necromaunzer.bsky.social
I promise I'll tell y'all if I hit the jackpot or or happen to get born into emerald mines cash. Until then, please use your time and DMs accordingly.
2,712 posts
1,066 followers
921 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
They're cursed to hype up all his brain farts.
comment in response to
post
That's the standard legalised middleman model in the US:
1) regular people give them money
2) no, that's basically it.
comment in response to
post
Kermit has not sworn undying blind loyalty to the cult enabling and enriching the Glorious Leader, so he gets the bad words.
comment in response to
post
Rule of thumb: he's lying when he opens his mouth, but seriously, an objective review of the results to see whether the numbers do in fact show a distribution as observed in the second video would do wonders for calming my mind.
comment in response to
post
He was not on drugs, as any drug tes- as his words and only his words will insistently tell you!
comment in response to
post
Don't worry, the people we give your money to will be fine on their yachts.
comment in response to
post
Except for criminal laws. Or finance laws. Or the Constitution. All that shit is too woke.
comment in response to
post
That knee doesn't look happy.
comment in response to
post
I wonder if there was some sort of test to clear up this question once and for all. Or are there only standards for *elected* officials who chainsaw through the public infrastructure?
comment in response to
post
Not at all. It eliminated all oversight over Elon's companies, so... heist accomplished.
comment in response to
post
I'm looking forward to see whether this all-but-admission www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9gC...
will turn out to have anything to do with this interesting statistical curiosity: www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOQ-...
comment in response to
post
Elections, yes, but there are elections in Russia too. The question is will they be representative of the will of the voters?
Just like Trump put a RFK in charge of protecting the people's health from threats like RFK, the administration's goal is certainly not enabling fair elections.
comment in response to
post
Do you think that election integrity will still be given by that point?
comment in response to
post
But really you're just asking for the party whose business model isn't distributing pardons in exchange for bribes and favours.
comment in response to
post
Hoping that the insurrectionist who pardoned 1500 of his fellow insurrectionists plans to abide by the outcomes of future elections is cute.
comment in response to
post
My fear is not that Trump succeeds at winning votes. My fear is that now that he's in that position, he will wield it to destroy any and all resistance. And judging by his actions since the election, that is exactly his plan.
comment in response to
post
You don't seem to understand. Trump's allies do not need to fear criminal prosecution while he is in power. Trump himself is supposedly criminally immune for as long as he can throw around pardons. Trump is taking the view that any checks and balances to his power are illegitimate.
comment in response to
post
Just let them illegally destroy as much as they want, maybe they'll get voted out after being in a position to hollow out voting rights for four years. Got it.
comment in response to
post
What if I need more space?
Well, maybe get a reasonably sized truck instead of half a tank welded to a bed roughly the same size.
comment in response to
post
It's exactly as you said. The party representing the richest few that has designed the current voting system to their liking is now, thanks to this voting system, all-powerful and that is good and just and suggesting that there could or should be anything different is mere propaganda.
comment in response to
post
You don't understand - social security is money that does *not* go into the pockets of Trump's ultra-wealthy cronies, so the Ministry of Propaganda, sorry, Fox News has assigned the Bad Words to it, like "waste" and "fraud".
comment in response to
post
"Overgrown" is a matter of perspective. When I see a "perfect" British lawn and imagine the human equivalent to it, I see endless fields of boots with sawn-off stumps sticking out of them as far as the eye can see.
comment in response to
post
I think I have sufficiently proven that I can run all the way to that fight I keep losing for some reason only to lose again for probably the same reason which I could figure out by running and losing more. But that gameplay loop is for people who enjoy running and losing. I have better things to do
comment in response to
post
It is well and truly hopeless. Don't fall into the Republican's ploy to think of anything other than complete and utter surrender to the current situation.
comment in response to
post
No, you're absolutely right. There are no solutions and to imply otherwise is to fall for Republican propaganda.
comment in response to
post
Okay, you've convinced me. Dems are helpless in all of this and there is nothing that can be done to oppose the oligarchy. Only thing left to do is to keep watching how the rigged system puts Trump into absolute power while at the same time patting yourself on the back for a job well done.
comment in response to
post
Gerrimandering elections until only their voters can vote means that convincing more voters who no longer can vote is irrelevant.
comment in response to
post
The Dems are simply not addressing the illegal attacks from the other side so when the systems that the Rs cripple fail, being good within the now failed system is no longer relevant.
comment in response to
post
Don't get me wrong, the Dems are by far the strongest party that's working within the political process. They are better party at playing politics, no questions asked.
BUT that simply has no effect when their opponents are not even trying to do that and are instead setting fire to the entire system.
comment in response to
post
Everybody - yes, including him - knows that he's not within his legal powers. He just says whatever it takes to keep getting away with breaking the laws.
comment in response to
post
Not with that attitude, you can't...
comment in response to
post
Weapons do tend to have negative effects on the target, yes.
comment in response to
post
I do recognise that they are trying to work within the rules, but they do not. For decades now, they have been working within the rules as interpreted by the Republicans, which might as well be "I can do everything, you can do nothing". Scratch that, that is *literally* the understanding Rs have.
comment in response to
post
Insofar as they are ineffective at facing a bully, yes. They are still engaging as if their opponents were interested in honest discourse rather than taking whatever they can get away with, rules be damned. Fault or no fault, whatever they're trying to achieve, it's either not working or bad goals.
comment in response to
post
With your life.
comment in response to
post
Short version, in every thinkable scenario, they claim that in that specific scenario, they can do what they want, and that specific scenario is basically always. And they keep getting away with it.
comment in response to
post
That's the thing: Rs have convinced enough people that in the very specific constellation they are in, they may do what benefits them. Funnily enough, if the situation is the exact opposite, then in THAT specific constellation, they say they may do what benefits them then too.
comment in response to
post
In terms off effectiveness when it comes to reaching their goals? Yes. When it comes to the goals that they respectively try to achieve, no.
comment in response to
post
Laws are only as good as the people executing them.
comment in response to
post
And this string of failures to defend against R attacks on the rules is just a few examples of exactly what's meant when people say the Dems don't fight enough for what the law would technically allow them.
comment in response to
post
Merrick Garland would have been a possible answer here. The reason why that didn't work out already formed when he was Obama's Supreme Court pick and the Rs decided that they don't have to follow laws they don't like and made up rules that only R presidents get to pick SC judges.
comment in response to
post
How can it be that some unelected dude bought the election, crippled infrastructure and stole confidential information and is not in prison with his whole gang right now? Trump's corrupto crypto coin? Emoluments from around the world? Shoulder shrugs all around.
comment in response to
post
Excellent question. They might wanna get to the bottom of it and react accordingly. But I'm not just talking about shouting duels on- or offline.
comment in response to
post
React in SOME way. Optimally, even ACT.
comment in response to
post
Hell, there were democrats who voted for some of Trump's staff picks. Don't act like it's business as usual.
When laws are broken, people endangered, corruption is obvious, don't whine, pursue the legal remedies (that haven't yet been upended by MAGA). Press charges, impeach, demand accountability.
comment in response to
post
Generally speaking: not let Rs run roughshod over laws, norms and rules every occasion they get the past decades. Specifically, now the cart is hip-deep in the mud, oppose Trump's barrage with all means available to them.
comment in response to
post
Does he even own a suit? Has he said thank you once?
comment in response to
post
"L'État, c'est moi." (English: "I am the state")
is the attitude that brought Louis XIV the love and adoration of all his subjects.
I assume, I should probably read up on how that ended.
comment in response to
post
Braid 'em. With the nose hairs.
comment in response to
post
Heh, wouldn't that be a swell reality where things like that happen?