So...mostly 18-24 year olds?
WoodScientist
joined 1 week ago
I'm just pleased to see that they finally recognized how to debate Trump. He's a fat fart of a narcissist who debates with a cloud of grievance and endless lies. He isn't a regular candidate; he is simply a bully. And like all bullies, deep down he needs to make other people feel small because that's the only way he can not feel small himself.
The mistake that so many others have made is that they treat Trump like any other ordinary candidate. Instead, it seems like team Harris actually sat down with a few psychologists, got to the core of Trump's fragile psyche, and figured out how to break him. If he wasn't such a cruel villain himself bent on ruining the lives of countless others, I would actually think such a trick is unfair and cruel. But sometimes you have to do what's wrong in order to do what's right. Trump is so consumed with his own ego that he is literally willing to order the extrajudicial imprisonment and summary execution of people who offend his ego. He is a dangerous man that cannot be allowed near any real power. And if taking advantage of his mental deficiencies is unfair play, so be it. I am willing to break the mind of a signal malignant narcissist if it means saving the Republic. I have no more sympathy for his mental illness than I do for those of countless dictators through history. The worst tyrants of the 20th century may have had some legitimate psychological illnesses that made them act the way they do, but that does not excuse their actions. Mentally deficient or not, they need to be taken down by any means necessary.
Hell, the only reason I don't endorse violence to keep these people out of power is that it's counter-productive to create martyrs. These people need to be shown as the fools they truly are. Only then can the spell be disrupted. If Trump's attempted assassin had succeeded, a dozen baby Trumps would have quickly risen up following the same playbook. Trump instead needs to be defeated not with violence, but with total abject humiliation and defeat at the ballot box. He needs to die not as a martyr at the height of his power, but from old age, as a sad, tired old man, repeatedly defeated and ranting at the clouds, repeating facebook rumors, til his dying breath. THAT is how you defeat Trumpism. You have to break his psyche so fundamentally that he never recovers. He needs to be defeated resoundingly and made such a fool that no one will ever attempt his playbook again, or at least until his humiliation has passed from living memory. Ideally he will end up dying in prison. But regardless he needs to live to til the end of his natural life, making a greater fool of himself with every word he speaks, from now until the end, digging his pit of shame ever deeper. THAT is how you defeat a demagogue like Trump. You don't out-logic him. You don't kill him. You break him. You shatter what his left of his ego and mind. Leave him a blubbering fool trapped in the remnants of his own shattered ego. That is how you deal with Trump. You have no mercy, and you break him.
Here's a few you can try in the future. You can take a paywalled link and append the address to the following sites:
archive.is/
archive.ph/
12ft.io/
removepaywall.com/
Just take the website link from the taskbar and paste it directly after. This works the vast majority of the time.
Some might complain about getting around paywalls, but I don't mind. The web was built to be free. If you want to have your info and stories completely behind a login, fine. Make your page require a log in to even see stories. Make that worth it to people, and you can build an audience. But don't have your pages and stories accessible to draw people in, only to slap them with a paywall. That strategy always felt like a slimy bait-and-switch to me. I remember back in the 90s when Congress had a serious debate over whether for-profit commercial activity should even be allowed online at all. And it's been downhill from there. Put your content on the open web or not. Pick a lane. Want a walled garden? Build a walled garden and don't let people see inside without paying. But don't lure people into your garden and then slap them with a pay booth once they're starting to enjoy the flowers. If it's even possible for people to use a paywall removal site, it proves you're trying to pull a bait-and-switch on readers.
As a matter of course, one should not even open a link that goes to OpenAI.
It's best not to become dependent on these piracy engines. These models are hopelessly unprofitable, and they will not be cheap and accessible for very long. They take such colossal resources to train, billions upon billions of dollars. Currently OpenAI is trying to do the classic Silicon Valley bait and switch. They have a product that is more expensive and inefficient than the previous method. If they charge the real price for their product, they know no one will adopt it. So instead they offer their product at an artificially low price initially. They hope that everyone will become dependent, after which they can jack up their prices.
It's the Uber model. Start by paying drivers more than they would make driving taxis, and by charging riders far less than they would pay for a taxi fare. This is possible through billions of angel investor subsidies. Then once everyone is dependent, slash driver pay and jack up ride prices. This is the only way for Uber to make back the billions they've squandered on market capture sub Silicon Valley execute bloat. If we had functioning anti-monopoly law enforcement, the executives of all these companies would be in jail. But for now they're able to take advantage of practices that would have seen them in chains two generations ago.
Same with OpenAI. They want to get all the copy-editing companies dependent on their piracy engines. They want all the graphic design companies dependent on their image stealing tools. Then, once these companies fire their real human copy editors and graphic designers, OpenAI will start charging the real price for its services. And considering the literal hundreds of billions being poured into these hopelessly inefficient piracy engines, the rate they will have to charge will be enormous. Someone has to ultimately pay for those billions Sam Altman is sponging up. And even if they didn't have billions of investor dollars to recoup, their ultimate goal is to gain a monopoly position in the copy editing and graphic design market. They will replace a million competing copy editors and graphing designers with a single provider - OpenAI. They'll control the market. Once all the real human copy editors, graphic artists, and voice actors/readers have been driven from the industry and been forced to move on and take jobs elsewhere, they will be able to charge whatever they please.
Any executive that lets their company become dependent on this technology is a fool. They're a sucker, falling for a classic bait-and-switch. Hopefully enough of them are smart enough not to be suckered in by the OpenAI con job, and OpenAI can hastily be driven into bankruptcy where it belongs.
Well, according to Trump, Harris is a Marxist. Are political reeducation camps out of the question? We'll go full Maoist. Anyone caught posting such drivel has to spend a year working on a state-run farm while they receive political reeducation. 🤣
If you have no problem hanging out with Klan members, you are hillbilly trash.
We're bringin' back capes and cloaks.
To prevent the obvious reference, the trend will be called, "'No capes' only applies to superheroes."
She’s not going to gain any trump voters, there’s zero logical reason for Dems to move to the right. Except they think they can get away with being more to the right.
While I can't speak on the effectiveness of the strategy, I would point out that Harris et al. aren't really aiming to recruit Trump voters. They're more aiming for more traditional Reaganite Republicans, the "never Trump" people. Think of the type of Republicans like Dick Cheney. That's the type of Republican they're aiming for. They're not aiming to convince an active Trump supporter to flip to Harris. They're trying to get Republicans who don't want to vote for Trump, who would otherwise stay at home, to instead vote for Harris.
My own parents fit into this mold. They're in their sixties and voted for Republicans their entire adult lives, up until 2016. They voted third party in 2016, and in 2020 they switched over to supporting Biden, and now they support Harris and are voting for Democrats across the board.
Whether appealing to voters like my parents or trying to appeal to younger, more disaffected progressive voters is a better strategy, I can't say. But the perennial problem of appealing to hard-core progressive voters is that they are incredibly fickle and often engage in self-destructive purity testing. Look at the leftist voters refusing to vote for Harris over the Palestine issue. Far-left voters have a tendency to find any excuse not to vote for a candidate. It's Palestine this time around, but it could easily be something else. There's always some issue that the main Democratic candidate has that some leftists will cite as a reason not to vote for the mainline Democratic candidate. In 2024, it's Palestine. In 2020, it was Biden and the crime bill. In 2016, it was Hillary's treatment of Bernie. Etc. There's always a purity test violation a certain segment of far left voters will cite to vote against their own interests. They want a perfect candidate, and they will actively seek out any excuse not to vote for the mainline candidate. As no politician will share 100% of their views, there will always be some reason to not vote for them.
The reason Democrats often tilt to the right is that voters on the far left side of things are often short-sighted and incredibly fickle. They're not reliable voters.
All Trump proved is that he is the social media-addicted racist uncle everyone has in their family. That is what he demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Among other things, we need to ascribe financial penalties to states that wrongfully remove people from voter rolls. States can rightfully remove people who die, move away, or are not citizens from voter rolls. However, there is no consequence to states for making a mistake. This encourages bad actors to deliberately be sloppy in their roll-clearing efforts, and it provides cover for purges based on race and ethnicity.
There need to be damages associated with removing someone from the rolls incorrectly. We should pass a federal law that establishes a new cause of action for such civil rights violations. Were you incorrectly removed from the voter rolls? You should be able to sue your state in federal court, for say, $100k plus attorney's fees, for violation of your civil rights. States can either be deliberate and careful about their voter rolls maintenance, or they can be driven to insolvency.