Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C
Posts
1
Comments
1750
Joined
9 mo. ago

  • That must be why the country has been so awesome during all that time!

  • Fetterman/Gabbard 2028! Yes we can!!1!

  • Politics only happens with an election

    This statement doesn't make any sense.

    And you do know he was already impeached twice, right. Once for staging a coup?

    Yes.

    If there’s no chance in hell of getting out of the House (much less getting over the Senate) it’s not going to happen.

    Well then it must follow that there's no reason to oppose anything he does and that we should be satisfied with that, right? Democrats should only go after the easy wins and instant gratification because nobody will remember any of this at any point in the future.

    Yes, it should happen. Yes every single one of them should throw him out. They’re not going to. Yet.

    So you think this should happen and this should be how things work yet argue against both those points for some faith-based future reward? If they're not doing this now or at any point in the past, why would they do it in the future? What exactly would compel them to change their behavior if current events aren't enough?

  • They likely gave up because they realized that trying to impeach him is just adding fuel to his bases fire.

    You gotta realize that Trump has a third of the country believing that he is a victim of political persecution. The "witch hunt" rhetoric was taken hook, line, and sinker. They sincerely and earnestly believe that Trump is a good man with a righteous vision, who is targeted by "the radical left", which is "weaponizing" the DoJ or the impeachment process.

    But if we apply this logic then Democrats should never oppose Trump or any other Republican, and where does that leave us? I find this quite ridiculous as not only does it excuse Democratic inaction but also mandates that they bend over backwards to support him in the future for fear of losing their job (a job that quite literally is to represent the people).

    Merrick Garland lost his shot at SCOTUS because instead of fighting back when the law was fully on their side nearly a year before the 2016 election, they arrogantly thought that they were guaranteed to win and Clinton would then get the nomination. They again backed down in 2020 just a month before the election and allowed Republicans to ram a nomination through. They backed down in Texas and allowed the Republican legislature to gerrymander districts and pick up several seats. They backed down on the government shutdown and allowed Republicans to take away our healthcare. They backed down and allowed the passage of the BBB. They're backing down and allowing the capture of a sovereign nation's president. They're backing down and allowing ICE to murder citizens in the streets.

    These are all reasons why they're losing elections. They're supposed to be the opposition party yet they refuse to oppose anything and even vote alongside Republicans often enough. Refusing to acknowledge this is why Trump won in 2016. It's why he nearly one again in 2020, and it's why he won in 2024. With each passing day they look more and more like they're all members of the same party because that's the only logical explanation for what's happening. Using the same tired excuses over and over and over only gets you so far before people see right through the BS.

  • We just lost the most important election of our lifetimes because that isn’t so.

    We lost that election because both the Republican and Democratic candidates thought pushing right wing ideology was the best tactic. Turns out that only works for one of the party's base.

  • So your argument boils down to "Democrats shouldn't oppose Trump & Co because it might hurt their chances at reelection?" What kind of nonsense is that?

    There are no repercussions because they don't have the numbers to actually get an impeachment without Republicans joining forces with them, which is unlikely to happen but even a potentially fruitless endeavor is better than sitting by doing absolutely nothing while the nation burns in front of our eyes.

  • This person is using the slaughter of innocent men, women, and children as a tool to mock others all because they're mad that a stranger didn't win a contest. I don't see what they're doing as any different than what Republicans are doing now in comment sections across the internet over the murder of Renee Good.

    This user and those Republicans share a lot more ideologically than either would care to admit, so I have no problem with my comment sounding arrogant/superior to their abhorrent behavior.

  • The supplement dissolves completely and is odorless and tasteless. You'd never know it was in the coffee or even in a pure cup of water

    I have had the "chunky" fiber supplement and found it disgusting as it is like pulp and I hate pulp.

  • Strawman argument. People didnt abstain from voting for Harris because it would "save" Gaza. They did it because both candidates shared the common ideal of bombing Gaza to smithereens and they refused to support that.

    It's incredibly disgusting for people like you to now mock others for opposing genocide just because your preferred candidate thought that supporting slaughter was more important than defeating her opponent and it all blew up in her face.

    Maybe you should hitch your wagon to better candidates if you don't want to be disappointed. That's on you not anyone else. Even now more than a year after the election was decided, you still think standing alongside genocide and Dick Cheney was the right call and can't understand why you lost. You are the company you keep, buddy.

  • This is a perfect example of why they're losing support. Less than half of them even support this despite there being zero repercussions from doing so. Remember when Republicans held 60+ separate votes to eliminate "Obamacare" throughout Obama's second term despite them not having a majority to guarantee passage of the bill and it seeming completely fruitless? Look where they are ten years later and tell me which is the more effective approach.

  • Thats exactly correct and anyone who tries to say otherwise is either being willfully ignorant or intentionally minimizing this fact. You might also be surprised to learn that many of these Dems voted against impeaching Trump for a third time last year. Their actions speak much louder than words.

  • I put two scoops of the Costco fiber supplement in my coffee each morning and have great poops now.

  • Im assuming you meant 'demons' and I'd argue that this line of reasoning is exactly why we are where we are currently. Republicans make things bad and then Democrats come later and keep them bad. Republicans make things worse and Democrats come in and keep things worse. Nothing ever actually improves and you get to a point where people are so desperate for anything different that they elect Donald fucking Trump to be president. This is the ratchet effect that Democrats enable through inaction due to their stated ideals being diametrically opposed to their actual ideals and the ideals of their wealthy donors. They simply tell you what you want to hear during election season and then disregard you once they take office.

    I wouldn't call having the same shitty, hand-picked type of people forced upon you over and over "democracy." That's just the illusion of democracy much like going to the grocery store and seeing shelves full of 'competing' products that all turn out to be owned by the same three companies. Things will not change until we break this cycle.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • There was FlyingSquid who was a "power user" and mod, posting seemingly 24 hours a day, but he seems to have vanished off the face of the earth. Apart from that the only users I recognize are the ones I typically have regular disagreements with over politics.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Can you explain what's unreasonable about that? External noise may be outside of their control but that doesnt mean they don't bear some responsibility to ensure that residents have peace and quiet in the place they're being charged to live. In that scenario, you would typically have the right to break your lease and move out without penalty. With internal noise, they have the responsibility to penalize the noisemaker with fines or eviction.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • I'd be willing to bet that nearly 100% of apartment leases have some language in them about noise meaning apartment managers absolutely do have the power to enforce these limits. Even HOAs, where you buy the property with your own money can enforce their own rules because you agreed to that when you signed the paperwork.

  • That tracks with every other platform though. I think the big hurdle is that it seems more complicated to get into since having independent instances is so different than everybody else.