Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions. If you want change, find local elections with candidates you agree with. Their campaigns typically pay well, in my experience, or you can volunteer if the pay doesn’t matter to you. It’s more fruitful than throwing your hands in the air and shouting about disenfranchisement.
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions.
What the heck? What’s the logic on that? People pointing out bad candidates is why they lost? Like seriously how on earth do you blame the weather man for the rain?
Seriously though I point out that blindly refusing to interact with conversation that makes people uncomfortable means not being prepared and the response was that this caused large standing issues with the governmental bodies that have been plaguing this country for longer than a single election?
2016 wasn’t the sole deciding factor and everyone is being very emotional and really fucking stupid in here. The push to volunteer is a really good one but doesn’t just make up for the idea that people talking are the issue. The share of ideas and push for betterment is necessary and sticking fingers I your ears and blindly blaming anyone that tries to point it out makes you just as fucking blind and ignorant as the people you call lesser.
It’s really fucking pathetic. It’s like being mad at a doctor who tells you to stop eating sugar cause you are diabetic.
Real simple. I could shut up and you would see no change. Just not hear the conversation about it directly. If you think I or any of the tiny percentage of the real world impact the Internet has is gonna be the changing factor you are incorrectly assuming and overconfidently ascribing power to what happens here. In this fraction of a fraction of a percentage.
Good luck with that prank though. Sounds like a banger of an own.
In January 2023, a study from New York University’s Center for Social Media and Politics about the influence of Russian trolls on Twitter found they had little influence on 2016 voters’ attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.
And it was mostly Facebook ads. Really misunderstanding what the dangerous part of the Internet is. Not the discussion space.
We are all already polarized and in our lanes here. And stop being age-ist. We are all in this together.
I didn’t mean it to be ageist, it’s just contextual. In the same way that I cannot see an American younger than gen y understanding what the world was like pre-9/11 past an academic level, I can’t see someone younger than 15 in 2016 truly understanding the spontaneous change in the internet in the year preceding the election. It was so tumultuous that, and this is was remarkable to watch in real-time, conspiracy theorists completely flipped across party lines. It literally flipped the crazy script. I admit that I should have phrased it differently, though, and I apologize for that.
I do too, which was why I fiercely advocated for literally any other candidate in 2016. I held my nose and voted for her, but I absolutely called it. Too many people just ignored the base, and it bit all of us in the butt.
She did win the popular vote, for whatever good that does us. But what prevented a Clinton presidency was Russia seeding propaganda about her on the internet topped off with the FBI being used as a political tool. The 2016 Green Party candidate flying off to Russia last year is still a funny little sign of how absolutely fucked we are when it comes to asymmetrical information warfare.
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions
Yeah the blame for them never codifying Roe into law, their carcass in the supreme court refusing to retire, them running a terrible candidate against the will of their own voters and that candidate running an awful campaign is the fault of… people arguing on the internet
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions. If you want change, find local elections with candidates you agree with. Their campaigns typically pay well, in my experience, or you can volunteer if the pay doesn’t matter to you. It’s more fruitful than throwing your hands in the air and shouting about disenfranchisement.
What the heck? What’s the logic on that? People pointing out bad candidates is why they lost? Like seriously how on earth do you blame the weather man for the rain?
Seriously though I point out that blindly refusing to interact with conversation that makes people uncomfortable means not being prepared and the response was that this caused large standing issues with the governmental bodies that have been plaguing this country for longer than a single election?
2016 wasn’t the sole deciding factor and everyone is being very emotional and really fucking stupid in here. The push to volunteer is a really good one but doesn’t just make up for the idea that people talking are the issue. The share of ideas and push for betterment is necessary and sticking fingers I your ears and blindly blaming anyone that tries to point it out makes you just as fucking blind and ignorant as the people you call lesser.
It’s really fucking pathetic. It’s like being mad at a doctor who tells you to stop eating sugar cause you are diabetic.
deleted by creator
Real simple. I could shut up and you would see no change. Just not hear the conversation about it directly. If you think I or any of the tiny percentage of the real world impact the Internet has is gonna be the changing factor you are incorrectly assuming and overconfidently ascribing power to what happens here. In this fraction of a fraction of a percentage.
Good luck with that prank though. Sounds like a banger of an own.
How long ago were you first legally allowed to purchase alcohol?
And it was mostly Facebook ads. Really misunderstanding what the dangerous part of the Internet is. Not the discussion space.
We are all already polarized and in our lanes here. And stop being age-ist. We are all in this together.
I didn’t mean it to be ageist, it’s just contextual. In the same way that I cannot see an American younger than gen y understanding what the world was like pre-9/11 past an academic level, I can’t see someone younger than 15 in 2016 truly understanding the spontaneous change in the internet in the year preceding the election. It was so tumultuous that, and this is was remarkable to watch in real-time, conspiracy theorists completely flipped across party lines. It literally flipped the crazy script. I admit that I should have phrased it differently, though, and I apologize for that.
Hillary Clinton was a poor candidate. Why is it that the neo liberals never want to give her any amount of credit for her loss?
People just want human rights, you egg salad. Try not to ruin that for everyone and I won’t call you a smelly foodstuff on the internet again.
I do too, which was why I fiercely advocated for literally any other candidate in 2016. I held my nose and voted for her, but I absolutely called it. Too many people just ignored the base, and it bit all of us in the butt.
She did win the popular vote, for whatever good that does us. But what prevented a Clinton presidency was Russia seeding propaganda about her on the internet topped off with the FBI being used as a political tool. The 2016 Green Party candidate flying off to Russia last year is still a funny little sign of how absolutely fucked we are when it comes to asymmetrical information warfare.
It does us absolutely none. Congratulations on getting your second choice.
…Yeah. That’s what “for whatever good that does us” means.
Yeah the blame for them never codifying Roe into law, their carcass in the supreme court refusing to retire, them running a terrible candidate against the will of their own voters and that candidate running an awful campaign is the fault of… people arguing on the internet