20% of people outright lacking empathy is a lot. With such a large percentage, how can you be sure you aren’t one of them?

Yesterday I helped to clarify why AIPAC fucked up in the NJ special election. When my response was followed with the joke “Ah, thank you for not explaining that while literally walking out the d”, it started collecting downvotes. The “not explaining” seemed to stand out as negative, and I admit I was a little confused myself. However, instead of throwing shade or downvoting it myself, I just asked a simple question about what they meant. The response: “(I was walking out the door, like the author while writing the article)” put everything to rest. It was a joke about how the author of the posted article trailed off without coming to a clear conclusion.

Yet even after this clarification was posted, you jumped in with the worst negative assumption about the interaction. You weren’t seeking clarity or offering anyone support, you were looking to attack. Even after being respectfully asked to re-read the conversation, you double and tripled-down on this incorrect negative assumption. I feel that this attitude is evident here, as you challenge your “detractors” and charge that they are the ones lacking empathy. Don’t forget that every accusation is a confession.

Ultimately, I don’t agree with your 20% statistic. Mostly this is because I don’t believe in binary assignments, such as having or lacking empathy. We are all capable of making positive assumptions about each other’s intentions. Some of us just choose not to in certain circumstances, but there is always room for change.

I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately, it’s even worse than most people realize. AIPAC is catching on to their drop in support and is now funneling their money to politicians through proxy PACs, such as the United Democracy Project (UDP). Also, since unrestricted arms sales to Israel is not a popular position, they didn’t bother attacking Malinowski on that issue. Instead, they put out ads on the topic of him funding ICE, since they knew that would hurt him more.

Good news is that AIPAC has now paid for the focus group polling, and field tested the idea of attacking politicians on the topic of ICE support. This should embolden progressive candidates to attack establishment politicians on this issue.

Here is a longish article on AIPAC and the NJ special election for more details. Also, Ryan Grimm has a great summary in the first third of this video. It looks like Breaking Points covers this election again today, but I haven’t had a chance to watch the new episode yet.

Glad I could help! 🙋‍♂️

I think it is you who still doesn’t comprehend what they were saying. They weren’t getting sassy with me, they were making a joke while thanking me for the explaination. They made that perfectly clear in the later response.

The first question obviously wasn’t a serious question, but they were clearly confused about who AIPAC was funding.

No AIPAC did not accidentally fund the progressive. Instead they accidentally went after the moderate with the best chances of winning. I was happy to clear that up.

Please re-read the exchange. I clearly and concisly answered the primary question, which is about what happened in regard to AIPAC funding in the election.

Them:

why does this article end like mid-thought?

You:

You didn’t answer his first question. The primary question he asked

Surely you can’t be serious. Nobody is going to be able able to jump into the author’s brain like that, and it is obviously not a serious “primary” question.

Edit: 🤦‍♂️ I get it now 🤣

I’m sorry, but I don’t understand this post (and that’s not my downvote).

Edit: I like your joke and I’m happy I could help. To be fair, I already heard about this AIPAC blunder, so I didn’t need to rely on how this specific article was written.

The non-progressive forerunner dared to say that we might want to reconsider sending unconditional arms to Israel. In response, AIPAC released a series of negative ads against him. This split the non-progressive votes, and cleared the way for the progressive to win.

If I was looking for a home/DIY Cad software, I would be looking for one with an amateurish feel too. I don’t need professional features like flow and thermal analysis. That’s how I interpreted that comment, and I share their sentiment.

Edit: After re-reading the OP, I definitely don’t think it’s their software. Comments like “it has some frustrating bugs that I don’t think will ever be fixed” and “is [there] a better intermediate software package I should be considering?” contradict that assumption.

I’m not saying they aren’t involved with this project, but I’m not seeing any indication that they are. What is making you jump to this conclusion? (Their last comment was obviously sarcastic.)

I honestly think it’s a bit of a stretch to call it piracy when the open-source code is hosted on Microsoft-owned Github, and Microsoft support has been caught using it themselves: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/microsoft-support-cracks-windows-for-customer-after-activation-fails/

The link I shared contains steps to activate the 3-year extension for free, on a non-business computer. I don’t care if this extension is marketed towards business accounts. You can activate all 3 years on your personal computer for free.

You can activate 3 years of updates for free with Microsoft Activation Scripts: https://massgrave.dev/windows10_eol

You allow your TV to access the internet?

It’s stunning that you jump to “subservient” at the idea of someone going down on someone else. I know I’m melted pool of “yes please, I’m all yours” when someone is going down on me.

If you’re a horny hypersexual, and you see a stunning female figure like Bill Clinton in a magestic blue dress and red heels, is it that much of a stretch to think you might get all up in that?

I’d love to know the full story behind this painting from Epstein’s NYC residence.