Zaktor @ Zaktor @sopuli.xyz

Posts

9

Comments

3,258

Joined

2 yr. ago

Trust me guys, this time the Republicans will finally be done with Trump!

"He opposed" as in subtly redirecting the conversation to the preferred narrative of the opposition. He didn't even say that money shouldn't be spent, just that he was focused on the battleground seats. Which is barely a bullet point in a daily political activity summary, but became a whole story with a clickbait headline because news is about clicks, not importance.

The title is not supported by the article at all. Here's the entirety of its quote from Jeffries:

“Here’s the thing,” Jeffries told Jonathan Karl on ABC’s “This Week.” “I’m gonna really focus on trying to defeat Republican incumbents so we can take back control of the House of Representatives and begin the process of ending this national nightmare that’s being visited upon us by far-right extremism.”

It's at best dodging the question. I assume Jeffries will support his incumbents and isn't a friend to progressives in general, but this statement isn't making clear anything.

Holy crap is that transcript insane. The moment centrists are on the downswing Carville wants to split the vote. Also some nonsense about all employees having "a fiduciary duty to your employer".

And all this with disgraced anchor Chris Cuomo egging him on then at the last moment remembering he was supposed to pretend he was neutral.

Yeah, of you were in there and didn't have people on the outside who knew your status and could initiate proceedings on your behalf, how would you ever get out? You don't get phone calls or lawyers or court dates.

Ask Ilhan Omar. She's just a little representative and they wanted her gone. AIPAC can be a big fish in a small pond against a small number of targeted representatives who are already on shaky ground. They don't mean shit at the presidential level.

What could possibly go wrong with pairing the extremely old Biden with the even older Bernie in 2020?

By the time a VP is being chosen, she wouldn't be "a rep", she'd be the Democratic nominee for president a.k.a. the most important Democratic politician in the country.

The tolerance for "it's a loophole" or "it's a glitch" as an excuse from human beings with power and agency in a system that's never been built assuming it would be run by a computer is way too high.

Yeah, he could literally be a gang member (he's not) and have good reasons for priority deportation (he doesn't) and it wouldn't matter. He had a court order that prevented him being sent to El Salvador and another requiring his return and they haven't adhered to them. Anything else they want to do can be done from the US in US courts.

Newspapers really seem to not like to name judges. They cling to the fiction that judges are just dedicated and interchangeable servants of the law rather than give context that might open the door to people realizing the judiciary has been poisoned over the years by increasingly partisan appointments.

Who knows why he didn't ok it, but this sure demonstrates how claims that the United States can't stop Israel from committing war crimes are lies.

If the end result of their primates no longer being in a study is euthanization, I'm guessing they weren't going to live full and happy lives after the study ended normally. The argument is not that funding cuts will cause harm to an animal, it's that we abused an animal and now won't even gain a benefit.

They're literally 'entitled' to use Swiss roads. You don't need to ask police permission to drive somewhere. If they thought the caravan was going to park somewhere illegally, they could intervene then once an actual crime has been committed.

But none of this is about actual crime. It's just NIMBY racism.

Private prison corporations in the US must be pissed. What about America First!? We could build those gulags and extract that slave labor here on American soil, but globalist Trump is instead giving our tax dollars to some Mexicans.

Reread the comment, because you've entirely missed the point.

I agree in the sense that the way things played out the narrative can be he was right the whole time, so someone inclined to avoid conflict can excuse it, but even if you're right, you're still obligated to follow court orders until you successfully get it stayed or appealed. They got a lawful order from a court to turn around flights and just didn't. The order doesn't need to be at the end of an appeal to the Supreme Court before it has effect.

And that grew into protests and riots, so... what's your point?

Hey guys, guess what. Authoritarianism isn't trivial to beat. All the other authoritarian states in the world aren't just full of lazy people who didn't use the one simple trick. Turns out both propaganda works and a lot of people are actually scared of being murdered or sent to a gulag.

But again, you get none of that if you try to skip the first steps.

It's all boiling a frog. If he did that day one it would be over the line and cause response. Each step along the way that is eventually accepted makes the next step easier, which enables the one after that and so forth. They deported "criminals" not legally in the country with little protest, they faced little pushback when it turned out they weren't criminals, so they then moved on to those who are here legally. And as this is becoming mundane they're laying the groundwork for it to be citizens.

The only line they have is what the people will tolerate, and they're expanding that day by day.

Revolutions don't just spontaneously materialize from nothing, they grow from riots, that grow from peaceful protests, that grow from people complaining to each other in social settings. None of the early steps are sufficient, but they are the type of things that are necessary for the end result. There is no world where less dissenting online leads to more direct action.