You asked a question (where have Kamala and Trump been?). I answered in what I believe was a relevant manner to the topic at hand and is a salient rebuttal of your “observation”. I don’t see how your claim to not care is relevant, you’re going to have to explain that one to me. For the record, I’m not the person you were replying to, nor have I watched a single episode of Maddow

We are maybe talking past each other? You responded to a comment asking where Jill Stein was the last 4 years, which is a question attached to the argument that her lack of efforts in the off years is evidence that she is not running a serious candidacy. You responded by asking what about the two big party candidates offseason’s actions, implying that you believe their actions are deficient under a similar line of critique. I pointed out that they did campaign to increase the standing of their platform and their party through lower level elections in the off years, which seems like a pretty strong rebuttal to the implication that they are not actively working to promote their positions throughout government. Perhaps you can explain why you view that as irrelevant

Literally, they were both out campaigning for their party’s candidates in elections in 2021, 22, and 23

… Your ballot was 74 pages? How? My city makes a big deal when we have to use the back of the 1 sheet of 11x18 paper. Granted we have off year elections in our state, so things are a little more divided, but that’s a long way from a 74 page short story of a ballot

Dang, you’re right, I was wrong. It calls for NWS to be commercialized, which could technically be interpreted as either sell off the assets to weather.com or as lay off all the employees and pay weather.com 10x their salary in contracts to get the same product. It calls for NOAA to be downsized alongside NWS’ commercialization. It calls for FEMA to pay much less out to states and eliminate its preparedness grants and insurance programs. All that in mind, it kind of seems tailor made to specifically fuck over Florida and other hurricane/flooding prone states, but it doesn’t call for eliminating the agencies. My bad, thanks for the correction!

Okay, but they literally said they would eliminate them in Project 2025. It’s being awful generous to claim they only want to do the lite version of eliminate. Boil the frog is over, MAGA is masks off crazy. They probably won’t be able to do it, because odds are good that the House at least will be blue in 2025 thanks to some of the more egregious gerrymanders getting fixed, but that doesn’t mean they don’t openly want to do it. These people are not smooth operators stealing brand awareness, they are chimpanzees flinging shit at the wall

And natural gas was supposed to be an transition energy source to get America off coal so that we could transition to renewable energy. History has not been kind to the “if we can just implement this greenwashed fossil fuel process, it’ll really allow us to unlock green energy potential down the road” promise

He’s not running for reelection, the Rs are getting that Senate seat this year

Sure, but 23% of LGBTQ voters aren’t voting for Harris, which is significantly less than a third (33%). Still higher than it should be, granted, but I am pretty sure that is what the original reply comment was pointing out.

From memory and a couple quick Google searches

• January 6th, including both the violence at the national Capitol and related, often violent protests outside verious state capitols
• Death threats to election count and poll workers
• Republican legislator invites armed men into the Oregon State Capitol during a protest
• Armed protestors rally around the tallying center in Detroit while the count was ongoing
• Brawl with counterprotestors at the “million Maga march”
• Violent “Stop the steal” protests in Sacramento

I wouldn’t say there was just a little violence after the 2020 loss

That’s not right wing. Do not allow right wingers to hide in the shadow of your reasonable political views by assuming their identity. Call yourself a market capitalist, a liberal, or even a Reagan-era Republican if you believe that is what your views align to and are speaking in an American context, but don’t let yourselves be used to rehabilitate the image of the right wing. They will only take that as a permission structure to hold more and more heinous views while pointing at you and others like you and saying "see, we are reasonable people with serious political positions that deserve a voice at the table. They don’t represent you, so why give them leverage to claim that they do?

Spending energy to convince conservatives to vote D is not a winning strategy. The idea is to convince those who are convincable, not to create some epiphany moment when all the Republicans stand up and say they were wrong and switch parties. This is naming and shaming as an electoral strategy, not as a punishment

Nvidia does not have a strong history of open sourcing things, to say the least. That last bit sounds like pure hopium

Dutch=Netherlands Danish=Denmark

That just sounds like more talk. Your standard of comparison isn’t talk vs action, it’s talk vs more blunt talk. Not really saying you’re wrong, but wouldn’t somebody be able to comment on an article reporting your ideal headline “talk is cheap”?

That’s generally true for all VPs. Biden was rarely on the news during the Obama years, same with Pence in the Trump years. She’s not an ideal candidate, but she does have some freedom of motion that is unprecedented. She gets to own the incumbency as the VP but only partially. Time and messaging will tell if she is able to define her candidacy by the positive things the Biden administration has done and the positive things that she can do moving forward or if Republicans will succeed in tying her down with whatever negative aspects of the Biden administration they can latch onto. It will be hard for them to pitch her as some kind of puppet for Biden or the DNC seeing as they spent some much air trying to convince everyone that she was puppeteering Biden from the start. If she can get a solid VP candidate (and there is a deep bench of Democratic Senators and Governors that she could pull from) and inject some energy into this campaign (suddenly Trump is the old man in the race), I think she’s got a really strong shot. There’s an outside chance someone will attempt to contest her at the convention, but as much as my personal views may be likely to better align with a more left-leaning candidate, I think the atmosphere of hesitancy from folks calling on Biden to step down or primary ing Biden in the first place suggests that the likelihood of a strong contender appearing and damaging her candidacy is low. I know there were plenty of folks on here who thought getting Biden to step down was some effort by the elite or the Republicans to steal away the incumbency advantage from the Democrats, but I really have a hard time seeing this as anything but a positive step in the campaign to beat Trump in November

Do the optics of appointing your brother to a cabinet position really make sense though? I think there’s plenty of aversion to the concept of yet another American political dynasty

The monkeys paw curls. Texas has implemented more laws to stop minorities from voting

Was 68 the last time an incumbent was switched out? Because as conflicted as I am about wanting Biden to give way for a candidate who is physically capable of campaigning vs being concerned about the ability to find someone with a better probability of victory than him, I don’t find the conventional political wisdom of 1968 a very convincing argument in today’s media and political landscape

The Constitution is in some ways is a sequel to the Declaration of Independence, which states: “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”. While the Declaration of Independence is not a legally binding document, it is widely upheld as a sort of “vision statement” for US government and governance