volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@zalasur The problem is that Harris leans more fascist, so all the people buying into that kind of rhetoric are promoting the authoritarian!

But people keep buying into the propaganda, so that's democracy for you.

@europesays Well it's up to the president.

@breedlov listening to MAGA crowd even today, I don't know how you can come to that conclusion when they seem very positive on Trump, they are talking very optimistically and positively about things like how well he did on the Joe Rogan podcast, and how Republican promises for tuture legislation are going to work for the public.

Whether they are wrong or right, they are offering a whole lot of positivity that's not related at all to fear, hate, and racism.

If you don't understand your enemy, it's going to be hard to fight them.

@PariaSansPortefeuille The complication is, these loud groups don't talk for the entire community. So many have the exact opposite perspective, so Democrats lose their support by agreeing to those stands.

@samueljohnson why?

Honestly doesn't sound like much of a favor to myself, so why?

@greenorchids

@redmiscreant Yes, if you rely on sources like the Atlantic and USA Today you will be missing quite a lot.

I really really hate to promote any perspective that could be interpreted as promoting Trump because I think he is a garbage garbage person who should not be allowed anywhere near the White House, but other groups that are not so vehemently opposed to him have been pointing out statements from dozens of people who were in the room, as they say, denying those reports.

Personally, I don't care. Both of these major party candidates are awful so I don't have a dog in this fight, but because I don't have a dog in this fight that means I can point out how bad the journalism is botching this once again.

I honestly don't care who wins. And because I honestly don't care, I'm going to point out that bad journalism is really screwing with the country.

@PallasRiot

@PallasRiot reports have account after account saying Trump never made those statements, not that it matters.

@helge on this platform the main feature is hashtags not CW. That way you can put up your filter to avoid the hashtag you don't want to see.

And personally I go for it being spelled out, uspolitics not uspol

@PallasRiot those stories have been discredited though

@samueljohnson not only do I think, but I'm informed enough to know that these sensationalized stories are just wrong.

The laws are public record. We can look them up for ourselves to see that these propaganda pieces are just misleading us, put out by special interest groups with power to try to sway the public.

Sadly, too few people know their basic civics well enough to catch the lies, so they fall for it.

But the clicks are there, the profit is there, so it will continue.

@greenorchids

@GGMcBG Oh no, not voting is also a brave sign that we're not going to deal with these two parties that put up garbage candidates this year. We're not just going to bow down and give them our votes when they haven't earned them.

It's not apathy, it is an emphatic sign that we aren't going to bow down to the people in power.

We are part of this society, and if the people in power want to be part of the society too then they need to shape up.

@greenorchids The problem is that we keep hearing such stories and then noticing that they're just not true, noticing that what people say about the law doesn't correspond with what we can read in the law for ourselves.

If you want to be convincing, this strategy of making it personal hasn't been working because the rhetoric just doesn't match the facts.

It ends up preaching to the choir. It doesn't really get anyone anywhere except more divided and less likely to find ways forward.

@JustOneMoreThing@mindly.social I'm really with @briansullivan here

What practical distinction are you trying to draw? I don't understand.

@samfr.bsky.social sure, because it often comes down to the difference between not being able to help versus actively harming.

It's a difficult decision how we need to distribute society's resources. But it's very different, acting against somebody, to arm up and take their stuff away from them.

@banty those are entirely different governmental structures with different rules with different countries with different norms with different demographic splits and on and on.

People pointing at Weimar Republic really don't seem to know how incredibly different that situation is to this one..

Let me emphasize one thing, though: the president does not have authority over the people that we independently elect to Congress, and nobody can be president unless the people we elect to Congress recognize them as president.

If we all vote for a bunch of representatives that want to overwhelmingly go ahead and just end the United States, well, none of this matters anyway.

But that's exceedingly unlikely. It's not going to happen. Even recent events show that the population isn't interested in ending the US. We're going to keep on going, we're going to keep voting for representatives that keep us going, even if it's rolling in mud, kicking and screaming the whole way.

Remember how important it is that we have separation of powers, that we have a system set up so that no one can be president without the other branch of government actively going out of their way to confirm their presidency.

We have so many checks specifically set up to avoid The sensational outcome that you are talking about, and they have proven themselves to be very solid time and time again.

@_dm

@banty But that's exactly it: 2020 proved that it can't happen, Trump tried to win and the structures that we have in place to make things right worked exactly as intended.

You say someone finally obeys, but you're missing that it's not someone. It's everyone. There's no single point of failure in this system, by design. Thousands of people would have to be not only fired, but replaced, and replaced in a way that the general population would accept. Which they wouldn't, especially considering the fact that people are after all opposed to Trump.

Civil servants blocking these actions? No, you have that backwards. You would have to have civil servants actively participating in the actions, an army of them.

Like I said, the vastness of that conspiracy is just not realistic.

@_dm

@CheapPontoon keep in mind that the reason Musk is supporting Trump is in part because he's already had a knife in the back.

The whole Trump thing is based on bringing down a system that people feel has betrayed them. It really is about tearing down, not building up. And so at this point Musk has felt so spurned by the status quo that he might as well join in the table flipping.

So inevitable falling out isn't much of a threat for him. Yeah, Trump's going to screw him over, and I bet he knows that very well, but the powers that be are already screwing him over, so he might as well try to be screwed over by someone different in case it leads to something better down the road.

Trump is a system of a failed system, not a cause. It was entirely foreseeable. We should have, and we should, focus on fixing the system so that people don't resort to folks like Trump.

@Morgunin But what about speed of delivery?

@cavyherd @fmhilton @blogdiva

@witchescauldron That's simply not true.

BlueSky and ActivityPub are engineered in fundamentally different ways, they operate in fundamentally different ways, with the first focused on users while the second is focused on instances.

The distinction has nothing to do with associations or backers. It's about how the code itself handles data and content.

And I think BlueSky is probably the direction a lot of us would prefer with the focus on users first, empowering users rather than centralizing around instances.