering, and death (of humans, yes, but more broadly in the ecosystems we all rely on indirectly/directly) in our lifetimes.

    the solution is societal and sociological. it's a really hard problem and we need people working on it, not telling people there's nothing to do

    the problem exists because people aren't doing enough

    • Burger 1

    'Global Warming's Terrifying New Math'

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    7 hours ago, ignatius said:

    Yes. Republicans are shameless and soulless fuckwads of an exponentially worse type of person than the dems but the dems do a lot of dirt too. They take a lot of money from the same people.

    i'll never say every dem is great. it's a bunch of humans. politicians tend to be lawyers first. that's the politician vibe: lawyer. if people don't like the politician vibe, i mean i think maybe we need to accept that that's the way it is. some of these lawyers are more prone to rationalizing bad decisions. i addressed the proportionality of donations from the oil sector, which is starkly weighted toward the republicans.

    7 hours ago, ignatius said:

    Regarding healthcare during Obama admin, it was the dems stepping on their own dicks that watered down the ACA. They take a lot of cash from the healthcare industry/insurance companies.

    i addressed above the scraping of votes on ACA. but you make a good point about the factor of industry donations. certainly that's something those legislators were thinking about, regarding their votes. i'd be all for someone unfucking the mess of healthcare in america.

    7 hours ago, ignatius said:

    Also, the dems can’t get on the same page when they have the opportunity. They’re too oblivious to seize the moment. Republicans all get in line and vote through every shitty bill and policy when they have power. They don’t waste any time. They understand the game and the democrats frequently do not. 

    yeah, this is definitely a relevant dynamic. the federal level elected republicans, i believe, operate largely by deceit. so, by the nature of that, they must align their stories. hence the block solidarity. that also helps explain their intense focus on strategic advantage. like i mentioned above, they're a minority power managing to game the system in their favor. their whole game is calculating the most advantageous strategy play, because they are playing for power, not for serving the people. i view this as a consequence of the nature of the parties. the dems are more of an actual party of representatives of the people, however imperfect. so, yes, as a big tent party, it is difficult to get everyone aligned. and, by the nature of it, they are not focused on power strategy as a chief priority. dems are commonly criticized for this, and some awareness of the problem has penetrated their leadership and they seem aware of the disadvantage. i don't think it makes sense to expect them to have the strategic power focus of the gop. we need to be aware of the dynamic and yes also criticize them to keep them vigilant to mitigate the disadvantage.

    again, i just view this as the army we have. these bunch of goof balls are the ones who we need to give as much support as possible, if we want to make as much progress on climate as possible.

    7 hours ago, ignatius said:

    so saying “things need to tilt left some and that’s all it will take” is optimistic at best. A 30 to 50 year plan is too slow. We’re already on track for major changes. The mainstream science and data that we get is already looking too rosy. The estimates appear to have been conservative when it comes to the pace of change. At least that’s what’s starting to show up in some of these talks etc.  we don’t know exactly what will happen and when but they have a pretty good idea about some things. 

    speaking just about carbon dioxide, we output 50 billion tons per year, and we need to get that to neutral. it's a major project. i'm not even talking about methane and nitrous dioxide. this is by far the most challenging thing humanity has ever attempted to do. replacing fossil fuel with renewables is... there are no words that describe how extensive of an undertaking it is. the earth has never had a species undertaking what needs to happen. that's what makes the situation look so scary., how impossibly hard it is to avoid the bad scenarios. and we're not even trying. we need innovations we don't have. that's why people look at 2050 as a target for changing course. we need to change how we make cement, plastic, steel. we need to totally redo grids. we need to get cold fusion working. we need to invent carbon capture. but yeah we need to get started immediately.

    and yeah the reality has followed the worst side of projections from the past, consistently. like, off-the-charts, on the worst-case-scenario side of the range of climate forecasts from past decades.   

    7 hours ago, ignatius said:

    anyway! Bill gates. Ugh. Not gonna read his book. Have heard him talk about lots of climate stuff and I liked his thoughts on modern nuclear power systems. It’s funny that his company was building one of those reactors in china as a pilot unit then it got mothballed due to trump’s tariffs and trade bullshit that made sharing certain technologies and materials illegal. So it goes. 

    his approach to the situation is by the numbers. like, with carbon, it's 50 billion tons per year being outputted. he breaks that down into what the big pieces are, what the alternatives are, etc, including example calculations for comparisons. he identifies gaps in technology, and provides language for discussing the relevant dynamics, such as the "green premium" which is the cost offset of moving away from fossil fuels. the green premium of a specific technology or plan serves as the key metric for analysis, for each specific case, and tells you how realistic and close or far we are from various solutions.

    there's also methane and nitrous oxide, which he also covers. he discusses things like the seasonal and day/nighttime intermittency of renewables like wind and solar, and the limits and cost of batteries. nuclear really comes out looking strong, out of all the current technology alternatives. like, right now, cold fusion looks like maybe one of the most important things going on in the world. 

     

    'Global Warming's Terrifying New Math'

    in General Banter

    Posted

    19 hours ago, auxien said:

    there’s essentially nothing we can do unless we first stop doing what we have been doing. the containment of current practices is key to/preceding any possible solutions.

    we are reliant on the power that fossil fuel gave us. zipping around town is a nuts ability that we take for granted. finding a replacement is extremely difficult. fossil fuel is just an efficient way of producing power.

     

    but there's plenty we can do now. please don't voice these paralysis narratives that paid posters are whispering in people's ears

    • Facepalm 1

    'Global Warming's Terrifying New Math'

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    i think that is like a 10 year project at least and with all the short memories in america it's a tough slog.

    eh, the climate project... is more than 10 years... i would like to think it's a 30-50 year project. that is the optimistic hope, that, by 2050, we will be seriously transforming the energy infrastructure of the planet, and by 2070 we will have completed it. now that i've written that, and you've read it, i think we both know that the force of human stupidity will prevent that best case scenario, which we are already badly behind schedule for meeting. unfortunately, the climate project is a 100 year project. the question we have, at this point in time, is how bad will it get, once we're further into it. i wonder if people in the future are reading this or not.

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    also, that corporate swing hits both parties. the dems are often just as complicit in bullshittery and shenanigans when it comes to making laws that only the law makers and industry lobbyists can understand.  the system is broken.

    both sidesism is a narrative tactic that's widely deployed, imo. the numbers don't show an equality, when you look at donations from the oil sector. i have to push back on statements that equate the two major US parties. i also have to push back on statements like "the system is broken" because i find it inaccurate, unhelpful and actually counterproductive. also there, i suspect narratives are deployed to distract peoeple's attention and energy away from effective channels and toward ineffective channels talking about how the whole system is no good. it sure is fucked up right now, of course we can agree on that. i know better than most exactly what kind of a monster we have on our hands. i just don't see any path that makes sense aside from utilizing the mechanisms of the system, which seem perfectly adequate. while there are malfunctions, i think that's kind of how these things go. governments are grotesque, lovecraftian beasts. inaction is actually part of the objective. the system is designed to default to doing nothing. it's actually taoist. when both parties can't agree, nothing happens. only the shit that everyone agrees on gets through. it's funny when a few pieces of legislation actually get bipartisan support, these days. they're like "yeah of course we need to do something about ufos." balances of power can shift. things are getting shaken up. do you know where we are right now? we are in a societal realignment. a reordering. the magnetic poles are moving and so is everything else.

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    i'm not totally pessimistic but even if by some miracle everything swings one way towards the left and the dems manage not to go around in circles watering down every bit of legislation that's worth a damn.. that we're still in for a wild wild ride with climate as it is right now and it feels like it's starting to gather momentum and a head of steam to really spawn some chaos. 

    lol. yes, the best people we have are fallible humans who will do imperfect work. the best legislation we can realistically hope for will suck in some ways, while being good other ways. this is the best path available to us. this is the way. yes, we are behind schedule and it won't be enough. yes, we are heading into a fucked up storm of human history.

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    i don't put a lot of faith in billionaires to levy positive change or have the greater good in their hearts when they're taking on whatever project they're in a twist about. they're often self serving and just dumping money into their own foundations instead of paying taxes.  it's quite often counter productive or takes on a problem that could be solved by other means. 

    i mean you can't really debate with me about a book you haven't read. gates's book How to Avoid a Climate Disaster is an invaluable resource. every staffer in congress should have a copy. he does a good job of analyzing the situation and providing a distillation of the significant information.

     

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    congress making long term climate legislation that actually matters is a pipe dream maybe. it's becoming more and more clear that doing the right things on climate change will take a lot of courage to throw out the rule book and throw some industries under the bus. which means throwing some big donors under the bus. not to mention all the asshole billionaires like the koch brothers who are not going to go quietly. 

    i mean technically a lot of climate legislation already passed is designed to be long term, even if it may need to be renewed, because that's how legislation works. but i know what you mean, you mean the real legislation that we need for the long term solution. we will incrementally increase and improve the climate legislation, and it is a zig zag line of progress. president desantis or christie would set us back 4 or 8 years yet again. that's why the path to a solution just clearly seems to me to be raise awareness about politics in america and climate so that the gop can be cleansed by purging as it needs and the left can hold power for long enough to instill a sane climate policy regime. there have been, interestingly, overtures from the right on capital hill! they are starting to test narratives to change posture on climate. changing talking points to the best way to address climate, rather than pretending climate doesn't exist. we already see congress members on the right sometimes slow roll their evil, showing some modicum of conscience. hopefully they'll allow themselves to continue suffering losses, reform, and let the left do what it needs to do. it will be the special interests that want the party to hold power, more than the members of the party, themselves. that is already the state of things. the congressional right looks like a lot of sociopath lawyers on painkillers sweating over how their drug deals are threatening the integrity of society itself. anyway, yeah, it's a question of do we manage to make that happen, or do we wait until the volcanos are going off.

     

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    there's things that would curb some of the greenhouse gasses that wouldn't require cutting the arms and legs off capitalism and the free market economy but to really make a difference and save those most at risk it's looking like we're going to have to tear up highways and build highspeed rail and change american culture from rolling coal big trucks to actual community and giving a shit about random strangers

    the situation is so complex, that why gates's book is so important. you're right. but there are just so many things that need to happen.

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    one way or another there will be people in the streets before anything changes one way or another and if things are going to change for the better there will be people fighting against it every step of the way. 

    yeah it will be a while before we are on the real path to a solution on this. i really wonder what things will look like, in the later half of this century. not hard to imagine droughts, fires, superstorms, floods, tornados, food shortage, water shortage, economic depression, earthquakes, volcanos, political instability and war. people may need to see some shit, first.

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    edit: one way to think about it.. when obama got in office in the midst of a total economic collapse they did a bunch of things that likely saved the economy.. however, they never prosecuted anyone. they didn't send anyone to jail. why?  the justice dept had done it in the past many times. the savings and loan scandals of the 80s.... the justice dept charged people with fraud and all kinds of things and sent people to jail. they held people accountable for all the things they did.. and not just peons but people high up the food the chain. there's books about and one of the lawyer tax account dudes who worked with the prosecutors spoke up during the obama years and very loudly asked "WTF?? this is fraud and we should be sneding people to jail amd making real reforms".

    and dems had all 3 branches of government and could've done what they wanted to do but they didn't.

    this is a common misconception. when you barely hold power, it's not true that you can do whatever you want to do. it means that your primary fear is losing the power that you tenuously hold, so you must choose your battles, constantly, and conservatively spend political capital. this is substantiated by looking at how obama's terms went - he needed to pinch pennies on his political capital, the whole way. 

    of course i agree that DOJ leniency toward the powerful is bad and should be remedied. 

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    another example is healthcare.. which i tell ya.. i'm grateful for what we got because w/o it i'd be super fucked.. but when it started.. when they started w/the idea of what they wanted it was "universal healthcare/medicare for all/single payer source" type of system.. then they spent forever watering down every aspect of it and what we got was the ACA.. a mandate for people to buy coverage, a medicaid expansion, subsidies so people can better afford healthcare and insurers unable to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions.. and all those things are big deals.. but it's not anything close to universal coverage and single payor source system.  it's basically funneling money to private insurers.

    again, they were scraping by for votes to get what they got. notable that this is an example of how more dems would make things noticeably better. single payer getting edited out is an example.

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    and again.. it's a step forward and big step at that.. but it's a watered down version of what everyone hoped for. so, the dems getting control and doing something meaningful to fight climate change.. well, i wouldn't expect it to go much differently.. the bar will be high and they'll come in somewhere in the middle... and that's even optimistic and depends on serious efforts and the dems somehow ending up in charge and being able to beat the inevitable court cases that end up in the supreme court... which will what it is for decades. 

    i'm not saying the dems are a perfect remedy for everything... if this were a boat then i'd be saying steer it that way. out of the available paths, i think the move is a hard push for the left to have firm control for a while. and it's a significant coincidence that this is also the true proportion of voters to parties - the dems get more voters, by popular vote. the gop is a minority party cheating their way to competitive power and they should be put in their place.

     

    On 8/29/2023 at 10:36 PM, ignatius said:

    so, imo the thing that needs to happen is a general strike, people in the streets and desperate action... here in the usa that means it's not going to happen until the average person has their world turned upside down... and by then will it be too late?

    maybe it will turn out that you were right. i think we are doing permanent harm, for the future, already, in terms of the destabilization that will continue to unravel. the question is how bad do we make it.

    'Global Warming's Terrifying New Math'

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    10 hours ago, ignatius said:

    as for america.. yeah.. uh.. idk. seems like nothing will change unless the allegedly "free" market wants it to. there's a lack of clarity as to what needs to happen and no agreement on the best way or anything. most americans are oblivious and don't wake up until their actual front lawn is on fire or fire comes out of the kitchen faucet. 

    i think it's as simple as tipping things left, enough. politicians learn when elections are lost. the gop needs to by cycled. 

    my view is that corporate powers like oil have dragged policy far from its natural state. simultaneously, the gop are overextended, chaotic and brittle. i think the play is: let the gop rubber band back to the minority status they truly represent, and give the left enough cushion and stability to really fix shit. gerrymandering legislation, etc. then long-term climate legislation can occur. 

    in terms of what needs to be done, gates's 2021 book How To Avoid A Climate Disaster is an invaluable resource. every congressional staffer in the country should have a copy. he takes a system designer's systematic problem solving approach to the actual problem, and the book is his output, which constitutes a policy guide and primer.

     

    • Like 1

    'Global Warming's Terrifying New Math'

    in General Banter

    Posted

    7 hours ago, zlemflolia said:

    imagine thinking you can solve climate change in a decentralized market economy, without rational planning. do you even know what these words mean and what the causes of climate change are?

    yeah. in the US we pass some climate legislation, try to pass more that nearly passes but doesn't, and don't even try on stuff we know doesn't have a chance. that range can move. it doesn't take much for things to shift, sometimes. it's becoming more and more recognized that the senate filibuster is an archaic excuse for inaction and it's unconstitutional. both parties routinely bypass it when necessary. a couple years ago the dems just went and tried to pass a rules change that would have allowed them to pass the Freedom to Vote/John Lewis Voting Rights legislation. 2 votes - manchin and sinema, sunk it. 

    good legislation is possible by voting democrat. actually, this is a crucial part of the solution, so i'm glad you brought it up. policy is necessary. that's why it's so important to vote for democrats. the republicans transparently serve the oil industry. donations cross the aisle but proportionally it's much more on the republican side, as measured on open secrets 

    investing in the needed innovation, updating the grid and other infrastructure, removing subsidies for oil! etc - all possible in capitalist USA minus fox "news" 

    'Global Warming's Terrifying New Math'

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    On 8/27/2023 at 3:28 AM, zlemflolia said:

    cant solve climate change without rational planning of the means of production which capitalism is incapable of, since it only plans for profit, which does not correspond to value, as we can see

    only socialism is a sufficiently advanced mode of production to allow climate change reversal

    that's dumb, unhelpful, and wrong. but i think you know that

     

    in the US, we need to elect more climate people to congress. it doesn't matter if they call themselves socialist. 

    2020 US Election

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    On 8/26/2023 at 1:54 PM, zero said:
    On 8/25/2023 at 9:31 PM, trying to be less rude said:

    this is the course of nature.

    lol...dunno how much nature is involved in politics. the whole democracy thing is a man made system 

    humans are nature.

    On 8/26/2023 at 1:54 PM, zero said:

    designed by humans to keep other humans from devolving into chaos...only at this point in time now we see it isn't really working that well. the chaos is starting to creep further and further in.

    democracy is the worst system of government except for all the others 

    On 8/26/2023 at 1:54 PM, zero said:

    the democratic system as it was originally designed needs to be overhauled big time.

    i think people expect too much of it. i view its purpose as quite simple, and it accomplishes it. that is to cycle in new people. it's a simple solution to the cronyism that festers outside of democracies. 

    On 8/26/2023 at 1:54 PM, zero said:

    but too many strings attached to it, which won't allow it to change...

    well the system is designed to be a self-repairing system. the way to affect change is from within. history is entirely individuals changing history.

    On 8/26/2023 at 1:54 PM, zero said:

    something closer to communism is probably how humans should be doing it, if this were in fact according to the rules of nature. a collectivist system without the corruption.

    there's a divide between theory and practice. there's a lot of utopia in the theory. in practice, they devolve into corruption.

    On 8/26/2023 at 1:54 PM, zero said:

    anyway, I hope you're right man about the GOP being fucked. 

    the more people engage with each other, the more victims of deceit will be disillusioned, and their deceivers revealed. like, as the georgia trials air on tv, people need to be talking about it. the future depends on our actions

    On 8/26/2023 at 1:54 PM, zero said:

    best case is don don's legal doo doo prevents him from holding office again. is there nothing in the fckin system that says convicted criminal con men cannot become US president? re-write that shit now! stupid congress needs to come up with a new rule fast stating this.

    he could run from prison. but his participation in an insurrection makes him ineligible. 14th amendment section 3. state secretaries of state will be putting it to the test by saying he's not eligible to be on the ballot. hopefully the threat of him being off the ballot in some states becomes real. they need to take it to court, probably.

    2020 US Election

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

    On 8/24/2023 at 12:14 PM, zero said:
    On 8/23/2023 at 10:24 PM, trying to be less rude said:

    right now the right is covered in its own puke. 

    agreed

    On 8/23/2023 at 10:24 PM, trying to be less rude said:

    it's over

    hardly. never underestimate the power of stupidity and nonsensical decision making in biased humans. "it doesn't make any sense," yet people will do it any way.

    people will vote R no matter what. donald is 100% proof of this. doesn't matter who it is, they stick to the party because why? due to some personal attachment to it... tunnel vision. won't accept factual information. fingers in the ears. will never EVER vote dem because of some stupid self-perpetuating reason. why tf anyone would vote for donald again is insanity. there are a massive amount of people in this country that should be deemed legally insane, and have their voting privileges revoked. 

    me, I'm not perfect, just try and always follow the path of logic, common sense, and reality. I don't like politics at all, but follow what's going on nonetheless. the 2 party system isn't the way to go, but what other choice do us Americans have. vote for the lesser of the 2 evils is how I see it.

     

    the trump threat is as a domestic terrorist leader. that is not hyperbole. we don't have to worry about an uprising. we have to worry about lone wolves and small groups, as we have already seen committing murder based on ideas from trump, fox and the gop

     

    i can't predict the future but i don't see 2024 being a strong year for the gop. biden slowed the inflation that trump started. biden recovered the economy that trump tanked. biden resolved the pandemic that trump inflamed. biden left afghanistan. trump brought the US to the brink of civil war (as though deliberately). biden brought things back to normal. the info haze makes it hard for people to see but some amount of sense penetrates by election day. trump is indicted for several of the worst crimes a public servant can possibly commit. 

     

    the reason the right is clinging to trump is because the right was weak before trump. the right went all out on stonewalling obama because it was their only play, they simply could not afford to allow obama any win, after the disastrous run of bush. their only hope was to prevent obama successes. they were weak. then trump showed up and rustled the crazies out of the woodwork, who showed up at the polls, voting republican. the trump base consists of a significant portion of new voters. and he jacked the base from the gop, who were the base of dupes that fall for the best conman. 

     

    my point is this: as trump spirals into disgrace, the gop all of a sudden have lost that magical segment of new voters, AND there will be weakened motivation among their original base, which embarrassingly joined a cult with a reality show guy who's going down in truly historic fashion. they're fucked. KO

     

    and it's fitting and appropriate. this is the course of nature.

    • Like 2
    • Farnsworth 1

    2020 US Election

    in General Banter

    Posted

    17 minutes ago, Walter Ostanek said:

    So I live about an hour from the border so should I be arming myself to the teeth (legally, with PAL in hand ofc) in preparation for spillover from the coming civil war next door?

     

    right now the right is covered in its own puke. it's over

    2020 US Election

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by trying to be less rude

     

    crucial to note:

    14th amendment section 3 could be enforced at the state level. it's an argument against being eligible to be on the ballot. any citizen can contest the eligibility. lawsuits may be utilized if necessary.

     

     

     

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.