volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
@mikeash or to put it simply, Trump's whole thing is lying to his supporters about how strong and effective he was, that's what he's running on.
You're free to promote that propaganda if you want, just keep in mind that you are promoting his presidency, promoting his own messages, as you do.
Do what you want though, just be aware of that you are playing his game, promoting his candidacy, reinforcing his messaging.
If you're comfortable with that, have at it. It makes it more likely that he will win, but you do what you're going to do, just keep in mind that you are reinforcing his messaging.
Oh, no, not at all. I'm glad to clarify. I'm not telling you to shut up at all. Speak all you want.
Your position doesn't match with the facts. You can definitely keep promoting that perspective if you want, this is social media, you can say all you want.
What you're saying doesn't match the facts, but you're still absolutely welcome to say what you want.
But there is the consideration that not only is what you're saying easily debunked by the record, but it does help support Trump. If you want to support Trump, go for it. I wouldn't want to do that, but you are perfectly right to play his game if you want to, and help get him reelected.
Just be aware that it's what you're doing.
If you want to help get Trump reelected by promoting factually false narratives, your call.
@mikeash I mean good thing I'm not making that argument then.
What are you talking about? I honestly don't know what that response is going on about.
@MugsysRapSheet as you said, the people who vote voted their beliefs.
Anyone who decides not to vote takes themselves out of the process.
And so, again, we need to emphasize that we can vote for better people if we want to. We have that power. And we need to hold our representatives accountable by voting for better people.
Anyone who decides not to vote is voluntarily forfeiting, so they're just not relevant by their own choice.
Anyone who doesn't want to be part of the political system I have no problem with. In fact I encourage that. If you don't care, don't vote, leave it to the rest of us to figure out.
BUT those of us who do have opinions and are willing to hold representatives accountable, we have the power to choose better people.
@mikeash again I am saying that if you watch how they act they are not 100% behind him, as they rake him over the coals very often.
No they didn't vote with him in lockstep when he was in power, there was a lot of his legislative agenda that they voted against.
The story you're trying to tell just doesn't match the record either now or when he was president. Again, we should be emphasizing what a loser he is because this story about him being such a strong leader is part of what puts him on the precipice of being re-elected.
We should have been emphasizing for the last couple of years that this guy was a loser that couldn't even hold his own party together. And if he's reelected now he's going to be just as weak.
To paraphrase Archer, do you want Trump? Because talking about him as a strong leader like this, that's how you get Trump.
The guy is a fuck up, with a long record of failure, and rejection by his own party, with legislators voting against him and promises that he didn't fulfill to his own constituents. THAT is what we needed to be emphasizing.
@EtherNRhum I mean that's a nice conspiracy theory you have there, but it really isn't realistic.
Half the country simply disagrees with the other half.
That's not Russians hacking the system or whatever you think is happening. That's just neighbors talking to their own circles instead of each other.
@MugsysRapSheet I don't know what you think is denial. I think I'm agreeing with you.
Yeah, incumbents are reelected by voters, that's what I was saying. So if voters don't like how their representatives are representing them, they should stop giving those people that power.
I don't know what you think I'm denying here, it's really important to emphasize that we don't have to keep sending the same people to Congress if we don't like how they are handling themselves.
It's really important to emphasize that we can elect better people if we want better people elected.
@Nonilex I often get the impression that you don't really talk to conservatives and so you don't really know how they act since the way you described them is so different from how I see them reacting on a daily basis.
It really comes across as promoting a liberal idea of how conservatives are instead of actually talking about how conservatives are from their own mouths.
@MugsysRapSheet I believe we vote for our congresspeople, and if we don't like the job they're doing we need to stop reelecting them.
I think this is a very important issue, far more important than the president. I mean, a president generally can't do anything that the people that we put in power don't authorize.
So if your congresspeople aren't representing you well, for God's sake stop reelecting them.
@HopelessDemigod only if they're hot
@bryan FWIW, it's one of my axes es to grind that activity pub is actually a pretty crappy system.
It's just not well designed, and we've seen the results of that over the years as it takes too many resources and doesn't offer features that users really want.
So just wanted to pipe in and say, yeah, you're on the right track calling it out for its failings.
@Nonilex The chief doesn't control the other justices, though. If the other justices didn't agree with the ruling it wouldn't have gone through, as is extremely evident in every single case before the court.
He can only steer rulings in the sense of choosing different wording. Beyond that, the other justices have as much power as he does to make their decisions.
This is a silly way to approach the Supreme Court.
@MugsysRapSheet Yes seriously that is how the US government functions.
@mikeash you really don't understand the party.
If you watch how Republicans actually act, they bash him anytime he gets out of line. Conservative media starts talking about their issues weeks before Trump figures out what he's supposed to talk about, and he babbles because if he says substantial things he runs the risk of crossing the party. So it's safer for him not to say anything at all.
For the past week the party has been raking him over the coals because he did so bad at the debate. They've been bashing him mercilessly.
No, it makes for good headlines to say that Trump has that kind of control, but he doesn't. He's subservient to them. And honestly the best way to oppose Trump is to point out what a loser he is, not build up his brand by saying he has that level of control.
@jstatepost The block button is your prerogative.
But if you follow the links that you posted, Trump did not say that according to those links.
If you care about the facts then you'll care about promoting this easily debunked claim.
@jstatepost if you follow the link and then follow the link, it's two levels deep but no, he didn't say that. This claim is false.
This is a post promoting a falsehood.
And especially when talking about falsehoods we need to speak out against people promoting falsehoods.
Or else you're no better than Trump.
@Acronymesis not at all! You completely misunderstand the point if that's your takeaway.
It's not both sides, it's either side. If either side gave us somebody worth voting for then we should. Unfortunately neither did.
So we should withhold our votes.
I've heard it said that if you don't vote with whichever party then you are a coward. I think that's exactly backwards, and even reflects poorly all the person making that argument. It doesn't take much courage to go with the group.
Instead I go the other way: no matter which party you might prefer in general, it takes courage to say they nominated a moron, and fortunately the other party also nominated a loser, so no matter what the US is going to slog through these next few years.
In my opinion the courageous position is to say no, you nominated a moron, and I'm not going to give you my vote. We're going to be okay I guess, whether you win or not, but I'm not going to let you assume that you have my vote if you insist on nominating a moron. You should have nominated someone better. You should have nominated someone worthy of my vote. Do better next time.
That's the state of #USPolitics . As South Park said, big douche versus turd sandwich. So screw both #Democrats and #Republicans. Neither of you managed to nominate someone worth voting for, so I'm voting for my dog.
To give either party our votes is to sign on to their nomination of garbage people. Let's not. Let's say that they need to actually nominate worthwhile administrators.
But more practically, let's focus on #Congress. No matter who wins this election, they're going to suck, but we can still express ourselves through our representation in Congress, and that's honestly how it should be anyway.
Check out your representatives. See how they have actually been voting, and vote them out if they have been letting you down. That's really where our focus should be anyway.
Not on which jerk ends up in the Oval Office.
(But thank God #Biden is on his way out, as he has been terrible for #science in the US, which has not gotten nearly enough attention from the press.)
@Nonilex no you have that backwards, the Supreme Court ruling does not amass power in the executive branch as it tells the executive branch that it cannot prosecute in some cases.
The Supreme Court ruling was all about limiting the powers of the executive branch, not amassing more.
As for the positions in the branch, they are necessarily political. By definition. The Supreme Court didn't invent that, that is a direct result of the structure of the federal government.
And the president has to be held politically accountable for what his employees do. This is core to checks and balances the US system.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
