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
1743
Joined
9 mo. ago

  • Epstein had a meeting scheduled with Bannon to outline a documentary on revamping Epstein's image the day Epstein was arrested for the final time.

  • Its funny you menting RCV because that was on the ballot here in Oregon last election and it failed by a 15 point margin because it got little support outside of citizen-lead efforts. State Dems of course want credit for putting it on the ballot despite abandoning their efforts after that and allowing disinformation to run rampant in the weeks and months leading up to election day. Dems have controlled the state for generations now, so why change a system that works for them?

  • You're arguing that people are more dirty and underhanded if they're Republican which completely contradicts your earlier statement about things not being "black and white."

    And yes, you and many others are arguing that it's okay because it helps Democrats whether you want to admit (or even realize) that this is the root of your argument or not.

    California’s law specifically triggered only if Texas went through with their proposed gerrymander.

    Which was only possible due to state Democrats showing up to the Texas legislature and giving the Republicans the quorum they needed to pass the vote. There's no "only if" when the outcome was a foregone conclusion. This is just slimy language to put the onus on Republicans for what's happening despite them being unable to do it without the assistance of Democrats.

    also has an expiration date following the 2030 census, at which point the California Citizens Redistricting Commission will resume their duties.

    So "bad deeds" today with the promise that things will be "put right" at some point far into the future? I can't believe people can't see through bullshit like this by now as politicians use this tactic constantly. It should be Chuck Schumer's catch phrase by now.

    Please tell me you realize these are not the same. If you cannot see the difference, you are either a zealot or arguing in poor faith.

    If there's such a stark and obvious difference, why is your whole argument based on faith and subjectivity? Faith they'll make it right in the future. Belief that they're the good guys, so they're doing it for a 'good' reason. You want to argue that things aren't black and white and it's not about party affiliation yet that's exactly what "the difference" appears to be. Where's the objectivity?

    Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement after the Supreme Court handed down an opinion in Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek, which deals with the constitutionality of and judicial role in partisan gerrymandering:

    "The Supreme Court's ruling strikes at the very heart of our American democracy. As Justice Kagan wrote in her dissent, the Court's role in our system of government ‘is to defend its foundations. None is more important than free and fair elections.'

    "This ruling greenlights the unjust and deeply dangerous practice of gerrymandering, which robs Americans of their right to have an equal voice in their government. Traditionally underserved communities, especially communities of color, risk losing the representation and resources they rightfully deserve.

    "The Congress must act. This year, the Democratic Majority passed H.R. 1, the For The People Act, which works to end to partisan gerrymandering by requiring all states to establish independent, nonpartisan redistricting commissions to draw open and transparent statewide district maps after each Census. We will continue to fight partisan gerrymandering, ensure every citizen's vote counts and oppose any attempt to compromise the integrity of our democracy."

    https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/pelosi-statement-on-the-supreme-court-s-decisions-in-gerrymandering-cases

    Do you agree that gerrymandering is unjust and deeply dangerous to democracy, robbing people of their right to have an equal voice or is that only true when Republicans do it? Democrats had the power to stop this in Texas before it ever happened, yet they chose to not only aid Republicans in their quest to gerrymander but also engage in it themselves. This is why I don't see any difference.

  • Interesting that you want to argue that the world isn't black and white while arguing that simple party affiliation determines whether someone deserves sympathy or villification for the same action.

    This is a very "only the Sith deal in absolutes!" type of statement.

    The truth is that people are just desperately clinging to the idea that Democrats winning an election will solve all our problems despite all the evidence to the contrary. They've proven time and time again that they are completely fine with "the status quo" because they benefit from all this turmoil just as much as Republicans do. They will not be our saviors no matter how badly people want to believe it.

  • Excuse the pun but something certainly seems fishy about this post. Surely at some point in their life, OP would have been in a room with women and discovered this wasnt true.

    They also keep talking about how this is something they've heard and read about but then later say they've had to leave the room when a lot of women are around because of the smell lingering.

  • Of course because it's good PR, and then later when they don't want to be constricted by such rules, they just write new laws to nullify it.

    The result is effectively the same as if they'd never passed these anti-gerrymandering laws in the first place, yet the sycophants eat this stuff up despite getting absolutely nothing from it.

    Don't forget that the Texas legislature was only able to gerrymander due to Texas Dems showing up and giving them a quorum.

  • It's not weird if you start with the premise of Democrats being just as dirty and underhanded as Republicans. Both these private organizations benefit from this. The people, not so much.

  • Yeah these graphs are frustrating. The knife one also has a Y axis starting at 600 along with the numbers being a "rolling 12 month average" of stabbings, whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.

  • I have no familiarity with Yunohost but this is just a matter of separating your services. Have one container with the *arrs, qbit, glutun, and VPN and a separate container with Immich and Nextcloud. I personally use Proxmox with Portainer to run tne containers, but you may be able to just run Portainer on your OS to accomplish the same thing.

  • You'll only connect to people who do have port forwarding setup, but nobody else.

  • That's obvious by examining all the geriatrics running the country who were alive prior to the implementation of these bans.

  • So pretty much personal aircraft only not commercial.

  • A Publix no less, a company valued at $50 billion, who is currently facing a federal class action for forcing hourly workers to work during breaks and off the clock, and who settled a separate lawsuit in 2000 after stealing $1.1 million in wages from its employees. No arrests made for any of these thousands of thefts, yet this guy is facing felony charges for stealing a few hundred dollars in product (actual cost not 'retail value').

  • Removed

    All take, no give

    Jump
  • I can't get open ports to verify

    Are you referring to canyouseeme.org (or whatever the site is called)? If so double check that it's using the correct IP address because the VPN will have a separate IP then your standard WAN IP which is whats displayed by default on the page. Test it by downloading their test torrent and running it in QBit

  • DeLauro said without the DHS stopgap Democrats “won’t be able to bring the kinds of pressure” necessary to make changes to the full-year DHS bill they’re negotiating with the White House.

    Oh I'd love to fucking hear a single example of Democrats achieving anything via "pressure" over the past year.

    Republicans: we want a $150 Trillion budget for ICE or we'll eliminate SNAP benefits.

    Democrats: outrageous! We'll allow you to eliminate SNAP benefits for children and the homeless, but there's no way we're giving ICE a penny more than $200 Billion!

    Republicans: you drive a hard bargain. We begrudgingly agree.

    Democrats: See we do work for the American people. This deal isn't perfect, but don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Be sure you get those donations in so we can continue this fight!

  • At least the ice agents won’t be distracted by filming protestors on their own phones.

    Yeah now it frees up their other hand for a second gun.

  • Even if they have them on they'll refuse to release the footage if it shows anything bad. Even podunk little police departments do this. Bodycams mean absolutely nothing to the public's safety. This is just more theater brought on by democrats to make it appear as if they're taking action while also passing Republican legislation left and right.

  • This is definitely peak Portland humor. I could see myself doing the same thing n his position specifically for the marquee jokes.

  • It goes back way before that too. During WWII they were firmly against the US entering the war and also against allowing Jewish refugees into the country.