I get that .ml is a Chinese-based server full of anti-west sentiments, but you guys have to recognize that the resolution to not strike Russian land itself is completely ridiculous, right?

Russia is waging total war on Ukraine. Other countries have been supplying arms under the premise of self defense, but the idea that one side of a war isn't allowed to be aggressive is straight up propaganda.

The "peace talks" that are coming are going to involve total surrender of Russian claimed land on Ukraine's part.

Somehow augmenting Russian defense forces with foreign armies is just poor old Russia reacting to a sucker punch while augmenting Ukraine's is tantamount to starting ww3.

The idea that Ukraine can't use foreign aid to strike back only really makes sense if you believe Ukraine owes Russia land in the first place. Otherwise, regardless of what side you're on, it's just walking on eggshells about escalation when the only one actually escalating anything is Russia.

Coming from someone who always votes left down the ticket because I live in a republican state hell hole:

There's a reason we want democrats in charge. They aren't perfect, but my state had a democrat governor (somehow) for 8 years until this year. The very first thing the supermajority red government did was axe the ethics board. The next thing they did was pass laws banning books that acknowledged gay culture at all and a unilateral bathroom bill with felony penalties.

The "both sides are the different flavors of fascism" take only works when you're completely blind to what republicans are actually out there doing.

1. "Handset" is obfuscating legalese to refer to a cell phone in a way intending to distance the meaning of the word from the thing that the old and technologically illiterate people who rule on this use every day.

2. I'm no fan of their strategy, but cell phone providers have claimed for a long time that filling your phone with unremovable bloatware causes the overall price to decrease. Their argument is most likely that they will have to charge more once the propagators of that bloatware realize that they can no longer force it on people and wedge that as a reason to pay less to carriers.

3. The reality is that cell phones are priced based on what people will buy anyway and carriers pocket as much of the money as they can that third parties pay them for their bloatware. Ultimately because of that this ruling hurts their bottom line, but the above reasoning gives plausible deniability in the face of the law as it is interpreted by old technologically illiterate lawmakers

I think it's not necessarily a contradiction to hold your pro-choice and anti-death penalty stance, but it's still a contradiction to hold the pro-life and pro-death penalty stance if your reasoning behind the pro-life stance is that all life is sacred.

I agree that a person's body autonomy and the state's power to execute citizens should not overlap, but I still think that giving the "all life is sacred" line to justify pro-life and then being pro-death penalty "because some people deserve to die" amounts to hypocrisy.

Sure but demoncrats are having post birth abortions and controlling hurricanes and rigging elections and causing my taco bell dinner to cost more! So what's the problem with stopping blue haired nymphos from killing babies?

-The average conservative voter

Turns out you can get away with a lot of blatantly evil things if you just convince your entire voter base that the only reliable news source is a Republican owned "entertainment" propaganda outlet

A "boys club" scandal a couple years ago where the male higher-ups only hired women who would tolerate being sexually abused. Some ex-employees described it as "company culture" that propagated for a decade or more. There was an investigation after some women spoke out that led to a lawsuit, several top level managers being fired, and a couple CEOs being scrutinized really hard.

All of this is off the top of my head and maybe somewhat inaccurate, but that's the gist of it.

Edit: Here's an article for you

Assuming bad faith over anyone who disagrees with you

libs are so cruel and violent

This is what leftist lemmy actually is. Voices of reason being underscored by the very same bad faith assumptions from a "morally superior" position.

All so you can feel better about the fact that people with your moral standing have zero power here while the rest of us actually try to keep this country from going tits up.

Do you honestly think the people you label as libs want genocide?

Well if you're so smart, how are they going to track your location otherwise?

I don't have first-hand experience, but from what I understand the way they make money off of those tablet screens they put in cars is by licensing proprietary software that other companies want you to have no choice but to use. That's why models with no screens are disappearing from the major car makers

Here's the thing, a weak Democrat candidate meant the GOP could ride the curtail of a natural red wave born from voter dissatisfaction into another Trump presidency. They didn't have to try faced with Biden so they didn't have as many opportunities to show their incompetence.

Now democrats have rallied and the writing is on the wall that Trump isn't good enough just by the virtue of being the republican choice. He actually has to try, which he hasn't done since 2016, and he's pretty bad at trying.

The word you're looking for is "euphemism". The media always does this garbage to make the party of traitors seen like they have a point

Welcome to sugarfoots, sugarfoot

It's the natural conclusion of the strategy republicans set into motion to manipulate their base.

It started just after Watergate. Nixon was facing massive calls for justice from both sides. Republican think tanks realized that their base of conservatives consumed news from all sources that informed their mostly unbiased decision to hold their guy accountable. So those republican think tanks devised a plan to create a conservative news outlet that explicitly demonized other news so that the conservative base would never turn on one of their own again. That strategy was realized in the 90's with the creation of Fox News.

Since then, conservative media has been slowly transforming politics from the perspective of the average conservative into a team sport, where the main motivation isn't "who runs the country better" but rather "my team is better than yours".

It wasn't so pervasive 20 years ago, but conservative media has found themselves with a base that now only responds to the outrage they've been conditioning them with, and that has created the raging confrontational assholes you see today.

Being a conservative doesn't mean what it used to. And that's because the Republican leadership robbed conservatives of that in order to maintain control of their base.

In theory that's how it works already. In practice, there is currently no disadvantage to appointing partisan judges and no system in which to objectively measure partisanship of a candidate. What that means is that there will always be partisan parties appointing partisan judges and there will always be candidates who claimed to be neutral who will be either accused of or proven to be partisan anyway.

In the current system true neutrality on the bench does not exist

My wife gets an honorable mention for being able to recite the "what did you say to me you little bitch" copypasta in its entirety on a dime and as fast as she can say it

These kinds of people, the ones who warp and twist society for their own gain, will always be around in some form or another. So will the people they fool into ushering in their brand of fascism.

I'll grant you that the "anti-woke" crowd is particularly brain dead though

You'd think it would be a win, but honestly Trump is a clown. More "centrists" who detest Trump might rally around someone like DeSantis, that's what I'm afraid of.

I know posting ben garrison is cheating, but this was years ago. They'd definitely latch on to the name as a tool to degrade him.

Hell, they've been trying to make the word "kamala" derogatory. Sorry Pete, even though you'd be as good a candidate as any, you've got butt in your name

I like the "formally" vs "formerly" suggesting Elon is never going to get away from Twitter in favor of X

Got called an llm arguing with a Trumper on one of those posts. On my 13 year old account. By his 3-month old account.

I just think it's incredible how many conservatives are completely willing to handwave pedophilia as long as it's their guy, bots or no.