Hey, you left out the part where you vocally advocate for voters to abandon the Dems, thereby making a Trump victory more likely—an outcome which would be a setback for all the causes you’re allegedly championing.
I forgot my peaches
Hey, you left out the part where you vocally advocate for voters to abandon the Dems, thereby making a Trump victory more likely—an outcome which would be a setback for all the causes you’re allegedly championing.
This seems like an opportunity for you to explain why the points being made are invalid, rather than just mocking them via meme.
It’s a brute fact that either Harris or Trump is going to be inaugurated as POTUS next January, and it’s also a fact that Trump would be worse for Gaza’s cause than maintaining the status quo. If I’m guaranteed an evil outcome in both cases, why shouldn’t I try to sway the course of history towards the lesser of the two possible evils?
Good thing we always have old faithful- racism and sexism. That’ll swing those undecideds.
At work, both the resident Gen-X divorced-dad asshole and the luddite boomer have taken to complaining that “We’re all going to be called racists and misogynists for not voting for Kamala” while grousing about hating her more than Biden, never once mentioning a single point of policy that they dislike.
House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski.
Insulting someone via stereotype doesn’t show that they’re wrong. You’ve added less to the discussion than the person you’re attempting to mock.
No, a conspiracy is when people get together and conspire, i.e. they develop a secret plan of action for nefarious purposes. In the strictest sense, the term “conspiracy theory” just means that you’re theorizing that some people have secretly planned to do something. If you theorize that some wrongdoers have developed or enacted a secret plan, and it later turns out your suspicion was correct, then by definition you had a true conspiracy theory.
Geez, the Bible sure does say a lot of needlessly nasty and hateful things that are used by religious bigots as justification for their cruel actions—almost like it’s the flawed product of ancient human cultures and their outdated values, and not a timeless divinely-inspired message from a perfect, unchanging, infinitely-wise being who loves and cares deeply about every single human being.
For what it’s worth, the author (eventually) explains that by “AI doomer” they’re not talking about people who are generally skeptical or pessimistic about AI’s influence on society, but rather people who believe that AI will literally kill all humans:
“[T]here are plenty of people who do believe that AI either will or might kill all of humanity, and they take this idea very seriously. They don’t just think “AI could take our jobs” or “AI could accidentally cause a big disaster” or “AI will be bad for the environment/capitalism/copyright/etc”. They think that AI is advancing so fast that pretty soon we’re going to create a godlike artificial intelligence which will really, truly kill every single human on the planet in service of some inscrutable AI goal. […] They would likely call themselves something like ‘AI Safety Advocates’. A less flattering and more accurate name would be ‘AI Doomers’.”
deleted by creator
The actual headline says “tens of thousands,” but it’s certainly funnier this way.
Glad you live and work in a place where biking is a viable option, but it’s the complete opposite for me. It takes me 20 minutes to drive to work on a route that would take three hours by bike just because of the sheer distance, and there simply are no bus routes out to where I live. Not saying we should stop advocating for better mass transit and bike-friendly urban planning, but just bear in mind your situation is not representative of everyone else’s.
The article says she has grandchildren, so her genes are still very much out there. Natural selection only works if it can get to you before you reproduce.
Notice also how their go-to response is to talk about their right to vote for third-party candidates, which is a strawman of the criticism they typically receive. They can’t and don’t engage the actual substance of criticism, which is that voting third-party under our first-past-the-post system is a bad plan that has a proven track record of accomplishing absolutely nothing.