The do-a-flip meme would be more likely to succeed.

Let’s add to that giving people someone to vote for.

DNC strategy had been to run dogshit candidates because “hey who are you else are you going to vote for?”

The candidates that are winning now are further left and not water carriers. The base finally gets the problem it created by listening to blue maga/ ABWD as long as they did.

You can’t change change an electorate, at least not in the course of one election cycle. You want to change an electorate? Start speaking the truth and keep giving the same speech as nauseum just like uncle Bernie did. But in the course of a single election, run candidate that meet the electorate where they are at.

Keep apologizing for the failure of Democrats and see how many wins you rack up with that approach.

We call this one “Democrats can never fail, they can only be failed”

Democrats say he has no plan because at a fundamental level, leadership supports most of the policies that Trump pursues.

Its not a question of the relevancy of Democrats or Trump’s ego: Its that both parties accept and operate to support the same corporate, zionist, fascist donor base.

Its why you weren’t permitted an anti-genocide candidate in 2024: Because it wasn’t in the donor classes interests. Its why they convinced Democrats to hold onto Biden as a candidate long as they did. Its party of why Harris was effectively “selected” as the nominee instead of running a real primary (for example, as Jon Stewart had suggested). Its why Harris ran on a campaign of “Nothing would fundamentally change”, while as an administration, having sold out both progressives and the BLM movement as a voting block in the period of 2021-2024. Democratic voters have been voting against their own interests, just like Republican voters, for decades.

There is no future or path to a better future through the traditional pathways to power in the Democratic party as it currently exists. Its structurally not possible. And this inability to adjust to an electorate with significantly different priorities than those who control power within the party is a constant headwind: By constantly being on the wrong sides of issues, like they are today, Democrats damage their ability to win elections.

For leadership, this isn’t a problem: They still get the policies they desire. For the electorate, or people running for office who want to change the Democratic party to one people actually want to vote for, this is a huge problem.

Huh. Idk. I’m not the admin. I just moved my yt content over there a bit further back.

Might have been a settings issue? Sorry I’m still learning about the details of streaming to peertube.

https://makertube.net/c/tropicaldingdong_lifestyle/videos

Its not particular interesting right now. Its too cloudy to see the waterfalls. Its just raining.

yeah thats my freind who asked me to stream’s channel.

I’m here: https://makertube.net/w/njyyaTmh7cdsR14qarMT4G

Currently streaming on peertube here:

https://lemmy.world/post/44221429?scrollToComments=true

Major storm event on Oahu!

A protest with a permit is a parade.

Your correct and since this is no stupid questions, I should have defined that.

Sure but we can backtest the power of the Trump endorsement, and even as early as 2018, it didn’t mean shit. Something thats been academically notable about Trump is how their ability to defy polling or elevate surprising candidates isn’t transferable. Trumps endorsement has never meant a sure thing, and right now? You’d be better off getting Harris’s endorsement.

This is a grift, I promise. There will be some stupid fucking crypto or something. He’ll lose. Then he’ll go work for OAN or some shit.

100% not the gay national anthem.

The count I saw is that Iran has something like 450 ships in operation prior to the start of this war.

I’m saying what you should stop doing.

No, I don’t think that I do. I’m countering that I think what you offer has no real value, doesn’t contributes to understanding and by following that frame work, you feed into the outcomes you allege to be against.

Its not only worthless, its actually less than worthless, because by adopting that framework, you actually cut against your own alleged goals.

Its a reactionary mentality embedded in emotionalism. Just like the those who like to blame voters for the results of 2024 or the people who blame consumers for the failures of recycling in the 1990’s, but can’t offer a functional mechanism for how blaming those parties to the system would contribute to different outcomes.

Israel absolutely tricked the US into this engagement, which most analysts have known was something Israel has wanted for decades. America as a state is utterly cuckolded to Israel for the purposes of this engagement. They aren’t in control of their own foreign policy. Just and just as well, a vocal majority of EU states are cuckolded to the US and seem to be getting dragged in as well, to greater or lessor extents, with few exceptions (Spain, Ireland, Norway). Do they not have agency? Or is agency the wrong way to think about these things if you want a predictive framework that is effective at capturing previous and future states?

I’m not offering speculative analysis with this point. The administration made this point:

No, America owns this.

Sure, in an existential sense I agree, but what then? Like what do I do with that conclusion that furthers my understanding? as in if I were to take this form of reductive analysis to geopolitics, how does that impact my ability to predict future states of the world? I take something like this sentiment and I ask “does this sentiment add to my models capacity to predict or does it detract?”

I would say this form of reductionism drops my predictive capacity to practically nothing. I can’t make predictions of future states or back test previous states of the world effectively in that framework. Its a form of cliche or jingoism, which while emotionally satisfying, effectively halts critical thinking. Like it might be a more conscilient or parsimonious explanation, but parsimony and consilience are irrelevant if the models they are a being used to value aren’t predictive. What matters first in a model is predictive capacity. After that you can update other values. But if the first thing you value in a model isn’t predicative capacity in some manner, you aren’t operating in the real world, by definition. You’re valuing something other than a models ability to predict reality (simplicity of the model, or ones ability to understand the model, or how well the model rhymes with other things you think you know).

Iran has control of and does not appear to be giving up, control of the straight of Hormuz. Basically then entire global economy hinges on this one geographically and physically limiting body of water. Any even elementary student of strategy knows this, has known this, and anyone advising world powers would be well aware of the implications of attacking Iran as the Americans and Israelis have done. As far as impacts you will likely feel, in the nearest time frame, this is the most relevant. 20% of global trade goes though this passage. The majority of oil going to south east Asia, China, Japan, Australia passes through this straight.

Like, I don’t really think its valuable to conjecture whats going on behind the eyelids of the administration, but they clearly misunderstood how vulnerable they were in this regard. The US dollar is suspending through enforcement of the petro-dollar: That the GCC nations are captured in the sense that they must trade oil in dollars. The value of the USD as form of fiat is elevated because of this. The GCC nations are all entirely dependent on the straight of Hormuz for effectively all calories going to those countries. These nations simply do not exist without access to the straight. They are also coupled with the fact that for all practical purposes, all of their water is from desalination plants; plants much more easily targeted as Iran has been both a) targeting radar and detection instillation throughout the region, and b) wearing down interceptor stocks.

While Israel basically tricked America into starting this war, its truly been one of their regional goals for decades. However, both Israel and the US suffer from extreme hubris in relationship to their capabilities, its clear both parties have misunderstood the mindset of the Islamic Republic. Both parties (Israel and the US) are used to negotiating with parties that will do practically anything to deescalate the situation. Iran is not like this. As a point of analysis, Iran (I think rightfully) considers what Israel and the US are doing as a war of extermination, and they’ve seen from other regional examples (Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon) what works and what doesn’t work with regards to resisting US/ Israeli hegemony. And we see them doing seems to be very informed by this. In-spite of the power imbalance, Iran has a clear path to victory here and the US has basically none. So long as Iran can keep the straight closed and keep GCC nations shook, the US has no path to victory through air control alone.

What will happen next is:

• Even if the straight were to open tomorrow, we’re looking at 3 months + of global disruption and we have recent historic precedent for this. See the Evergreen and the Suez canal. And that was with all parties cooperating to re-open the canal as soon as possible.

• Prices are going to skyrocket and inflation is going to go back to being at risk of spiraling out of control. This is going to be like covid, but also not like covid, in that we don’t have the buffer in interest rates we did had built in the pre-covid times. The US can not both lower rates and prevent inflation. Its not clear there is any path the US can take financially.

• Before the cold war, full blown wars would often last decades. The period of the cold-war and post-coldwar era are not reflective of how wars are fought historically. Modern war is focused on the doctrine of shock and awe: Dominate the air, use extremely impressive high tech weaponry, and forms of “omnipotent” systems (Wheres Daddy?, Satellite imagery, RF signature analysis ect). The shock-and-awe doctrine is to orchestrate the appearance of such dominance, the other party loses the narrative. However, with a few notable exceptions, this doctrine does not work against an opponent who is determined to resist (See Vietnam, Iraq one, Iraq two, Afghanistan, Hezbollah, etc…). The approach that the US and Israel are dependent upon has been repeatedly demonstrated to fail against a determined opponent. The US will lose this war.

Pushing this guy is how they stay in power. They don’t give a fuck if they win or lose. Democratic consultants had their best year in 2024 pushing two right wing slop candidates.

Nothing, Forever: Silicon Valley Edition