If someone claims something happened on the fediverse without providing a link, they’re lying.
I think mistepping generally just gets you in trouble if you try to act like you know what you’re talking about or insist that a given position is correct. Just say you’re not the most informed and are looking to learn more or understand people’s perspectives rather than assert one thing or another.
My fear is that, and to be clear, this is just my own fears, not saying that this will happen, but I fear that my parents could get me exit-banned and bribe some corrupt doctor to declare me insane or something and force involuntary ECT or someshit like that and wipe my memories of their emotional abuse/neglect. But again, that’s just my fears, I hope they aren’t secretly that controlling/manipulative.
Here in the US, they are nobodys, they don’t have the Guanxi to do weird things, so its harder for them to weaponize the government’s tentacles against me. Things have to go through the courts and unlike China, they can’t just do involuntary treatments without a court order.
Well… as long as you’re not a teenager. I had pretty similar fears growing up in a conservative Christian family that my parents might send me to some camp like that. The “troubled teen industry” is very unregulated and has seen a lot of cases of child abuse and even deaths, and kids can end up there for any reason at all, it just takes parental consent. I didn’t dare tell them when I was having doubts about God until long after I had moved out and had completely left that shit behind. If they thought I was going to spend eternity in Hell there’s no telling what they might have done, and they also probably didn’t even know about all the abuse and stuff that happens there and wouldn’t have listened to me if I tried to talk my way out of it. It was pretty terrifying, and probably contributed to my far-left political views today.
I studied abroad in Japan for a year back 10-15 years ago. I definitely experienced “reverse culture shock” when I came back, the feeling when you’ve had all kinds of new experiences and have seen the world from a completely different perspective, but then everything’s just… the same. The people you left behind are just a year older, the roads and the stores are all just like they were when you left, maybe a new fast food joint opened up and that’s the biggest thing that’s changed. It’s pretty maddening. Of course, you can talk and talk about all these stories and people and all that - and in fact it was pretty good for me in that I was able to overcome some shyness and social anxiety because I had something interesting to talk about - but there’s a lot of stuff that you’ll never really be able to explain, things that just can’t be put into words. Especially with language, I feel like we’re losing something as people rely more on AI translations (useful as they are) because my experience is that speaking a different language can really shift your whole perspective in subtle ways. Translation is metaphor, it is inherently an approximation of meaning. It is, however, a lot of work.
In time, my experience of living in Japan and the unique perspective it gave me has become one of many perspectives that I can draw on, and I have other shared or relatable experiences with the people around me. Granted, my experience abroad was a relatively short time, not like actually immigrating. But ultimately, everyone has different experiences that can seem very alien to others, even within the same country or culture. When we see these differences not as barriers but as providing valuable and distinctive insight, well, that’s the dream, isn’t it?
On immigration policy, the survey shows Latinos place a high priority on allowing unauthorized immigrants to stay in the country legally.
Your own source supports my position, lol.
What part of, “Israel is going above and beyond in finding new and exiting war crimes to commit,” reads to you like I’m “literally making the argument for Israel to claim it wasn’t so bad?”
What you said is like saying, “Show me when Imperial Japan did anything as bad as the Holocaust.” Sure, the Holocaust was a special kind of evil that went above and beyond, but Imperial Japan did all sorts of heinous, horrific shit and there is absolutely no reason why we should make favorable comparisons about them. They were even on the same side, much like the US and Israel.
Also how tf is it “whataboutism” when you made the comparison? Completely ridiculous.
I presented four sources to the other person that demonstrate that that’s not true. Even if it were true, their messaging did not reflect it. They presented themselves as border hawks, indisputably, and you are either misinformed or lying if you deny it. I’ve backed my position up with evidence.
Don’t whitewash those wars. Sure, Israel is going above and beyond in finding new and exiting war crimes to commit, but the US wars were also horrendous.
What an incredibly stupid comment. No, they did not campaign on “the opposite of building the wall.” They literally said, we’re the ones actually trying to build the wall, and Trump is blocking us because he’s all talk. You are uniformed about this.
Accusing me of watching Fox News is also laughable. Fox News did not support the Democrats’ narrative that they were border hawks, actually. Their position was always that the Democrats were soft on immigration, which they said was bad.
Senate Republicans block border security bill as they campaign on border chaos - NBC
Deportations by ICE jump to 10 year high in 2024, surpassing Trump-era peak - CBS
Biden pulls from Trump’s immigration playbook in election year twist - CNN
Don’t accuse me of being misinformed when you don’t know shit.
Democrats also campaigned on deporting Hispanics, and even more Hispanics voted for the Democrats. I guess that’s also a really stupid thing to do and should be pointed out to those stupid people?
I’m so sick of people trying to change the way entire demographics of people behave rather than trying to change the way one political party’s leadership behaves. It’s so fucking stupid that y’all waste your time trying to pressure literally millions of people to become unconditional supporters of the Democrats rather than trying to pressure the Democrats to adopt positions that would win them over. Like, however stupid you think it is for Hispanics to only vote for the deporter you like slightly more than the deporter you don’t like, your approach here is like 10x stupider.
One person vs tens of millions of people, but since that one person is a member of the ruling class, we couldn’t possibly criticize her or try to pressure her to change, no, that’s not our place, our place is merely to ensure our peers are loyal to our rulers no matter what.
Also yes Democrats may have claimed some things about republicans, but on the flip side Republicans also claimed constantly that democrats are softies letting every one and their mother in, so it sort of cancels out.
“Why didn’t they just listen to what the Republicans said about us?”
Even with this insane line of logic you’re expecting them to follow, Kamala still won Latinos. Only by a few points, compared to previous elections where the Democrats did not attempt to run to the right of Republicans on immigration, but more of them still voted for her. Just not enough to overcome the votes of white people. If we’re going to point fingers at entire demographics like this, then we ought to blame the people who are actually most responsible, right? But somehow, it’s always minorities who catch the most blame, isn’t it?
Blaming voters for things instead of politicians and campaigns is completely backwards and unproductive. Even if it wasn’t, I’m not going to blame them for taking the democrats at their word for what they were going to do. That’s nonsense. If your campaign depends on people seeing through your lies and still voting for you, it’s a stupid fucking campaign.
It’s like you didn’t read a single thing I said, most crucially the part where I tell people like you to go fuck yourselves.
Everybody in this thread going like, “It was so obvious he was going to do this, how could they be so stupid?”
I’ll tell you why: it’s because the Democrats ran as border hawks. Remember when they were saying, “We’re the ones who actually tried to pass a bill to crack down on immigration, but Trump blocked it.” The Democrats actively downplayed the threat that Trump posed by trying to claim that he was all talk. They completely abandoned any argument like, “Trump wants to build a wall because he’s racist,” in favor of “We’re the ones who actually want to build the wall.” If you’re saying that Latinos were “stupid” or whatever, what you’re saying is that the Democrats were lying and it should’ve been obvious to Latinos that they were lying, and because it was so obvious they were lying, they should’ve voted for them. Which is an absolutely insane thing to say.
When you have two candidates fighting over who’s going to be tougher on immigration, it’s really not that surprising that people who might be affected by that issue don’t vote based on that issue. And many Latinos have conservative cultural values. Absent a clear argument for vote against Trump, like that he’s racist, that his talk about cracking down on “illegals” won’t stop there, they voted based on other shit.
Of course, this reality is utterly unimaginable to the DNC, because it’s taken as unquestionable dogma that the way to win votes is by moving to the right and appealing to the mythical centrist swing voter. The reality is that if you can draw this hard moral line, and stand by it, then you can convince people that you’re actually going to protect their rights and that they should put aside other, less important concerns for the sake of defending this moral line. Even if that requires going out on a limb and adopting a more “extreme” position. Even now, there’s a lot of silence coming from the centrist Dems when they ought to be shouting from the rooftops about this shit, because oh no, what if we alienate the three people in the country who actually liked Dick Cheney.
I fucking hate anybody who tries to pull this “leopards ate their face” bit about vulnerable minorities who were abandoned by both parties. Go fuck yourself. Legitimately, go fuck yourself. You don’t get to stan a party that says, “Fuck you, vote for me,” and then act all smug when people don’t vote for them and get screwed over by the other side. Yeah, it was obvious they’d get screwed over by the other side, but your side was also promising to screw them over. Christ.
“Here’s my card. If you wouldn’t mind signing it and giving it back to me, we just need 30% to get a vote on forming a union.”
In 2020, she had all the time in the world, and she mismanaged things badly enough that she ended up dropping out before a single vote was cast. What happened in 2024 was purely advantageous to her, she got to skip the primary altogether and only had to keep it together for 15 weeks. Few people in history have ever received such a privileged ramp towards the presidency.
The primary process is an additional hoop that a candidate has to jump through, they have to appeal to a different segment of the people than in the general, which may leave them having to pivot or backtrack on their positions. They may have to endure bad blood, or harsher criticism from people who had been invested in another candidate. You could say that the lack of the primary cost the Democrats the election but only in the sense that Kamala probably wouldn’t have won a primary and we’d have gotten someone better.
15 weeks is also plenty of time to get a message out. Other countries do much shorter campaign lengths. And in the current situation where most people are driven by “negative partisanship,” voting against the people they hate more, being relatively unknown (not that a VP is that unknown) can be advantageous.
The main thing was policy but she was also just an unpopular politician with bad political instincts (campaigning with the Cheney 's lol), and she basically got to fail upwards and bypass any of the checks that would’ve recognized that unpopularity before it was too late.
Hindenburg, who ran as a left wing centrist.
There wasn’t anything “left-wing” about Hindenburg. He ran on maintaining the status quo - a status quo that was a rapidly deteriorating depression with very high unemployment. He represented business interests and was never going to do any of the major reforms that would’ve been necessary to save the republic (if anything could).
The social democrats decided to throw unconditional support to these centrist parties for the sake of stability. They didn’t seem to have any actual understanding of why conditions were deteriorating, why extremism was rising, or what needed to be done in order to address it - all they could ever think to do was support the bourgeoisie in order to buy time - in order to sleepwalk into fascism.
Naturally, as Hindenburg represented bourgeois interests, he was always going to side with the far-right against the left, if he had to choose. And, since conditions were declining with no plan to actually fix anything, he was always going to end up in the position of having to choose.
I would say that there are similarities, though, yes.
Spine? Conviction?
Whatever it is, the important takeaway is if future campaigns take the same approach, they’re liable to get the same results.
That’s true, but it’s also true that this map may be the best shot they have to pick up seats. I don’t think I’ve ever heard someone say that a senate map looks good for Democrats. In 2028 they’ll have what, Arizona and North Carolina? Well, and the VP, potentially (and having to replace Fetterman). And in 2030, just Ohio and Pennsylvania? I don’t see any chance of winning Iowa but whether there’s even a remote possibility of them gaining a majority in future elections will depend on whether they can narrow to one or two seats here.