You Should Know
YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.
All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.
Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:
**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities:
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Credits
Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!
view the rest of the comments
Joe Biden should be in an old folks home. He can barely stand up let alone lead a nation. No fan of the other guy either, but let's face it. Both of them are only puppets on a string.
Biden has accomplished alot of big things actually, they just aren't culture war issues so Republicans have never heard of any of them.
nonetheless, Biden still sounds far, far more coherent than Trump ever did when President
"a historic bipartisan infrastructure bill, generational investments in clean energy and semiconductor manufacturing, the first gun safety law in almost 30 years, a bill codifying same-sex marriage, a bill aiding veterans who suffered health effects from burn pits and an electoral reform to prevent a repeat of Trump’s attempt to use Congress to undermine the election."
https://thehill.com/homenews/4015533-dear-democrats-stop-talking-about-bidens-age-and-focus-on-his-accomplishments/
I think he's doing a fine job.
Yeah but what about drag queens and fighting about childrens movies? Clearly those issues are far more important than infrastructure, strengthening the economy and taking care of veterans
How many kids are still imprisoned in the concentration camps on the border?
In today's news, people can think about more than one thing at a time. Border policy doesn't negate the fact that the Climate Bill and the Infrastructure Bill were objectively good, historic pieces of legislation.
I don't think that answers my question? How many children are still locked up in concentration camps on the border? What is the number? Do you even know or are you just completely checked out from the issue because you are morally reprehensible? Let me illuminate it for you, 1 in 3 of all migrants held in america's concentration camps is a child.
The fact the US has concentration camps on the border and that liberals have just conveniently forgotten about it and gone back to brunch as soon as Biden became president is the problem here. You make claims before an election about issues and then do nothing about them when you have every power to do so. Then you wonder why nobody is enthused to vote for a gaggle of liars.
Pretending that the US is doing literally anything about climate is also a joke. The bill is worthless because it does not change the fact that fossil industries have a higher rate of profit than renewables and until this is resolved every single action on climate is completely performative that only brings us closer and closer to the inevitable disaster that capitalism has caused. What you are doing is greenwashing concentration camps.
Hey, here's the funny thing about the internet: No one is obligated to engage in questions posed in bad faith.
Here's what the climate bill contains for anyone actually interested:
https://youtu.be/qw5zzrOpo2s
It wasn't asked in bad faith. If you knew the answer beforehand I would have happily conceded you do in fact care about having concentration camps. Not knowing is absolutely a sign of being checked out, which is half the issue here, none of you actually do anything except vote. You see politics as something you do once every few years and as a spectator sport the rest of the time. You have no concept of electoral vs non-electoral politics, you literally do not take part politically except as entertainment consumption outside of voting. You all have this embarrassing mindset:
I know the question is in bad faith because these are not concentration camps:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/07/biden-migrant-families-detention
The definition of a concentration camp is: "a place in which large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities".
They are concentration camps. Calling them "migrant detention facilities" does not change their function. It also does not change the fact that the US has been forcefully sterilising women in them either.
"If families were detained, they would be held for short periods of time, perhaps just a few days, and their cases expedited through immigration court"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/07/biden-migrant-families-detention
Not concentration camps. You don't get to leave a concentration camp after having your day in court. Are detention centers ideal? No. But neither is leaving people in the desert without food, water, or shelter, (or worse, leaving them prey to local vigilantes).
Yes, the Trump administration was keeping people in horrific conditions, forcibly sterilizing women, and separating children from their parents without cause and without tracking. If you have some specific evidence that those abuses continue to this day under the Biden administration, please feel free to share.
55 days is the average amount of time people spend there. This is not a "small amount of time".
Stop replying to me. I don't want to hear this apologism for literal concentration camps anymore. Get a grip. You're defending the fact that one third of these people are literal children getting locked up for 2 months at a time as if that's normal, fine and good. If you were a German in Nazi germany you would have defended your government every single step of the way.
If you want to learn about the abuses LOOK IT UP, it is nobody's responsibility to educate you. You know how to use google.
Now stop responding to me with concentration camp denial.
"If families were detained, they would be held for short periods of time, perhaps just a few days, and their cases expedited through immigration court"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/07/biden-migrant-families-detention
Not concentration camps. You don't get to leave a concentration camp after having your day in court. Are detention centers ideal? No. But neither is leaving people in the desert without food, water, or shelter, (or worse, leaving them prey to local vigilantes).
Yes, the Trump administration was keeping people in horrific conditions, forcibly sterilizing women, and separating children from their parents without cause and without tracking. If you have some specific evidence that those abuses continue to this day under the Biden administration, please feel free to share.
They're both far from the best the USA has to offer, but it's better to understand and attack the structural barriers to viable 3rd parties here than to get pissed off at the state of disenfranchisement of the average voter and elect a ' wild card' out of spite
undefined> attack the structural barriers to viable 3rd parties
Which starts by voting third party and ignoring people who parrot nonsense like "a vote for X is a vote for Y".
Nope, terrible idea. You've walked into their trap card: First past the post voting. It takes advantage of your impatience and lack of understanding of the system to lure you into throwing your vote away.
I'd say it starts with bringing ranked or approval voting to your state, supporting voter initiatives in your state that erode the 2 party systems power.
You need to understand
Nope, that's nonsense that just reinforces the existing dual party structure. The statement 'throwing your vote away' is the first sign you're on the wrong track.
I want a viable third party as much as you do. I'd like to actually have a choice instead of always choosing Democrats because I'm not insane. But third party votes aren't the way to change that. I think plenty of people have mentioned the game theory and FPTP, so I'd like to touch on two other points.
For one, if you look at the third parties, they're laughable. They aren't even serious about winning! What power would a Green or Libertarian president even have if they somehow won but Congress was still just Democrat or Republican? This is an important litmus test with these parties. You don't grow top down. You field every election, but your priorities are local and state. If you want to be a serious national contender, you need to start influencing local and state elections. Then, elections for the House and Senate. And finally, president. You need candidates who have plenty of experience throughout government, and right now no third party can offer that. The fact that they only care about the presidency tells us something very important. They're only in it for the grift. It's their cash cow. Hell, look at their platform, and you don't need to even be against third parties to vote against them. Vaccine hesitancy and anti nuclear are instant rejections from me.
Second, it does actually seem like we could see a third large party, and it isn't from any current third party. Republicans are heavily fractured. There's sharp divisions between the extremist Trump wing and the more moderate and establishment Republicans. It's very possible the Trump wing breaks into its own party, especially if Trump doesn't seem like he'll be the GOP nominee. We can examine this dynamic. The faction is probably 10-15% of Americans, which puts them at the third largest. And if they become a new party, it'll be after having exploited the Republicans to get themselves off the ground, and they'll be taking some infrastructure and voter networks with them. There's also the possibility that a third party forms if Republicans do disastrously in the next elections, but that's a way more involved situation.
In my world history class, we learned about two men who disliked the Catholic Church's corruption and wanted to see it cleansed. One was Martin Luther, who left and made his own successful sect. The other is Erasmus, who worked within the church and eventually brought about the changes he wanted to see. Luther may have influenced matters at the time, but it still took someone like Erasmus to create the change. So, who in the end was actually successful with their goal to purge corruption? Erasmus, by working within the system. Luther was quite successful, but he failed horribly at his original goal.
Vote for who you want in the primary, but in the general, vote blue no matter who. We've already seen that this works at changing the party. This is why there's now a prominent progressive wing, and why Biden, a moderate, has championed progressive legislation. It's much easier to co-opt and use an existing system.
go back to the fox news grandpa