fonix232

Even the system of checks and balances were kind of a fuckup if you think about it - the whole system just presumes that most people are acting in good faith and bad faith actors are limited to a few positions or a single branch.

apologies, the video wouldn't load so I presumed it was one of the in-depth rants about how Trump is just a symptom and how others are in control.

I also seriously misread the OOP, but in my defense it was 3am and I've been running on 2-3hr of sleep a day for a while now.

And yes, my account was inactive for a while as the federated Reddit alternatives haven't been teeming with much content or discourse when I original joined, and a recent Reddit ban that nuked all my alts was the trigger to continue moving back here. Alas not a bot and I've been using this nickname for the better part of the past ~25 years.

The White House has no balls

While you're not wrong that Trump is just a puppet for a number of masters in various hierarchies, there's one key attribute he has that makes him indispensable - the cult he managed to build.

With him gone, do you really think that any of the current replacements being fostered could actually get anywhere with MAGA? Do you think that any of the people in question, let it be one of the Trump kids or JD Vance or quite literally anyone from his inner circles, replace him as the cult leader?

Trump is uniquely positioned as both the executor of the will of this cabal, and the cult leader of the morons. With him gone, the cabal will be hard pressed to push for another candidate who can move even remotely as many voters as the orange turdsack did.

With Trump gone, so will be the MAGA movement, and said cabal will be back to, well, not square one, but it will be a major setback until they can find another mascot who can charisma the moron third into voting against their own interest.

And that gap, that few years will allow for a crucial thing: "re-education". With Trump gone, the MAGA followers will be able to re-evaluate their stances more freely, with reduced effects from e.g. sunk cost fallacy, and can be taught to recognise populism and how it actually negatively affects them by preying on their weaknesses.

Here's a better idea, allow people to carry certain self defence items.

It's been clear for a while that the Met can't be arsed to actually protect the people of London - there's no preventative, retrospective or any kind of action for most "petty" crime, as long as you don't get stabbed, you get a case number that gets closed off, and have fun dealing with your insurance company who'll make you pay an exorbitant premium and still refuse to cover certain items.

I'd agree with the ban of self defence items if policing was in place that would prevent petty crime like pickpockets and muggings and robberies, but the police has devolved into a ticketing system thanks to the Tories restricting budgets and selling off assets that would've generated income... and until the Met is restored to a properly functioning institution - including a serious revamp regarding the rampant racism, sexism, etc. taking place between the officers - people need a way to defend themselves without relying on the police.

No. If courts decide that the demolition was illegal, he has to put it back exactly the way it was. It's not a free pass to "rebuild it the way he wants".

Reform going just one week without having to suspend/kick members for things other parties would've been completely cancelled for... now that is an impossible challenge.

Wonder how many bags of shekels such a 180 costs.

Do these people believe in anything?

People's opinions change as they learn new information. It's usually called growth.

Lisa Nandy probably learned that if she changes her stance on Israel, she'll be benefitting from it in some way, let it be a cushy "job" once she "retires" from "representing" her electorate, or a direct payout, or some other benefits to her or her family, or even just the "benefit" of getting to stay in Labour.

Now technically this is growth too, but the cancerous kind.

It's not you who got disaligned from Labour. It's Labour, with Starmer's strafe to the right to appease "undecided" and "centrist" voters, that led to Labour leaving behind those on the left who just wanted some representation after a decade and half of kleptocracy that turned the country into a tuppence whore. Labour just decided that instead of helping her, it's their turn to fuck her in the arse.

Can't say I'm not torn about this.

On one hand, forgoing the pledge of clean by 2030 is obviously bad. The UK already has an issue with energy prices in every aspect (my estate is paying £120k a year just for keeping the communal lights and lifts running, because it's on commercial rates thanks to the amazing idea of management companies... would cost under £20k on a residential rate plan, which it should be), we're paying out of our arses just for a basic necessity, all thanks to privatisation and austerity...

On the other hand, the budget announced yesterday is already floating the idea of raising income taxes. Which, let's be honest, will screw things over even more. Our leccy bills will go down but taxes go up, and I'm not sure which option is worse in short term. it's just such a hassle to see that any kind of improvement on the long term will make life worse in the short term. All thanks to the Tories selling off the revenue generating assets for short term profits that also somehow slinked off to pad some already well-padded pockets.