PaintedSnail

Technology Connections explains rice cookers: https://youtu.be/RSTNhvDGbYI

TLDW: they turn off when their temperature goes above 100C

So why did the get rid of Wordpad?

Yes, a better candidate would be ideal, and that should absolutely be pushed for in the primaries. What is your plan to help that?

But everyone’s idea of an ideal candidate is different. If the Democrats don’t field a candidate you like in the general, what will you do? Will you withhold your vote, and in so doing help the party that is actively damaging the country win? What is your plan?

We can sit here all day and complain about this side or that side and how the Democrats are failing, but in the end that means NOTHING without a plan to DO something about it.

What is it your are going to DO?

That was a lot of valid complaining about the Democrats, but not one word that can be converted into an actionable plan.

That depend entirely on what that “something else” is. So far, all I’ve heard is either “don’t vote unless the candidate is ‘left enough’,” a vague and counter-productive inaction; or various calls to “tear down the system” with no indication of a plan how or what to replace it with.

I’m not saying the Democrats are faultless, but empowering the people that are proactively causing harm doesn’t help.

Then you will need to be aware that by not voting for the more left candidate, we will have a far right government for a couple of cycles at least. This will cost lives and further entrench them into power. It is why we have what we have right now. It will also drive left leaning candidates further right because they are going to cater to the people who actually vote. A far left candidate winning is still possible eventually, but it would require a major turnout at the primaries and a lot more damage is going to be done to a lot of innocent people in the mean time. Is this a cost you are willing to pay?

No part of my statement said there were only two choices. It was in regard to all choices.

But in the context of this thread, the general election will only ever present two choices. (So vote in the primaries.)

Naivete at it’s finest. Reality is that the choices available to you will never conform to all of your desires, so in that sense, a choice is always going to be for the lesser evil. If you think there’s an action you can take to avoid making a choice at all, then reality will disabuse you of that notion as well.

That is a much more interesting response, thank you.

I know very well that a politician is not required to listen to their voters. That is the nature of a representative democracy, and it has its pluses and minuses; but that’s another topic. A politician will do what they want once in office. Sometimes they do it for their own selfish reasons, sometimes they do it because they know something the American public doesn’t, sometimes they do things because they are weighing opposing agendas differently. That is why it is important to push for candidates that have principles that are the most aligned with yours. Then even if they are driven by their own selfish reasons, at least their actions are more likely to align with your desires.

That’s not to say that voters have no power at all. We got Trump because his principles (such as they are) aligned with a large enough portion of the American public that the Republic party thought he was their best chance of winning. Make no mistake that the Democrats DO want to win. Voters need to show them that a candidate whose principles are more left leaning is their best chance of winning. That is what the primaries are for. You will note that only two political parties even have primaries.

I believe you have a misunderstanding that anyone thinks that having to choose the lesser of two evils is a good thing. It’s not. It’s only better than choosing the greater of two evils. The main point that I have been trying to make is that NOT choosing the lesser evil is functionally equivalent to choosing the greater evil, even if the choice made is to not make a choice.

This is because there isn’t a better choice; there is no “no evil” choice. Even not choosing is still a choice. Unless you know of one and would care to enlighten me on the specifics of that choice. So far, the only point I’ve seen you try to make is that not choosing is the best choice; something that I vehemently disagree with.

That doesn’t disprove what I’m saying. That’s just your feeling with no evidence to back it up.

I have history to backup my claims. Yes, we’ve shifted right due to incrementalism because people on the right are more likely to vote, so it demonstrably does work. There’s no reason we can’t shift back if people who want change actually vote for it, rather than withholding their votes for a “perfect” solution.

That is reductionist to the point of obsursity.

Republicans are demonstrably by more fascist.

Not voting against Republicans keeps more fascism in place.

Therefore, not voting only increases fascism. Voting for someone that can’t win against the Republicans increases fascism.

And before you say voting for Democrats also increases fascism, they are already less fascist than what is currently in place. Having anyone else, even a Democrat, in office will be less fascism.

Vote to decrease fascism. Move in that direction. Not voting only pushes us toward more fascism.

There is not choice available right now to remove fascism entirely. We must show politicians that they stand to gain by moving away from it. Not voting doesn’t do that.

If we want to push things back to the left, we absolutely have to show support for more left candidates in the primaries.

But if we don’t show them that we’re willing to vote, we’re just going to get candidates that chase the votes of the people who DO vote.

The primaries are the key. Support the people who will oppose these issues.

But as we saw with Bernie, the support has to be undeniable and actionable, or they’ll just put in who they want anyway. This means that there is a non-zero chance that we’ll end up with the usual kind of choices. Should we then support the candidate that isn’t at least actively disparaging the law, or should we not vote and increase the chance of the party that is actively destroying things winning?

That doesn’t answer my question. Who should we vote for that doesn’t result in the fascists staying in office?

Who should we vote for otherwise? Every other option leads to Republicans staying in power, and they are the ones actually doing it.

Don’t vote? That’s fewer votes the Republicans need to win, so they stay in power.

Vote third party? That splits the opposition vote, and Republicans stay in power.

And no, neither of those choices “teach the Democrats a lesson.” It just drives them to go to the people who do vote, who are more right wing, so it drives everything further right.

You want a more left wing party? Show them that the left votes and our votes have value.

In theory, vacation time is supposed to be something you negotiate as part of your employment contract. Conservatives believe that market forces will balance out the needs of the worker and the company, as companies with bad employment practices will have trouble finding employees.

In practice, that only works for high-demand positions with a small labor pool. Basically everyone else has no negotiating power because employers have a huge pool to pick from. Conservatives say employees can just go somewhere else to get a better job or go back to school (another topic), but that also doesn’t work in when all the available jobs do the same thing.

Basically, it’s an extension of rugged individualism. It’s up to the individual to take care of themselves. The fact that the landscape in which most people must operate doesn’t allow for it is ignored.

No artist gets paid to create placeholder art during development. They get paid for the final art pieces that are used in the game itself. No actual AI art was used in the final game except for a few accidentally included bits that were not correctly replaced with the final art and that issue was corrected. No artists were harmed in the making of this game.