Beyond dems, beyond republicans, a working class person in the labor party that is not past retirement age. They know what it means to exist in the working class. No more red vs blue, no more treating politics like your favorite sports team.

Personally I think there should be an age cap to become president, and also hold other seats in office like the supreme court, but I digress.

No need for rich people who don’t understand the working class, we idolize them because we are pawns of capitalism and are infatuated by their wealth rather than their character. Someone who is proof of the American dream and a role model to our children. ZERO felonies. Someone with a degree, previous political experience before presidency, a thorough resume, etc. My logic is if they have felonies and cannot even be a teacher in the classroom for kids, they sure as hell should not try to guide and teach the country how to evolve for improvement.

Hopefully this becomes more prominent and we find someone with qualifications who are authentic, clear AND empathetic, professional and sophisticated, and a meaningful, warm person to guide the nation. Beyond a mere politician, but a human who understands what it means to be the majority and lived it themselves.

They immerse themselves in different communities to gain knowledge of the American people. They represent the people here. No judgement.

And even if someone runs for this and loses, we need inspiration to diverge us from the two party system. It might take time, but it can be worth it for this country to evolve. Running for a color is not what should exist. Parties evolve, therefore their colors don’t shine the same anymore.

The attack of Turkish backed rebels on Kurdish forces and the atrocities they do to people in Syria could not have been possible with out US approval, Biden's approval. Too bad Kurds dont realise that Turkish backed rebels are also US backed and funded ones.

Not that i care but its interesting to point out that Biden did the same thing he accused Trump of.

People will often try to shirk blame in their capacity as consumers by saying "but look at the fossil fuel industry lobbyists! They have disproportionate clout, shouldn't they get the blame?"

But the question then becomes why they have disproportionate clout. It's not just money in politics; Trump has shown that can be circumvented with adequate pandering to popular opinion. Furthermore, countries without as much of a lobbyist problem (eg. Canada) are almost as bad. Clearly, something else happened.

And I suspect the "something" in question here is that when environmental activists claim that maps representing tsunami height represent radiation, that the Seralini study "proved" that GMOs cause rat tumours, etc... this only further reinforced people's mistrust in enviromentalism.

I'm not saying this was inevitable. It was more like a series of events within their control and outside their control, but the Democratic Party establishment is clearly infighting.

In the 2020 Democratic Primary the establishment had their candidate based on name recognition from the Obama years. Joe Biden as the former Vice President was always going to be very difficult to defeat in that primary. However underneath many higher ups in the party had doubts about Joe. John Kerry, Obama himself. You could sense tension.

Now after the 2024 election the infighting is far more intense. Kamala Harris lost. Some are blaming her. Some are blaming Joe. Some are blaming others. It's a mess. The party is still a name recognition machine, but it's far more vulnerable than in 2020. If Harris ran in 2028, she would still likely win the nomination, but that's if she runs.

Other faces like Governors Gavin Newsom, Josh Shapiro or Gretchen Whitmer could take the mantle, but it's unclear. The party did this to themselves. They panicked and toppled with the broader issues of global inflation were on the wrong side of the election.

I don't know what will come from the next four years. The establishment has never been this vulnerable. It's a real possibility that a progressive like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez takes the mantle or even a celebrity like Jon Stewart. That's how strange the times are.

We'll see.

I lost a lot of faith in this country the week of the election. This election wasn't about policies. It wasn't about Republicans vs. Democrats. It was about morals vs. Greed. That is why many of us were so stunned at the results. Trump couldn't win. He is a felon, rapist, pedophile, insurrectionist, traitor. He is the bad guy. Kamala is a prosecutor dedicated to putting the "bad guy" away. People will surely do the right thing. And he won.

I had quite a few conversations after the election with people that voted for him. And every time, it boiled down to money. Tabling the fact that his policies will surely cost us more money, just like they did last time, I finally had a realization. Money was the driver of all of the reasons. Taxes, groceries, immigrants taking jobs, covid (I guess this is democrats fault). These are not faceless facebook/reddit people, but people I look up ao, respect, and have meaningful relationships with. And they saw no problem voting for the "bad guy" because their wallets are hurting. And when I pointed it out, they still didn't see a problem with this. I was even called "stupid" for voting for someone simply based on morality.

After a lot of thought, I finally swa that Trump, Fox News, all of it, is a symptom. George Carlin said that people are the problem. And I think he's right. We have created a culture where we value money over everything else. I get we live in a society where money is important. But I've always felt that when faced with doing the right thing and choosing money, MOST people would choose the right thing. Hell, with all of the Christians in the US, surely they would follow the teachings of Jesus before choosing money. I was wrong.

And that's why Kamala lost. She appealed to people's morality. Trump kept harping on his ability to make people have more money. And now I realize it's all about money for most people, and we can't change that because it's the culture. Trying to appeal to someone's morals and logic will always be a losing battle when they value money over those things. I even had someone tell me they would rather hear lies that fit their agenda than hear facts.

And with that we are truly doomed.

TLDR - this countries society has trained us to follow the money. And now people don't see the problem putting the devil in charge if it makes them a dollar. Trump is a symptom, not the problem. That is why so many of us that hold morals above money are stunned, disappointed, and speechless at the results of the presidential election.

Hunter Biden’s Pardon: A Victory Over Political Witch Hunts

Today, justice roared back to life. Hunter Biden’s pardon is more than an act of mercy—it’s a bold rejection of the corrupt weaponization of our legal system by political bullies. For years, Hunter has been a punching bag, not because of his missteps, but because of his last name. His enemies didn’t want justice; they wanted blood.

This pardon is a giant middle finger to the hypocrisy of a system that lets an incoming president waltz through 34 felony counts while Hunter’s every move was magnified into scandal. Let’s be honest—if his last name weren’t Biden, none of this would have ever happened.

Hunter Biden’s story isn’t just his own. It’s about drawing a line in the sand against kangaroo courts, media smear campaigns, and the blatant double standards that threaten democracy itself. If fairness is off the table for him, it’s off the table for all of us.

So let’s celebrate this unapologetically. Justice doesn’t bow to mob rule. To anyone who’s outraged—save it. If some people can walk free with rap sheets as long as a CVS receipt, then you bet your ass I’m celebrating Hunter’s freedom.

#JusticeRestored #NoApologies #GameOver

Seriously. — None of these people are in office yet and people already calling them awful picks.

Let them do 1 hour of their job before you judge them.

If they do wrong things, name specific actions these people have done from their term.

Why can't people wait until January 15th or whenever the inauguration will be.

It's not like anyone commenting will stop them from taking office.

Unless of course you're Matt Gaetz and not even your Republican colleagues have your back.

Biden just issued a full and unconditional pardon of Hunter Biden, despite promising not to.

I expected him to better than this.

Biden's legacy is now the man who was too old and didn't yield the nomination; the man who debated his opponent like a corpse; and the man who pardoned his criminal son in the last weeks of his dying presidency.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/01/us/politics/biden-issues-a-full-and-unconditional-pardon-of-his-son-hunter-biden.html

Palestine is in the full wrong. Israel has every right to fight back. Israelis had the land first and they, a small country, have been fighting the whole region for much longer than I have been alive.

People complain about Israel bombing Palestine, but the thing is, Israel isn't trying to kill people. They quite literally tell the people in Gaza/West Bank to get out. And Palestinians say that Israel is in the long. Like bro, they are saving you.

The Palestinian regions are literally ran by terrorist. I just can not express how wrong Palestine is, and you guys need to own up to it. I am not a fan of the FreePalestine movement. You can not say this is islamophobia because I am not hating Muslims. I'm hating terrorism.

Get mad at me, I purely believe that Israel has all right to do this.

Listen I understand many of you may be critical of progressives. But the ideology that rahm Emanuel believes in and the actions of him and his Allies is why the Democratic Party is where it is today. Since the 1990s the Democratic Party under his and his Allie’s influence have transformed the party from the party of the working class to the party of the upper middle class and business professionals. They left behind the working class in favor of the later. Now they aren’t just losing the white working class, they are losing Hispanics and slowly losing African Americans. The Democratic Party is slowly getting out of touch with the people, thinking that neoliberalism and appealing to ceos and even the cheneys is how you can pick up votes. It hasn’t worked. Schumer even claimed that for every working class democrat they lose they pick up moderate republicans. That hasn’t translated to anything but disaster and now they are thinking about doubling down. One of the reasons why they lost Michigan was due to the war in Gaza and are now thinking about doubling down on support for Israel.

Here me now, electing rahm Emanuel as DNC will only exasperbate the problems in the Democratic Party. It will turn off progressive voters (which could be enough to flip even many lean Democratic states red as many will stay home or even become republican). It will also turn off voters who aren’t progressive as appealing to neocons and the upper class will turn off more voters as they will see the party as more out of touch. Rahm is out of touch with the thinking of the American people and has been in high positions of influence in the party for far too long. Way too long.

When he led the dccc in the 2000s the only reason why his candidates won was due to the 50 state strategy and the fact that bush was unpopular. Not because they were as he called it “closest to the center” they all lost in 2010.

In reality elections aren’t decided by who is closest to the center or who is more progressive or more conservative. People decide elections based on conditions. That’s how it’s always been.

Here me now the direction that rahm will take the party will cause an exodus from the party. He left office with an 18% approval rating. He isn’t liked outside Washington. He is out of touch and has been in very high positions of power for far too long. We need fresh blood. Doesn’t have to be progressive. But anyone but rahm. Does anyone agree?

Will Trump's Tarrifs stop a war over Taiwan? Will additional economic threats successfully deter China? No and no.

As we've learned from Ukraine, if an autocrat states they want to use millitary force to solve an issue, it should be assumed automatically that they will do so and that nothing short of direct American millitary intervention will change their minds.

China is an exception as Xi's call to be ready for war by 2027 seems to show intent of going in anyways with or without direct American intervention which the Biden administration states was "the commitment we made" multiple times.

Also as we've seen with Ukraine, economic consequences are not a credible deterrant so despite both sides reliance on trade with the other, China still seems hellbent on war with the United States and the United States still seems resolved to defend their commitment as demonstrated by plans to eventually be able to deploy 5 carrier strike groups out of the Navy's total 11 to theatre. During the 1996 Crisis for comparison, the United States only deployed 2 to theatre with preparations for a third being made in the Persian Gulf after pulling it away from Bosnia.

For all the PLA's technological advances over the past decade and a half, this will be insufficient to defeat the United States in conventional battle as they have a no first strike policy when it comes to nuclear weapons.

For example, anti-ship ballistic missiles are insufficient to defeat American ship borne air defences such as the SM-3 and 6 as the poor performance of Iranian made weapons in Houthi usage during Prosperity Guardian showed. Even theatre ballistic missile saturation attacks may not be enough with the few that get past SM-3s ,6s, and other air defenses which in a war over Taiwan would also include THAAD and Patriot causing little damage as Iranian saturation attacks against Israel showed.

The PLAN has only demonstrated sufficient coordination for "2 carrier operations" even though their third one just finished testing compared with the planned American 5 carrier strike groups.

They do not currently and probably will not in time for a war in 2027 a stealth bomber. For comparison, pre production started in 2023 of the B-21 with a planned official IOC date of sometime in 2027.

The Maga movement possesses an abnormal hawkishness towards China even in comparison to previous administrations such as Clinton's which almost got into a war with them in 1996. Clinton was willing to forgive so long as they behaved and both the Bush & Cheney Republicans and Obama while monitoring force developments heavily also wanted to play nice while contingency planning for if they didn't such as the development of AirSea Battle for "sophisticated opponents with anti-access area denial capabilities" with a 2009 Air Force Chiefs of Staff memo saying this means Iran and China, but the Maga movement views them in the same lens as the Soviet Union was during the McCarthy era with even US citizens originally from China such as McConnell's wife being viewed with suspicion by Maga Republicans.

Trump's administration intends for Taiwan to spend in excess of 10% of their GDP on defense which doesn't seem realistic unless there is an actual war ongoing such as with Ukraine's 37% defense spending. The United States currently spends 3% and during the 1980s 5-6% for comparison. By the time of the Gulf War, the Pentagon was preparing for budget cuts on the account of force reduction treaties with the Soviets as well as millitary and political decline of the USSR.

Surely they will increase spending, but probably not as much as is requested by the new administration untill an actual war breaks out. Even if they don't, Maga's seemingly "good vs evil" style struggle with the CCP will leave Trump's administration honor bound to millitarily act even if Trump himself doesn't want to on account of Taiwan "stealing American chip production jobs" as he put it.

If Maga's China hawkishness and "America First" is to be of any credibility, they need a battlefield victory to validate it just as the Gulf War and the Reagan Buildup + AirLand Battle being meant for a war in 1980s Europe validated the Neocons during the Reagan/Bush era even if Trump has any personal reservations on account of his friendship with Xi Jinping even going to far as to state that Xi visited Mara Lago. Remember, 2027 is the leadup to an election year so the stakes will be as high as humanly possible.

Let’s Redirect Our Energy Wisely

It’s clear that the MAGA crowd thrives on feeling miserable and oppressed, even when they aren’t. They’ve chosen to live in a world of fake outrage and conspiracy theories—whether it’s doctored images of “porn in schools” or lies about drag queens “harming children.” They blow the trans issue out of proportion, despite likely never having met a trans person. With trans people making up only 0.002% of the population, their obsession with this tiny fraction of society is absurd.

They’ve won this election, and now they need to face the consequences of their choices. Let them live in the echo chambers they’ve created; their brains have turned to applesauce, and there’s no point engaging with those who are willfully committed to misunderstanding reality.

Instead, let’s focus our energy on those who didn’t vote, those who reluctantly supported them, or those who might have voted differently under different circumstances. These are the people who can be reached, and these are the people who can help bring change.

MAGA types will always find a way to be unhappy and blame us for everything wrong in their lives. Let them. They’ve chosen misery. We, on the other hand, can choose to build bridges with those who are willing to listen and work towards a better future.

Stay focused. Let’s engage with compassion, purpose, and a clear strategy to create real progress.

100% facts

First I want to point out how all the woman have shifted their style to give a beauty queen look regarding this as true femininity When in reality they wanted to be picked by Trump so they imitated the women in trumps life who he found attractive

It was conservatives/Republicans/Maga who:

Named the ACA Obamacare

made the people believe folks were only voting for Harris because she was black and a woman

claimed that there was an attack on Christianity and the people needed to stand up

claimed white people (or skin rather) wouldnt exist by 2060 due to all the immigrants coming in

claimed transwomen are taking women spaces even though there is less than 1% of them (this number decrease even more when you check out how many of them actually wanna play sports or who feel comfortable enough to go into the womens bathroom)

Claim they have the moral high ground because their prolife

Claim their goal is to protect women (however constantly elect rapist)

Questioned Obama's legitimacy as a U.S Citizen

Questioned Harris blackness (they spent the whole election doing this)

Constantly are talking about southern pride (as if the confederate flag isn't one of the most unpatriotic things in America)

Downplayed police Brutuality by screaming blue lives matter so much so to even create a flag for it

Who are the first to accuse the opponent of being an elite despite all the elites supporting the democratic party

Will call LGBTQ pedophiles when they have many politicians who have claims about SA brought up agaisnt them many of the victims significantly longer

Clalm they only want whats best for children yet do nothing to benefit the child that are outside of the womb

Look at Republican/Conservative/maga proganda its always some white lady with a cross around her neck talking about how to save the children from being brainwashed (educated)

Look at how they took the world oppression applied it to themselves and claim groups at a historical disadvantage have privilege

How they taught each other the word woke means to kill or get rid of straight white people

This is the same group who has a problem with Ariel/Starfire/Juliet for being black BECAUSE of white erasure or blonde earsure or redhead erasure and

"historical accuracy"~How to train your dragons live action movie

Now im not saying liberals/democrats/progressives dont use identity politics im just saying we dont use it as much or there is at least facts and actual substance behind it and our politics is not focused on identity like MAGA/conservatives/Republicans are

I would argue the point of conservativism is to preserve certain values and to keep us overall grounded

And after the 2016 election

Ive discovered either they are doing their job and preserving values

Or

They are not doing their job and overreacting because they are afriad of change and liberals have not done a good job at helping them through this process

Im going to give them the benefit of the doubt and just say Liberals are moving too fast for them to comprehend and/or we haven't done a good Job of educating and explaining what's happening why we should progress as a society

Im going with this for 2 reasons

1. i would have to admit that the majority if not all of these people are the labels associated with them (HATEFUL etc which there us a high chance many of them are)

2. Ive talk to my fair share of conservatives or more conservative leaning people and there are plenty of concepts they do not understand in the slightest

Words like: systemic systematic institutionalized doesnt exist in their vocabulary

Gender cant be a performance for them because the moment they look at it that way their entire identity crumbles it no longer seems real to them

Many of them dont even understand the value of emotions or that the MOST LOGICAL decisions requires some level of emotion

I think part of the reason we arent getting through to them is because a lot of us fail to realize that conservatives value identity just as much as liberals but in a different way

For them the parts of their identity that they will outward acknowledge functions with there being a purpose

Liberals will say label definition

Conservatives will say definition label

And the difference is mostly were the emphasis is placed

The reasons Liberals dont focus so strongly on definitions is because most of our understand with social cues and awareness is through examples THERE IS NOT a definite answer and a lot of the definitions are broad as hell anyway

For example what is a sandwich

Googles says- A sandwich is a food typically made with two or more slices of bread with a filling in between

Keep in mind that typically means usually or general or most common

Basically my theory is this overall hate restricting of people's rights is because they are in the middle of a tantrum they have not properly learned how to deal with equality or equity or someone else getting a chance to shine

Im sorry sis but there is no excuse

They know the issues

We told them the problems

I do not care if Kamala Harris shit on a plate in front of the enitre world and ate it

She was the only candidate that had a possibility of winning where rights protections and freedoms were not on the line

Yes i understand that there are some people who wanted to vote for her but didnt because they were debating between a better econmy and the rights of other people

I understand that they picked Trump because they didnt feel like anything bad was gonna happen to them

This being said we did the research they did not and the research clearly states that Trump is a narcissist that doesn't care about America

The research and evidence tells us that Harris is far from perfect but wouldve been a better person to lead our country

There is NO EXCUSE

US primaries are far less interesting than the media portrays them as. Most of the strength is in name recognition and in such a large, diverse country getting your name out there is enough to get the votes. In most cases this tends to benefit establishment picks. Now about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or AOC.

Can she win the 2028 Democratic Primary? Yes. It's possible. In a divided field.

If Kamala Harris runs I think it's over much like Joe Biden in 2020. National name recognition and despite the sting of losing in 2024, she would be very difficult to defeat.

If it's a divided field and the Governors from Gavin Newsom to Josh Shapiro to Gretchen Whitmer split the vote - then yes AOC could win.

As of now three years out I'd say Harris and Newsom are the only ones that can get that "frontrunner" status and with Newsom it's going to be a slogfest.

Just my take. What do you think?

See New York Times, Nov. 28, 2024, "Who Might Be the Next Chair of the Democratic Party?"

My thoughts:

I really think we need an outsider, fresh blood to shake things up. An insider who bears much culpability for the current state of defeat and disarray would not be appropriate. And whomever it is, given recent experience, if they don't completely and totally distance themselves from the pro-genocide stance of the Party to-date, they'll alienate me.

Today's Democrats are simply about using the little guy & taking their money, hopes, and dreams and funneling it straight to the already wealthy!

The Harris campaign raised over 1.5 billion dollars!! A decent chunk of it was paid to her friends in the form of consulting fees to make them super rich and then another good chunk of it was paid to the already super rich & famous celebrities and Hollywood to endorse her!

When are the everyday plain Jane Democrats going to wake up and noticed that the Democrat party left them a long time ago?

Every four years, coinciding with the presidential election, the nation's most pressing questions are compiled in a voting list. These can be foreign policy or domestic issues.

This way, decades long issues can be voted out.

No more support for Ukraine and Israel for example.

Or the abolishment of unconstitutional (in spirit) organizations like the electoral college.

Previous choices cannot be voted out or reversed for at least 4 years.

The main point was pretty simple: the Trump administration should focus on aggressively consolidating power before worrying about things like the economy. Sure, Trump has control of the House, the Senate, and the Supreme Court, but the level of centralized power is still not enough. He should take advantage of the momentum from his recent victory and use his current authority to generate even more power. In this article, and the ones to come, I’ll lay out some specific suggestions following this line of thought.

This one is about seizing control of the military.

I mentioned that Trump should avoid pursuing accountability for the events of January 6th. But that was then, and this is now. Back then, it wasn’t even clear if Trump could become president again—let alone take both the House and Senate. So, adopting a low-profile strategy made sense at the time. But now, he’s won the presidency and Congress without making such commitments, so the situation has changed.

At this point, I believe Trump should use accountability for the January 6th “military rebellion” as his first step toward consolidating power.

There’s no doubt that January 6th was a case of insubordination and rebellion. One of the key figures was General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He directly stripped Trump of his military command authority and control over nuclear weapons. Trump must investigate this behavior once he’s in office. His first act as president should be to arrest General Milley and demand he expose his co-conspirators and other crimes. This could serve as the starting point for arresting more and more high-ranking military officials. Of course, once this precedent is set, other cases can also be leveraged—such as investigating military negligence during the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan.

How far should this purge go? I recommend removing 1/5 to 1/4 of U.S. generals. To be clear, this doesn’t mean physical elimination. For those with the most serious offenses, longer sentences can be handed down—for example, General Milley could face life imprisonment for treason. However, for the majority, penalties like dishonorable discharges or demotions could suffice. For instance, the current Secretary of Defense could be demoted by four ranks for gross negligence during the Afghanistan withdrawal.

Once this is accomplished, the military will experience a profound psychological shock. And because of the military’s unique position in society, this will send a message to all sectors of society about Trump’s resolve and ability to fight.

Don’t worry about military resistance. Right now, the military is in a state of confusion. If Trump acts immediately upon taking office, wielding the momentum of his victory, the military won’t have enough time to organize any countermeasures.

At the same time as this purge, Trump should begin promoting a new generation of generals on a large scale. Each one should be personally invited to Mar-a-Lago or the White House for serious one-on-one conversations. This is not the time to save effort—putting in the work here will ensure a wave of young, ambitious officers who owe their careers to Trump. Even if they’re not fully loyal to him, the public perception will be that they are.

So I am curious does anyone have any takes on this?

Do you feel like there is something feminist can do better?

What do you think feminist struggle with the most?

Im a male and I consider myself a feminist and I personally want to talk about the execution of feminism...how it's promoted and the message we are sending

My understanding standing of feminism comes from Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

And basically how she explains it as the political economical and social equality of the sexes

I find that there are many phrases that are used but aren't properly explained or aren't nesscary and certain jokes can be harmful (or simple just complaining) i actually have an example for each one of these anyways I digress

While I know there are many males that don't believe the sexes are equal......ignoring them and focusing on males who believe that fact

When talking to them i often find that they feel feminism just pushes this idea that females are superior to males or this idea that "all males are bad"

This includes males who recongize and understand the ways in which the patriarchy hurts everyone as well as themselves

Many of the actions that self proclaim ffeminist take seems very performative as well

My main goal is to see what other areas or ways in which the feminist movement has failed and how we can fix it

P.s i know i am focusing on males in this post but I really do wanna look at all areas this includes race relationships in feminism and other areas i didn't list

The only good Trump appointee in either his first term or so far in his second was Louis Dejoy for Postmaster General. First, Biden kept him on. Congress passed the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022. The USPS Board of Governors have agreed to his plans. He is turning an absolute dire situation for the USPS into a feasible business plan. Yes, it involves pain. He is the one administrator or cabinet secretary that didn’t want to damage his assigned agency, but instead solve the real problems. Nearly every other administrator hates the agency, and seeks to undermine it any way possible. People said that about Dejoy, but he answered, how do we solve the USPS losing billions per year? Maybe there were a few other that were good if I knew the details, but his selections generally are awful.

https://apnews.com/article/mail-ballots-voting-postal-service-dejoy-7799ebbaeaf757a5f353c171e540e973

While we may have been on the losing side this time around, remember that one election will not define us. We are on the right side of history, and America is worth fighting for—always.

As we drive across this beautiful country for Thanksgiving, let’s hold onto hope. When you sit down to have those tough conversations with your family, remind yourself and them that America will be back—stronger, brighter, and more united.

Our flag will still be there. One election cannot and will not break us. Keep fighting for the America we believe in, because America is worth it.

Cynicism in cable news is endless. For profit incentives run amok much like social media, but for decades on cable news there was this perverse combination of monetary incentives and establishment ass kissing. MSNBC has been one of the worst.

People forget that MSNBC was struggling in 2013-2014 after Obama's re-election. It had no defining narrative and as a hyper competitive for profit outrage channel it needed a villain. Donald Trump saved their jobs in 2015.

For almost a decade the anti-Trump narrative has been ratings gold for MSNBC. Emotionally gaslighting angry liberals into believing that opposition to Trump is all that mattered. Not policy. Not coherence. Nothing else mattered.

But the system depended on Trump being the villain in the upcoming the election. The future. It worked in 2016, 2020 and 2024. Now that ship has sailed and ratings have plummeted. For three cycles MSNBC catered to anything that was anti-Trump to Anti-Trump Republicans that were generously given air time and disregarding left populist voices as a threat to Trump gaining or maintaining power.

It coincided with the perspectives of the network and created strange alliances. Liberal firebrands like Rachel Maddow that had interesting takes during the Bush years were now singing hand in hand with Nicole Wallace - someone that worked for Bush. All in the name of being Anti-Trump. It was policy free and incoherent, but emotionally engaging.

Now Donald Trump is just the present and guess what? Americans only kind of care about the present. It's not that emotionally engaging. The present is for the 6pm news or a major world event. Sudden, interesting and then people move on. It's not narrative focused. That is Donald Trump now and MSNBC is screwed.

When Joe and Mika told their audience that they were making amends with Trump on Morning Joe it was over. Their audience was built on being anti-Trump and that pivot was seen as a betrayal. When you have no narrative thread in a hyper competitive media ecosystem people tune out.

I'm glad MSNBC is dying. It was a network that wanted it both ways. Moral outrage at Donald Trump, high ratings and confirming their own biases in their elite bubbles. But that combination was going to explode eventually. No one can have it both ways forever.

My opinion is... if some kind of mass popular movement, social uprising, or mass general strike does not occur in the next ten years, we are doomed.

I identify with the working class (but modern economists might call me lower middle class) am white, male, CIS-gendered, hetero-normative, but I worry about my friends... I worry about the poor. I worry about marginalized groups (people of color, LGBTQIA+, women, the disabled, the unemployed/under-employed)... I worry that concentration camps will become a thing for trans people. I worry about an end to all New Deal gains, an end to social security, an end to medicaid/medicare/food assistance, an end to any labor rights we may have, and the normalization of cruelty.

Not only that, but the climate crisis will erupt with more fervor, the cost of living will skyrocket because tariffs are a terrible idea, and the housing crisis will become even worse.

​

I was raised in a left-leaning family. Not radical but still very left-leaning. For a long time, I had the opinions of my parents and that was it. I also hated the radical right wing. At some point, around 15, I became more divided and was not as left-leaning as before; the truth is I was noticing that the left had hypocritical stances or at least wasn’t always coherent. For example, it preached tolerance but the right wingers complaining about the slightest thing like insecurity would get criticized and dismissed as racists. I also thought the non-binary and pronoun thing made no sense. Though I never liked them, I started to be more receptive to parts of right-wing figures like Ben Shapiro and various conservative influencers. They were criticizing inter alia the hypocrisy of the left and I did agree. I also understood the anger of the common right-wingers, be it online or in real life. But it all changed when a killing occurred in a lgbt bar and those people like Shapiro downplayed the horror of it or downright justified it. I realized they didn’t care about democracy or being “canceled” by leftists. They just wanted to kill specific demographics. Elon Musk is a prime example of the horror. He abandoned his trans child for just being trans. And conservatives have praised him for this. They actually think it’s rightful to do so.

And they are hypocrites too: They think they’re an oppressed minority but they represent at least half of the country. They talk about being canceled but they cancel leftists too, and violently so. They say facts don’t care about your feelings but they’re fragile crybabies as well who can’t stand the simple existence of some people They say politics mustn’t interfere in sports (when it’s the NFL or NBA supporting blm) but they dickride the UFC and its advertising of Trump. They accuse the left of being corrupt (which isn’t necessarily false) but their favorite superstar is corrupt himself and even lost a lot of his companies due to total mismanagement and stupidity.

Oh, and they also love a convicted felon, a corrupt politician, etc. And they complain about bureaucratic billionaires ruling the country on the democrat side but look at all the beautiful people Trump selected. But that’s alright, they don’t care about others’ opinions and it’s only inconvenient when people don’t care about theirs. They’re a cult too: a reporter interviewed those Trump adepts in the street and what we can objectively gather from it is: those idiots think that if Biden said it, it’s bad, but if it’s Trump, it’s at least justifiable.

They cry again and again about leftists propaganda (which isn’t an illusion) but their own propaganda is an undeniable reality. The most popular political influencers are conservative too. But those influencers keep complaining about censorship because that’s what keeps them going and allows them to scam their stupid followers who, by the way, deserve to be.

These individuals don’t want democracy, they want a world adapted to their fragile emotions.

By the way, I am still critical of the left and acknowledge the hypocrisy it has but I am done sympathizing with those empty brains. I really thought they were demonized and caricatured but in the end, they are actually what we depict them as. Disgusting. I hate politics and whatever happens to the US, the country will deserve it. It’s just a mosaic of cults.

What do you think?

There are so many issues privacy laws cause:

When I call company IT about something I have to tell them everything. My user ID, my PC ID, what applications I have. Why? I'm sure it's because they can't store any "personal data". To be efficient, they should be able to pull up all this, but they can't. Maybe because I work for a European company and they farm out tasks to India, it's worse than it has to be.

When I do anything with medical we have to start over. I don't go to the doctor often. So by the time I go I have to see a new one. So they need all my history since they can't transfer it to another office or seems even between doctors. Not sure. I've gone to cancelled appointments because they can't use email for some reason, they can't leave a phone message either.

It's horrible in EU on the business side. They're not supposed to be able to store anything about you without your consent, which would be hard for businesses that might want to keep you purchase history or address or how to bill you.

Also in product development: tech businesses will want to know how you use things so that they can make it better. Simple things like "how many times does this button get pressed" or which apps get run at the same time, what hardware do you have. It helps to get that data off your device. But laws say you have to consent to do that.

It get's to be a political spin that someone made up. People think "I don't want corporations or govt spying on me!". So what happens with that sentiment is that the above blocks are put in place that hurt more than they help.

The positive side to this lack of privacy is that buyers and sellers are more easily connected. The internet and Amazon has made it a lot easier for you to know what is available to buy and what the best price is. Or maybe you want to pay more to buy local. Whatever, knowing what the choices are arguably raised the standard of living for everyone.

On the other side, the worst thing about advertising is that you see a lot of stuff you don't care about. Targeted ads are better because they at least have a chance to show you something you might want. It is true that they often take the cheap way out and push you to buy stuff you looked at and passed over, just like a used car sales guy may run after you with "what's your best price?". More has been put into social media to show you things you are more likely to react to. But it also works on the sales side, If you are part of a conspiracy theory group, you are probably getting prepper equipment ads or live out in the country ads and conspiracy minded political propaganda, and that may be interesting for you. Or for me, bicycle travel and old cars and a more mainstream kind of historical analysis.

I think all these privacy policy popups should be done away with. And let the professionals share data about me so they can better help me!

Lets be real here it was never gonna happen anyway. Democrats only care enough to talk about it when election season is around and the GOP has become outright hostile to the idea so it has no path through congress. Now Trump has made it clear with Elon and Vivek that he will gut the fed budget of anything that doesnt explode. Puerto Ricos Prostatehood party the New progressive party (PNP) has used fed funds as a tool to gain support for them and for statehood aoung the poorest of puerto rico. Without it they and statehood will have nothing to stand on and with the emergence of the Puerto Rican Independence Party (PIP) in alliance with the Citizens Victory Movement(MVC) and with record support for national Sovereignty it is clear that puerto rico future is not being the 51st state.

"Tyranny rendered calm by the influence of terror, is the only kind of happiness which this government is able to afford its people." -Astolphe Louis Léonor, Marquis de Custine, 'La Russie en 1839'

Translation: (What the Russian government says to the Russian people):

"We scare you into silence so you are happy not to speak up."

P.S. Joe Rogan's an idiot.

A lot of people believe that sending F-16s to Ukraine will have a major impact on the Russia-Ukraine war. I don’t buy it. So, what’s the next step? I think the U.S. should deploy a significant number of F-35s to assist Ukraine in the fight.

Would this fundamentally turn the tide of the war? No. Could these F-35s be shot down or destroyed on the ground? If enough are deployed and used actively in combat, the answer is almost certainly yes, and the losses might not be small. It’s not just about Russia targeting airfields—there’s also the possibility that China might get more interested and send military or technical advisors to help. Would losing F-35s mean that some of its technologies could fall into the hands of Russia or China? And would it damage the U.S.’s reputation and morale among its allies? Of course. So why do I still advocate for deploying F-35s in large numbers to the battlefield in Ukraine? Here are a few reasons:

1. Demonstrating strategic resolve. The U.S. currently has a major issue: its resolve for military conflict is too weak, and its adversaries know it. This is a problem even bigger than the shortcomings in its combat readiness or defense industry. If the U.S. doesn’t address its lack of will to fight, it will remain passive in any military engagement. Deploying F-35s and being willing to accept heavy losses is a way to partially rebuild that fighting spirit. Knowing the risks but still stepping up is a form of courage. Yes, this sounds a bit extreme, but as they say, sometimes you need to overcorrect to fix the problem.

2. Laying the groundwork for an eventual exit. Once significant losses of F-35s occur, it will give the U.S. more justification to begin pulling back from Ukraine. If even deploying F-35s couldn’t save Ukraine, the next step would be ground troops or nuclear weapons—something even the most hardcore neoconservatives would struggle to justify.

3. Forcing the U.S. military to acknowledge China’s strength. Heavy losses of F-35s will push the U.S. military to face the reality of China’s growing military power. It will make it harder for self-deceptive reports to be published in the future. And when it comes to formulating strategies against China, the U.S. will likely be more cautious and rational.

4. Waking up the U.S. defense industry. Losing F-35s would serve as a wake-up call for America’s defense industry, forcing it to stop stagnating and start innovating. It might even prompt serious reforms in the defense sector, pushing it to step up with greater determination.

I believe that deploying F-35s to Ukraine would, on balance, do more good than harm.