If history tells us anything, fascists love advertising that they're actually socialists and that you should definitely vote for them. And North Carolina got a little taste of what that might feel like last year.
Santa's the one buying all the personal information because he has to update the naughty list
Does this also apply to primaries? My ruby red state has an open primary, and our democrat ran unopposed, so I voted for the less "trumpy" republican for state positions. Excited that my state will have the PSL candidate on the ticket this November though.
Joining/starting unions and mass strikes would be much faster if you are able. Sure, vote too, but the premise of this post specifically says they don't care what you think. Make them care.
Representatives chosen by sortition like jury duty would be more representative compared to what we currently have, and that's such a wild thought.
Man, you're really pinned on the whole "liberalism isn't a dirty word" thing. I don't really care at all about what your definition or anyone else's definition is for moral and political philosophies since we'd all be talking past each other. Everyone has a different perception of what it means to be a "true" liberal, so it's not even worth discussing. I think it would be fair to say that one of your guiding principles is to protect people from those who would deny their liberty. Military might is one way to make sure this is obtained, but you're really glossing over all the "non defense" measures of our military. If your liberty comes at the cost of someone's liberty a world away, I'd say it's worth trying to minimize that, right? Or does your comfort and safety inherently cost the lives of others?
Considering the American flavor of violent imperialism justified where Russia and China's as unjustified is odd. It's all unjustified as far as I'm concerned, but it's pretty telling why you'd omit the US in your spiel. The US is just as much a part of the problem as Russia and China. The world isn't a safe place in large part because of our country's actions. This arms race of global violence only ends one way- the destruction of the human race.
Shrugging and saying "that's just how the modern world works" isn't a viable excuse when we're the ones making the world work this way and you're an active supporter of continuing this reality along the same path. I wouldn't personally call you liberal since you seem pretty conservative to me, but if you are dead set on defending the honor of the word liberal, I'd suggest growing a spine for anything other than your personal comfort.
How about, instead of arguing definitions of words that are constantly misused by people who want liberalism to mean anything stretching from neoliberalism to communism (which is weird how you'd take conservative's definition of liberal at face value), you talk about how much your individual ideas have ratcheted to the right instead? I'm also not the original person who blamed your position on your liberalism.
Insular, America-centric, "we must have the most firepower to protect us from the evil people", is absolutely the rhetoric used by republicans in 2008. Maybe if you traveled back in time, you'd be voting for Mitt Romney regardless of how safe his dog was. It's entirely a fear-based position to have, and that's been the republican MO for a while. Our military industrial complex makes us less safe because it constantly creates situations that guarantees its own existence. Protecting your comfort through global threat of violence is a cowardly position to uphold.
Ah yes, if you're the biggest and most violent bully in the school yard, you don't have to worry about being beat up. Just say "they hate us for our freedom" in the mirror 3 times while ignoring any sort of actions we do as a country that might make other people or countries want to attack us. I swear, your exact message could've been said by the average republican in 2008.
Blackstone wants democrats to win while Blackrock wants republicans to win. To corporations, the choice between biden and trump is like Coke vs Pepsi because they largely win either way even if they’re a bit disappointed they have to drink Pepsi when they wanted Coke.
If America is going to go through the trouble to convert everything to metric, might as well switch to base 10/decimal time as well lol
And when you finally find some helpful forum with content from 15 years ago, you’ll have someone be like “GUYS I FIGURED IT OUT! Here’s a [broken] link to someone else who solved it” with a dozen or so “Thanks, that solved the issue immediately for me!” Comments after it.
I was more of a Zork Nemesis kid, but I’ll definitely be getting this.
I really wish the x axis was average distance traveled and the y axis was danger.
I get that the way this graph was designed was for humor and to highlight hot air balloons, but if you’re looking for a safe vehicle for a specific distance, it really doesn’t help out in any way. It probably wouldn’t be safe to drive my car across the Atlantic Ocean.
Horses are technically more dangerous to ride than motorcycles. It’s just that motorcycles attract a kind of people who like doing backflips in front of a semi truck.
Microplastics from heavy vehicles scrubbing away their tires is a bigger issue than tailpipe emissions, which is why tailpipe emissions are the only thing focused on with regards to regulatory standards. Can’t have people thinking BEVs are similar/worse for the environment than a small car.
As a Miata enjoyer, I’ve always had a soft spot for the Boxster. It’s probably my favorite Porsche other than the ones that are impossible to buy (speedster, Carrera GT, 550 spyder, 918 spyder)
If she didn’t have any bombs to write on in the first place, people might not have such an issue with biden.