LovingHippieCat

This is of course bigger than just AI but this kind of thing is one of the things that really bothers me about it. AI is useful for a handful of things, I've mainly just found it useful to help debug code. But the industry puffs it up so much as this revolutionizing force which leads to people doing things like this. Take a tool that is useful in less than a handful of circumstances and have it do EVERYTHING. Because the industry says it can and they wouldn't lie right?

Of course all this will do is revoked visas of brown immigrant students.

Fuck dude, I hope that all the calls that his office is getting shows him he fucked up. The right will never like him, they view him as a globalist who believes in science and shit.

Maybe, maybe, he will have a trans advocate on his podcast who will give the information about how BS this shit was. But even if he does, the damage has been done.

This is another moment that shows why we need to remake the democratic party during the primaries next year. We need to go out and vote for progressive candidates so people like Newsom see that progressive is the right way to go, not this shit he's doing.

Some stuff from your link

Republicans can’t pass a spending bill without Democrats but they’re trying to ram through a MAGA budget disaster that slashes essential programs, attacks basic rights, and enables the Trump-Musk coup.

They can pass that budget without Democrats. They're going to use Reconciliation like the Democrats did under Biden. So this one is moot. Also in this point they talk about how the Democrats just have to refuse to vote for a bill that cuts the social programs. Which they have. So both moot and already done.

Deny a quorum to completely freeze Senate business. If Republicans don’t have 51 votes on the floor, Democrats can walk out, preventing the Senate from doing anything at all.

What? The Republicans have 53 senators. As long as each one is there they can still do whatever they want. This one just doesn't make sense.

Refuse to give an inch. Block every unanimous consent request and force the GOP to waste precious time on every single step of the process.

This one is actually dead on and something that should happen.

So basically the article you linked has 3 ways the Democrats can fight back. The first way is something they're already doing, refusing to vote for a budget that cuts programs. But also the point is moot because it says they need Democrats to pass the MAGA budget but they don't. So that point doesn't work. The second is also moot because the Republicans have 53 senators and will be able to do stuff if the Democrats are there or not. And the third is actually an option they can do.

So your article has 1 possible action while acting as if the Democrats aren't already doing another one of these. The article is saying they will gladly vote for a budget that cuts the programs despite the Democrats saying they won't.

Thanks The Guardian for not mentioning how he also talked about a trans woman that set a new record on a race by 5 hours. Turns out 2 things, the race is over 800 miles and takes 8 days so 5 hours is next to nothing, and also that it was a Co-Ed race. So the trans woman set a record in a race that takes 8 days and I would bet she set that record because she traveled just a little bit faster than her competition.

He portrayed it as the trans woman setting the record in woman's sports but if he said it was a Co-Ed race then his point would be moot. But the Guardian can't talk about that because they are on his side there.

Two of these guys are much more complicated. Most people have already pointed out Lincoln but Teddy is more complicated than how he viewed Native Americans. He was out first Trust Buster as President. The robber barons thought they had bought him but once he was in office, after the death of McKinley, he went after them. He broke up Standard Oil. He went after those fuckers with his big stick and helped a lot of people because of it. He also created National Parks, which is complicated but still more positive than the destruction of the land that was happening.

Of course he was also racist, but there are presidents who are complicated and manage to do both terrible and actually very positive things at the same time. Teddy wasn't perfect and he was often an asshole, but he did good things too.

They've increased taxes in 2009 in response to the crash, they've done investment in infrastructure. They've passed the first climate change legislation ever in this country. They increased the minimum wage in 2009 and tried to again. They did actual shit for the 4 years of the last 2 decades they've had full power to do anything. But then voters vote them out because they don't do everything they intended to.

They need do more, but they need full power to do that. Whenever they get that they do shit. But it's impossible to do shit when Republicans control one house of Congress kneecapping everything they want to do.

Also they are incredibly different. One of them wants to increase the minimum wage, the other wants to get rid of it. One of them wants to make sure queer folk are allowed to exist in public and have rights, the other wants to put us in prison and take away our right to exist at all. One of them wants to bust monopolies and the other wants more monopolies. One of them wants to increase social safety net benefits, the other wants to get rid of it. One of them wants to tax the rich, the other wants no federal income tax at all. One of them believes that voting should be easy and the other wants to make voting impossible.

They've passed plenty of bills that end up dying because of Republicans, you're blaming Democrats for Republicans being the problem and saying they're the same. You're being reductive because they happen to both be capitalist parties, which sucks ass but there's a lot of space in the capitalist spectrum.

Listen, there's nothing wrong with wanting Democrats to do better. But it's BS to say they haven't done anything positive in the last 20 years. 20 years where they only actually had full power for 4 of those years and 2 of those years only barely had a majority in the Senate.

Edit: also most of what I said Harris campaigned on has not been promised for 2 decades. She campaigned on policies that the party hadn't supported on the presidential level before. The only democratic presidential nominee to campaign on legalizing weed was Harris. The only one to campaign on a unrealized gains tax was Harris. The only one to campaign on the down payment assistance was Harris. Biden talked about increasing the minimum wage too but that was 4 years ago so not over the last 20 years.

Yes. The vast majority of the party supports us and fights for us. A handful of Democrats have come out and said they think the party is "too far left" on the trans sports stuff but the majority of the party? They support us. The article should at at the end of the headline that they passed this first test because they blocked the fucking bill.

Right? All they had to do was promise to Legalize weed, increase the minimum wage, put caps on rent increases, go after shrinkflation, make it easier to vote, say that healthcare is a human right, fight for unions, promise to help support people who currently can't afford to buy homes to be able to buy homes, and tax the rich and corporations more.

Oh wait, Harris did all of those things. Democrats have had progressive policy, but voters keep voting against it. Because Democrats have to be perfect and cant also happen to have a couple shit policies. The moment they have a couple shitty policies, or don't have all the progressive policies people want. those are all that matter and that means Democrats are just the same as Republicans.

Theres a massive problem with propaganda in this country to the point where Unions, public school Educators, Farmers, Poor folk just barely managing to survive until their next paycheck would all rather vote for the guy who wants to make unionizing Illegal, who wants to dismantle the Department of Education and public schools, who wants to take away farmer subsidies so that small time farmers collapse in on themselves, and who wants to take away the very federal programs that help poor Americans survive. As opposed to a candidate who wanted to support more unionization across the country and support workers right to strike, who wanted the department of Education to remain in existence and had a teacher as her VP who talked about how teachers needed raises, who talked about going after big time corporations who also happen to be massive farmers and force the small time farmers to sell to them so that the small timers now make no or actually lose money while the corporation gets their subsidy, and who talked about raising the minimum wage to 15 an hour "at least" and supported legislation that would allow for said poor folk to get more benefits and be lifted out of poverty.

Democrats are and were pro worker, even if not perfect. But the workers abandoned them because at least the Republicans say they'll fix everything right away. And hey if they don't, these things take time. But if a Democrat is elected and says they'll fix everything right away, that they'll change the country and they don't do it immediately, well that's just because Democrats are incompetent.

Many many workers are voting for Republicans knowing it's against their interests because of hatred and bigotry. The Democrats need to do better, the need to be reshaped into a more progressive party, and they need better messaging and marketing, but to say they aren't already the pro worker party is fucking disingenuous at best and outright spreading far right propaganda at worst.

The Republicans weren't in the minority during Obama's term except for the first 2 years when he got a shit ton done. But in 2010 they got elected to the majority in the House. They weren't a minority party except in the senate until 2014 when they managed to take it.

The reason the Republicans were able to Kneecap Obama wasn't because they were the minority party and the minority party can just do that, it was because they had power. Because the voters elected them in the midterm election with the lowest turn out in decades and that shaped the rest of his presidency.

Democrats right now don't have any power besides the Filibuster and that is definitely going to be used for legislation. But Republicans are also going to use Reconciliation to do some of their most influential legislation because that way the Democrats can't do shit.

And they're planning on passing it in the Senate with Budget Reconciliation so the Filibuster won't stop it.

SF is incredibly liberal, I could absolutely see Nancy losing and finally being forced to retire. Just gotta get people out to vote during the Primary.

Pelosi was elected when she was 41-42. Saikat Chakrabarti is 39, so only a couple years younger than when Pelosi was put into Congress. This is the perfect time for her to be forced to retire.