The democrats did try to do things like pass a huge expansion in immigration enforcement. Harris promised to have a republican in her cabinet. She campaigned with Liz Cheney. Did republican voters suddenly jump on board? No.
The Biden administration slow-rolled prosecution of Trump for his crimes because they wanted to court moderates and republicans. That failure enabled Trump to run again from somewhere other than prison.
"If only the dems had run Romney for president, then they would have won" is not serious.
> The democrats did try to do things like pass a huge expansion in immigration enforcement.
IIRC, Biden hemmed and hawwed on border environment until like a couple months before the election, when he issued some executive orders that actually had an impact. But that was too little, too late.
> Harris promised to have a republican in her cabinet. She campaigned with Liz Cheney. Did republican voters suddenly jump on board? No.
Except that was misunderstanding "republican voters" and the energy Trump was tapping into. Getting Liz Cheney on board was just Dem elitists trying to ally with the dying and unpopular elitist wing of the Republican party.
I'm talking about something far more radical than some warmed over 2000s centrism: jettison the much of the social-justice activist baggage and co-opt some of Trump's populist appeal, like his rejection of neoliberalism and support for effective border enforcement.
So Harris goes on stage and says that we are going to amend Title 7 to expressly exclude LGBT people from its protection. This would have led to victory?
> IIRC, Biden hemmed and hawwed on border environment until like a couple months before the election
You recall incorrectly. The Biden admin was trying to push congress to pass a bi-partisan immigration bill. It was torpedoed by Trump when he wasn't even in an elected position on the basis that it would help his campaign run on Biden's "immigration failures".
Trump does not support effective immigration enforcement whereby the rule of law is carried out. Rather Trump supports similarly ineffective immigration enforcement, just with the incompetence accruing in the opposite direction.
The point is twofold. First, we need to stop letting the fascists own this idea that they're effective at anything beyond causing unnecessary human suffering (that many of their sick supporters actually seem to relish).
Second, regardless of the Democrats' policies, the fascists won by promising a siren song of simplistic fairy tale answers that were never going to work out (obvious to anybody using half their brain). There is no way to remain honest and overcome this when the People want to choose feel-good lies over uncomfortable truths. And if you try to compete by adopting similarly dishonest tactics, you're never going to catch up to the fascists who have years of a head start and an emotionally-resounding message of restorative cruelty.
I disagree. The Dems shot themselves in the foot for several reasons:
- trying to appeal to the "center" instead of going the other way and channelling the more radical elements' rage against Trump. I believe Bernie would have beaten Trump as the nominee. Yes, the GOP would have painted him as a "Communist destroying the American Way of Life", but they did that to Harris anyway so being centrist gave the Dems nothing.
- not focusing on prices and jobs from day one, in simple terms the average uneducated worker could understand, and mostly, trying to say "things are good/better" which may have been true, but everyone else thought they were not when they went to buy eggs
- Biden trying to stay in for a second term instead of bowing out at the start
> It was massively selfish and incompetent for them not to make major policy pivots with the goal of just annihilating Trump and his movement. Instead they just treated it as a regular election, where the goal was to eek out a victory for their partisans.
It sounds a lot like you actually agree; those are all reasons why every Democrat constituent should be livid with the party "establishment". Instead, any time this point is brought up, people respond instantly with the "it's not a 'both sides' issue" thought-terminating cliché. In this case, one person says, "Okay, but obviously the other people shot themselves in the foot" and the response is "I disagree, here's how they shot themselves in the foot".
I think so. Something more in the Sanders direction would have been way better, though with a keener eye towards not alienating working-class folks (like putting a massive student loan forgiveness plan front-and-center did), with Trump's rejection of free-trade dogma, and jettisoning the social justice activism that loses rural areas and many working-class voters.
> Instead, any time this point is brought up, people respond instantly with the "it's not a 'both sides' issue" thought-terminating cliché
"Both sides" itself is also often a thought-terminating cliche. It is always important to look at the larger context these points are being made in.
Here, the original comment was taking individual Republican voters to task for supporting this performatively-cruel societally-destructive con man with a proven track record. This is something that every individual Republican voter directly did, while Democrat voters did not do and would not have ended up doing [had Harris won]. Harris, for all of her faults and would-have-been letdowns, did not openly run on a platform of destroying our society. Reasonable people can disagree with her policies, but she appeared to be poised to at least lead the country rather than deliberately divide us.
But the comment responding to that then tried to equate that blame to "both sides", going so far as to use the word "collectively" to try and bootstrap personal responsibility from the (obviously terrible) actions of the Democratic party.
So no, that is not an equal criticism in the context of criticizing Republican voters who actively voted for overt evil! The many failings of the Democratic party is something that definitely needs to be discussed, but not in the context of the much larger and more serious problems in the Republican party. Rather, bringing it up here seems like yet another instance of the only-Democrats-have-agency fallacy.
(I presume the downvotes without comment are just the same old fascism supporters who hate my framing because it clashes with the lies they tell themselves about what they voted for. The funny part is I'm no friend of the Democratic party either - I'm a libertarian who actually believes in many of the issues Trump abuses to rabble-rouse. But my country called, so I swallowed my own independent individualist pride and answered that call rather than falling for the siren song of destructionist grievance politics)
This is nonsense, I'm sorry. Trump literally got elected off of pure partisan vilification, insults and just bullshit in general. The idea that the left need to go high while Trump and the GOP openly courted shit like pizzagate is just nonsense.
The fact that the dems are weak assholes unable to make even symbolic measures towards someone that's openly violating the constitution and harassing citizens is symptomatic of the deeper rot of attempting to be a 'big tent' party and having zero actual spine or policy.
> This is nonsense, I'm sorry. Trump literally got elected off of pure partisan vilification, insults and just bullshit in general.
Did you pay any attention at all to the 2024 election? Biden's age? Inflation? The half-hearted, too-late pivot on border enforcement? What you say is nonsense. It's twisted misinformation. There was a lot more going on.
> The idea that the left need to go high while Trump and the GOP...
Yeah, it's cathartic to act like a kid on a playground, and unleash your inner asshole because some other kid was mean, but it's stupid and immature.
> The fact that the dems are weak assholes unable to make even symbolic measures towards someone that's openly violating the constitution and harassing citizens is symptomatic of the deeper rot of attempting to be a 'big tent' party and having zero actual spine or policy.
The dems are weak, but that's because they want to stay exactly as they are instead of becoming a truly majoritarian party. If the dems make Trump-like power grabs (as many liberals fantasize about), it'll just make Trump stronger, because he can and will use the backlash.
> Did you pay any attention at all to the 2024 election? Biden's age? Inflation? The half-hearted, too-late pivot on border enforcement? What you say is nonsense. It's twisted misinformation. There was a lot more going on.
Did you? Biden and the Democratic party was entirely focused on attempting to appeal to 'centrists' and Republicans, exactly what you wanted and they lost because of it.
> Yeah, it's cathartic to act like a kid on a playground, and unleash your inner asshole because some other kid was mean, but it's stupid and immature.
No, it's called having an actual policy and stance. If someone's behaving like a dumb asshole then they should be called out on being a dumb asshole. We should expect more from our politicians and one of those things involves actually calling this shit out.
> The dems are weak, but that's because they want to stay exactly as they are instead of becoming a truly majoritarian party. If the dems make Trump-like power grabs (as many liberals fantasize about), it'll just make Trump stronger, because he can and will use the backlash.
At this point, the only recovery from the damage Trump has inflicted upon this country is going to be a massive power grab. That means dissolving ICE and arresting everyone involved, packing the supreme court, pulling out all of the Trump appointees and criminally investigating everyone involved with this administration. And let me be very clear: any Dem that does not agree not only deserves to lose, but they deserve to be harassed for the rest of their life and never, ever hold another job again. There is no middle ground anymore.
> attempting to appeal to 'centrists' and Republicans, exactly what you wanted
Why do you think this is what they wanted?
> At this point, the only recovery from the damage Trump has inflicted upon this country is going to be a massive power grab. That means dissolving ICE and arresting everyone involved, packing the supreme court, pulling out all of the Trump appointees and criminally investigating everyone involved with this administration. And let me be very clear: any Dem that does not agree not only deserves to lose, but they deserve to be harassed for the rest of their life and never, ever hold another job again. There is no middle ground anymore.
This just ignores the point from the parent comment it is in response to; regardless of how agreeable these actions would be to you and others (myself included), there are many who could be easily convinced that the result will be harmful to them pretty much "because it's 'the Democrats' doing it". You can arrest however many thousands of politicians and agents; the problem would be exacerbated in that case since the same people who voted for Trump twice would feel even more aggrieved. Many of them like what (they think) he's doing and would jump at any opportunity to vote for someone similar.
What you describe would not be the recovery you hope for, at least not long term. Granted, I don't know what would be, but this issue is one of "post-truth" where significant amounts of people can simultaneously be convinced of conflicting opinions about an event, even given videos from multiple perspectives, as we learned recently. Throwing an easily-contested "massive power grab" into the mix is not a serious suggestion. The political machine that got Trump elected will easily get another demagogue elected off the back of lies mixed with truths about said power grab.
>> At this point, the only recovery from the damage Trump has inflicted upon this country is going to be a massive power grab.
> This just ignores the point from the parent comment it is in response to; regardless of how agreeable these actions would be to you and others (myself included), there are many who could be easily convinced that the result will be harmful to them pretty much "because it's 'the Democrats' doing it".
And I a key point is: rejection of Trump is not an endorsement of the Democrats, let alone a full-throated one. Remember: the Democrats are still really unpopular. A Trump-like Democratic power grab is just as unacceptable to many people, and putting voters in the position of choosing between two unacceptable power grabs to not a recipe for resounding electoral success. It's likely a recipe for failure.
A power-grab would emotionally satisfying for partisan Democrats, as they are angry at Trump and would be happy with the result. The problem is they aren't even close to a majority, and they're exactly the kind of people who should be told to hold their nose instead of being catered to.
>> And let me be very clear: any Dem that does not agree not only deserves to lose, but they deserve to be harassed for the rest of their life and never, ever hold another job again. There is no middle ground anymore.
The GP has a totally unreasonable attitude. It sounds like emotional lashing out rather than anything helpful or productive.
This echoes my own experience. The very few times I attempted to post a question it was later flagged as duplicate, pointing to some other question which matched the keywords but didn't at all match the actual use case or problem. I don't know if this was the result of an automated process or zealous users, but it certainly put me off ever trying to engage with the community there.
I had the same experience, eBay suggests that I'll have a Jabra speakerphone in my mailbox tomorrow to try moving everything to a better audio setup. The software seems good but the audio performance is miserable on the preview device, you essentially have to be talking directly at the microphone from not more than a few feet away for anything to recognize.
Sadly, the Jabra (or any USB) audio device means I'll need to shift over to an rPi which comes with it's own lifecycle challenges.
Service jobs are hard to export, it's just moving money around inside your country. Riveting is a job that produces goods that can be exported for incoming cash, elderly care isn't.
That is a fundamental distinction, yes. But the notion that exporting brings wealth to a country is… kinda not really the case anymore.
If that wealth is ending up in very few people’s hands, and if said people are wealthy enough that they keep their money offshore (which is the case a lot of the time), what is the big difference in making something you can export?
This makes next to no sense. Service jobs aren't "just moving money around inside your country" for the same reason that exporting goods isn't "just moving money around inside your planet".
Services sell time and skills directly, instead of in the form of a tangible good. That's it.
Unless elderly care is too expensive and people have their parents live with them.
In the late 90's when we talked about the transition to the Service Economy, jobs such as call center were touted as the way forward for the recently unemployed textile workers. Until we found we could move those to the Caribbean, Philippines and India.
I remember a number of people talking about how they could make decent money bar-tending and waiting tables. Until the economy slowed down and people stopped eating out.
Service is job that you pay someone else to do because you don't want to do it, which is great until you have less income. Then it becomes a budget line item that can be cut.
> Riveting is a job that produces goods that can be exported for incoming cash, elderly care isn't.
Where's the distinction between "moving money around inside your country" and "goods that can be exported for incoming cash"? If you go to mcdonalds to buy a burger instead of making it yourself, is that also "moving money around inside your country"? What about paying some carpenter to make a chair rather than making it yourself? Should we just cancel all jobs that can't plausibly produce stuff that can exported?
It wasn't about the labour part and whether that is exportable in the off-shoring sense.
It's about the product being exportable (in the sense of being able to sell it for money outside of your country) vs. just having people within your own economy doing "left pocket <-> right pocket".
And even with that, you can sell a waiter's service to other countries. You just have to first make them come - it's called tourism and comes with a whole lot of other jobs / supply chain(s) as well. Some of which can themselves be off-shored!
Absolutely screwed! Every single product they have - OS (dominant desktop and laptop OS by a wide margin), Azure - (gaining in second place, now 25% vs AWS 31%), M365 (also dominant, particularly in terms of revenue). None of these show any sign of going anywhere, and if anything, the numbers for cloud and M365 are trending up.
I could only wish my own business were this screwed.
Their success is a big part of why the experience is so bad as they have to appeal to a common denominator.
At the same time, they also win on the little things that diehard opponents choose to ignore, like search that kind of works. I don't like Office 365 but I'm a paying customer because, after long research, I haven't found a competitor that meets all my requirements.
I think it means one should read the very next sentence:
> Pieper emphasized that current over-the-counter NAD+-precursors have been shown in animal models to raise cellular NAD+ to dangerously high levels that promote cancer. The pharmacological approach in this study, however, uses a pharmacologic agent (P7C3-A20) that enables cells to maintain their proper balance of NAD+ under conditions of otherwise overwhelming stress, without elevating NAD+ to supraphysiologic levels.
This view is just very extreme, it is much less zig zag. It is just mounted to the wall at the high points and slack in between. Certainly there is also a reason for the exact amount of slack like thermal expansion.
* The amount pictured is in excess of that required for thermal expansion. The excess is to have some spare length in case of modifications. For example if you have to replace the transformer and the terminals are not in the same location. You cannot extend a massive cable like that easily or without degrading its specs.
* The sine wave pattern makes it into AC of course (/s)
Billionaires benefit from it, they are the ones buying off our government. All the other "wedge issues" are designed to deflect attention away from our oligarchs and both parties are on the take. Look at how the DNC reacted to Mamdani for a recent example.
To be clear, because I know it will come up - not saying both parties are the same, but I am saying they are both doing the oligarch's bidding. The US government is now fully captured by billionaires and is currently being used for personal enrichment of those in power.
I’m certainly no authority but i tend to write the same way for casual communication, came from the 90s era BBS days. It was (and still is) common on irc nets too. Autocorrect fixes up some of it, but sometimes i just have ideas i’m trying to dump out of my head and the shift key isn’t helping that go faster. Emails at work get more attention, but bullshittin with friends on the PC? No need.
I’ll code switch depending on the venue, on HN i mostly Serious Post so my post history might demonstrate more care for the language than somewhere i consider more causal.
This is precisely the thing they voted for.
reply