TropicalDingdong

@TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

TropicalDingdong,

Just in-case you’ve never actually seen Joan Rivers, one of the funniest stand-ups of all time.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=dauUOqte7Bo

TropicalDingdong,

Seems like the program went down the drain.

TropicalDingdong,

Because its pleasurable to believe in “secret knowledge”, that you are in the knowing group, and everyone else is the “out group”.

GME, and its associated cult.

Christians and Zionists.

Qanon.

Its all basically the same at its roots, which is that humans take pleasure in a good story, and rather than believe what we think is most likely, we more often choose to believe that which makes us feel special.

TropicalDingdong,

There and better and worse variants, but the fundamental issue I’m identifying is the tendency to want to believe ‘good stories’. I think it’s a profoundly human flaw, related to our evolution and history as a species that tells stories to transmit information. We believe a good story. It’s pleasurable to lose yourself in story. You remember good stories. But a story being ‘good’ has little and less to do with it being true.

While we’re discussing this issue in the light of conspiracy theories with no basis, I think the flaw extends to all domains of human life where communication and evaluation are necessary.

TropicalDingdong,

Arguably, grass roots activism is the only thing that has ever changed this society for the better, ever.

TropicalDingdong,

this is why we have to invest in things like pipeline now

TropicalDingdong,

I mean, I think we’ve been saying this since November.

TropicalDingdong,

Could you imagine if Israel had to pay for the actions of its military on their own?

TropicalDingdong,

Could have began investigation of these things on day 1 of the new administration/ congress.

TropicalDingdong,

There are so many great city builder demos on Steam right now, you can play 3 new ones every single day this week

There are so many great city builder demos on Steam right now, you can play 3 new ones every single day this week

TropicalDingdong,

I mean, I’m not going to wade into whatever shit waters it would take to see how right wing audiences are reacting to this.

It’s a nothing burger to end all nothing burgers for those of us on the left. I’m not sure how the right is reacting to it. I don’t care. I don’t think it changes anything.

TropicalDingdong,

Great.

Biden, now say you’ll do the opposite. That you’ll work with abortion rights groups to make a right to an abortion the law of the land. Give us something we can use to clearly distinguish you from whatever polices Trump is going to be promoting.

TropicalDingdong,

Cool.

He should say that pursuing a law to codify a woman’s right to an abortion is a major plank of his 2024 platform. I’ll vote for him if he does that; hell, I’ll go get ten people who aren’t registered, and make sure they vote as well.

He can win on this issue alone, but he has to do more than luke-warm ideations and milquetoast ‘support’, as if it needs to be someone else taking up the banner to do so. I don’t need him to express passive support for issues like abortion rights, which is all those citations offer.

I need to hear him say he’s going to own the issue and fight to make it a reality. Passive support simply isn’t good enough.

TropicalDingdong,

“If Americans send me a Congress that supports the right to choose, I promise you: I will restore Roe v. Wade as the law of the land again,” the president said, with Supreme Court justices in attendance for this address to Congress.

That isn’t the same thing as what I said. Biden is taking a passive position of support. In the same way that the administration might write a budget, Biden’s office can propose legislation they would like taken up. He could work with house members to do so tomorrow. He can make this a priority of the administration.

The key difference I’m seeing that you dont is that passive support isn’t equivalent to actively fighting for something. I’m making a commitment that if Biden takes this on as a “active fight”, in contrast to something they “passively support”, I will to.

As far as I know, working with the house to get a bill to encodify a right to an abortion is not a campaign promise Biden has made. He’s offered passive support that if someone else does the work, he would support it. These two things are not equivalent.

TropicalDingdong,

Ok, point made. I owe you ten. I’d still like to see Biden “actively supporting”/ “actively promoting” the a woman right to choose in his 2024 campaign language, but if he’s working to push both the American people and congress to do so, that is specifically what I asked for.

TropicalDingdong,

Well I’ve already got two commits from NC to get registered and vote.

TropicalDingdong,

Well its like I said. I need Biden to advocate for them, not to be supportive of them.

Its a fundamental and important difference. I really think Biden could win if he makes this the “issue of the election” and uses it to distinguish himself from Trump. Passively saying “Well if the American people want it enough, I’ll support it” isn’t good enough. He needs to advocate for it; to get onto TV and media and present people with why this is such an important issue and why it should be the case.

He doesn’t get anything ‘passively supporting’ the issue.

TropicalDingdong,

He’s done everything he can within the powers of the executive branch to support reproductive rights.

Like, I just don’t agree with that. I have to push back there because I do think Biden has a job to do that he isn’t doing here.

The role of president or any political leader is always more than to just be reactive to what the other branches of government do.

Their role is to lead and to provide guidance, not for what congress wants, but for what they the president believe the right thing to do is.

Obviously a president can’t pass laws unilaterally; that was never suggested. But look at how presidents who have been effective at getting an agenda passed have done the work. They get out there and they make the case to the American people for a given thing. Their job is rhetorical. They have to make and sell the case, and convince the American public to support a thing. Its a matter of who is operating on who. Is the president being operated on by forces or is the president operating on those forces?

Examples of this being done effectively:

Roosevelt (FDR): During the Great Depression, FDR used “Fireside Chats” to speak directly to the American people, what the impact of the economic measures he wanted to take would be. His first Fireside Chat in 1933, he detailed why a “bank holiday” was necessary to prevent a banking crisis, helping the public understand and support the government’s intervention.

Eisenhower: Eisenhower and the Interstate Highway System. He signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956… Eisenhower promoted this project as essential for US security. He used the cold theCold War and the need for efficient military transport to gain public and congressional support. He didn’t have support begin with. He had to use rhetoric to draw people to this cause.

Obama: Obama’s efforts to pass the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010 serve as a prime example of presidential advocacy. He frequently addressed the public and Congress, explaining the benefits of the ACA. He used speeches, press conferences, and town hall meetings to directly engage directly with peoples’ concerns. He used media coverage of these events to promote the ACA. I mean the guy practically went door to door to get the thing passed and he made a show of it. And it worked.

So there are plenty of ways to fry a catfish here, but the point that I’m highlighting is that it shows a lack of leadership when you supposedly ‘support’ a policy, but wont get out there and do the on-the-ground work of advocating for that policy to get it passed.

I’ve never seen Biden use the bully pulpit, but its precisely the role of the President to do so. And its not Congress he needs to be working on, its the American people. You move the people and you move congress.

TropicalDingdong,

Lets see if they show up for the election. If so, this is evidence for the effectiveness of Macrons gambit.

TropicalDingdong,

I mean I think this represents the core of Macrons strategy. Force the issue. Don’t wait. Get people emotionally worked up and do so quickly. Don’t wait for things to cool off.

TropicalDingdong,

Yes, yesterday. There are a wide range of views as to this being a good idea or not.

TropicalDingdong,

It definitely fits the bill of the “bold move Cotton” meme template.

I personally side with WWII General Pattons quote on planning:

"“A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week.”

Too many political leaders think they have until next week to figure out how to deal with the rising tide of fascism globally. They don’t. If Macron thinks he’s got the nuts or at least a hand that plays, I say push the chips. Because next week you won’t have a stronger position.

TropicalDingdong,

Its interesting right? In a Machiavellian sense.

The timing just… all came together for Manchin to have played his role, and now Fetterman gets to be "that ‘Democrat’ ".

Maybe the Fetterman one hits a bit closer to home because I don’t think Manchin really ever presented himself as anything other than what he was. Regardless, the useful tool of an “unreliable Democrat” remains firmly in place.

TropicalDingdong,

It would be one thing if there was no mechanism for accountability within the Supreme Court. Its a fundamental flaw in our constitution.

However: fastcompany.com/…/can-a-supreme-court-justice-be-…

The way the Biden campaign is running to the right this election, Democrats will almost assuredly be losing the house and the senate, so removing any of these justices is a bit of a fantasy. If anything, we’ll probably lose a liberal justice for a conservative one.

TropicalDingdong,

Of which they’ll get 0

TropicalDingdong,

Your uncertainty doesn’t have bearing here. There is a preponderance of evidence showing that since 2016 (and before), there number of ‘swing’ voters has diminished to basically nothing.

Neither Trump nor Biden are actually running against each other , because no voters are going to be converted from one side to the other.

They are both running against “the couch”, in that whoever can convince enough of their voters that the election is worth showing up for, will win.

Also, if you were a Republican, why wouldn’t you vote for Trump? He delivered, in one way or another, on all the major policy goals of the base. For the Republican agenda, he’s been the most effective president since Reagan.

Bidens camp is in a fever dream with this strategy. And I agree with the article. it is their strategy.

TropicalDingdong,

He tanked the economy and killed over a million with his handling of COVID, the wall didn’t get built, Mexico didn’t pay for any of the repairs that did, Hillary has -34 felonies to her name, his trade war with China didn’t bring back manufacturing, Russia was emboldened by his term, American global superiority was damaged by his garbage foreign policy, fossil fuel usage is continuing to decline in favor of renewables…

I agree with all that. But you and I don’t live in the same world that Republican voters do. They litterally live in a completly different media and ‘story of history’ landscape. You obviously do, and should, despise all of the things that Trump did while he was president. But there is no denying that these were the things that Republican voters wanted him to do. And he gets to blame any failures on Democrats or the deep state or whatever other kookie bullshit they come up with.

You can and should hate the Republican agenda, but you shouldn’t put blinders on to suggest that Trump didn’t pursue it aggressively, and actually accomplish much of it. He got tax cuts for billionaires. He got the Supreme Court, and thus Roe. He at least tried to do almost all of the things he said he would do. You should disagree with all of those things, but you are not a Republican voter. Neither am I. But we should be clear headed about what Republican voters want, especially considering how horrible it all is.

TropicalDingdong,

Yeah this game was… interesting enough. I can’t say it was really worth the time to figure out though. I really like RPGs, open world/ multi-path games. But this one just didn’t “hook” me.

TropicalDingdong,

Man if only there was some way to know. Some way that you could tell.

TropicalDingdong,

This is a big deal. I’m extremely excited to get a look into these data. This would be an INCREDIBLE thing considering that Biden has been lagging Trump in the polls for over 450 days.

And whoever tells you polls don’t matter has their head up their ass. Polls do matter, a lot, especially this far out. People aren’t a monolith. People do change their minds and perspectives.

Apparent viability matters. Even a 2-5% hit in polling to Trump can take him from the range of viable to non-viable.

And yes, polling is flawed. In 2016 and 2020, the polling massively underestimated support for Trump. We need to keep this in mind when we look at these numbers,.

Keeping in mind that the trajectory of Bidens polling was into the carpet, pretty much since the inauguration.

If Biden can shift this towards an upward trend, he’s suddenly back in the game. Thats a sea change. Thats huge.

TropicalDingdong,

Agreed. I’m holding back to do any real analysis of this for about 10 more days.

People love to say polls suck, they don’t mean anything, its total none-sense, etc. Interestingly its always when their candidate is losing.

Now that these polls are shifting, my guess is the dorks who can’t tell up from down start shifting their stories, and soon after that, they’ll be pretending it was always their view.

Polls are important, especially in terms of this far out, and especially in-terms of the ‘appearance’ of electability. These are the weeks and months where momentum builds. A sudden breakout, or sudden drop in polling numbers is extremely consequential.

TropicalDingdong,

Its important that groups like sunrise do this now, to maintain some semblance of political integrity going into what seems more and more likely to be 4 more years of Trump. We’ll never take the country back without the youth, and gaslighting on Joe Biden won’t win them to your cause.

We’re going to need a better option if we want to stop Trump.

TropicalDingdong,

You don’t want Biden for reasons of your own, and this is a great way to attack him

You know you can just ask me what I think right? Do you try to tell your SO, your kids, your family what to think? Like I really wonder if you carry this kind of gaslighting approach to conversation irl.

What I want is for Biden to be the kind of candidate who can get elected. So fucking what if a his apologists online are going to vote for him regardless? He’s DYING in the polls. and its 100% due to his policies on Gaza and Israel. He’s giving us no room to put daylight between him and Trump. I need a candidate, any candidate, who can beat Trump in November. Biden can’t do that right now. You being willing to support Biden in-spite of him being a genocidal apologist isn’t good enough, because there are enough people out-there for whom that is a bridge too far.

He’s gone, the wrong direction in every way, shape, and form since October of last year. Student protests? Wrong answers from Biden. Israels genocide? Wrong answers from Biden. Border policy? Wrong answers from Biden. And no, these microscopic nibbling around the edges aren’t good enough. He paused some shipments? He put down a few sanctions? Who the fuck do you think you are convincing with that? Like really? What voters do you think that works on?

This is the fundamental flaw in the entire rhetorical approach that both you and the Democrats seem so pot committed to, that they’re willing to lose an easily winnable election to Trump over. Any Blue Will Do (ABWD), as a material political strategy, sets you up for failure when there is no distinction between the two parties. ABWD results in the weakest, most ineffectual candidates. It puts us in a position where we’re up against a literal fascist, who just caught 34 felonies, and we’re losing to them. Its a direct result of the rhetorical approach, of the apologist, of the willingness to look past the deep flaws that prevent Biden from being a viable candidate.

Biden can’t win right now. No incumbent has ever recovered from polling or an approval like Joe Biden has earned. Apologizing for him wont change that. Excusing him won’t change that. Pretending he doesn’t support something when he does wont change that.

Check out this page: …fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/

I was planning on making my mid-month polling update about swing states, but I’m considering shifting to an analysis about incumbency and approval/ polling rates.

Biden currently has an approval lower than any president in the history of this country, at this same date in their Presidency. Yes, lower than every incumbent that was held to one term. I don’t generally support trend based analysis for things like this, but if this keeps up, he’ll end his presidency in the high 20’s, low 30’s, barring some extreme event (again, I don’t typically support trend analysis for things like this). The lowest an incumbents approval has ever been on election day and still become re-elected is GWB at 51%. Biden hasn’t polled that high since June of 2021.

I think, both agree that stopping Trump is the number one priority. Where we disagree is whether Joe Biden is even capable of doing so. You or I supporting Biden individually is irrelevant. What matters is if he is popular enough, viable enough, among enough of the voters, to get over the 270 threshold. If Biden can’t do this thing, he isn’t worth considering as a candidate.

It might be possible for Biden to turn the ship, but I think he’s shown us enough of who he is to know that he won’t. He continues to take on Republican polices as if they were part of his campaign platform. Its like he’s governing and campaigning as if Republicans are suddenly going to swoon and come his way, which I think we could both agree is preposterous. He keeps distancing himself further from the base and further from the coalition he needed to win.

I think I just saw the headline float past that Sunrise Movement won’t be supporting him. Did you hear that click? That was the youth vote closing the door behind them on the way out. I wonder who is next? I could see the ACLU with holding their support if he signs the “Protesting Israel on Campus is Hate Speech” bill.

I’m interested. Whats your line? Where do you drop your support for Biden? My guess is that you are basically the bellwether, just based on how I have you pegged. Like whats your line before you’ll seek an alternative? My guess is that whatever your line, thats the threshold we’ll have to cross before the DNC will pull him and we’ll get another candidate, so I’m genuinely curious about what it would take for you to move on from Biden.

Its probably going to be Newsom. About two to three stories a week on a national or international topic with Newsom’s take bubble up. Newsom has been extremely careful about not commenting on student protests. Plus its not like he can actually do anything in regards to policy so he’ll be able to talk all the shit he wants without having to back it up. I suppose Kamala could get the nod. She’ll have the administrations baggage to wear, which if she can’t shed, I think loses her the election. Maybe plucky Mayor Pete?

TropicalDingdong,

Steve Garvey won the primary cheese head. He won. Porter lost. Goal met.

TropicalDingdong,

Schiff spent 10 million dollars promoting Garvey, a Republican, to stop a progressive.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines