N=1 and all, but last night they did an absolutely stellar job with the high risk forcast, and under the strain of this admin no less.

Ew its a bidet, not an enema dude

Reading this on a toilet without a bidet :(

Please send your prayers

Holy fuck i actually sighed relief

Since journalism! Here is his take quoted directly

[On the failure of libertarian politics]

The decade that followed — the roaring 1920s — was so strong that historians have forgotten the depression that started it. The 1920s were the last decade in American history during which one could be genuinely optimistic about politics. Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron.

And his ““clarification”” of the obvious misogynism in the original.

It would be absurd to suggest that women’s votes will be taken away or that this would solve the political problems that vex us. While I don’t think any class of people should be disenfranchised, I have little hope that voting will make things better.

Emphasis mine. You’re to telling me, that even in the beginning questioning the notion of womens suffrage isn’t inherently misogynistic. And then follows that up with “nono we shouldn’t disenfranchise, BUT I don’t believe in democracy anyway” for his retort. I would love to live in your alternate reality where you can defend Thiel to begin with… I thought MLs want to eat the rich.

Hell most ‘liberals’ i know don’t even know what political theory matches their alignment. I wholly doubt that 20% polled are completely okay with this court giving up… critique of liberal institutions and representatives is a completely different matter than trying to talk down to people who may not fully understand or comprehend even their own positions, even if well intentioned.

The elder liberals I talk with are not filled in, still obtaining most of their knowledge of events through corporate media. That isn’t their fault, but that won’t keep me from vehemently criticizing, for example, liberal MSNBC and their coverage over say a particular conflict in the middle east. Now when they do coverage of Trump, again i will be noting their passiveness and complicity, even when agreeing with their notions. Those disagreements from a fundamentally human point (say war not generally being a good thing) are usually something liberal individuals completely agree with, but do not have an alternative narrative to fall to once they start taking apart and questioning what they’ve been told, therefore they’re less likely to begin with.

The liberals of our representatives, like Chuck Schumer, have absolutely no excuse to turn their back on their constituents, but they have an interest in ‘business as usual’. We should not hold back in our push to remove such spineless, uncaring, nihilistic representatives as soon as possible. And frankly, if you haven’t at the bare minimum written to your representatives, i don’t want to hear what your idea of a strategy is.

I would wager that some American demographics are a lot more selfish than others… I digress, because it doesn’t change two facts:

Media has long manufactured consent (even lying in doing so 🤯, see: Iraq) for various attrocities committed by the united states government, regardless of popular support.

And second, the gutting of social security by bypassing budget approvals (infraction of sep. of powers) and kidnapping of students based on ideology and without due process (just authortarianism) are part of the same issue currently afflicting the US. If for some reason individuals drive a cudgel between these issues, they’re more than either ignorant to or complicit with the issue they whatabout over.

But on that, given your anecdote is taken from a livestream chat, you may be underestimating just how much astroturfing takes place. We’ve known part of the playbook is to completely overwhelm our media intake, desaturating perceived potency of headlines and happenings. I would go as far to take wedging issues like that to be another tactic… as we’ve seen that strategy successfully work to drive flimsy democrats to 180 on LGBT rights.

If you assume the worst of the people you will need to work with, you won’t get to influence them enough to understand the nature of the issue at hand

But hey! We aren’t talking about innocents now being slaughtered by our operations halfway across the world (again)… almost like a recurring theme…

The senate intelligence committee meeting that happened a couple hours ago made me start greying, Tusli Gabard in particular