PhilipTheBucket

In their own moral framework, it's okay to kill literally anyone, as long as you're in charge and are willing to say a few words about "national security." Good to know, I guess. Presumably they mostly live in places where that's (for now 🥲) not the rule, and would be horrified if someone forced them to go back to places where that is the rule.

Honestly, I think mostly what this means is that they've done a good enough job of chasing away all the reasonable people that they've entered into an increasing spiral at this point. Everyone has to be most unreasonable in order to stand out, and with no one sensible to compare themselves to, they have to get more and more outlandish in order to be the outlandish-est one.

This dude is really just 180 degrees out of sync at all times

There was a guarantee that things would get horrifyingly worse if Trump won.

There was a chance of things getting worse if whatever Democrat won, and also a small chance that strong vocal protest would produce an improvement in US policy producing some improvement for the Palestinians.

With Trump, they had no chance at all.

It's 2025. Any minor success of his administration is being dismantled by Trump. Get with the times.

What percent reduction in US overall carbon emissions would you define as "minor"? If you had to give an objective number to it.

The larger point outside of that one word "minor," I think, is largely true. People really fucked up on a world-altering scale letting Trump come to power again. Were you one of them? I feel like there are a lot of them in this thread, who contributed in their little infinitesimal ways to letting it happen. Thanks! You guys should do something about that going forward, or else this stuff is going to keep happening and get infinitely worse.

Also jesus christ, your condescending tone is obnoxious.

Do a quick search for "LOL" in these comments. I was pretty direct about disagreeing, but I wasn't condescending until someone came up super hostile and talking down to me. I actually still kept it factual about what we were trying to talk about, which domain in standard lemmy.ml tradition they rejected with extreme hostility, but I wasn't the one that started the condescension. Condescension and hostility are strong traditions here, valued and celebrated as long as they're in line with the hivemind opinion-set. I was just better at it than the other person, and that's why they got upset, and why you're mentioning it now.

I tell you, I gotta plead ignorance on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here, that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know...

I had a feeling you wouldn't want me to tell you, and would want to pivot to some aggressive complaint in some other kind of way, and bring up the talking point about "pretending" again as if I wasn't specifically addressing it. 😃 Glad we had this talk.

(Here is a source: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bidens-climate-act-cut-us-emissions-by-2030-by-35-43-epa-2023-09-13/)

You expected him to single-handedly solve climate change? Start in 2020 and then by 2024 there is no accelerating pace of wildfires? And you can't support a politician unless they can do that?

I asked what the total level of reduction in emissions his policies are predicted to accomplish are. I completely share the opinion that what someone pretends to do, doesn't matter. So what's the predicted reduction in objective terms? I feel like that's something you should know.

Do you want me to tell you? I feel like it could be educational for you to learn on your own. You tell me, I can do either way.

Are we still giving Joe Biden credit for pretending to be progressive

What was it I gave Joe Biden credit for? I feel like you might have skimmed my message because of length, and missed it. I was pretty specific though.

Also, what's the total reduction in emissions that Biden's policies have resulted in, and what total are they predicted to produce in the future? (Or were, I mean Trump's trying hard to undo them with some level of success.) That stuff wasn't contained in my message but I'm curious whether you are aware.

I mean Biden tried spending almost a trillion dollars on the biggest action on climate change in the history of the US, about ten times over, and y'all didn't give a fuck. So I guess Newsom is trying shitposting instead. I don't love it either, but aiming to win elections on substance certainly doesn't either, so why not.

Edit: I'm not able to see or reply to the lemmygrad person locally, but yes, people not voting hard enough for Al Gore in 2000 is very much a primary reason why this is happening as early as it is. It would have changed a lot of things, among them the creation of ICE. It wouldn't have been enough by any means, but IDK how any person alive in the US right now at this point in history can say that voting doesn't make a difference to the day-to-day reality we live in. This year is literally the A/B test demonstration.

Ah, that explains it. It didn't sound like a quote that would come from the real UN. Maybe in some other, superior timeline...

That's wild, I never knew the origin of that last sentence.