Bernie is a social media merchant. Dude is an expert at looking like he’s challenging the status quo, while never doing anything that could truly piss them off. Dude straight up ended an interview when the interviewer started suggesting Schumer face a primary challenge.

Trump is awful, but his election is in its own way proof that the American people are willing to reject the status quo and embrace change.

Democrats don’t need their own Trump, but they do need someone who is results oriented and willing to abandon a lot of longstanding assumptions.

This is facetious. He had no problem running to be the democratic nominee, and is a member of the democratic Senate caucus.

The current senator minority leader is Chuck Schumer. He’s incapable of being an effective opposition leader. The dude is addicted to the status quo, terrified of rocking the boat, completely disconnected with the American people, and overall stuck in the mindset of a 20th century politician.

There is a lot of frustration with him among democratic voters, but he’s maintained his power among the donors and other senators.

A huge part of his argument is that there’s nobody else that can replace him. At the moment, he’s not wrong. His rivals in the Senate are either cut from the same cloth as him, or are in their own way content with the status quo. I know people on Lemmy love Bernie, but the man was elected to the Senate the same year Pokemon Diamond and Pearl hit the shelves and is no closer to the revolution he promised.

While this filibuster doesn’t accomplish anything itself, it’s part of a larger effort Booker is making to raise his national profile and position himself so he can replace Schumer. In that context, it’s an important and smart strategic move.

Ironically this filibuster was probably less physically and emotionally exhausting than trying to teach all of his Senate colleagues how to effectively use TikTok.

Okay but the Rock once made a profit off a movie based on the video game Rampage. Some movies don’t require good acting.

This article almost feels like gaslighting.

Disney has put out a ton of content that follows the same power. It generally can be summarized as "put out overpriced mediocre garbage, hamfist some culture war stuff in there, and then imply anyone who doesn’t like it is some sort of deplorable.

This movie:

• Had a budget of at least 270 million, meaning that it would have to make like 700 million to be considered a success
• Looks mediocre as all hell regardless
• The Dwarves are CGI monstrosities that feel more at home in a horror movie. This is because Disney kept pivoting to dumber decisions based off petty internet drama.
• The decision to cast a Latina in a movie where the actress is explicitly white is on some level a deliberate decision to start culture war drama. Disney has had multiple WoC as princesses for over twenty years now, so it’s not like they didn’t have other movies they could have adapted
• They made Zegler look a lot less attractive than she is IRL via poor wardrobe choices, while managing to capture Gadot’s beauty.
• Israel aside, I have zero idea why Gadot is cast in this. She’s like the female version of the rock in that she’s only really good in stupid action movies that take absolutely minimal acting abilities
• I understand Lemmy is super pro-Palestinian. However the general viewing public is a lot more divided, and many people simply don’t want modern politics in a movie they take their small children too. This is the kind of shit you say at a premier of a small budget film, not something that has to gross hundreds of millions of dollars
• Zegler also harassed Gadot on set, despite the fact that she was trying very hard to not bring politics into the workplace. Again I understand Lemmy might think that’s amazing, but most working people recognize that as the kind of shit they put in an HR training video
• Zegler also seemed to go out of her way to insult hardcore fans of the show. This is especially egregious because hardcore fans are the type of people to see an IP no matter how bad this is.
• Unlike Joker where you can just dodge criticism by calling fans of the original incels, hardcore fans of Snow White tend to be gay men and white women. The end result was a lot of the outrage came in the form of gossip influencers throwing shade, which the Disney PR machine was not prepared to counter.

The most ridiculous part of this is the trailer for Lilo and Stich, a movie that is a million times more minority forward than the Snow White remake, dropped to largely positive reception. 2024 is going to be simultaneous “Snow White failed because of bigotry” and a movie centered around two woman of color, and unconventional definition of family, and Hawaiian culture prints money hand over fist.

No. However if you’re the type of person to ask in this question, you should be invested in a target date fund. As part of the way they attempt to hedge for retirement, the include exposure to international funds and bonds.

Dude should have just added comments indicating that the code was part of some security test but was unfinished and extremely dangerous.

Change a few file names, add a comment how it will never run under normal circumstances, and you’ve got plausible deniability.

One thing to note is that there are a lot of bad American beers in small and mid-sized cities. Basically what happened is that in the 2010s it became trendy to go to a brewery with a food truck and just hang out. As a result a ton of “breweries” opened that were more or less selling the experience, with a handful of low effort trendy selections to serve as a hook.

That doesn’t mean there aren’t good beers though. America is the land of people who do their own thing, often regardless of social norms and established conventions. There’s a lot of great beers across a broad range of categories, it just takes a bit of digging.

As a sidenote a lot of these D tier breweries are closing and/or rebranding. Changing consumer sentiment means merely being a craft brewery is no longer a hook, while rising real estate costs make the entire endeavor more expensive. The breweries in shitty locations tend to close. The ones in good locations tend to massively reduce their own output, while offering a variety of local alcohol and expanded food options.

If the tests don’t give any insight into the functionality it is testing, they are probably not the best tests.

No I think it’s more likely than not that there’s a small extremely dedicated group of terminally online progressives who are wholly unaware of how bad they make basically every liberal look.

Except on reddit, which is clearly astroturfed to hell from some organized group. Probably multiple.

If you told me most online progressives were part of a psyop to make people more conservative I’d believe you.

The point is that you don’t know the first thing about American politics, and are wholly unqualified to make any comments about it.

If you honestly think a military junta would be more representative of the American people than Trump, then I don’t know what to tell you.

Also our president is not elected via majority (or plurality) vote. This has been one of the major complaints about the American political system since 2000, so I gotta wonder how much you’re paying attention.

You’re basically describing the Riechstag fire decree.

Your first question is pretty philosophical. All I can say, is that most representative governments place a huge emphasis on giving the people the power to write their own collective destiny.

A military takeover based on the desires of a minority of citizens would violate that principal. I don’t think any reasonable person can call it saving democracy.

Just to be clear, your solution to saving democracy would be for the military to usurp a president who received the majority of the vote less than six months ago?

To be fair that 1950s boomer is putting that pedal to the floor, seatbelts off, zero concern for anyone’s lives including their own.

I mean for all we know they might and just choose not to federate.

I agree. Ironically he also went on a bit of a rant about how the traditional media outlets whittle down interviews to the most salacious bits, and that’s part of the reason the American public is slowly losing trust in them.

While the reason for him saying this is to discredit his previous perception as robotic, he’s also not wrong. All the articles I read “highlighting” the interview hyper focused on a few lines, and in doing so left and incomplete or dishonest impression.

So I watched the entire three hour interview.

Technically speaking, Zuckerberg emphasizes the need for balance. He on multiple times either emphasizes that both men and women should feel comfortable in corporate environments, and explicitly says something like “there has to be a balance” on at least two occasions.

The issue is that other parts of the interview don’t really match that idea of balance. Zuckerberg and Rogan spent like a third of the entire interview talking about bro culture stuff. I’m not even talking about “bro culture in the context of corporate America”. Rogan spends like a full ten minutes lecturing Zuckerberg on the proper way to bow hunt.

Overall I think the media is focusing outrage bait while ignoring the serious implications of the interview. Zuckerberg is clearly lobbying the Trump administration to prevent meta and other US tech companies from being subject to EU regulatory security. It has serious implications both as a consumer and in terms of geopolitics.