mfed1122

Purchased, although I almost feel like I'm robbing the developers at that price. Never heard of it before. Hopefully it's not overly sappy (as indie games often are), or least pulls off the sap. Looks like it could be fun to surf around though and high reviews sold me.

Doesn't this not even make sense? It's not like women can asexually reproduce, lol. You can just as well target the men?

Really missed an opportunity to have an element greater than 100% of the screen width causing horizontal scroll into an empty white space to the right of the page

Cease posting

In fairness to the conservatives, most of them are pretty suspicious and upset about this and are beginning to think Trump really is on the list. This is based on what I see on r/conservative though, fwiw

Except the situation they're describing is a multi-generational one and they're trying to do what's for the greater good over time, which is ironically what the more short-sighted "blue no matter who" people accuse them of not doing. Sometimes things need to be permitted to get worse before they can get better. You can't just follow a simple greedy algorithm of taking the best possible move at every point with respect to the next state of the game. This algorithm is very easily gamed to lead to bad situations.

So everyone who tells people not to vote is a tankie? Real nuanced thinking you're doing there. I'm happy you found a fun word to use as shorthand for "people I disagree with", but maybe try to actually understand the people you're throwing it at first, you tankie

That's not why anyone abstains from voting. People abstained from voting for Democratic candidates because they felt that they are controlled opposition, who only slow the rate of decline temporarily before the pendulum swings back to Republicans to do the dirty work. The only way to break that cycle is to force the Democrats to run better representatives of the people's interests, and the only way to do that is to deprive them of power when they run shitty candidates like Kamala and want you to vote for them just because Trump is worse. This is the same thing that's been happening since the 80s, and if people would have stopped falling for it back then, it wouldn't have got as bad as it is now. If Kamala had won, we'd still be heading towards he same horrible destination, it would just be slowed down a bit. You could argue that slowing it down is still better than letting it go full speed ahead, and that's true, but only in the short term. At some point we need to pay the price to turn the ship around.

I don't know if you find this line of reasoning convincing, but at least try to remember that the reason people abstain from voting is not them being picky or perfectionist. It's them trying to look at things in a longer-term, greater-good sort of way. I have a 60 year old friend who spent her whole life voting for Democrats she didn't really like. What did it get her? Bush, Obama, Trump's first time, Biden. And the possibility of Kamala. And you do realize that if Kamala had won, we'd just be getting all this same Trump shit but a few years later, right? That was her reward for voting "blue no matter who": the same fucked up situation we're in now. So she's tired of it, she doesn't want to vote anymore for someone who won't make things better. Her only hope is that starving the Democrats out will force them to eventually run someone who might actually change things in the same aggressive, effective way that the conservatives always manage to achieve.

Again. It's not about "I only vote for someone who perfectly agrees with me", and in fact the people who abstain from voting are most likely people who have voted MANY times in the past for people they don't even like at all, so it's a really misguided accusation.

I feel ya. I also am very irritated by the tendency of people to say things that are "so brave" and seem to think that they've achieved something. It's too bad I did a bit of that myself there. I don't know what sort of plan there could be. I think the reality is that the situation is messed up in a way that only wealthy powerful people could effectively fix, and good luck getting them to do that.

I feel like supporting people like Mamdani, especially locally, is the best we've got. Yes, I realize the intense irony of the fact that he's literally a member of the Democratic Party, but he's far on the leftmost side of it. I was seeing some other good discussions about how parties can change over time. I think it may be possible to drag the Democratic Party kicking and screaming to the left over time, and the way to do it is to absolutely put a stop to "blue no matter who" voting mentalities. They may be the good cop, but they still want their personal money and power. There is some legitimate competition there between the parties: competition about who gets to rig the system most in the favor of their sponsors/companies/etc. As long as people vote "blue no matter who", the party has literally no incentive to offer more liberal candidates.

You're right, and I really appreciate you bringing up the statistical angle there. I am a bit of a stats nerd and indeed am aware of the multiple biases present in that sample of insufficient size. However, since the Internet is so full of bots and I don't really trust the news on this, I don't have much more to go on. It sucks, but polls seem like straight up misinformation at this point to me

On the other hand, I feel like I only ever see people arguing this on the Internet using examples of other people from the Internet. Every liberal person I know IRL loves Bernie, and many of them even say " But I understand that the party can't run him because a lot of democratic voters think he's too far to the left". Like, are these voters in the room with us right now?

People who get heated over declarations that both sides are the same, take note. This is what we mean when we say this. The Democratic Party could not any more obviously be controlled opposition. This entire team is full of venture capitalists, wealthy people, wealth-backed people.

Both sides aren't the same. In the same sense that the good cop and the bad cop who come to interrogate me aren't the same. It's true the bad cop is going to knock me about a bit and scream at me, and the good cop is going to be nice to me. But they both work for the police. They both are trying to land me in jail. They're on the same side. They're just trying to get what they want out of me from two different angles. The one angle is direct, it does the heavy lifting. Why do you think the Republicans always get so much done when they're in power but when the Democrats hold majorities they don't get anything done? It's for the same reason that the good cop doesn't get me set free back onto the streets without a shred of new evidence out of me. It's unbelievable that people fall for the oldest trick in the book when it's so clearly presented. The people who think the Democratic Party aren't controlled opposition are like people who think the circus clown really didn't mean to slip on that banana peel and land on the whoopee cushion. It's a show, my god.