What he said wasn’t against the middle of the night judgment, he wasn’t “slamming” the court. He was angry at the administration for making it necessary. He said he opposed having to get up and work in the middle of the night because the admin was refusing to do their job. He didn’t disagree with the judgment, he was objecting to the fact that they are taking extraordinary effort now in order to weigh in on things that shouldn’t need their attention at all.

And honestly, Sammy, same. This clown show has demanded too much of my attention and it’s not theirs to demand. But it’s your job to make sure we don’t get to the point where this shit happens. That was your fuck up. Sometimes when I fuck up, I have to work extra to fix it.

So fix your shit, Sambo.

As someone with a bunch of friends who had factory gigs before NAFTA and still a few today, there’s plenty of people who are happy in factory situations, you know?

It’s fair to say there’s a lot of inaccurate assumptions on the right wing side here, but factory work isn’t always a horror show. It’s obvious they want to do as much as they can to make it awful, like deregulating things and whatnot. And obviously, the infrastructure isn’t there and won’t spring up overnight. That’s no good, but the factory labor itself? Probably fine in a lot of cases.

Mask off these days for you, I see.

Are you familiar with toxoplasmosis? The disease that mutates into different forms so a bunch of different animals can host it and pass it along.

This is a long article but it’s really good, it’s worth a read and it predicted a lot of the discourse of the last decade: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/

The sort of gist of it is this: the more grey area / ambiguity in a topic, the more we pop our own identity into our stance on it. And so if that thing is controversy, we argue about it so much more if there’s room to self-insert our identity in that grey area. It spreads and spreads to a bunch of different hosts. It becomes a meme via argument by infecting a bunch of hosts to pass it along.

And that’s Monk.

Pretty early on, it was very clear that they had no actual understanding of the topics they were talking about. I tried in their first few weeks to engage with them and so did others. Only to find nothing there. No opinions, and all counter-arguments were clearly copy & pasted off of Wikipedia. Things like “we have X amount of members in Maine”.

Please.

Eventually they stopped trying to engage altogether, and instead moved into a deliberate pattern of line-toeing retorts. None in good faith. But, more importantly, never with enough substance to interrupt the ensuing argument, while simultaneously always enough comment traffic to perpetuate the thread.

Monk is a memetic toxoplasmosis source vector. Through pure ineptitude or irony, I think they’ve accidentally turned more people against third parties than for them, but maybe that isn’t their goal.

Even now there’s an undercurrent of “I don’t think I even disagree with them”. Well, how could you? They haven’t said anything worth disagreeing with, have they? What have they said, though? Not much. Nothing recognizable as an opinion in defense of the third party articles. Often, just enough to establish a veneer of plausible deniability.

It’s a sophisticated form of trolling and it’s recognizable to anyone with a long history of community management online. There are some people who never seem to be directly at fault for things, yet every single time you remove them, the temperature goes down.

You don’t need to actually build a case against these people to know that the equation is simple: when they’re around, everyone is angry. When they aren’t, people get along better.

Anyway, my point is this: you can tell who is contributing in good faith and who isn’t, because they will attempt to say what’s on their mind. It might be the worst take you’ve ever heard in your life, but it has a concretion to it. Monk has no concrete substance, they simply like to stir the pot.

Indexable content is a good idea objectively, but Lemmy will never “be Reddit”. Sometimes something is just lost.

Because it’s a huge undertaking and there are different times for ballot eligibility in every one of the 50 states. When do you think the candidate would be chosen? This week? Ready in the wings already and on the ballots?

These bureaucracies move at such a slow pace there was legitimate concern that BIDEN wouldn’t be on the ballot in time because the DNC wasn’t moving quick enough. That was months ago.

Furthermore there’s the wheels of public opinion and moving those in lockstep with the speed it would take to create an alternative is something that takes so long that candidates often begin campaigning the year before the primaries.

There is no other candidate and this is not a personal take but a logistical one. It’s too late.

Actually pointless. Like, not a figure of speech. It’s too late to legally position a new candidate. It would be challenged. The Heritage foundation is already priming legal challenges, and who was that who owned the courts, again?

Let’s imagine that he does step down. How would everyone agree on where to vote next? What’s the process to get them in the running again? What’s your guess on the timeline to do that unassailably vs serious legal opponents?

I wonder what I would do if I were running a campaign for a felon and I needed to make it happen no matter what. I don’t have a good candidate but I do have propaganda networks and I do own judges everywhere, and my opposition has a hard time agreeing with each other, and they crumple apart like tissue paper on basic purity tests, and their candidate is old and has a stutter- his only seeming drawbacks that play to the media.

I wonder what I could do to improve my position and involve my only remaining power assets.

I wanted to dislike this comment but it was shockingly coherent. And correct. Perhaps too coherent and correct, for some.