Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
Just gave yourself over to the media machine, huh. Nuance, understanding, and empathy be damned. You hate to see it.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
No, dogmeat did not say any of the bolded part. You added that part in on your own.
More importantly than you being wrong, however, is that you're providing cover for people engaging in bigotry. That's shameful.
On October 22 2024 11:09 DOgMeAt wrote: mindful of what? It's democrats who are out of touch. eg tampon tim
Ensuring women have access to basic healthcare products is being out of touch?
I get that you want to "make America great again", I just didn't think you were talking about the 1930's.
'Out of touch' now means that everyone else is out of touch with white men.
out of touch with a weird subset of white men*.
Because I'm a white man and I want women to have access to basic healthcare products.
I second that, although admittedly I don't know if I'm in the minority, in my country; I don't know if a majority of American white men simply don't care to make sure that everyone who needs basic healthcare products has access to them.
On October 22 2024 11:09 DOgMeAt wrote: mindful of what? It's democrats who are out of touch. eg tampon tim
Ensuring women have access to basic healthcare products is being out of touch?
I get that you want to "make America great again", I just didn't think you were talking about the 1930's.
'Out of touch' now means that everyone else is out of touch with white men.
out of touch with a weird subset of white men*.
Because I'm a white man and I want women to have access to basic healthcare products.
I second that, although admittedly I don't know if I'm in the minority, in my country; I don't know if a majority of American white men simply don't care to make sure that everyone who needs basic healthcare products has access to them.
I think a significant minority of white men in America hear "tampon Tim" and giggle. I don't think it's about access to basic healthcare products at this stage.
On October 22 2024 07:48 Uldridge wrote: The existential threat is there, no matter who wins though. Trump is just a symptom. He's the voice channeling all the conspiratorial, schizo, out of touch, disenfranchised people. How do you turn the tide? At the same time: why are these people like this? HOW did this happen? It's time for some really serious root cause analysis, because just brushing it off as "tsk, just impressionable, gullible, stupid, insane people" isn't going to cut it for the third election in a row. There are people thinking the hurricane was manmade to steal lithium. I don't understand reality any more.
We need something better than "they're too far gone". I'm actually starting to feel quite anxious for you guys, no matter the outcome. Let's just hope everything stays more or less calm at the turn of the year.
I want to talk about this seriously, without being pulled into the Dogmeat discussion.
I think a core reason for this is that these people have noticed they they are getting the short end of the stick. It is a fact that a lot of things only get better for those at the very top, and get worse for everyone else.
Money and resources accumulate more on more onto ever fewer multibillionaires. Housing is getting more expensive for normal people, you have to work more for less (real) money, things that our parents generation took for granted seem utterly unreachable for us. (Affording a house and a family on a single normal income, for example). Stuff gets more expensive while pay stagnates. Natural disasters happen more often.
So there are some real grievances that lead to people being unhappy in general.
Then there is social media. Social media is broken and it breaks people. Social media is designed to make people angry and unhappy, as long as that keeps them hooked to the platform. Anger is a very good driver for this. This is both something that just happens on social media, and also something that gets increased through enemy action. Russia has long been fighting a hybrid war against the west, and using social media and other avenues to sow discontent has been a very, very successful endeavor for Putin.
If we want to make stuff better, the top three issues are:
Wealth inequality Climate Change Social Media
Fixing them is not easy, and not even something that you can get majorities to actually think is necessary. Yet if we don't manage to do that, things will only get worse on the societal front.
The rich getting richer is a feature of capitalism that people are okay with, as long as they feel that they also get some share of that pie. That is no longer the case. We need to solve this.
And i have no idea how to tackle social media. It is a drug that destroys us. It is basically heroin. We need to devolop some societal inoculation against the bad effects from it, in the same way that we eventually managed to develop societal resistance to mass alcoholism.
There isn't a silver bullet for fixing social media, but making it so that social media companies are legally responsible for the content that's publicly posted on their platforms would be a good start.
For example, here in the UK it's possible for people to be prosecuted for inciting racial hatred using platforms like Twitter. Imagine if Twitter themselves were also held responsible each time this happened? They are amplifying these voices by giving them an audience, and they're profiting from doing that, so they should be punished every time someone is convicted of posting illegal content.
Of course, this will never happen because these companies are too big and too rich, but it would be a good first step.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
No, dogmeat did not say any of the bolded part. You added that part in on your own.
More importantly than you being wrong, however, is that you're providing cover for people engaging in bigotry. That's shameful.
for you its bigotry, accepting physical reality for everyone else. tbh i didnt know ppl like you existed outside of twitter. It makes any discussion pointless when you cant comprehend reality
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
Hadn't you heard? Cutting off your nose to spite your face is the smart thing to do!
I mean its not, its about not restricting tampons to only womens bathrooms, so that they can be placed in gender neutral bathrooms and spaces like locker rooms. Republicans specifically made a stink about the law that they wanted to restrict it to womens bathroom and the DFL said "that's silly why would you restrict it like that it helps no one". If you've ever been in a public bathroom, a bathroom in a residence you live in, or a lockerroom you can tell that the only difference between the two is urinals in the men's locker room. Women don't need special equipment to go to the bathroom or change. You're allowed to make a lockroom for just men or women depending on the day.
Even if it were about allowing Tampons to be in men's spaces whats the issue with hygiene products being made available to men? Do men not have women that they interact with that may need a tampon?
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
Yeah I agree BJ Republicans are in it for the cruelty and want to maximize just how much they can inflict it on other people. Conservatives are more than happy to go along with it and don't have any logical or moral reasoning behind what they do. MAGA people don't even deny this they're really happy to tell you about the people they hate and want to be punished. They really don't give a shit about how anything on the platform actually helps them they're just happy with the hate they get to justify themselves with.
On October 22 2024 07:48 Uldridge wrote: The existential threat is there, no matter who wins though. Trump is just a symptom. He's the voice channeling all the conspiratorial, schizo, out of touch, disenfranchised people. How do you turn the tide? At the same time: why are these people like this? HOW did this happen? It's time for some really serious root cause analysis, because just brushing it off as "tsk, just impressionable, gullible, stupid, insane people" isn't going to cut it for the third election in a row. There are people thinking the hurricane was manmade to steal lithium. I don't understand reality any more.
We need something better than "they're too far gone". I'm actually starting to feel quite anxious for you guys, no matter the outcome. Let's just hope everything stays more or less calm at the turn of the year.
I want to talk about this seriously, without being pulled into the Dogmeat discussion.
I think a core reason for this is that these people have noticed they they are getting the short end of the stick. It is a fact that a lot of things only get better for those at the very top, and get worse for everyone else.
Money and resources accumulate more on more onto ever fewer multibillionaires. Housing is getting more expensive for normal people, you have to work more for less (real) money, things that our parents generation took for granted seem utterly unreachable for us. (Affording a house and a family on a single normal income, for example). Stuff gets more expensive while pay stagnates. Natural disasters happen more often.
So there are some real grievances that lead to people being unhappy in general.
Then there is social media. Social media is broken and it breaks people. Social media is designed to make people angry and unhappy, as long as that keeps them hooked to the platform. Anger is a very good driver for this. This is both something that just happens on social media, and also something that gets increased through enemy action. Russia has long been fighting a hybrid war against the west, and using social media and other avenues to sow discontent has been a very, very successful endeavor for Putin.
If we want to make stuff better, the top three issues are:
Wealth inequality Climate Change Social Media
Fixing them is not easy, and not even something that you can get majorities to actually think is necessary. Yet if we don't manage to do that, things will only get worse on the societal front.
The rich getting richer is a feature of capitalism that people are okay with, as long as they feel that they also get some share of that pie. That is no longer the case. We need to solve this.
And i have no idea how to tackle social media. It is a drug that destroys us. It is basically heroin. We need to devolop some societal inoculation against the bad effects from it, in the same way that we eventually managed to develop societal resistance to mass alcoholism.
So for the underlined parts, is the important objective to work on communicating that Democrats are trying much harder than Republicans to address wealth inequality and climate change? Because Democrats are at least proposing ideas, but then they're being blocked by Republicans. If Republican voters sincerely think wealth inequality and climate change are legitimate issues, but still vote for Republicans who oppose the interests of the middle class / non-millionaires, then there's a miscommunication problem going on.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
Hadn't you heard? Cutting off your nose to spite your face is the smart thing to do!
I prefer to start with Hanlon's Razor in situations like these: we should assume sincere ignorance first, as opposed to first assuming malicious intent. That way we could at least attempt to engage in a good-faith dialogue. If we assume what Bill Maher suggests - that Republicans are purposely being evil - then it might be harder to change minds.
On October 22 2024 07:48 Uldridge wrote: The existential threat is there, no matter who wins though. Trump is just a symptom. He's the voice channeling all the conspiratorial, schizo, out of touch, disenfranchised people. How do you turn the tide? At the same time: why are these people like this? HOW did this happen? It's time for some really serious root cause analysis, because just brushing it off as "tsk, just impressionable, gullible, stupid, insane people" isn't going to cut it for the third election in a row. There are people thinking the hurricane was manmade to steal lithium. I don't understand reality any more.
We need something better than "they're too far gone". I'm actually starting to feel quite anxious for you guys, no matter the outcome. Let's just hope everything stays more or less calm at the turn of the year.
I want to talk about this seriously, without being pulled into the Dogmeat discussion.
I think a core reason for this is that these people have noticed they they are getting the short end of the stick. It is a fact that a lot of things only get better for those at the very top, and get worse for everyone else.
Money and resources accumulate more on more onto ever fewer multibillionaires. Housing is getting more expensive for normal people, you have to work more for less (real) money, things that our parents generation took for granted seem utterly unreachable for us. (Affording a house and a family on a single normal income, for example). Stuff gets more expensive while pay stagnates. Natural disasters happen more often.
So there are some real grievances that lead to people being unhappy in general.
Then there is social media. Social media is broken and it breaks people. Social media is designed to make people angry and unhappy, as long as that keeps them hooked to the platform. Anger is a very good driver for this. This is both something that just happens on social media, and also something that gets increased through enemy action. Russia has long been fighting a hybrid war against the west, and using social media and other avenues to sow discontent has been a very, very successful endeavor for Putin.
If we want to make stuff better, the top three issues are:
Wealth inequality Climate Change Social Media
Fixing them is not easy, and not even something that you can get majorities to actually think is necessary. Yet if we don't manage to do that, things will only get worse on the societal front.
The rich getting richer is a feature of capitalism that people are okay with, as long as they feel that they also get some share of that pie. That is no longer the case. We need to solve this.
And i have no idea how to tackle social media. It is a drug that destroys us. It is basically heroin. We need to devolop some societal inoculation against the bad effects from it, in the same way that we eventually managed to develop societal resistance to mass alcoholism.
So for the underlined parts, is the important objective to work on communicating that Democrats are trying much harder than Republicans to address wealth inequality and climate change? Because Democrats are at least proposing ideas, but then they're being blocked by Republicans. If Republican voters sincerely think wealth inequality and climate change are legitimate issues, but still vote for Republicans who oppose the interests of the middle class / non-millionaires, then there's a miscommunication problem going on.
I don't think that republican voters think that wealth inequality is a problem. I do however think that wealth inequality is a main reason for many of the things that make republicans angry. But i don't think they view things like that.
A main point of the republican party is to prevent that attribution from ever occuring by distracting their voters in lots of different ways. Rich people don't like people thinking about wealth inequality, and they have figured out a lot of tools to prevent that from happening.
On October 22 2024 07:48 Uldridge wrote: The existential threat is there, no matter who wins though. Trump is just a symptom. He's the voice channeling all the conspiratorial, schizo, out of touch, disenfranchised people. How do you turn the tide? At the same time: why are these people like this? HOW did this happen? It's time for some really serious root cause analysis, because just brushing it off as "tsk, just impressionable, gullible, stupid, insane people" isn't going to cut it for the third election in a row. There are people thinking the hurricane was manmade to steal lithium. I don't understand reality any more.
We need something better than "they're too far gone". I'm actually starting to feel quite anxious for you guys, no matter the outcome. Let's just hope everything stays more or less calm at the turn of the year.
I want to talk about this seriously, without being pulled into the Dogmeat discussion.
I think a core reason for this is that these people have noticed they they are getting the short end of the stick. It is a fact that a lot of things only get better for those at the very top, and get worse for everyone else.
Money and resources accumulate more on more onto ever fewer multibillionaires. Housing is getting more expensive for normal people, you have to work more for less (real) money, things that our parents generation took for granted seem utterly unreachable for us. (Affording a house and a family on a single normal income, for example). Stuff gets more expensive while pay stagnates. Natural disasters happen more often.
So there are some real grievances that lead to people being unhappy in general.
Then there is social media. Social media is broken and it breaks people. Social media is designed to make people angry and unhappy, as long as that keeps them hooked to the platform. Anger is a very good driver for this. This is both something that just happens on social media, and also something that gets increased through enemy action. Russia has long been fighting a hybrid war against the west, and using social media and other avenues to sow discontent has been a very, very successful endeavor for Putin.
If we want to make stuff better, the top three issues are:
Wealth inequality Climate Change Social Media
Fixing them is not easy, and not even something that you can get majorities to actually think is necessary. Yet if we don't manage to do that, things will only get worse on the societal front.
The rich getting richer is a feature of capitalism that people are okay with, as long as they feel that they also get some share of that pie. That is no longer the case. We need to solve this.
And i have no idea how to tackle social media. It is a drug that destroys us. It is basically heroin. We need to devolop some societal inoculation against the bad effects from it, in the same way that we eventually managed to develop societal resistance to mass alcoholism.
So for the underlined parts, is the important objective to work on communicating that Democrats are trying much harder than Republicans to address wealth inequality and climate change? Because Democrats are at least proposing ideas, but then they're being blocked by Republicans. If Republican voters sincerely think wealth inequality and climate change are legitimate issues, but still vote for Republicans who oppose the interests of the middle class / non-millionaires, then there's a miscommunication problem going on.
I don't think that republican voters think that wealth inequality is a problem. I do however think that wealth inequality is a main reason for many of the things that make republicans angry. But i don't think they view things like that.
A main point of the republican party is to prevent that attribution from ever occuring by distracting their voters in lots of different ways. Rich people don't like people thinking about wealth inequality, and they have figured out a lot of tools to prevent that from happening.
Such as how Trump blames immigrants and the less fortunate for everything bad in society.
People have this idea that, if they don't understand another person, the other person is wrong. "I don't understand you" = "you're wrong". This is one of the things that leads to so many conflicts. The assumption that other people can only be right if we understand what they say or do is inherently flawed.
The other problem is that those with power actively exploit the human condition (such as the above) for their own gain.
On October 22 2024 11:24 BlackJack wrote: Bill Maher has a theory that Republicans love the crazy politicians even more because it sends it even stronger signal to the left that "literally anything is better than what you're offering."
If that theory is correct, then it proves that Republicans are indeed delusional and out of touch, because those Republican politicians aren't better for our country or our people. Republicans are just plain wrong, if that theory is correct. I don’t know if that theory is correct or not, and I have no idea if some Republicans are trolling with purposely terrible leaders just to stick it to the libs, but they'd be hurting themselves too.
As dogmeat said, they are arguably less delusional and out of touch than the people believing a man is a woman because he put on a wig and stuffed his shirt with giant inflatable tits.
No, dogmeat did not say any of the bolded part. You added that part in on your own.
More importantly than you being wrong, however, is that you're providing cover for people engaging in bigotry. That's shameful.
for you its bigotry, accepting physical reality for everyone else. tbh i didnt know ppl like you existed outside of twitter. It makes any discussion pointless when you cant comprehend reality
On October 22 2024 21:09 MJG wrote: There isn't a silver bullet for fixing social media, but making it so that social media companies are legally responsible for the content that's publicly posted on their platforms would be a good start.
For example, here in the UK it's possible for people to be prosecuted for inciting racial hatred using platforms like Twitter. Imagine if Twitter themselves were also held responsible each time this happened? They are amplifying these voices by giving them an audience, and they're profiting from doing that, so they should be punished every time someone is convicted of posting illegal content.
Of course, this will never happen because these companies are too big and too rich, but it would be a good first step.
I disagree with this. This is like holding city major accountable for something, someone said on the street of this city. I also think that ability to moderate is part of the power those companies have. I would rather have them not being able to moderate any content without specific court order (specific as not "delete any post with "faiuihreuah" in it, but rather "delete all the posts and account of x y"), this would curtail their power more than anything else. As it is now its like having private security company instead of police (to keep comparision to the city going). I also think social media should be strictly 18+ at the very least.
On October 22 2024 21:30 Sermokala wrote: I mean its not, its about not restricting tampons to only womens bathrooms, so that they can be placed in gender neutral bathrooms and spaces like locker rooms. Republicans specifically made a stink about the law that they wanted to restrict it to womens bathroom and the DFL said "that's silly why would you restrict it like that it helps no one". If you've ever been in a public bathroom, a bathroom in a residence you live in, or a lockerroom you can tell that the only difference between the two is urinals in the men's locker room. Women don't need special equipment to go to the bathroom or change. You're allowed to make a lockroom for just men or women depending on the day.
Even if it were about allowing Tampons to be in men's spaces whats the issue with hygiene products being made available to men? Do men not have women that they interact with that may need a tampon?
Agreed. It doesn't even look like DogMeat understands what Tim Walz did and how it's beneficial to students. It's also interesting to see how scared some men can get if they so much as see a tampon, and god forbid we normalize students helping each other out.
EPT
