It’s very funny to take this tack when you are basically claiming to be the smartest person in the country, the only one to see the plain truth of the situation

I can’t think of Reagan’s shooter’s name, either. That isn’t proof it was staged.

Love that straight up QAnon level shit is getting the majority of upvotes here. Good sign, the future is bright

I mean, they are doing their job. It’s just that their job is to keep the left down, not to win.

This is a very econ 101 take. A similar argument is that if you increase the minimum wage, people will per se lose their jobs because of supply and demand curves. But the empirical evidence doesn’t support that. I don’t think we know for sure why, but increasing the minimum wage has second order effects that seem to counteract this. Similarly, it’s true that if you print money, you increase the supply of money which according to supply and demand means the money will be worth less. Now I don’t think we have as clear empirical evidence that shows this isn’t true, but we do print money all the time. I mean, that’s how government works; congress passes a bill, and the federal reserve supplies (“prints”) the money to fund it. There’s not some bank account somewhere that has to have the money and if it doesn’t we have an overdraft situation. But, if the bill is printing money to support farmers and provides an increase in the food supply, the cost of food relative to the dollar could go down. Now maybe the cost of other things goes up, but the point is that it’s much more complex than “government print money, inflation go up.”

The argument I’m making here is based on Modern Monetary Theory (maybe I’m doing a bad job of representing it or understanding it), which you should definitely check out if you haven’t.

Before the cuts, the IRS generated $0. After the cuts, the IRS will generate $0. Getting rid of the IRS can’t cost the US government any amount of US dollars because the US government has infinite US dollars.

To be clear, I think it’s a bad idea to cut the IRS. We should be beefing it up and tasking it with going after the rich, because taking money away from rich people is a good thing. But buying into the framing that the US needs to take money from people because it can then spend that money on something else is a mistake, and not just because it’s false. It’s bad politics. Conservatives don’t actually give a shit about government efficiency or fiscal responsibility, they just hate taxes. If it makes the deficit 10x worse they still want to cut taxes however they can. But they are happy to weaponize concern trolling about the debt and deficit to cut government programs that benefit the poor (or prevent such from coming into existence), and liberals are very susceptible to these arguments.

Your karyotype doesn’t determine what kind of gamete you produce.

See for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome

AFAIK we don’t have any way to determine this before sex differentiation actually occurs. When sex differentiation occurs it happens as a response to hormones, not karyotype. It’s possible that environment could be the determining factor, as is the case with freemartins.

So no, it’s not an exaggeration nor embarrassing to say that nobody meets the order’s definition of male or female.

Telegram isn’t encrypted end-to-end by default; apparently if you do encrypt e2e you can’t access chats from multiple devices.

Signal’s protocol is widely understood to be the gold standard for security, which is one reason it’s been adopted for multiple messengers. Telegram has a bespoke protocol which is not as well regarded.

This assumes Democratic leadership thinks winning is more important than bringing the left to heel. Given their behavior that’s not a great assumption to make.

migrants were capturing the geese from the local park pond and eating them

This is totally fine by me, I don’t see the problem

Oh word?

I got so much concern trolling for saying Biden was bad and should step down. People accused me of wanting fascism. They insisted I was naive and we should be standing behind Biden.

I just want to say to those people: you were wrong. Dumping Biden has wildly hurt Trump’s chances, and you were the ones arguing against it.

Why not? They’ve been boosting a far-right, anti-Muslim Israeli extremist for years

They do have a point. She hasn’t even been a game show host!

I’m like 80% sure Trump doesn’t want to end democracy.

Hmm. Interesting idea. I’m sure the next sentence won’t be completely consistent with Trump wanting to end democracy.

He just wants more attention, power, and to protect himself when he goes out after 4 years.

Oh.

Trump voters are the victim of a con, but the con is bigger than Trump. Conservatism in general is a con that needs misinformation networks like talk radio, fox news, facebook groups, etc. Without having been steeped in that bullshit for 40+ years, Trump would never have succeeded. It’s the whole ecosystem that’s doing the radicalization, not just Trump.

CW: animal cruelty

Well, no, but there’s a big gap between “not helping” and “wounding”, and this is much, much closer to the “not helping” end of that gap.

What wound?

I mean the critique behind “why didn’t he do it when he had the majority” still applies: calling for a constitutional amendment is ineffectual. There’s no way a constitutional amendment is going to happen in today’s political environment.

Also the court reform he’s proposing isn’t a constitutional amendment, but since he waited until he didn’t have a majority, that can’t happen either.

It’s almost like he doesn’t want change.