[-] [email protected] 13 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Is verbal harassment of police and such even a thing? What if he did shout 'fucking pigs' or whatever while he was videoing? To me that would change nothing - but would it?

provide evidence either way, but if this just is their typical Baghdad Bob propaganda, I

50
submitted 10 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

You don't say.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

How the hell is it only 83% of Democrats?

200
Who bee on first? (slrpnk.net)
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 12 points 3 days ago

IRL an opener like that receiving a response like that would probably be a sign that these two people are absolutely made for each other, IMO. They'd probably be a fantastic couple and wind up growing old together.

[-] [email protected] 49 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

But are they ... ignoring the voices of progressives like Mamdani, Sanders, and AOC?

Almost certainly.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago

These motherfuckers never even learned what a prefix was in 4th grade.

7
submitted 4 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago

the poorest most easily manipulated people

The people who would benefit the most from Democrat-championed social programs that they now label as "radical" and "socialist" you mean?*

 

*Which is not some blanket endorsement of Democrats. A lot of them are also out of touch, too conservative, and still trying to run the country like it's 1952. I'm eagerly awaiting the rise of a viable 3rd party (but after all these decades I'm not really holding my breath) or the implosion of the Democrats. I was aghast that Trump somehow pulled them right instead of left, but maybe it will result in an implosion from which Bernie, AOC, Jasmine Crockett and such can bring a phoenix out of the ashes.

[-] [email protected] 46 points 6 days ago

Because that's what we were given to choose from.

Insert long, tired diatribe about FPTP voting and the US two party system here.

TL;DR: Third party votes were effectively a vote for Trump. And while I actually did not truly shame anyone for their vote (I hope) this was always true, and I do think folks shouldn't pretend it wasn't true. If you are going to make a principled vote in the name of sending a message, I think it's only reasonable to be honest about the effects of that decision.

[-] [email protected] 67 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

This one would say all the things Harris would have done wrong are still better than all the things Trump is doing wrong. I'm not and have not been a fan of Harris. She's still not Trump.

Edit: While I actually did not truly shame anyone for their vote (I hope) it was always true that third party vote was going to help Trump get in, and I do think folks shouldn’t pretend it wasn’t true. If you are going to make a principled vote in the name of sending a message, I think it’s only reasonable to be honest about the effects of that decision.

[-] [email protected] 51 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Both sides are still not the same, IMO.

Dems suck, but not remotely to the same depth as Republicans.

I'd hold my nose and vote for Harris again if the election were tomorrow, and for the same reason as last time. (Gestures around)

Dems run the spectrum from conservative through milquetoast to leftist. The milquetoasts seem to win most of the time.

R is 100% bigot fascist authoritarians or people for whom those things are not a dealbreaker.

1574
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
55
submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
326
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
198
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
124
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://reddthat.com/post/44520548

  • Oxfam condemns "private finance takeover" of development efforts, as over 3.7 billion people remain in poverty ten years after the Sustainable Development Goals were agreed.
  • New Oxfam analysis unveils “astronomical rise in private wealth”. Between 1995 and 2023, global private wealth grew by $342 trillion – 8 times more than public wealth.
  • Oxfam analysis also shows governments are making the largest cuts to life-saving aid since aid records began. Aid cuts could cause 2.9 million more children and adults to die by 2030, from HIV/AIDS causes alone.
  • Results of a new global survey show 9 out of 10 people support paying for public services and climate action through taxing the super-rich.
  • Oxfam urges new strategic alliances to address inequality; urgently revitalize aid and tax the super-rich; and assert new “public-first” approach over private finance.
1488
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
734
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
735
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
485
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
view more: next ›

octopus_ink

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 4 months ago