KillingTimeItself

oh of course the .ml user is entirely uneducated on this topic, surprising frankly.

It’s not even a propaganda problem, per se, because most people aren’t obsessively following the news and economic reports.

i HIGHLY disagree with you.

Even if you’re a relatively disconnected right winger, who listens to fox news or the daily wire a couple of times of week, the propaganda is so fucking blatant it will still completely indoctrinate you after a few years.

like to be clear, any right winger that obsessively follows the news is literally ben shapiro or alex jones. There is no “moderate” here unfortunately.

biden getting flak over inflation is fucking hilarious.

The fed is literally irrelevant to the president, the president does not control inflation. Sure maybe his spending increased inflation. But the entire global economy was at a practical stand still. If you think getting a seized ICE working again is hard, try it with a global economy.

You can bitch all you want about inflation, but at the end of the day, nobody really knows what the right solution here was. We could’ve gone through another great depression event if not for global stimulus. And a few years of bad inflation and high costs will beat literally starving.

rhetorical fascism

aside from this, create a propaganda wing as big as the republicans, and make it accurate. Somehow.

not as representative as trump either apparently.

The far left is definitely in no ways representative of the average democratic voter either.

i mean sure, if you thought i was defining democracy, that’s one of the ways you can define it.

I was just making the argument that you shouldn’t give a fuck at all if you don’t even care to uphold the values of such democracy, yourself.

Also if we’re being semantically pedantic here, a democracy is technically just a form of collective enrollment in governance. The people collectively as a unit decide who best represents their values, and then they elect that person to a position they see fit for those values.

fun fact, we call people who are represented by politicians, constituents.

so why did you even bring up the data lmao? Just make the argument without it.

I’d also like to see more people vote, but i think we’re probably our own biggest obstacle here lmao.

yeah but the problem here is twofold, if we do it ourselves, they will accuse us of being what they say we are. If we do not, they will make up their own, and pretend like it’s happening.

It’s the anti fascist problem. If you’re anti fascist, you’re just fascist against fascism. There is no way to combat fascism without more fascism.

There isn’t a good solution here, unfortunately.

Americans value the speed and simplicity of a message over accuracy or nuance.

idiots who do not prefer the accuracy of transmission* FTFY

something that I would consider manipulative at best.

i really wish more people would do literally anything to not get got by this low level bullshit lmao. It’s so silly that people care so much about problems, but so little about information sources, or accuracy, or even factual nature.

I don’t know why you’re intent on blaming imaginary women for your hurt feelings

im not, i just have grievances with people not wording and articulating things correctly.

To be clear, i’ve already said i have no problem with like 95% of the post, if not all of it, my problem is specifically with how people word things. Arguably if we’re reading into this deeply my post is actually a satire of the problem at hand here, but that’s rather silly and nobody gives a fuck about clever satire.

I am dissatisfied with that deal.

and you prefer a second trump deal?

Like you can pretend like you aren’t satisfied here, but you’re being presented with a would you rather of, would you rather cut your arm a little bit, or stick a needle into your eye. And you sit there and go “yeah no i dont think i want any of these options” except you forgot to read the fine print where the second option is the default result.

just needs a subtle background hum and everything is complete.

How would you describe the Democrats immigration policy as of this year? Because they voted yes literally on a Republican immigration bill. They continued to champion that “hard border” bill throughout the election. The concept of a hard border was a Republican one that the Dems took and now the Republicans have gone to ethnic cleansing.

to be clear the “hard border bill” you’re talking about isn’t that hard. The two primary things it did were increase funding to the border patrol, ICE and the immigration judges. The primary issue at hand is twofold, massive influx of immigration to an unprecedented level. And the lack of infrastructure to handle it. When people come to america to claim asylum, they are by law, required to have an asylum trial. There are currently not enough judges to hold all of the trials that need to happen, thus people end up with multi year court dates, and stays in sanctuary cities. Some of these people will get through and become citizens, some of them wont, but for now, they’re under temporary status citizenship.

If you consider “funding the courts so people can get citizenship” to be a hard border bill, i question what a relaxed border policy for you would be.

Now to be fully transparent here, it does also constitute shutting down the border if more than 5000 migrants pass through in one day. Doesn’t require it, just allows for it to happen. There are arguments around this being unethical or even illegal immigration law. but a temporary shutdown likely beats the current mess we have right now (surrounding wait dates and what not)

If you’re talking about HR2, than that’s not a dem bill. Idk why we’re talking about it.

Dems are pro border wall now.

some of them are, but this is probably due to republican and conservative propaganda, they understand nothing about the border either.

Dems are on isreals side

do you have any stats on this? I recall seeing that support for israel is mostly in the older population. And republican leaning, as far as popular sentiment goes, it seems the majority of people agree that israel is probably being too aggressive and that we should do something about it. Unless your minimum buy in here is genocide in which case this is an untenable conversation and i can’t go any further.

Please go read up on the Democrats policy proposals from previous elections and compare to now.

i mean if we’re talking about the obama admin, they did a shit ton of deportation and bombing of the middle east. Idk what that’s worth to you. But it’s one of the admins of all time so. Policy proposal is a moot point anyway, so i won’t engage on those grounds.

A ideology that became popular in the US from Ronald fucking Regan. They are at their core an ideologically right wing org with a left wing base they hate and occasionally have to give concessions on.

i’m unsure what you mean by this, but it is my understanding that most of the US voting base in the dem party is moderate or generally liberal (soft left). And that a minority of it is left leaning (moderate left), or far left (hard left). Lemmy is a good example of the far left. And voter turnout seems to agree with this, considering that like 70 million people turned out to vote for kamala. If the majority of the population were as principled as people on lemmy i would expect maybe 50 million.

while decrying the evil college students

do you have an actual example of this? I know that trump has said that he would deport them, but i havent heard the harris campaign say anything of that nature yet.

The Dems concede to the left or they die to fascists.

i really don’t think it needs to. Maybe i’m wrong, but everything i understand about politics and sociology leads me to believe otherwise.

it is in fact politics, i will give you that one. Now if only the voting population was more capable of doing literally anything smarter than being ok at guessing sometimes…

well if you don’t consider upholding the values of the people within the government structure worth voting for, than maybe democracy isn’t the thing for you.

losing sure, but biden had historically high voter turnout, probably as a result of the mail in voting over covid.

This turn out is pretty high as well we’re looking at about 71 million votes right now. For an “unpopular candidate” this is pretty clearly, good turnout.

there are moderates, politically, the problem is that the political environment is so heavily galvanized they don’t really show up clearly.

Most conservative moderates are either going to vote trump (in which case they aren’t that much of a moderate) or they’re not, and they’re going to vote for dems, (which is more moderate)

The problem at hand is that moderates just don’t get any political attention, even though they’re like 30-40% of the voter base, if not more.

yeah, and those polices weren’t global tariffs, deleting the DOE, and fucking over most of the federal government.

ok so. I like the concept, it’s a good way to move.

HOWEVER there is one big problem. We can’t use this emotionally inflammatory rhetoric, because it’s what the right thrives on. You can quote me on this later, but i guarantee you if the right sees this they will call it “sexual eugenics” or something stupid.

literally all you have to do to make this a fully marketable and unbeatable position is to treat it like econ 101. Social interaction is most often based on simple contractual obligations. Those in question here, have failed, and thus, it is no longer contractually valid.

“the market for sex is simply untenable culturally, and in terms of healthcare, completely fucked. I no longer plan on having casual sex anytime soon” and suddenly it’s like 50x more reasonable and palatable than the previous statement.

and before anybody tells me “oh well it’s good for attention and marketing” yeah, if you want to spread the entirely wrong message. just look at the bear vs man debacle that happened a while ago.

although you have to be careful because the right will probably just tell you that this is the point, at least the religious part of it, in which case being inflammatory isn’t going to do shit anyway. Tough times we live in now, i guess.

but women get to blame men the other way around? Or are we not blaming anybody and i’m just not following.

I don’t keep up with this shit lol.

The problem is that for many women, sex always runs the risk of pregnancy, and they are actively making it extremely dangerous for us to be pregnant.

so then don’t have sex because it’s not economically or financially tenable. Not because “men are the scum of the earth”

There’s nothing wrong with a principled opinion, there’s everything wrong with a pointed attack founded on shaky grounds.

The left really fucking sucks at rhetoric, that’s one thing i’ve noticed.