• 520
        link
        fedilink
        521 year ago

        I’d take both stuttering and rambling over a treasonous, vain, rapist, corrupt, racist, manipulative, wannabe-dictator.

        I mean seriously, people wanna talk about speech patterns over any of that shit?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      201 year ago

      Yeah well until we have ranked choice voting this is what you get to pick from. And the choice really does matter.

      • Brave Little Hitachi Wand
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        Don’t settle for RCV, it’s a watered down option that allows party politics to continue largely unabated. If you want to argue for an alternative to FPTP that really forces them to earn your vote, talk about approval voting or Condorcet.

    • zak
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      He was great in all those Naked Gun movies

  • Cait
    link
    fedilink
    111 year ago

    Maybe instead of an minimum age, american presidents shoud have a minimum iq, but at this point a basic ability to speak and decent common sense would be too much to much to ask

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      Unfortunately IQ is a terrible test for that and we have to rely on people to make that decision. They’ve got a fetish for antiintellectualism though.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    591 year ago

    Elon Musk is just sitting there listening to this word salad, clenching his asshole as tight as he can, realizing he decided to gang up with the assholes who hate electric cars.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      None of this stuff is even in their own interests.

      It’s like the anti immigration people who don’t want to fund education. It’s H1B visa workers that will need to fill jobs in the future.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not really. Tesla is aimed at libertarians, aka the conservative side that wants the cool toys from the left but only for the wealthy. For example, the Cybertruck is about making electric vehicles appealing to the more radical side. So it is a pickup truck, but not a too competent or practical truck, but that doesn’t matter. What it has to be is a shiny toy for assholes to LARP being a millionaire during the apocalypse. “It’s bulletproof!” being one of the stupid lies that he uses for marketing towards them.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      201 year ago

      I don’t know, Musk has gotten to the point that he might actually match with the MAGAts against his own company and then fire half the staff for not defending the factory against him.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      16
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t think he cares all that much about Tesla and probably sees the writing on the wall for the company. Its reputation is mud. He got what he needed.

      He’s on to the next thing, only using Tesla as a stepping stone to the next grift.

      Here’s my assessment of him -
      He started out exploiting people - His family used aparthied and slave labor to build their wealth.
      From there, he used his family’s wealth to woo/partner with engineers with good ideas.
      Then he moved into his business exploitation phase, using his lack of morals to claim ownership over the companies he founded with others ideas and sell them off (Zip2 and the first X . com).
      Using those proceeds, he entered the government exploitation game. Space X, which is held afloat by government grants. Or Tesla, which was also held afloat by government grants at first, and then later, largely by over-enthusiastic stock market investors, whom he began to experiment with manipulating.
      Naturally, he moved on to trying his hand at stock market manipulation in a big way. It’s where instead of making millions for himself and billions for companies (or billions in ‘assets’), he could have personally made actual billions in liquid cash. That’s what all the ‘will he, won’t he?’ was about regarding purchasing Twitter and its massive stock price fluctuations.
      But he got outfoxed by Twitter’s then-lawyers, and now he’s desperately trying every knob at his disposal, including Putin and Xi’s, in the hopes that his empire of grift does not collapse. It’s why he’s attempting to turn Twitter into an online bank (like the first X . com), and wants the husk of Twitter to cater exclusively to stupid and manipulable people - things he sort of knows, because he recognizes the mythos has been broken and he can’t pull the same confidence tricks.

  • @[email protected]
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    701 year ago

    They do believe the car thing. A relative of a friend told me she didn’t want Biden to take away her Honda CRV because she liked it so much. She seemed to think it was a nearly done deal, Biden’s coming to reclaim all fossil-fueled powered vehicles and make everyone buy electric cars. I didn’t ask for details.

    Of course, the Republicans are standing strong against this atrocity.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Just raw economics will win them over long run. EV will be price parity at some point not in the too distant future. In those sunny southern state, where solar + EV is just such a clear win, the rolling coal inbreds just can’t not see it.

    • ThePowerOfGeek
      link
      fedilink
      English
      401 year ago

      So this is the new “Obama’s gonna take all your guns!!1!” trope.

      Which of course he didn’t. Either of the times the GOP leaders said he would. And they knew it. It was just to create hysteria among their base.

      • @[email protected]
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        181 year ago

        Yep, though the gun manufacturers, via the NRA, probably drive that one. They LOVE it when a Democrat is in office because they can say that and watch gun sales rise.

        I’m convinced they also love shootings, or at least did, for similar reasons - I’m sure, for a while, gun owners worried this latest shooting might be the one that generates new restrictions on gun purchases, so out they went to buy. At this point I don’t think they have anything to worry about; we as a country seem to have decided mass shootings are Just Great, so that little fear probably doesn’t work as well any more.

        Let’s never forget the NRA’s solution to school shootings, after Newtown, was literally, “More guns in schools.”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        It wasn’t for lack of trying though, because Obama did call for and back legislation to ban certain scary guns. Their attempts at the taking of guns simply failed the standard legislative process. Many of you probably weren’t of voting age at the time, but this process of attempting to take the guns actually did happen during the Obama presidency.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          271 year ago

          I was of voting age in 2008. Banning or heavily regulating certain types of guns is not the same as sending the national guard into every home in the US to search for and confiscate them, which is exactly what conservatives have been saying will happen for at least a decade now. Iirc trump banned some kind of bump-stock-adjacent device, but I don’t recall any gangs of roving feds going door to door to round up all the ones that have already been purchased.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            Moving the goalposts, not allowed. I will return the discussion back to course.

            Banning of guns is what people generally think of as “$politician taking the guns” and is what drives 2A voters to vote against $politician. In the above discussion we were discussing Obama, and he did in fact do what I said he did.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            Let me make sure I’ve got what you’re saying correct:

            Banning or heavily regulating guns that people already legally own, guns that have been widely considered a constitutional right for >75 years, is not the same as “taking your guns”, is that correct? Would it be fair to say that they only thing you would consider to be “taking your guns” would be house-to-house confiscation of all firearms in private hands?

            In re: bump stocks - it turns out that a lot of people that purchased them (and forced reset triggers, which are a similar concept) got letters from the ATF telling them that they had to turn them in or destroy them. Because, see, the ATF could just force the companies that sold them to disclose customer records, which means yeah, they could come to your door and take it. Unless you paid cash at a gun store, there’s an electronic trail, and the ATF followed it for a whoooooooole lot of people. Continuing to keep one that you purchased legally at the time? That’s a felony, because the ATF has re-classified them as machine guns, which means you can’t own one since they were produced post-ban, and there’s no way to make it legal. (Currently, there’s an appeals court that has ruled the ban illegal, but we’ll have to see how that plays out.)

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              121 year ago

              If you genuinely and unironically thought bump stocks and pistol-ARs weren’t going to have a reckoning, you are the perfect example of why we need to start taking guns away from conservatives.

              Every good old boy knows a fascist making ghost guns in their garage.

              Quit your fucking pathetic 2A pearl clutching and just admit it’s about the killing fetish already.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                41 year ago

                I’ll bet that if someone called you a pearl-clutching 1A fetishist that just wanted to groom children, you would–rightly–argue that no, civil rights like the ability to read books about gender identity and sexuality are protected civil rights that the gov’t shouldn’t touch.

                Or if someone said that if you have nothing to hide, then you should care if the gov’t spies on you, you would tell them to fuck off and come back with a warrant.

                …But as soon as it’s a civil right you don’t personally like, well, then it’s ammosexuals and murder fetishes.

                The right is already trying to take your 1A rights in regards to press and religion–and largely succeeding!–but by golly!, you’re gonna just hand them your 2A rights so that when they finish taking your 1A and 5A rights you won’t be able to do dick except say mean things in public that will get you arrested on domestic terrorism charges (see also: cop city protests in Atlanta).

                Cool, nice chat.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              81 year ago

              guns that have been widely considered a constitutional right for >75 years

              That was really only a result of the NRA having a coup and going from a sporting organization to a 2A advocacy group in the 1970s. They lobbied for multiple decades and had a couple of supreme court victories in 2006 and 2012 that made it an individual right to own whatever the fuck kind of gun you want. It’s very, very recent.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                31 year ago

                Yeah, no. It simply wasn’t considered an issue before that point for the most part. Then you had Reagan passing bullshit laws because he was afraid of black people, and, well, shit took off.

                It’s pretty clear from a reading of the documents surrounding the writing of the US constitution that it was always intended as an individual right–and legal obligation in many instances!–and that it was intended to mean military arms.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Obama didn’t increase firearm restrictions, but Trump did with the bump stock ban. Which, incidentally, is due to be overturned by the Supreme Court this year.

    • David Blue
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      Depending on the generation of CR-V, I suppose - and without any hard math/stats despite how hard I’ve tried - I suspect the net impact of your relative driving it for the rest of its usable life vs buying a brand new EV to be significantly less, considering Lithium mining, curb weight, etc.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      I know why politicians claim it, because taking away something that belongs to someone is an affront to them the way “regulations requiring manufacturers to adhere to climate friendlier standards” isn’t, but it’s such an annoying instant radicalization people make.

      Finding out gas stoves cause a significant percentage of childhood asthma and some states proposing a subsequent ban on household gas in new builds only became “BIDEN WANTS TO MAKE YOUR GAS STOVE ILLEGAL”. Subsidies for electric cars became “BIDEN BANNING GAS CARS” etc etc.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      Oh no! Obama Biden is coming for your guns cars! Only our guy can save from this totally real danger!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      To “debank” means to kick a customer out of a bank, and no longer doing business with them anymore. So like in Texas after their abortion ban (pre-overturning of Roe) people could sue you for assisting in an abortion, so probably a bunch of banks in Texas went to abortion clinics and debanked them, just sent them their deposits in a check and stopped doing business with them so the bank couldn’t be sued.

      You gotta be pretty far down the rabbit hole to think that sort of thing is going to happen to…people who have gas cars, or something.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      201 year ago

      Which is exactly who he’s talking to, which is exactly the type of person that has the time to get out and vote when the time comes without really thinking about anything else.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1431 year ago

    “This is the guy I want to represent my interests in international negotiations.”

    – 40% of Americans

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        411 year ago

        Biden is too old, and I wish we would have ran someone else to aim for 12 years. His administration has done a pretty decent job with what they’ve been given to work with. Honestly, we need to give them enough margin to be able to legislate without enormous concessions.

        But when the alternative is gestures wildly that, this really shouldn’t be an open question.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          For me age is irrelevant if they can do the job but it’s abundantly clear neither Trump nor Biden are capable. The reason I think age doesn’t matter is because someone like Bernie Sanders has been rock solid on his positions for decades and can still form convincing arguments. I’m sure we’d all love a younger candidate and I’d have settled for Andrew Yang but the radical idea of a universal basic income ensured the DNC pulled him off stage.

          The two party system has essentially guaranteed we will always be voting for the least damaging candidate and until we transition to ranked choice or abolish the DNC/RNC we’re just stuck right where we are.

          • @[email protected]
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            61 year ago

            me age is irrelevant if they can do the job but

            George Santos is young, Matt Venmo Gatez is young… I dont think being young automatically makes you a good choice for political office either

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      281 year ago

      If he wins the world is lost. His “leadership” is indicative of the same disease that’s increasing everywhere. It’s worrying and it’s all coming from the “right” of the political spectrum. Wars are coming.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        141 year ago

        I’ve always had to remind myself and others of this. Trump isn’t the problem, not really. He’s just a symptom of the brain rot gripping the world at this moment.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          71 year ago

          I’m tempted to at least partially blame COVID but things were sliding this way long before then. I mean there are people out there simultaneously claiming that masks don’t work and also that they’ll choke you to death from lack of oxygen…people have grown real accustomed to tolerating cognitive dissonance.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            21 year ago

            I got one I can pull out of my arse.

            People are too nice and polite. Back in the day someone would say some shit and you could reply “what the fuck do you know about that? Fuck off, you dropped out of school at 16 and you’re telling me you know about that. You’re full of shit and you know it. You might actually be the stupidest person i know. Greg you dont know this guy, i do he once got stuck outside in the rain for 45 minutes because he was pushing a pull door. He even watched someone come out and didnt manage to work it out”

            Also ignorance was made cool on TV. TV used to be about the best and the brightest, you can go watch old news articles, documentaries or read the newspaper. It was written above the average to stretch people. Then cheap TV came on where we were kind of meant to laugh at poor stupid people, but they do have some good characteristics. They can be funny, nice, insightful suddenly people enjoy them and listen to them act like them

            Ease of use is more important than anything and it’s a race to the bottom. That’s why I force myself to read books or I’m going to get brain rot. But back in the day all you could do was read books.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      301 year ago

      He just stumbles randomly from conservstive buzzword to Conservative buzzword without saying anything of substance. He’s literally the perfect candidate for them.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1681 year ago

    Honestly it’s a little how my mom talks when she gets upset. Just a stream of things that are loosely connected but are all bobbing along on the same river of emotion.

    It’s how I get stuff like “You never call me you call your cousin he’s cheating on his wife you know just because you broke up with your girlfriend doesn’t mean you have to take it out on me”. You can kind of see how there’s a shared feeling or theme there but it’s not articulated.

    I’m going to guess that for someone who produces output like that, input of that type goes in easily. They’re just vibing on the emotions.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    25
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sounds like my dad; " Your Firefox things doesn’t work" while Libreoffice on his PC couldn’t print.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      “Actually it’s because HP’s printer software is shit”

      “What? That printer was $300. It’s great! And it worked fine before you added these stupid Firefoxes”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The printer randomly reconnects with a new MAC over USB (god knows how), registering as a new device. The WLAN interface died years ago and suddenly popped up again.

        But no, the printer is good, Firefox is at fault. 🙄