Yes but a lot of people who think they stand for something instead fell for anything.
Yes but a lot of people who think they stand for something instead fell for anything.
They can start by developing indicators that actually work, instead of indicators that make them look good.
Seeing sports as a casual way to get exercise is fine on a personal level if you aren't an elite athlete, but you can't force that perspective on millions of people who enjoy competing or watching elite athletes compete. It's a weird take to want to rewire sports to accommodate a very small minority of people, most of whom wouldn't even agree with that perspective.
Death penalty isn't necessary at all anymore, as there isn't any risk to society in keeping them imprisoned. In the past we were sometimes forced to execute because there weren't viable long term prisons. That's the only legitimate need for the death penalty to exist in my opinion.
I can't imagine it works as a deterrent given the psychopathic nature of these crimes.
I suppose it could bring some kind of peace to a victim of aggravated rape, that their rapist had paid the ultimate price so that would be nice. I'm not sure it works that way though or if it's a healthy coping mechanism.
Overall it feels like it should be a relic of the past.
This is the standard that was applied when a few nazi flags showed up at convoy rallies. You either need to reclaim the cause for your protest, or admit that it actually stands for something else and then ask yourself if you want to be part of that.
I've never used an iPhone, been a die hard android user since the beginning, but I might switch because of this. I don't care about AI and don't want it on my phone.
Also, do you extend this level of courtesy to events that make your political opposition look bad? It's easy to find the energy and motivation when defending your team, but it rarely goes the other way.
I'm unclear if this makes it easier or more difficult to do an insurrection. What am I missing?
There's actually a lot more bad choices but you never know about them because nobody cares.
Yep. Even if she is telling the truth about her motives and if she uncovered true election fraud, she cant break the law to obtain that evidence.
They get news from different sources than you do.
We escaped it by my wife quitting work, so that's always an option.
Well sure, except that problems with social media are everywhere, even in suburban and rural areas where kids have plenty of places to go.
You can't jump to full authoritarian without going through the first steps. I actually don't understand your second point at all though, about being a Christian.
No, but I'm also not sure where you are going with that question. I suppose hezbollah flags directly have something to do with the Palestine protests, whereas nazi flags didn't really have anything to do with the convoy, so maybe it's more understandable to have hezbollah/hamas flags there. But they are still terrorists, right? Or are we OK with them now? I'm just not sure what you mean.
Sounds good, talk to you in about 5 years!
I'm not sure if these people are propagandists or just dumb. It seems like a very obvious non story if you actually read what happened.
Actually you are probably right about him shifting. There are a lot more anti vaxxers now, after COVID, than there were before.
It's a little confusing what Biden even meant. I assumed he was asking if white people were swapped out for Black people on Jan 6, and all else were equal.
Yeah I suppose they would hop on as well. The idea that my experience would be tailored according to unknown algorithm and agenda kind of scares me.
I haven't dabbled with that stuff for years, but I could go back to that as well I suppose.
The entire system is being challenged from top to bottom, with supreme Court justices and Judges all over being called into question.
People aren't thinking about consequences when they commit murder, so it doesn't really matter how severe they are.
I agree with you, but this is blatant misrepresentation of what actually happened, and that should worry you. I'm not saying this to defend Trump, I'm saying this to point out the misrepresentation of events by the news media.
I'd be curious to see similar math for republicans. It's probably a similar amount of time where they had full bully powers to do whatever they wanted, right? Maybe it's just me, but I'm fine if that kind of power from a single party is rare. If it happened more often we would get much more volatility as laws were changed back and forth. This way change happens more slowly, but it's generally objectively good change rather than reactionary or populist.
I think the key point is that people in Texas feel as though they have control over their schools. People want to leave when the schools don't reflect their values and they are powerless to change it.
Yep, and so we get very gradual change. It's not like the political environment is actually broken into left or right anyway. If the Republican party disappeared overnight, conservative Democrats would immediately become the new hurdles to progress, albeit shifted a bit to the left. "Progressive" policies would be more left, and the new "conservative" policies would as well, but they would still be conservative relative to the others.
No that's the whole point of the post
You honestly believe that? Our perception of the world and our opinions is formed by what we see and here. It's that simple. Not sure how you think you somehow transcend that, and have some innate ability to discern truth from propaganda. Whole nations and civilizations have been deceived by propaganda and none of us is above that. So the question we should be asking ourselves is what propaganda are we consuming and how is that affecting us?
The charges were about collusion, and not about whether or not the Russians tried to interfere.
When you say "Republicans", are you referring to politicians or to the roughly half of the country that votes Republican? Because I kind of agree with your take if it's regarding politicians, but even then it should apply to all of them. If you are referring to everyone who votes Republican, then you are so far off base that I don't even know where to start.
Uhh... Haha?
To me it's a little bit different when it's groups of people who want to murder each other for personal reasons, compared to a mentally ill person wanting to lash out at society by murdering indiscriminately. I wish we bothered to talk about them differently, since they illustrate different problems within society and will have different solutions.
I'm saying that I exist in that space between.
The role and benefit of conservatives in any society is to resist reactive or bad change, to resist the creation of new problems, which is the mistake that progressives are prone to making. You need both. I agree that conservatives cannot be trusted to govern alone since it will result in stagnation in the long term, but also neither can progressives be trusted to govern alone. In reality you can't actually get rid of either, because society will simply shift until you have both again.
Ok, so everything conservatives stand for is wrong? And everything progressives stand for is objective truth? Or are you only referring to climate change?
Also Trump is not an anti vaxxer. Don't you remember "Operation warp speed"? Maybe you should find more variety in your news sources.
Also, discussions during COVID regarding school closures and vaccine mandates are not the same as denying vaccine efficacy. I hope you aren't confusing those issues. Yes I'm sure there were anti vaxxers on the news from time to time, but you seem to think it was super common. That's not what I remember at all.
There is a lot of space between calling out inconsistencies, agendas, and extremists on the left, and being a right wing extremist. If you think being able to criticize obviously agenda-driven lists, or to see nuance or weaknesses in them is some kind of litmus test for extremism, then perhaps it is YOU that is the extremist.
I read through the 14 tenets and kept thinking it was stupid, vague, biased, and perfect for applying to whatever you don't like. Not only that but it could be easily applied to any authoritarian regime, Communist, fascist, or whatever. And then I looked into it a little more and it turns out that he isn't a doctor at all, just some magazine contributor for a leftist magazine. I assume you looked it up just now, but you may want to look into it a little more carefully before you base too much on that. There is actually a lot of discussion and criticism around the validity of those points.
Sounds like you are working from a different definition of fascism.
You can't weaken the federal government and be a fascist at the same time.
Fear seems like the go-to strategy when you have the weaker candidate. During the Obama elections, the only thing Republicans could do was try to scare people into voting for them, since they knew they couldn't beat him. The strategy turns from focusing on the strength of your own candidate to focusing on the flaws of the opposing candidate. Democrats entire strategy at this point is maximizing fear of Trump. Not sure why it's so hard for them to get rid of Biden and put up a real candidate, but it looks like a flaw in the nomination process.