I’m a big Nintendo apologist. I’ve argued in the past that their consoles are the only ones worth buying over a gaming PC (not including Steamdeck there), and while I have never defend their terrible IP practices, I have been willing to overlook it and continue buying their products. This shit is indefensible. The price hike would be bad enough, but killing off physical games is a disgrace. Nintendo fans should be angrier than everyone else, not defending this shit.

That’s definitely part of it. I would say the trucks that are literally becoming unglued (while the CEO is figuratively) are causing equal, if not greater, damage.

The Proud Boys are more like the Brownshirts: useful for the rise of fascism, but ultimately, a disposable group that was never going to get any real power under the regime. The way ICE is acting is more analogous to the SS or Gestapo: an unaccountable group of government goons that disappear undesirables and dissidents.

Well, that’s true, but the fact that he said, “I’ll only do it if they air it unedited!” makes me think he thought they would say, “no,” and he’d be able to decline while saving face. My gut tells me he’ll make up another excuse now. I’d love to be wrong, though!

He’ll find a way to back out. Musk is stupid, but not that stupid.

Reminder that the Post Office is only losing money because of a 2006 law that forces them to fund their retirement plan for 75 years in advance, which is an insane burden that no nother agency or private corporation undertakes. Also, even if it does lose money, it doesn’t matter because the USPS isn’t a business. It’s a government service provided for the public good.

If the independent calculations are correct, DOGE has cut $8 billion in government spending. 20% of that, divided amongst 350 million Americans, would be $4.57. If DOGE’s claims are correct (and they’re not), they cut $55 billion, which would be $31.43. Even if DOGE met it’s goal of $2 trillion, that would be $1,142.86, which would be a significant one time payment for a lot of Americans, but wouldn’t offset the loss of Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, a functioning Post Office, etc.

Honestly, this is the one I’m least worried about. It doesn’t sound like anyone who wasn’t about to retire is taking the deal. I’m more worried about congressionally allocated funding being impounded, federal bureaucrats being illegally fired, and Doge’s massive security breaches in the Treasury and IRS.

You’re not wrong about Netanyahu, but Biden and Harris both played into his hands with an appeasement strategy, and we should absolutely blame them for that.

Astrology daughter. NFT son will be bankrupt in your basement, no matter what. Astrology daughter might marry a rich guy.

Boy, this, “Jury Nullification,” thing sure sounds like it would give everyday Americans a dangerous amount of power of our judicial system! I hope the media writes a lot more articles about it so that more people are aware of this terrible, terrible thing that they should never, ever do.

Before joining Lemmy: “It really doesn’t matter what instance you join, you’ll be able to see content from all over.”

After joining Lemmy: “So you’ve enlisted in .world, eh? Welcome to the fight, soldier!”

It’s very interesting that pro-Luigi posts are immediately and universally censored while pro-Jan. 6th posts are given a lot more leeway. Both were attacks on powerful members of the ruling class, but only one group of sympathizers is being completely shut down. It’s tempting to think that it’s because tech billionaires have a right-wing bias, but I actually think it’s worse than that. I think it’s because the January 6th riots represented a partisan divide, while Luigi’s (alleged) actions have received bipartisan sympathy. Apparently, violence and terrorism are acceptable unless they lead to class solidarity.

Dude, you need to reread the article, then reread my comment. The Uncommitted movement and Abandon Harris are two different groups.

I criticized Abandon Harris in my comment for having unrealistic goals for how far they could push Democrats. Uncommitted had much more reasonable requests. Harris completely blew them off, so they couldn’t endorse her, but they still came out with an anti-Trump, anti-third-party statement. Harris could have one their endorsement with some small, most symbolic gestures, and she fucked it up. Losing that endorsement was entirely the Harris campaign’s fault.

Well, I get what you’re saying, but I think Harris’ failure to negotiate with these groups is entirely on her. The Uncommitted movement’s goals were very lofty, but their demands were small. They wanted State Rep. Ruwa Romman to give a speech at the DNC, and a leaked draft showed it was a very mild speech that didn’t even condemn Israel. It just called for an end to the war. After the DNC declined, they asked her to meet with families who’d lost loved ones in Gaza, and she ignored the request. Finally, they gave her until September 15th to hold a meeting with them, and she again ignored them, so they decided not to endorse her.

The Uncommitted movement didn’t create the problems Harris had with the Muslim community; Biden’s handling of Gaza did that. The Uncommitted movement just took that anger, organized it, and put it towards productive action. That’s what activist leaders are supposed to do. The Uncommitted leadership was clearly looking for any gesture towards the Palestinian community that they could take to their supporters, and Harris just wouldn’t do it. You have to do something to win an activist groups’ support. Endorsing her after she snubbed them wouldn’t have convinced the Uncommitted members to vote for Harris, if would have convinced them their leaders were pushovers.

Yeah, also no, and it you’d actually read the original comment, you’d know that. As I said:

they declined to endorse her, but still urged their supporters not to vote Trump or third-party.

They knew Trump was worse, they didn’t want Trump to win, but they needed Harris to make a gesture towards the Arab community before they could endorse her; she didn’t, so they didn’t. She didn’t negotiate to get their endorsement, so she didn’t get their endorsement. It’s very funny that you’re acting like everyone else is an idiot yet you still don’t understand this.

Yeah, except the Uncommitted leadership didn’t tell their people to, “swim in lava,” (if I’m following this tortured extension of the metaphor correctly). As I said, they opposed Trump, and even warned their supporters that voting third-party would help him, they just didn’t endorse Harris because of her failure to make any of the very small concessions they asked for. She put them in a position where, as political leaders, there was no way they could endorse her without completely destroying their own credibility. If she needed their endorsement that badly, then it sounds like her bargaining position wasn’t that good.

As I said in the other comment you left, your interpretation of the analogy makes no sense. Your point would be valid if I were discussing Arab and Muslim voters who voted for Trump, but I’m not; I’m discussing the Uncommitted movement, who endorsed neither candidate.

…except they didn’t do that. The Uncommitted movement didn’t leave her for Trump; they didn’t endorse Trump and actively warned their members not to vote third-party because it would help him. They just followed through with their threat to withhold their endorsement. If she needed their help that badly, she should have done something to win that endorsement.

Well, A) I’m describing the position Uncommitted was in, not giving my own. B) Who the hell are you quoting when you say, “punish?” That word doesn’t appear in my comment, and I definitely didn’t say that the Uncommitted leaders were trying to punish anyone, so what the fuck are you talking about? Are you actually arguing with me, or someone you made up in your head? C) Your entitled, sneering attitude is indicative of why Harris lost; telling Palestinian that Harris won’t oppose the genocide, but vote for her anyway or else; telling teamsters she didn’t need them to win; it turns out that was a losing strategy, huh?

By the way, I actually voted for Harris, despite her floundering, directionless campaign, but since I’m not a complete idiot, I want to understand people who didn’t. Blaming other people for Harris’s loss might feel nice, but internet temper tantrums don’t win elections.

Anyway, I could also call you an asshole and tell you to get fucked, but honestly, I’d rather you work on your reading comprehension. You don’t seem to have understood (or at least engaged with) anything I said besides, “Uncommitted didn’t endorse Harris.” Honestly, based on your comment, I’m not even sure you understand what the Uncommitted movement was.