frazw

joined 2 years ago
[–] frazw@lemmy.world 154 points 3 days ago (20 children)

Yeah the logic always stuns me.

"If I vote for a Democrat they'll probably take some of my money through taxes and I'll be poor"

Trump wins and ruins their business, they lose all of their money.

"At least I'm not poor because of evil Democrat taxes"

They have truly been brainwashed. Whatever bad shit republicans do they still believe the Democrats must be worse, because the republicans told them so. Even though the republicans have provably been lying to them for years.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

If you give people no credit for admitting they were wrong or give them no chance to atone, then you give them no reason to do it and they will continue down the path they are on. To me it is preferable that she stops being toxic vs her continuing if those are the two choices.

I am not saying she should be forgiven, but if she is genuine, and that remains to be seen (she has a lot of work to do to prove that), then continuing to punish or otherwise vilify her, sends her the message that she's damned is she does and she's damned if she doesn't so why not continue being toxic. Why should she try to be better?

If she continues to atone and does some very positive things in future (again doubtful) there should at least be some consideration given that she may have changed.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 56 points 6 days ago (8 children)

My most charitable thinking about this is that she s always just playing to win. The way she acted was just that, an act. She did it because she knew it appealed to a particular segment of society that could get her elected. Now there is a sea change she is smart enough to know MAGA is doomed and she had jumped ship early because she thinks it will be more politically advantageous in the long run.

She may be genuinely remorseful if she is good for her, but it doesn't erase the things she had voted for, against, and the things she said that harmed people or incited violence deliberately or accidentally.

That said, she is somewhat uniquely positioned to assist in the deprogramming of MAGA members so, though I don't trust her, the things she is doing and saying today are leading people away from Trump, and that is the most vital mission right now.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

You don't think it's progressive that the USA has its first black president closely followed by it's first orange president? I'd say that's a society that is closer to saying it doesn't see colour.

Seriously though, I think the fact America hasn't had a female leader is strange for a country that used to claim to be the greatest nation on earth.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Well maybe I am, but I also think there is a tendancy to dismiss a lot of trump's behaviour as delusional, or dumb when I see it as intentional malice with moments of dementia woven in.

I do think he is not very bright, but not so dumb as many want to believe. It feels good to think of him as dumb, but the fact of the matter is he convinced tens of millions of people to vote for him. He has steam rollered the USA and imposed his will. He is clever enough to have understood his to manipulate the public masterfully up to his second election, despite being a convicted felon by that point. To say he is stupid and somehow lucked his way into all of that is not impossible but improbable. I think his issue now is that he underestimated how the public would respond as he got positive reinforcement for many years even when doing harmful things because of his blind support from MAGA. He underestimated how much they would put up with.

It is entirely possible that he pulled the number out of the air but I don't think that's how he works. Some of what he says is rooted in a truth that he then distorts and exaggerates to serve him, which is why I think the number comes from his deliberate misunderstanding than from nowhere.

The deception doesn't require him to accept he was wrong. It requires mental gymnastics. Something he has proven to be an Olympic gold medalist at.

Just to be clear I am not defending him I am advising caution. Writing him off as stupid means you are in some way excusing his actions as being accidental and leads to the "of its just trump being trump" rhetoric that has let him get away with so much. He is a dangerous, dangerous man. I can't decide if he believes the things he says or simply wants you to believe the things he says. I lean towards the latter.

As I wrote this I am reminded of Boris Johnson who is someone who spent a great deal of time convincing the UK public he was a harmless, likeable idiot. He was not. He was an intelligent, deceptive man who wore his public image like a mask to hide his nefarious intent. Boris is not trump of course, but I see Boris as a cautionary tale and it makes me view Trump differently than I perhaps would if Boris had not existed.

Fully accept I may be wrong about all of this, but just want to share my opinion.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I'm not sane washing. I believe it's how he sees it and now he's probably been told that's not how it works, he continues to use this method as a way to make the number bigger. So it crosses from idiocy to deliberate deception. IMO

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 86 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Why is no one concerned about how unfair this is for the puppy?

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago (1 children)

More importantly does Tim Cook know he's Ellen DeGeneres?

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (7 children)

When he says he's going to reduce drugs by thousands of percent, I think he looks at the price of drug x in, for example, Germany and sees a price of $10 then he looks at the price in the USA of $160. So the USA price is 1600% of the Germany price.

He claims to reduce them to the Germany price, and then screws up on how percentages work and says he'll reduce it by 1600%, instead of what he should say, which is reducing it by 94%.

So that's how I understand the comments he makes. Either way he's full of shit and won't actually reduce them at all, but I think I get why he thinks he is correct in stating percentages in the thousands.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 32 points 1 month ago (10 children)

Miller just looks like someone who is angry at the whole world because he was bullied when he was a child.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

These guys are so scared of having to face their confusing feelings that they will go to extraordinary lengths like running for office, rising through the ranks and using their power to avoid temptation.

Just admit it to yourselves and everyone will be happier.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Not even out of spite. Out of Practical concerns about the smooth and uninterrupted operation of the factory. Any time they need to send an engineer from Korea or need to have inspections etc their workers are at risk of detainment. Even if they had a100% American workforce which is unlikely, they'd need to send staff from Korea every now and then. The US just told them there are better countries to operate in where such things won't happen.

 

Democratic political strategy

 

The Geneva convention was established to minimise atrocities in conflicts. Israeli settlements in Gaza are illegal and violate the Geneva convention. Legality of Israeli settlements Article 51 of the Geneva convention prohibits indiscriminate attacks on civilian population yet Israel attacked hospitals with children inside. Whether you agree or not that Hamas were present, children cannot be viewed as combatants.so when no care was taken to protect them, does this not constitute a violation? According to save the children, 1 in 50 children in Gaza had been killed or injured. This is a very high proportion and does not show care being taken to prevent such casualties and therefore constitutes a violation.

So my question is simply, do supporters of Israel no longer support our believe in the Geneva convention, did you never, or how do you reconcile Israeli breaches of the Geneva convention? For balance I should add "do you not believe such violations are occurring and if so how did you come to this position?"

Answers other than only "they have the right to go after Hamas " please. The issue is how they are going after Hamas, not whether they should or not.

EDIT: Title changed to remove ambiguity about supporting Israel vs supporting their actions

view more: next ›