I mean, yeah? Couch it like some calculated facade, but it kind of seems like you either do this or you are "undisciplined, erratic campaign speaks to potential issues down the road".
The "tails i win, heads you lose" stuff is pretty lame NYT.
It brings to mind the term 'scofflaws' - the main issue being we managed to elect a large number of office holders who not so much distain laws that are hard to enforce, but avoided having to try and enforce them.
I mean, its more that it is allowed to occur. We had institutions in place that were supposed to prevent specifically this, and we allowed them to ... Not do the thing (the thing here being prosecute seditious behavior).
Kind of seems like you should follow that line of questioning, rather than pivoting away.
You and the rest of the senators seem to think you appear reasonable and 'just the facts', but you frankly just seem weak and unwilling to face what is clearly in front of you.
This image is ludicrous. Yes, the 1992 LA riots was the latest time ot was used. That may be of interest to viewers.
HOWEVER - the EXTREMELY IMPORTANT part of our current situation is whether there is a civic disturbance (there is not), and who might ne trying to stir one up (ICE and the Admin)
I think you should also know - you are often still audible to the person who put you on hold on most call center systems. From experience, you can get some pretty wild pickups on the other end - mute is key lol
I don't think any closer reading would have mitigated my reaction? As from your own follow on notes, it seems like there is, a "right" answer as to who or what caused the shut down.
I just saw this, which does address the concern I was trying to voice. I think there is a reason folks saw the thread and are responding as they are -clarifying this was helpful to me.
FFS people, the statement that one can describe either Dems or the GOP as having caused the shutdown is in no way even remotely a claim that both sides' policy stances are equally good or that one should blame both sides equally.
I have no doubt you have a great deal of expertise and wisdom to draw upon, which is why its exasperating to see you draw parallels between a shutdown that took place within legal bounds, and one which is in response to actions well outside those bounds.
Oh wow! So then you must really understand how aggressively Trump is asserting authority that his office does not hold here, and are using that deep understanding to frame the shutdown we're currently in as not just another partisan blame game, right?
Just a quick item here - the veto power is a constitutionally derived power of the office - Trump arbitrarily deciding which parts of any budget he will or will not fund is not!
Why does Tom have the authoritative say on what is and is not authoritarian? The dismissal of anyone else's ability to perceive a world just always discounted
SCOOP: Sen. Brian Schatz is expanding his holds on Trump's nominees to include an additional 50 names — along with a batch of bipartisan foreign affairs bills.
The (shockingly) rare senator who asked themself "what could I do right now?", and then did the harder part and tried to answer that question. The Schatz and Murphy approaches have shown how threadbare their willingness to do something is.
Don't think that's what is happening - they are still ludicrously tapped into a consultant class and a mindset that "sober, serious politics" is required - 'our good friends on the other side need only meet us in the middle' type BS. Like the Admin is straight up calling them the evil enemy.
Setting aside the "non-sentient digital entity" status, i think it has a practical effect - your input is being hoovered up to train the models.
Might as well make it a nicer dataset? I dunno. The fake fawning "your absolutely right! Wow great catch - the earth IS round. Lets update that" sucks.
