Yeah. i’d bet they’d agree with you.

I disagree, but if that is your belief, you’ll need to get to guillotining and . . luigi-ing. The longer you wait the harder it would be.

Like, here, on Lemmy, we have a media not controlled by them. And an actual, physical, elementary classroom is somewhat influenced by oligarchs in the form of government mandates, but it can also point out that influence and work against it.

So . . you’re for the DNC . . overturning police cars.

Sure, why not. Someone write that down.

Like - DO GOOD WORK ?

I dunno, it seems like it should be more . . y’know. Specific. The first part anyway. “Don’t fuck with a primary” is pretty self-explanatory, but there are things the DNC has to do to run a primary, so we should probably get specifics for that too.

Fair, but we’re talking about the DNC itself, not the House leadership. Anyone know anything about anyone on the “short list”?

Does the DNC actually want to win? I honestly don’t think they do.

Yes. They do.

It’s not a super-duper-double-twist-psyop-gotcha-infinity-plus-one “controlled opposition”. That’s just on tv. In real life, it turns out to be really hard to get people out to the polls on election day. And the champions of evil have been working that point down to the ground for decades.

I just watched that one!

Oh, no. No, no no. It’s much worse than that.

Hell if they were still on NT we’d be safer.

Same as it ever was.

remember when it was SWATting? Now it’s this. The kids. Lookin’ for kicks.

“triggering alarms” eh. The bbc yesterday used something like that yesterday; “raising concern” “sounding alarm” something like that. The Guardian used “Elon’s controversial salute”.

Headline writers: Stop. It’s not working. (Propublica, bless you, please don’t take this the wrong way, it’s more about corporate news but since you’ve used it as well . . )

We all went through four years of “raising alarms” and “very concerned” and “may be planning” and “seems to” in the headlines. Just stop. We’re not doing that now. If you want to crank out sludge and bland oatmeal for the sake of living another day, fine. But it’s not helping anyone but yourselves.

Say what it is. Use simple words, and don’t waffle. If you can’t say “Nazi” for some reason, find useful substitutes for it. "Contrary to common sense’ for example.

in the 50 years that it was in effect the Democrats had the power necessary to put up a legislative firewall (see, e.g. Obamacare)

I don’t think the Democrats had the uncontested power to put up an amendment or any other pro-women’s-health legislation very often in those 50 years. The one time I can think of is the one you mentioned, and they decided to use that power to pass the ACA instead. They had lost the supermajority by the time that was done.

All that “chipping away” wouldn’t have made much of a difference if the SCOTUS hadn’t been obscenely hijacked and thrown to the Federalist nazis. And all of that was because the republiQans never wavered, never changed their commitment to depriving women of their rights.

In the case of Starmer vis-a-vis EU, I obviously don’t know the details very well, but I would think they’re not going to be able to have any kind of public discussion about rejoining anytime in the next 5-10 years at the earliest. I would expect there to be some backchannel discussion, but I can’t see any real headway being made. Certainly if I was the EU, I wouldn’t be interested in talking about it at all. I would think Labour would have enough on their plate just beginning to stem some of the damage that’s already been caused.

It’s not really a question of democracy as such, it’s a question of media literacy and policy.

Kids under 16 should not be on social media. Social Media should be required to expunge all their data every 30 days. Influence campaigns that we know russia and China run should be illegal, and punishable.

That’s for starters. Media theory for everyone. Explain how television works on television. Limit advertising. Limit demographic data for private interests, not much more for government interests.

The hole that we’re in isn’t because people have racist views (though they do) , or that the mechanisms of democracy are under attack (though they are) - it’s that we all stare at lighted rectangles all day. And what those rectangles are doing is grinding everyone’s discourse into mush.

Well that’s probably true, but “give up your guns!” is not a Democratic party thing, or anything but the most pacifist of liberal “things”, afaik.

I’d like to see this fascist white house try to take away assault weapons from their voting base. That’d be a real popcorn event.

Cat: Don’t make me come in there!!

Tiger 1: ?

Tiger 2: aww

Nooooo decisions must be made for the oil corporationnnnnnnns!

5, 10, 20 - yeah. The effects are emerging for the rest of everyone’s lifetime. There are probably future generations who won’t notice.

It’s just an astounding piece of self-destruction. Much like electing trump. In many, many, very practical and concrete ways.

With respect, that’s not a real thing. The “US Dems didn’t codify abortion to use it as a fear tactic to drum up votes” is not a real thing in the sense that it’s not a policy, a position, or the statement of any party leaders. I’m sure there are edge cases where a candidate or commentator may have used it that way.

It’s an insult that was picked up by many as a truism, but it is not true. There are several reasons why but it takes more than a couple of paragraphs to go into it.

I don’t really see the analogy between rejoining and restoring abortion-rights anyway. I think they’re too different.

While I wish it was an option but, barring some kind of catalyzing event, it isn’t. Not in anyone-here’s lifetime.

no shit?

Damn, the press already has this administration on the ropes!