#politics
1 messages Β· Page 36 of 1
Not sure on that one
i saw reddit about pelosi selling out on case so prob
the bill doenst have 230 in it does it?
Nope
well if trump vetos it, dod can just go w/o money until biden signs
I like the idea of them going without money for a while π
whens the money run out from previous
Exactly lol
im asking what date do they run out?
and itll just be like any other shutdown, itll be backpayed
At this point I feel pretty convinced the Pentagon can conjure up some money from somewhere if they really need it π
But no idea how long until they run out
just go seize some pirate ships and take their money
haha
I would appreciate more money for the DoD - there's actually good places it can go to
Unfortunately it often doesn't
Need to re-allocate funds to better sources
I guess this means things are starting to look up? https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/12/08/europe/uk-pfizer-biontech-covid-vaccination-intl/index.html
Yes, props to the UK for beta testing
EU approval will take like two weeks or more, ppl expect that we start to vaccinate in germany in January
USA isn't going to get any better so it feels like the only way it's going to go down is to get the vaccine.
But we need to see the effects, how much and whom of the population you need to vaccinate until numbers to to 0
Well, the US gave up fighting this a long time ago, lol
But even we in germany struggle
Yeah, it sucks to see it happen. I don't mind staying inside for another month or so.
The tech isn't new, it has been tested for quite some time now
It's just that they tried to use it for different things, and the payloads weren't effective
Because they tried it with hiv or cancer
That's why it never reached market like this before
Also, i would argue that this kind of vaccination is safer, since you are not injecting an actual virus like with classic vaccinations
well safer in regard of how body responds to the virus itself, sure. but we are messing with elements of the body we have never touched before, we wont know if we 'got it right' in our understanding of mrna until potentially years or decades later of dna based side effects occur. I saw something about risks of side effects on the immune system. ultimately, we dont know yet.
but isnt this the first its been tested in humans?
No, there have been mrna tests before
There have been clinical trials of mrna before this year tho
Just for other areas
And it never has been approved for greater use, yes
Those are active human trials of mrna as of early 2019
And apperently there are licenced mrna therapoitcs for animals?
Idk, i am on phone and this thing is 40 pages π π
that looks like animal studies, this history lesson on mrna doesnt seem to mention humans: https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-once-dismissed-idea-became-a-leading-technology-in-the-covid-vaccine-race/
but based on this article, high doses is potentially dangerous in that the body has a severe immune reaction to it, and low doses are ineffective....
might explain those recent test results where the people who got the half dose had better results than the full dose
so that worries me if they get dosage wrong
Yeah... I'm gonna probably wait a while. Sucks that health care workers and other essential workers will pretty much have to get it or risk losing their jobs, but really what can you do >_>
Biontech vaccine vs placebo
After around 14 days you seem to be safe
So it will take months, even if we can vaccinate tens of thousands per day
are these people being exposed daily to test if its working - meaning its guaranteed giving it to placebo people?
These ppl are part of the trial, normal ppl
We don't shove them unmasked into a maga ralley if you mean that, no
They are as exposed as everybody else
:/ well every shred of support I had for Tulsi is now gone, https://parler.com/profile/TulsiGabbard/posts
can I charge back political donations?
Tulsi is supporting agent orange on 230
These fucking idiots dont realize how critical 230 is the foundation of the internet
for communities
the real irony is, that repealing 230 does the exact opposite of what the fucking idiots want, it requires MORE Censorship
if any of you are fucking idiots who support repealing 230, you need to read https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
47 U.S.C. Β§ 230, a Provision of the Communication Decency Act Tucked inside the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 is one of the most valuable tools for protecting freedom of expression and innovation on the Internet: Section 230. This comes somewhat as a surprise, since the original purpose of the legislation was to restrict free speech ...
repealing 230 means every forum and social network will have to manually review and approve anything you post before it can show
discord im not even sure how it could safely operate
How likely is it that a repeal of 230 will happen?
mRNA vaccines are relatively new, they have had trials before but zero have been authorized for general human application before 2020 (I don't think any have been authorized for human trials pre-2020 but maybe I'm wrong). Most companies had abandoned it entirely pre-2020 due to the more serious complications associated with them specifically around unintended immune responses and autoimmunity.
Sounds like it's pretty safe to say the long-term ramifications in humans are not well understood.
Take your chances with COVID or a completely new kind of vaccine... neither of which we have much long-term data.
I can see a lot of young/healthy people weighing this and refusing to take the vaccine.
Also I don't think we'll see a complete repeal of 230, possibly amendments to it though.
Repealing 230 is going to only lead to more censorship and moderation, bad for both sides if every platform is suddenly held accountable for the things their user says on said platform.
tbh i don't think i really want to take it
i mean there is a reason vaccines take so long to get approved
I'd feel a little more comfortable when we have more data, that is, millions of people taking it... and observing what happens in the next year or so.
I don't want to be the guinea pig.
There will be a lot of resistance to the vaccine so I don't know, but certainly there will be segments of the population that will effectively have no choice because it's tied to their job.
So we should have plenty of data soon enough.
There is apparently legal precedent that states in the US have the power to mandate vaccinations due to public health concerns, but if they exercise this power during such polarizing times, it will be a disaster.
So we'll likely see the mandate come from businesses and other private entities.
And probably some public entities too, like schools of course.
Looks like Biden's already come out and said there will be no federal mandate to vaccinate.
I donβt mean to get political or anything, but what the heck is oatmeal?
um, its a #food
how did you end up asking that in the politics channel lol
oh apparently this is some shit post meme
Perhaps
please shitpost on somewhere else
no dont do it there either
thats off topic
you can do it in #memes its use to shitpost
https://twitter.com/i/events/1336428639399755776 lol even SCOTUS just denied trump
The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned back an effort by Republicans to reverse President-elect Joe Bidenβs victory in Pennsylvania. The decision was announced in an order with no noted dissents. The courtβs order read, βThe application for injunctive relief presented to Justice Alito and by him referred to the Court is denied.β Experts and officials have said there has been no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 US elections.
a hundred thousand people? at a single college? why do i doubt this
ic
in that case, its not too bad
should be pretty doable; most of those who cant yet / wont get vaccinated will just live at home w parents i reckon
I expect some combination of students temporarily moving in with parents and commuting that way, or renting an apartment nearby. But yeah, sucks.
Or wait
Even if you live off-campus, do you need to be vaccinated to attend in-person?
I guess it makes sense that you would...
If off-campus students can still attend in-person without vaccinating, I expect we'll see students simply live off-campus for a while.
Yeah it's unrealistic for students to get the vaccine within the next couple of months.
First doses are going to healthcare workers and vulnerable groups.
Kind of an interesting situation because the Trump administration refused buy additional doses apparently, so there will be a shortage of the vaccine in the US for a bit.
I wouldn't be surprised if the general population doesn't have access to the vaccine until next summer π
Lots of seniors and essential workers, though.
You'd think young and healthy people like college students would be among the last to get it, but I don't know.
230 protections are not clearly defined enough to hold platforms like Twitter accountable for their choice to curate content. I don't think repealing it all together is sensible, but I don't think they should be protected at all when they specifically choose to editorialize content on their platform. Example being if they are categorizing a persons post as true/false, they should be held to the same standard as a newspaper editor for that specific instance. Currently as it stands via a flaw in the law they are completely immune to such a situation. The law really needs to be brought into the 21st century.
I think the censorship is particularly nefarious due to the fact a lot of people are getting their news via tech platforms these days but I also don't think the law should be involved in if a company can do that. That realistically should be for the people to decide via their choice to use or not use the platform.
People should be against these companies censoring and leave the platforms, regardless of who's being censored; but that's up to them. Specifically because they have a lot of influence and allowing them to censor gives them a whole lot of power. You also do not know when you or your viewpoint are going to become the target of said censorship.
The 700+ billion dollar military/defence stimulus bill also effectively puts a stop to troop withdrawals from Afghanistan, South Korea, and Germany.
On the other side of this, is a company responsible for their platform being used to spread lies and other deliberate misinformation that causes harm? If you force a company to allow harmful lies for the sake of "equality" then you're enabling misinformation attacks.
Though I'm not entirely sure how you're going to draw lines, fight companies as large as nations, or enforce any of those protections. It's like GDPR, really. It sort-of works, but it's more an honor system right now
And even the top websites don't follow most of all of GDPR still
Ehh, that sets a potentially dangerous precedent
All a big mess! You have nation-state level attacks putting misinformation on social media (e.g. https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/17/politics/trump-retweets-known-russian-disinformation-biden-derkach/index.html or the post's Hunter story) and then people get upset when the platforms try to prevent this from spreading. We, ordinary people, are getting attacked so surely if these companies can block bullshit they should do so.
I'm all for freedom of speech, but honestly that's never been honored on websites anyway
Yes, that does have a slippery slope argument of "If they block this they could block anything" but by that point you simply... move to another website. You already see this (albeit for "I prefer the lies" reasons) with Parler.
Don't like a website preventing you from spreading misinformation? Move to another service. Free market! π
Any platform that gives true freedom of speech means it won't have anything to curate content. Those platforms simply don't survive online
Worried a site is preventing truths? Move to another service. Free market!
Every platform curates content
That's how it works
So the whole "free speech" argument falls flat anyway
Plus free speech protection is against the government not against private business.
Yeah, no such thing as freedom of speech for a private company
That's kinda what the whole thing is aiming at, iirc
I think you may be arguing against your point, there
I'm on the fence, but I think overall it's a good idea. The execution is questionable
The heart is in the right place
Going from "We are labeling known bullshit claims as bullshit" to "everything is now our responsibility" is quite the leap, surely
Problem is I have a good idea of why people want it- they want to strongarm Twitter and Facebook into becoming the next parler
Which, I mean, look at parler
Yeah, saw that coming
That's the problem right there
Ehhh
Like anyone actually does that
Let's not pretend
We live in reality where things aren't black and white
I was trying to avoid talking opinion and instead talk fact. Like when posts claiming Trump won the election are marked as "ahahaha nope" on twitter, that's disputing factually incorrect statements rather than opinions. When people claim vaccines cause autism and are blocked from facebook groups, that's preventing the spread of factually incorrect claims.
Meaning people don't do their own research
Rarely ever
And yes, I agree with bax. Saying "this is factually false" is good
"the media"
Some publishers, perhaps
Sure can. Like you can claim Biden won the election and deserved it, or Biden won the election and didn't deserve it. But you can't claim Biden lost the election and claim"it's just an opinion, man"
Turns out it's sometimes difficult to do it, yes. Drawing boundaries is one of the problems
But at the very least "Trump won the election" is factually false
So that's a good start
π€¦ββοΈ
It's a formality at this point, but okay.
And technically that's not certified or whatever until like January... 6th?
Can you clarify for me right now if you're honestly making the claim he hasn't definitely won, or doing a devils advocate thing?
I'm fine with the latter, but the former is just willful ignorance of how the process works.
And I don't want to waste my time on the former right now π
So in the chance a state goes for electoral sabotage, destabilizing our democracy, you won't call it.
That would certainly be interesting, but there's only a couple states with the power to overturn the election like that and there's issues with even that
Sorry, I said I wouldn't waste time on it.
If a bunch of politicians collude to sabotage the election, yes things could go sideways. But that's not worth thinking about because by that point we can't really call ourselves any sort of democracy.
The only swing state that might even have a chance to do that has explicitly said it won't happen
Even then it wouldn't really work
Even then the house likely wouldn't hear it
You'd have a better chance of winning the lottery twice and then being abducted by aliens
The 9-0 decision yesterday left me feeling a lot safer about the country's future as a democracy
This is the closest you can get to "GTFO" from the court. Not one dissent stated. No elaboration; not even worthy of comment.
Additionally, Twitter, Google, FB post "the AP/election sources called this race differently"
And "this claim about election fraud is disputed"
Which guides people to check facts
I disagree
They hire people to weigh risk and make calculated decisions for the betterment of the company
I'm sure they looked at that one
Not for you, maybe
If I'm a business and I'm coincidentally scaring off white nationalists, fascists, and racists from my platform by censoring alt-right and Russian misinformation, I'd be incredibly happy with myself. π
But you seem to be outnumbered by people that appreciate it
I don't think anything near that percent care in any way about twitter
πΏ love to see it
Even "worst companies in the world" lists don't have that level of participation
They built their viewers into anti-fact warriors and are now losing viewers because they made statements too close to reality.
Trump tweeted several times that Fox daytime is garbage and OANN is the place to go to for unbiased news
So of course his fanbase followed
Oh, nothing is. Except twitter isn't the only company so you'd need collusion between a variety of companies to do it and get away with it. A true "the media" conspiracy on a level unachievable currently.
Unachievable because of the math involved in keeping conspiracies secret
Which is one of the reasons I hate the term "the media"
It's so abused
or other social media - yeah, that's the point
You'd need collusion between all major publishers at the very least
It's not "the media" and never has been
"the media" never existed
Not in the sense that it's used today
That's happened a few times, actually. Each time it was shot down within a day by other media and died
We already saw that sort of thing with the hunter laptop story spreading wildly (the one no news organization would touch with a ten foot pole), even with platforms working to slow its spread.
There's even been instance of newspapers releasing obituaries for people still alive
People are dumb, always have been dumb. π
They have been, yeah. With basic fact checks in place by companies, though, those things can slow or stop
With "people are dumb"
People have been dumb
Imagine an evil Twitter that's actively spreading false information - this will never happen, but imagine it. Now they're fighting Google and Facebook, as well as other major news outlets
Sure, some people will believe only Twitter, but those are lost to begin with
And a minority
man basket whats wrong with you lol
you are so dillusional. also consider 1 state destroying democracy still cant give trump the win. like 3 would have to
Very few people live in a perfect bubble
Yeah, I mentioned that earlier
Even PA wouldn't be able to alone
and do you really want civil war? because thats the start of civil war
if trump tries to overthrow this election, this is war
you shouldnt WANT to be right
what fucking good is a trump president to you if society is shutdown and you cant even live a normal life?
Anything certainly can happen, like being abducted by aliens
Have you packed for that occasion?
what a great reward for ruining this country
"i told you so" doesnt have any value if is its illegit and corrupt
"Yes i told you so that trump is a piece of shit and ruined the country"
great success! /s
"anything can happen" has no merit. "Anything within reason can happen" works, but that excludes Trump being able to overturn the election
It's just continued shifting the goalposts until we've fallen right off the flat earth
do you believe the earth is flat basket?
I feel like this is something youd also believe
We live in a society
If a civil war is what it takes to have a peaceful president remaining in office then so be it
Β―_(γ)_/Β―
I'd really rather not a civil war, thanks
"peaceful president" lol
I don't want to be anyone's enemy, but if I have to I will
"current evidence"
.... ok so you are a partial flat earther. got it
a sane person would say "Yeah weve been to outer space and can clearly fucking see its not"
there is no "measurements", there is no room for possibility of wrong
its 100% undeniable
Nah, basket is just so open minded his brain risks falling out.
The truth is so obvious, guys.
Geosynchronous satellites, the ISS, and time only work because our math about the earth being the shape that it is is correct
My favorite part is (possibly hollow)
I have worked on satellites, the earth is not flat
But how do we know the iss is real and satellites are real
Also I'm not a flat earther but it could all be fake
Oh no, "the media" is here
Lol
But... the evidence now includes visual evidence rather than just calculations...
Actually I learned two days ago that, while we weren't able to launch our latest tests into space this year, NASA took the project and put it into orbit but gave no credit. That slightly sucked.
"just calculations" is what's preventing satellites from raining down on our heads. Lol
Yep! π
"Look mommy! A shooting star!!"
dead
as soon as you fly over Antarctica you disprove most flat earthers. ez pz
(since the majority appear to think the edge is actually big ice wall we mistake as antarctica)
I'm glad we all learned you're a geocentrist today. This has been informative.
I mean, I know the whole flat earth thing was an ad hominem, but you didn't have to completely sucker yourself into defending that position. Unless you somehow actually believe in a flat earth?
Sorry yeah that's the label "the media" use for you.
a normal person wouldnt put any energy into that at all
What do you prefer to call yourself? A "Truly enlightened" person?
No, but we do have a pretty firm grasps of a lot of concepts
You can't fence everything
You have to take a stand somewhere
Else you forget to breathe
Or worse, don't believe in breathing
Because that's science, and maybe science is wrong
And we actually breathe water
Ooh, I read Norse mythology, too!
except that those would require evidence
they're fun thought-experiments, but nothing more
same with flat earth
fun thought-experiment, but not worth exploring
you can go down the rabbit hole of "technically nothing is completely proven" and "aren't we all just living in our own realities" as much as you want, but at some point you have to get on with your day
the earth is round, Trump lost, now please get your shoes on and go get groceries
or go to work
these are the tweets of a stable man
lol
same tweet on 12-04
is that like a mating call for dumbasses?
he can go generate some for his golf course
yeah, the 2024 election or something. Assuming he isn't thrown in jail before then
although he might be able to pardon himself
maybe
it would be the first time, and the house would probably hear it
because that's actually part of their job
NY would like a word
well, "anything can happen", right?
"we'll see" and all
https://i.imgur.com/UvAOF97.png
- Any current evidence has been thrown out
- We're not the people you need to convince
- "Just look!" isn't a valid argument
so "anything can happen" except when it comes to laws that are created by people and constantly change
"overturn the election" is civil war territory
that's not a nice place to go
it's a far-right fantasy and r/liberalswithguns would like to say hello to those people I'm sure
finally, a stance
and a plan for action
thank fuck
I know he has
I'm just glad someone finally has a goddamned plan
oh yeah it is really nice
something something "we'll see"
if it does, it will be challenged
at least it's a plan, which is more than we have now. Fucking hell, we've set that bar low
states may challenge it, though
read: probably will
states or a federal judge
a whole, what 100k?
wouldnt shock me either or
that'll go far
Still going to take another year to get everything back to "normal" though isn't it
sadly we'll never know what the pandemic would look like with a president that actually cared. I can imagine far fewer people would have died under Obama or Biden, though
Yeah, I dont think the mandate will follow through considering the vaccine projected to be out before the end of the year is stated to be deployed to the most vulnerable people first before the rest of the masses get it
lol
and was told he was a racist for doing so
Trump did anything but act on information
Trump didnt do shit. he incited riot when governors tried to do what he wasnt.
oh a subreddit i should join?
he was handed the keys by both Obama and CEOs and disbanded Obama's task force designed to help with this exact thing and ignored pleas by major corporations to buy equipment early
Idk basket but probably not
he didnt listen to the top epidemiologist in the country and instead did his due best to instill distrust in fauci
Trump didn't close travel. He acted like he did, but he didn't, really. You could absolutely still go in and out of the country without much issue
his excuse for why cases were rising is because "we have more testing"
He did
travel isnt what people blame trump for... travel restrictions was just a delay of the inevitable. If Trump hadnt been so anti science and anti mask, people would of masked up more.They are refusing masks BECAUSE of trump validating it
Aikar is correct
many people refused masks because the president wasn't wearing one
which was evidenced by street interviews
and really just any MAGA rally
or if he didnt downplay the issue and say "its just like the flu"
Was Biden president
there's actually a great John Oliver segment on Trump's inaction and what happened. It looks at every claim that Trump did the best he could and refutes them
The answer is no, so it doesn't matter what he said and he can be wrong
If he did actually say that
Which idk maybe he never did who knows
hes talking about his xenophobia not his fear of the virus. context clues.
"oh John Oliver" - I know some people hate liberal media
We will just have to wait and see
he didn't suspend all travel from China, though
fear mongering of trump isnt about covid directly
as in, Trump never actually suspended travel to/from China
ever
at all
as in, that claim is actually false
when he says fear-mongering, he means the xenophobic nature of the actions he was taking.
@autumn lotus dont merge the statements. hes commenting on trumps general record saying hes not a good leader for a pandemic
the segment I was referring to, if anyone would like a watch. I do enjoy my comedy, even if it's a little dark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuVo4fnpLC8
John Oliver takes a look at how the Trump administration has handled the coronavirus outbreak in the US, from lack of preparation, to mangled coordination, to harmful communication.
Connect with Last Week Tonight online...
Subscribe to the Last Week Tonight YouTube channel for more almost news as it almost happens: www.youtube.com/lastweekton...
that statement does not say trump is fear mongering corona
basically picks apart all the common claims that Trump did anything well or even average
well, unless you count trump fear mongering that "the dems are some conspiracy against the public to push a fake virus"
I mean
thats a true statement lol
that's the advice given from top health professionals, and again, Obama's own task force that he created explicitly for this kind of thing before he left
all it took was for a few americans to bring it back, and bam travel restrictions are nothing now
which, again, Trump immediately disbanded
anything to undo the legacy obama left
really sad that republicans arent using this time to finally distance themselves from trump and return to normality.
I think he won stuff by a lot
BY A LOT
I'm off on my own tangent at this point
by a lot
by a lot
ffs you are a fucking lost cause basket
do you seriously not understand how calling it a chinese virus doesnt count as fear mongering making his people think chinese people are "dangerous" and gonna give them corona?
should be shamed for it yikes
.............
that's me out
you know that normal chinese-american people have gotten beaten half to death by trump supporters because of this shit right basket?
that's called fear mongering
so when a virus comes out in the US that we had no part in creating, pure fluke of science, america should be the shitbags and be shamed?
china did 40x more than the US ever would to have slowed it
so if we have the next virus, were 40x shitbags?
yeah pretty crazy that the chinese managed to deal with the virus better than we did, huh weird.
- qualifier
- that's not how it happened
And when the next virus comes from a plant, or cow, or chicken, or eggs
that's a lot of qualifiers
"we're worse only if X Y and Z happen"
I see your double-standards and raise you a reality check
because nothing like that could have ever happened to anyone else
I agree, you have to really question the U.S.'s containment that we let it spiral out of control
more double-standards
yes really
so, your saying because their culture is different than yours, its ok to blame the entire country for a tiny fraction of chinas cultural norms.
you know 10 million people didn't instantly get it, right?
all at the same time?
same with the U.S.
there weren't suddenly many dead and millions with it
something something containment something spiraling out of control
in the U.S. when only a couple hundred had it and they were aware of it
no one had a fucking clue about the viruses capabilities yet
well trump was aware of how bad it could be in january and he didnt do shit until it was too late π€·ββοΈ
again it doesnt matter, it was destined to get here, it wasnt possible to stop
something something containment something spiraling out of control
something containment
containment
something
"entirely"
yeah, we really showed them, not wearing masks
really showed them
something containment
hey, quarantines are a form of containment
no, Trump was saying they don't do shit
his advisors told him that masks needed to be saved for health professionals at that time because he refused to buy equipment like he was warned to do months before
he took that to mean "masks don't work"
and here we are
yes
they were
they actually were
and it was more than a few hundred at that point
again, the John Oliver segment I linked touched on that
oh, fucking hell
that's not good
Lol
?ban save @autumn lotus Xenophobia
imaBASKET#0001 was banned | Xenophobia
ohai proxy
spelling proxi's name wrong
oh, it's this thing again
if you're not white, you're not American I guess
you'd think the U.S. intelligence agencies would be aware if someone tried to get a security clearance without a valid birth certificate
kinda need one to be VP, I think
or president, in the case of Obama
Pence and the white house trying to drown out Trump's tweets at this point
I'm watching them file in immediately after that overturn tweet
My only thing is is if that's just against blatent tin foilers or people commenting on the news and what's going on, etc
These people aren't just reporting on court proceeding, they're telling people there is fraud
im not really sure where is best to put this but the ban happened here. basket is dming me asking me to appeal to a higher power to get him unbanned because apparently im a voice of reason π€·ββοΈ . he says that he would be happy to just have his permissions to view/talk in the politics channel removed because he helped people in the dev channel and would like to continue to do so. this is a very half-assed effort as i think he's pretty annoying and doesnt really make an attempt to understand the other side but it is what it is.
There is a ban appeal on the website as I already told him; if he wants to appeal, he has to appeal properly
So he already tried to appeal to the person who banned him, was directed to the website, then tried to go around her via bryce?
Time really flies
Oh, I understand that
my boss will get really frustrated once he sees my estimates
Lol
Time flies like an egg
I have no idea why that phrase is in my head
On a lighter note, there are many great memes to come out of the last several years of political shit storm, the elections that followed, etc
Beautiful
the ramp video is fucking great
I know you already handled it but [removed for Z, my love]
play nice
Yes sir
One day we'll look back and say, "wow, that was dumb, but we got some good chuckles"
Yeah it only cost us hundreds of thousands of lives
Yeah, too soon
May always be too soon
Might be past that point a little
bax <3 Z
D'aww
I was running through it in my head, and I think the internet age is going to softly murder some of the old childhood things like "X and Y sitting in a tree"
Because many kids will have internet friends and "mbaxter and Z750 sitting in a tree" doesn't have as nice a ring to it
In short, I was looking for a way to play on that and I had a small existential crisis
What yaβll talking about
it still works kinda
Sorta, ish
"Z and bax sitting in a tree"
^^
Step 1: Be American
Just gotta try egg
Step 2: Pronounce things correctly
zEd
Now we know the truth, the chicken came first, clealy
Egg being so slow and all :(
Colour makes more sense than color
The chicken won the race
isnt that just spelling?
Spelling has fuck all to do with pronunciation
I will grant you, grey should be spelled with an e
adding worthless u's all over loses me
Yep
Yes
i actually agree
aluminium is also just more fun to say
My personal trick for grey is to keep spelling it different ways until I determine that it just looks wrong no matter how I do it
Kk
Colrrr from omicron persei 8
Well there was that Facebook whistle-blower who gave a sworn affidavit to the effect that Facebook, Twitter, and Google coordinate censorship actions.
To me the whole thing is not about free speech though, as bax said people should leave these platforms. If they make clear statements on how factual a tweet is and their view can be proven false they should be subject to laws as would a newspaper who claims something similar.
Banning π hate speech π and π missinformation π is π not π censorship π
Yes it is.
I just want news to be news, reported as-is without turning into massive opinion floof pieces, and hate speach can fuck off but too
I heard about the texas lawsuit on a fact based channel before I saw it elsewhere, and when I did see it on CNN, it just looks like it was a total hit piece from the title rather than an actual fact based piece of news
Yeah I agree.
There you go, literally the definition
It's why I generally try to run around multiple sources, but, it's so hard trying to find any form of real fact based news which isn't opinionated floof from either side
It's part of obscene speech
Not in the states
And no it isn't in the US
I personally disagree with hatespeach and think you should fuck off if you serve to harm others
I dislike hate speech but laws against it are while well meaning a very bad idea.
But, I think that hate-speech is such a dangerous route to go down, at what point does it become hatespeach to tell the truth?
You're effectively giving the government a cheque book to decide what is allowed to be said (they just have to change the definition of hate speech).
Like, yea, conspiracy and all, but, theres many dozens bits of research which are already held as a massive no-no due to government/societal control
Lyme disease is an interesting example of that I think, if I understand you correctly
My main concern is people (particularly children and young adults) who use systems like this and really start relying on them for their facts they're opening themselves up to thought conditioning. That being said not sure laws are the answer to that particular problem.
Well my main concern in them censoring is that, though it's not a primary concern in general.
Still curious how people feel about the US Congress to keep the 19 year war going and injecting money there instead of at home.
Infact Mini, they voted to keep troops in Germany indefinitely too, and effectively removed any presidents power to withdraw them except in exceptional circumstances.
I just hope that one day we get to the dystopian star trek world where money ain't a thing and we all get a long and further society as a whole
that would be nice
I actually think the opposite, but mainly due to what I think would be necessary to get there.
yeah I heard that
for money for us I guess
You're likely to see a return of troops soon.
did they actually move?
um isnt germany troops not in active duty and a method of troop readiness to deploy if needed?
There was a partial withdrawal
yeah but thats not directly for the 19 yr old war, but a staging area
Yep, there is an Aegis Ashore installation there too.
and the war is a cluster fuck everyone can agree, we withdrew too much too fast before the job was done, and fully withdrawing now would be complete failure
Yeah congress voted to keep troops in Afghanistan, Germany, and South Korea in their funding bill.
Obama was promising "by the end of the year" for about 8 years regarding complete withdrawal, and many were heralding him for doing so. Why is it different now?
obama wasnt a saint lol
iirc wasnt it obama that withdrew too early?
i deeply supported him, but he made mistakes
Obama has that fun video where he went to flint, said he basically trusts the water there and did the whole "pretending to take a sip" routine
My faith in politicians is basically 0
even the ones who pretend to be there solely for you are govered in so much slime
in the end the question has to be asked, if we withdraw 100%, are the terrorist defeated to the point they cant retake over? if the answer is no, then withdrawing is stupid
Yeah Obama's Flint visit was sociopathic.
Then we should probably occupy all the countries they occupy?
Cat, have you seen this vid? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvlcI2TmfdI
From Michael Moore's 2018 Trump-era epic, Fahrenheit 11/9.
In this scene, President Obama comes to Flint amidst the poisoned water crisis. His appearance left the residents of Flint stunned.
South Korea makes sense, not sure about Germany and Afghanistan though.
I agree on South Korea
Germany needs at least some troops for their Aegis Ashore installation.
Seems they have a much larger presence than that though
But that thing mostly operates itself.
Could probably also pull some troops out of Japan too
Obviously it has strategic value, but between South Korea and Guam, I think that's enough.
Pretty sure US military presence in Germany is 60Kish, 40K of which are armed forces.
Yeah that's way too many
Oh Japan's presence is actually smaller than I thought.
Actually, no. It's large.
50,000+ in Japan, also too many.
Think Japan is 60K from memory
we got a whole city thats basically just an US base
Yeah 50K could be right
I imagine US military gets in trouble in Germany as much as they do in Japan/Korea π
Kaiserslautern?
The locals around the bases tend to have a negative opinion.
man im jealous of them, they get to just chill over there drinking beer
no thats larger
If you have a family you can live off base with a housing allowance, too.
They have it nice
That's on top of the pay they already get.
Kaiserslautern has the most if memory serves me right.
I cant really find waht I was talking about, mmmh
Yeah it's fine, I wasn't disputing you just was interested.
I think its rammstein
Ah the air base?
Yeah that's a huge air base, the actual base is bigger than a large town I think.
yeah
Mitten in Rheinland-Pfalz liegt das sogenannte Little USA. Die amerikanische Airbase Ramstein ist das Zuhause von rund 17.000 US-Soldaten. Hier, mitten in Deutschland, leben sie wie Zuhause in den Vereinigten Staaten.
ECHT.
NAH.
DRAN.
βΊ Jetzt Sendersuchlauf starten!
βΊ Mehr HAI. CLASS. DOKUS. findest du ...
I like how you can instantly tell it, just by the cars, lmao
It's a joint country airbase , has two runways that can accommodate the biggest military planes in existence.
But operated by US
but man, imagine importing a US truck so you can drive to work for 2km
LOL yea
cause clearly our cars suck
they even got american school busses π
this is more ridiculous than I remembered
Same thing in Korea. Where I grew up, near and in Yongsan Army Base, it's like a completely different country π
Ramstein AB is part of the Kaiserslautern Military Community (KMC), where more than 54,000 American service members and more than 5,400 US civilian employees live and work. U.S. organizations in the KMC also employ the services of more than 6,200 German workers. Air Force units in the KMC alone employ almost 9,800 military members, bringing with them nearly 11,100 family members. There are more than 16,200 military, U.S. civilian and U.S. contractors assigned to Ramstein AB alone.
Oh π
thanks for you contributions to out economy
I didn't know Ramstein AB was part of Kaiserslautern, there you go.
uuh I mean savety of course π
That makes a lot of sense now that I think about it.
kaiserlautern is a bigger city
but I didnt knew rammstein was that close to it
but yeah, germans hate rammstein actualyl
Basically the air base is on the outskirts of Kaiserslautern.
cause its where the relays for all drones in the middle east are
Apparently about 15-20 mins drive.
so you are basically committing war crimes on our land or smth
Yea the US is all about that unless someone else does it.
I read that it was estimated that a third of drone strikes exclusively affect civilian non-combatants (i.e. don't affect enemy combatants at all). Not sure how accurate that is though.
Well drones were a smart idea. Just poorly executed I think.
They're really cost effective and potentially could save many lives if used well.
yeah, weapons do save lives, not take them, my bad π
Talking about it proportionally, the cat is already out of the bag on people having weapons and using them to kill others. That occurred thousands of years ago for reference. I suppose one could argue that if the US had zero weapons that situation would save many lives, though I don't believe that's a very intelligent position.
Yeah you can't really argue that weapons aren't necessary, if you do it's a very stupid position
And arguably American hegemony has been better than any alternative we could imagine given the circumstances.
dw am half joing
I figured tbh though wasn't sure
There are an increasing number of people who think the "get rid of weapons" way.
Screenshot (Dec 9, 2020 6:35:08 PM)
Screenshot (Dec 9, 2020 6:35:27 PM)
Screenshot (Dec 9, 2020 6:35:52 PM)
That was beautiful
Hmm
The states supporting the suit, all of which have Republican attorneys general, are Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia.
fuckin ell
ken paxton is a standup guy btw
or was it sid miller
i don't remember
one of them is a real standup guy
oh look it mentions it in the article
I'm... not seeing how they're a stand up guy?
sorry I dropped my /s
Can't wait for SCOTUS to hand these states the L
Oh it's the guy with all the whistleblowers too
add it to the pile
it makes me sad to see that he's still fighting this hard
and that there are just so many americans that are somehow ok with this
I'm curious how Texas (and other states) believe they have any standing here to overturn votes in other states.
The outcome of this should be the final nail in the coffin, hopefully.
The ultimate defeat π
The arguments from what I've seen are: 1. several battleground states broke their own constitutional laws in changes they made to the election process, 2. several battleground states used dominion voting machines which were bipartisan criticized for security and also due to the company who made them and their origins, 3. that districts in certain battleground states gave different rules to certain districts which breaks the equal protection clause in the 14th? amendment.
Even so, Texas has no standing to bring that argument to any court.
The fact there are effectively 18 states backing it is unprecedented, makes me think forcing a contingent election is on the cards. But I think it'd be 25-25 if that was the case.
It would be different if the federal government is making the case, but it's not. It's one state against another.
of states supporting it is irrelevant at that point. They have no standing/business with how other states conduct their elections.
In fact state legislatures contesting a presidential election is unprecedented I think.
Texas is not involved in another state's election process.
Fairly sure SCOTUS is going to say something along those lines. "It's none of your business"
They're not really claiming to be, they're claiming they violated the 14th US amendment, which is the business of SCOTUS.
The relevance of the number is that it speaks to how strongly it's believed by other legislatures that something is amiss, and if that will translate into something happening to certification in the House or Senate.
That being said I don't think it can affect anything..
I can't recall when the first new day of Congress is
That's the only thing that could throw a spanner in the works for a Biden inauguration at this point in my opinion.
I think it's the 6th of Jan?
The relevance of the number is that it speaks to how strongly it's believed by other legislatures that something is amiss
But. Where. Is. The. Evidence.
I can't recall when the first new day of Congress is
If Biden's election is invalid, then the House's election is invalid and they gotta go home π
Being. Presented. To. The. Supreme. Court. Of. The. United. States. of. America. If. They. Accept. The. Case.
Evidence is not presented in the media, it's presented before a court.
So you're truly suggesting that they have been just... hiding this evidence for weeks through all these trials thrown out by judges left and right for not showing anything? Just... waiting for... secret reasons? Embarrassing themselves repeatedly through these bullshit cases so they can pull this off last minute for... reasons?
I'm sorry, but that's bonkers
There has been plenty of evidence presented, if it's enough to decide there was something fundamentally wrong with the process is up to the courts to decide.
plenty of evidence presented
Really? Why are they consistently getting laughed out of court?
I don't think there is personally, the only thing I'm unsure about is the equal protection clause and how that is interpreted and if it's enough for SCOTUS to invalidate an election.
I doubt SCOTUS even takes the case and would prefer it to be handled by another court first.
"Fuck fuck fuck where's the legal sized paper oh shit oh shit the deadline oh no"
Do other courts decide on US constitutional matters specifically?
Yes
Yep!
Hm, although other federal courts do rule on constitutional matters, seems like issues of State vs State goes straight to SCOTUS
Litigation normally doesn't go directly to SCOTUS, though. This is just a bit of a special case.
the Court held that under Article III, the federal courts have jurisdiction to hear all cases arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and that the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction in all such cases - so federal courts can theoretically hear all of those cases, only the ultimate decision comes down to SCOTUS.
Yes, and this is normally by SCOTUS either refusing to take up the case (lower court's ruling stands) or deciding to take the case.
Yea, makes sense.
To my knowledge SCOTUS typically intervenes in more constitutionally ambiguous issues.
But, I learned something new. Litigation involving states as plaintiff and defendant goes directly to SCOTUS.
Is there a reason why? Seems strange to have the exception.
I mean that explains why Texas brought it to the courts. Affect a swift decision either way.
There are 51 state delegations right?
Yeah, so even in a contingent election it's 25-25 since DC does not get a contingent en bloc vote.
Republican's would effectively pick the VP though
Ahhh pretrial.
This statute provides that lower federal courts may also hear cases where the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction,[2]:19β20 with the exception of disputes between two or more states. When a case is between two or more states, the Supreme Court holds both original and exclusive jurisdiction, and no lower court may hear such cases.
Oh I missed that part, was looking specifically at procedure.
So Texas did the right thing in terms of procedure, only SCOTUS can hear this case.
The more you know π
Well that explains why they had a state bring it up, expedites the final decision.
My guess is they will take it, and it will be a partial victory, not one that changes the election.
I doubt it will be any kind of victory. It's worth noting that the states Texas is targeting is very selective and the red states joining in are as "guilty" of the accusations they are making against the blue states.
It's going to be a double-edged sword.
If by some miracle Texas wins, blue states are going to sue back using the same exact argument.
Apparently based on Texas' arguments, they should also be suing themselves π€£
As well as many other states besides just those 4
ALM's Law.com online Real Life Dictionary of the Law. The easiest-to-read, most user-friendly guide to legal terms. Use it free!
In this instance, Texas is accusing specifically those swing states of acting in a way that they themselves have also acted.
I honestly didn't think FB would lose that
Google is the gov'ts next target, I believe
Wait, it's written like FB already lost
But reading more, it may not have happened yet?
Either way, Google is on that list as "next"
I'm curious how they're going to be "broken up" if they win. Seems like a baseless case from the article.
They do need a bit more regulation, but I think over-regulation is just as damaging.
Companies have been broken up before afaik
But, the fact that large companies are taking Microsoft's stance for dealing with competition is just sketchy af
Like, I get that breaking up can happen by splitting them from whatsapp and instagram but I really want the resolution instead to be something insane splitting up facebook.com into baby books.
- Segment their userbase geographically
- Segment their usernase by generation (obvious name for one: you're okay, boomer)
- Split by registration year
- Anyone younger than 20 has to go to instagram, anyone older than 45 has to go to a revived friendster
Revived friendster got me
i feel theres no hope left in republicans. the right is just too far gone.
Aren't we coming up on the date that the electoral college finally decides or whatever?
for people to be so willing to deny logic and want to kill people and destroy americas foundation just to keep their guy in
the right is normalizing murder, thats a serious issue
and if you disagree with my statement ,id love to hear your explanation on why advocating for civil war, which means killing people, on the basis that you disagree with the person and your guy lost, and you want to kill those people to keep your guy in power, and then none of your peers are calling you out to say "Stop that"..... how is that not
electoral college decides next month iirc
ah, they cast votes on the 16th, but, not offiially counted until next month
fang fang likes to bang bang
at the same time, not everyone who supported trump is raging over this like a madman
if we talk about anything the democrats do, the first thing screamed at any of us centralist/rightish leaning people is NOT ALL DEMOCRATS
I do not support anybody who is attacking or threatening to attack others, but the issue is that it goes both ways, and a lot of people are scared about lots of things right now on both sides of the politcal spectrum around the world
plus there is concern with Biden being compromised by external and internal interference. Considering trump's external influence the left has been obsessed about since the beginning really doesn't make much sense.
first thing many of us heard after biden being called by the media was magical trump supporter lists
people are literally making lists of people flying trump flags on their houses to be attacked
yeah, its begging for civil conflict to people who would otherwise not want to take part of it
Congress makes basically the final choice on December 18th. Both houses have to confirm the results. Usually that's a rubber stamp, not so much in a contested election. However technically the results are not "final" (i.e. possible to contest) until either Jan 4th or Jan 20th depending on who you ask.
And they're just going to say Biden, right?
Well.. Republican's control the Senate, and you have 18 states worth willing to contest it in SCOTUS.
That's like literally a dictatorship then
Additionally just like in 2000, I think a single member of Congress can contest it in the battleground states, with the signature of a Senator.
In 2000, they didn't have Senators who'd sign it, seems that maybe this year will be different.
So even tho Biden won, they can just give it to Trump again?
Also not really, if it was a Dictatorship then Trump himself could contest it.
In the confirmation process, not the courts.
Well no.
So in this situation, it becomes a contingent election.
Which means the House votes for the President en bloc congressional delegation.
By the entire process, Biden hasn't really won yet, he's just the projected winner
And the Senate votes majority for VP.
That theoretically means 25-25 I think, though I'm not 100% sure on that.
So Republicans will confirm Biden, and put Trump as VP.
Correct, legally speaking Biden is not the President Elect.
Which he had promised in the debates not to claim until the result was officially decided. Broken promises etc etc.
The reason I'm unsure about 25-25 is I'm not 100% certain the new Congress does the contingent election, or the old one. If it's the old one, Trump wins.
The new one is a stalemate for a contingent election, pretty sure either the Speaker decides in that instance or there is no process.
It's fun to speculate but Biden is 99% going to be elected and Harris will be his VP.
99 is far too low. Unless this wild plan to invalidate millions of voters rights somehow goes through after failing a few dozen times already.
The crazy side of the republican party will continue moving the goalposts until they run out of space to move them. I'm afraid of what happens next as a consequence of all this.
At least the damn Kraken thing is dead now. That's nice.
SCOTUS thing will die too. Expect a decision tomorrow or early next week.
I was kinda hoping they'd just put it out today after PA's response was filed (which it was)
Any guesses on the new goalpost after this scotus decision?
Gosh if claiming president elect based on the results clearly showing he will be president (from this election) upsets anybody, those folks must really be pissed about Trump's presidency. Can't imagine having that much anger that they must have.
Yeah, although he's technically not president-elect yet, I'm pretty sure Trumpers has no qualms about President-Elect Trump being called by the media in 2016.
Of course not, it's all manufactured rage for the "enemy" π
Clinton conceded the day after, btw.
I'm guessing one of the next goalposts will be patriotic faithless electors π
That's a good guess.
Later we'll get Rand Paul and some representative disputing the results to cause debate
Yeah definitely, that'll be after the EC votes
And after inauguration, that's when I get nervous what their supporters start doing
You heard about the right-wing terrorist who brought an alleged bomb into a Democratic headquarters in Spokane, right? Maybe something like that, but bigger.
The goalpost's movement was undetectable
Sure, except that's not going to happen lol.
But opinion pieces gonna opinion.
Looks like all 4 swing states have responded now? If I'm not mistaken.
They all mention Texas has no standing lol
Georgia: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163383/20201210145849997_Georgia -- Brief in Opposition.pdf
Michigan: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163387/20201210145404465_22O155 Texas MI BIO 12-10.pdf
Pennsylvania: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163367/20201210142206254_Pennsylvania Opp to Bill of Complaint v.FINAL.pdf
Wisconsin: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163393/20201210150111653_Brief.pdf
I need my Twitter dark mode back
This election cycle, Georgia did what the
Constitution empowered it to do: it implemented
processes for the election, administered the election in
the face of logistical challenges brought on by COVID19, and confirmed and certified the election resultsβ
again and again and again.
Yet Texas has sued Georgia anyway, asserting
claims based on essentially four factual allegations
damn
that's brutal
Since Election Day, State and Federal courts
throughout the country have been flooded with frivolous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths
of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the election. The State of Texas has now added its voice to the
cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate
elections in four states for yielding results with which
it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its
original jurisdiction and then anoint Texasβs preferred
candidate for President is legally indefensible and is an
afront to principles of constitutional democracy.
also brutal
not as pointed as Georgia's
Yea I pretty much agree the election is basically decided at this point for me unless something big comes out
Supreme Court will toss it out on standing or laches
laches is basically you took too long, we can't uncook the egg, even if you had a point
Basically since Georgia went Biden any scenario in which Trump is accepting his nomination on Jan 20 will see people storming the White House
This is all fun to doomscroll about but not worth seriously worrying about
I doubt Texas can prove it was injured by the results of another state's election lol. I'm guessing it'll get tossed out on standing. "They didn't vote the way we wanted them to" is not a valid argument.
had to pop back in here for a bit to say... yet again... TIME has made Person of the Year more ridiculous, which I didn't think was possible
no one is quite sure what it means anymore... I thought it was supposed to be the person/group/thing that had the biggest impact on the world. Of the 4 finalists, I think healthcare workers have directly impacted the lives of most people. Unsure why they weren't #1 π€·ββοΈ
I guess you can pull the all-too-classic... "so did Hitler" π
Is that not transphobic as fuck?
Uhh
children cannot give consent regarding most stuff though? why should this be any different
I mean, it's difficult, being stuck in the wrong body, especially in puberty, is literal torture for some ppl. Then again, you are not allowed to get a tattoo at that age, because society thinks you are not mature enough to make such a lasting decision π€·ββοΈ
Is it still allowed with parental approvement?
I hear a lot of places still allow that with parental approvement
Could be just a "phase" where you want a sex change but later on realize the impact it could/would have on your life. Imo it's justified to not allow kids to have control over such drastic measures that early on
Or well taking hormones and whatever other treatments there are
implying that being transgender is just a phase
Man I love the internet
German far right party political ad
"end to the corona panic, i show face, the corona dictatorship must end! For freedum of citizens in our county!"
His website
Jens kestner, afd (the party), undertaker
That explains it π π
Undertake is a beautiful word for that job btw
A silenced issue is the people who start transgender treatments and back out
For some it's just as simple as puberty blockers which have their own harm to the body, but people go much further too into it, years of treatment and surgery before they determine it was a mistake
Here's the thing, I have nothing against people who wanna swap gender, but, there is a thin line between trans and people just questioning their identity, especially at a young age, and no, we shouldn't just dismiss what their needs are and how they feel, but, we need to stop blindly steering people into a life of regret
the problem is that both decisions could end in a life of regret
Issue is that much of this research is taboo, so especially at young age the studies are generally lacking, pretty sure I read one which most people preteen who "come out trans" revert back to their normal gender
its a hard topic, there is no right or wrong really, but this decision def shouldnt be made by the kid alone
if it doesnt have supporting parents, there should be other adults that are close to the kid that can give a picture
The problem is that I guess it's sorta like a tattoo or a new piercing
You may reaaaaaallllyyy wanna do it
But, you got no idea if you're gonna pull it off until the needle has already struke
yeah, I made that comparison above, its not the same at all but kinda is I guess
My biggest gripe is the basically seemingly world record for youngest transition
When I was 8, I wanted to grow up to be a scooter
I don't think you can compare "hey I wanna be an astronaut" with "fuck I am born in the wrong body"
Okay, maybe not at 8, but, you know; I believe in listening to people and supporting them, but, there has to be a better way than basically shooting between "I'm a girl" and medicine
It's more the aspect that they're still young and growing and figuring out who you are, it's already a scary time and now we have more and more push towards these diagnoses which have life long impacts, sometimes all because I wanted to wear a dress
I'm erm... Joking... On the last point. Neever work a dress in my whole life, you know
cat is secretly a crossdresser
Seems at this stage there isn't enough data to suggest that transgenderism is strictly biological. Potentially it's also environmental. Of course, there are biological correlations, but not always. So it's ignorant to conclusively say it is or isn't a "phase."
That's just where the science is right now.
The distinction is significant because it's one thing to be born neurologically different vs being environmentally influenced, in the latter case consent seems to be a more important consideration (which minors are unable to give).
Detransitioning is real and should be further studied.
Now that the Biden Administration will be a scandal plagued mess for years to come, it is much easier for the Supreme Court of the United States to follow the Constitution and do what everybody knows has to be done. They must show great Courage & Wisdom. Save the USA!!!
34187
166496
So he conceded but then said the Supreme Court should install him anyway
Hah. I think there are a number of factors that will set apart Biden's presidency from Trump that will affect whether people consider it legitimate or not. Biden is unlikely to be a divisive figure. Many people on the right just want a return to normality or centrism. I think the number of people on the right who truly believe the election fraud narrative isn't even close to the number of people who actually voted for Trump.
So the idea that Biden's presidency will be haunted by questions of legitimacy by half of Americans, I think, is greatly overstated.
Fingers crossed on Georgia
I'm eager to see how Trump responds to the inevitable rejection by SCOTUS. I think everyone in the political spectrum knows it's going to fail, except Trump, he probably actually believes there's a chance.
This Texas lawsuit is extra bogus, btw, because those aren't the only states that made the kind of changes Texas is complaining about. They're just the ones that were close, went for Biden, but have Republican legislatures so have a chance of picking Trump delegates instead
Yep, I believe it was almost every state that made similar changes, including Texas.
Hell, Texas made changes to their election proceedings that would be against what they're arguing about
Yeah
Not only do they lack standing, not only are they too late to have a valid argument, they're also cherry picking
Yeah I believe it's called the clean (or unclean) hands doctrine.
lol, someone used Taylor Swift as an example of why CDPR should be able to ignore hate mail and death threats from fans and keep delaying Cyperpunk 2077 until it wasn't a buggy mess
Didn't Taylor Swift have some kind of breakdown and disappear for a year due to stress from hate mail and such?
It specifically targets people who were not born as women
I mean yes but they are not biologically the same thing though
Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden.
Each of them was named person of the year in the year they were elected.
That's kinda the point, I think. Baring someone from a sport because of the color of their skin would (rightly) be calling out for being racist
That's the point of her bill
There are well understood biological differences between male and females
^
so instead of gender separate people based on their hormone levels
biological differences which especially show in aspects like sports, such as track and weights, etc
I mean you have to make categories somehow
From the title in the image, it seems like the bill prevents women from taking part in a sport because they're not born as women
even south park explored this topic, this is a real issue
It's unfair to women who have trained for literally years to be thrown out of the way due to somebody changing their gender
Yes
Which imho is well found
How is it fair that women can train on the track for literally years, top of their class, etc, and thrown out because somebody changes their gender identity
Nevermind muscle is already established, giving already giving former men an advantage
Sure, fair. There's categories for that, though
where?
Well, then why not implement something like that
Yeah, sports like track and football dont have seperate classes besides age/gender
Only thing is, what do you do for catagories? as it's not like wrestling where there are inherit differences in size, etc
professional wrestling is generally split into weight AND gender
at least, afaik
Yes and there is generally a good reason for splitting them
Unless there is a sport where men and women have equal advantages
Afaik there really isn't
Apart from chess, all sports rely on physical strength on some level. Testosterone is OP.
It's generally well understood that biologically, men and women have different physical attributes that affect their athletic performance (or really, any aspect of physical labor).
Now it may not be the case always, but it is generally.
It's not an issue of being transphobe or insenitive to someone's gender identity, it's about athletic competitions being a level playing field.
The problem is that we have activists that claim these people/policies as transphobic
Plus there is still much to learn about how the body/mind copes with radical transformation
I absolutely think trans people should have a venue to athletically compete, but I don't know how that would work.
Yeah, its just a tightrope balance to sports
either allow them into the men/womens sports as defined gender, keeping them in their own biological groups, or make separate groups
all of them have their own issues
the activists are a problem when they fight for rights that aren't fair to other people. they tend to shove it under "equality" but in reality it's about superiority
It's really nuanced, seems like. For example, how far along are you in hormone therapy? At what age did you start hormone therapy? These questions seem to be impactful.
The thing is that there's so many different variables in play before you start even bringing in hormone treatments into the equation, etc
yes
It's such a nuanced issue, but, I don't think that it's fair to womens league sports, nor is it fair to people going through therapy to lump them in with the males, etc
imho, they need their own catagory, but, even there it's nuanced af
Personally, in my own experience with trans people, I don't find conforming to a new gender solves their problems, if not it may make their problems worse.
Just don't do sport
That's the wrong answer.
Transgenderism isn't a choice most of the time.
Sporting is tho
Right, but their inability to conform to their biological sex doesn't mean they should be excluded from sports.
It is a choice... they chose to go through the hormone therapy and identify as the other sex.
well if hormone therapy is an option (depends where you live and whatnot)
Well right now they can't really be included either as it's not fair for other contenders
Right, it's just a grey area where we need more information to be able to make informed decisions on the nuances.
I don't see "choosing hormone therapy" as a choice in the same sense. I see that more as a treatment.
To becoming the person they were meant to be.
Ah, so mentally they have no awareness of their action of saying yes to the treatment?
By saying they "chose" hormone therapy therefore they forfeit their ability to participate in competitive sporting events is like punishing them for choosing to treat a condition. They absolutely deserve to have a venue for athletic competition, their choice to treat their condition with hormone therapy shouldn't affect that.
We just don't know yet how that should work.
But what condition, physical, mental?
Obviously the answer isn't to allow biological males to participate in women's sports events.
we are doing a physical treatment on something that is mentally affected.
Yes, they are treating a mental condition as best they can. Not everyone can afford hormone therapy, but it is treatment nonetheless.
They don't want to feel trapped in a body that is incongruent with their gender identity.
In choosing to do so, that shouldn't be perceived as a choice that they forfeit their ability to participate in competitive sports.
the issue is that the entire discussion is a massive rabbit hole
ideally you find a way for people to be happy with the skin they're in, but, it's not that easy
if people wanna treat themselves that way, I don't see why I should stand against it, but, it shouldn't serve as a means to disenfranchise others in the name of "for societal good"
For sure, definitely I agree with the idea that they perhaps shouldn't be participating in competitive sports of the opposite biological sex. In the example above, that would be unfair to the women who train so hard to compete.
It's not a binary thing though. There's a spectrum on a biological level of people with various hormone levels that influence their ability, and of course genetics of body build. And then you've got people who are unknowingly XY and all sorts of other outlier situations in which nobody (not even transphobes) could claim there was a choice in the matter.
The obvious answer is to stop sports, since most of them suck anyway π
Well, yea
Competition does tend to breed toxicity π
even within one gender, some people are just never gonna be near the top
unknowingly XY, the hell you mean by that?
no matter how hard they train and all that, and I think that that's just something that's accepted
The issue is people who've gone through or started to go through the changes which make men more different than women
somebody at the back of the track on a guys team can be faster than half the womens team just because of biology
So it just comes down to an arbitrary line defining acceptance, and not an actual measure, and that's where it gets ugly. π¦
pretty much, yea
Yep
And, you can't really say, yea, you're trans, you're slower than X, so we'll allow you to compete in the womens team, etc