mozz

Is this bullshit? This feels like bullshit.

The Moscow Times reports

No link? I couldn’t find it on their web site.

reportedly

is said to be

according to a Kremlin insider

is described as

Etc etc

“glitches”

Everyone wants to belong

Everyone wants allies, close friends, brothers and sisters they can rely on and love and support

In the modern world we have pale imitations and crap. There is no village, there is only a dim landscape through which we shuffle, largely alone.

And so there is craving for some substitute, because the under structure is unfulfilled

It seems unlikely that it’s all that mysterious

OpenAI/Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and Google

There you go I solved the mystery

The interfaces are relatively modern too, with VGA and a PS/2 keyboard.

The other politician: Everyone is mean to me and calls me weird. They're STUPID. Not like my really good friend who just gave me money. The best friend. Amazing friend. I'm putting them in a position of power.

Also I want literally the opposite of everything good on literally every single policy available

(Except maybe abortion; I’ve got some experience with that one and let me tell you it’s a life saver. I won’t stop my allies from making it illegal, nothing like that, but personally I can definitely say I’m a fan.)

So then I said, Herr Thälmann, how important is nuance, in analyzing a political situation? How important is compromise with people even who don’t see eye to eye with you perfectly, politically?

And he said, ZERO. Just push for what you want. If it’s not perfect, it’s garbage; try to oppose it. Compromise is the obstacle to progress.

And I said wait. How can I hear you? I thought you died. In Buchenwald.

And from that point on, I heard nothing. Only silence.

Agreed

Oh, fracking is a huge deal. As is the rest of energy policy, as is the half a billion tons per year CO2e that Biden’s policies have removed from our emissions.

I was referring to the idea of removing any level of qualified analysis from the evaluation of Harris’s real policies proposed or otherwise, and replacing it with “she made THIS one-off comment several years ago about something that is purely a performative aspect of any policy because the current congressional climate simply will not allow a ban on fracking anyway, and then that contradicts this OTHER one-off comment she made just recently about something SHE’S A FUCKIN FLIP FLOPPER” horse race disingenuous bullshit

Hope this helps

I mean, Obama really did wear a tan suit. He really did ask for Dijon mustard. Maybe it would have been more accurate for me to say “ginned up” instead of “made up,” because generally speaking they are more or less factual yes.

Like I say, someone from the left who’s all upset about Obama’s drone strikes and saying hey WTF we need better than this, that 100% makes sense to me. But if someone is attacking Obama about the tan suit, and then when they’re called out they say well what about the drone strikes, I’m just trying to push him to the left, that seems dishonest to me. Doesn’t that accusation make sense?

Correct.

If you want to evaluate the candidates on their energy policies (for some fuckin reason, as if it is necessary to have a comparison between these two on the merits), you can check into what each of them wants to do, and how much sense it makes.

If you want to pressure the Democrats to be more climate friendly in their policies, probably the best way is just to educate voters about what a vital issue it is (change the calculus of what positions will win or lose them elections), or maybe make the case to the Democrats that support for the fossil fuel industry isn’t as vital as it used to be (e.g. point to candidates in PA who were openly hostile to the industry who still got elected e.g. Fetterman)

Picking out one random wedge issue, and covering it in terms of whether Harris “flip flopped” between her support for the Green New Deal several years ago which included this one provision and now at this point not really saying much about it, as if that is gonna make anyone better informed about what is going on, makes no sense. It’s just creating a conflict between two random single statements at the very fringes of what a coherent energy / climate policy would even be. But it makes perfect sense if you’re casting about for some random cherry picked thing to say about her that sounds bad (and in a very particular way that will lose her support from both fossil fuel people and climate people, because each of them can focus on one time frame of her position which is alarming to them that they disagree with.)

Haven’t you read his own self report of his motivation? He cares so much about left wing causes that he’s decided to accomplish them by making a part time job out of attacking the most left wing person (whoever that might be) in this election for a variety of made up reasons.

It’s a hugely effective strategy. MLK did the exact same thing; he just made up hostile nonsense about the most civil-rights-friendly candidate at any given time, and presto! It pushed them to the left. That’s how we got the voting rights act and all this other good stuff.