FinnFooted @ FinnFooted @lemmy.world

Posts

5

Comments

186

Joined

2 yr. ago

Its not the highest. Its +5.3 when it was +8.2 a few werks ago. And its amazing you're still trying to do so many mental gymnastics to brag about a temporary +8.2 approval rating.

I could probably go through the data and find someone with better approval at one point after years of being in politics. Hell, I'm pretty sure Bidens approval after being elected after being vp for 8 years and then on the campaign trail another 4 years was higher than +8.2 direactly after he was elected. But the premise of bragging about a temporary +8.2 approval rating is so stupid I'm not going to bother to make a real comparison and entertain it.

You heard it folks. People temporarily like trump a tiny bit more than they hate him and that's ridiculously amazing. The bar is in hell.

It didn't used to be normal that politicians were so hated and its weird to act like we should be happy about a politician most poeple hate.

Again, I never said "polls are meaningless." I said "poll bumps all presidents have after an election resulting in a transfer of power are meaningless in reference to policy approval."

But look back at your own link. His approval rating is already slipping back. Less than a month ago he was at +8.2 and now he's at +5.3. And it will only accelerate as his policy sinks in. Also wild that you think +8.2 approval could mean that anyone is "very satisfied." But, whatever.

Sorry, let me hold your hand on what i was saying a little more. Approval rating bumps directly after an election where there's been no time for major policy to occur (let alone for people to digest that policy and it's fallout) because there's been a transfer of power is meaningless when it comes to reflecting policy.

I didn't say it wasn't even and imperfect metric. I'm saying that its almost no metric. Perhaps even evidence of poor performance to be honest. Because the approval bump is a repeatable and measurable phenomenon we observe after every election that has 0 to do with presidential policy or action. And his post election approval bump is the second worst in history, only below his own poor approval bump from his first term.

Information is relative to the environment and circumstances. Is doesn't exist in a vacuum.

This is the most garbage logic. His approval rating does not directly equate to fulfilling promises. There can be cause and effect, but it's not guaranteed especially when there's so many factors that impact approval rating.

Presidents get a post election bump. It has nothing to do with fuffiling policy promises. Hell, the bump began before he took office, so obviously it has little to do with him fulfilling promises. Trump had a bump his first term too. But guess what. Literally every other president, including Biden, had a better overall approval rating at the beginning of a term than trump ever has. Time will tell where his approval lands.

This is so disappointing. I've already migrated my passwords back to KeePass. Time to start hunting down other alternative. This is what I get for allowing myself the comfort of a centralized ecosystem.

No. Black people overwhelmingly still voted against Trump and for Kamala.

I do this. But, I'm also lucky to live in a city with second hand shit everywhere. Not everyone lives in a city.

But, google shopping will tell you an alternative store to buy most things online. And compare costs for you. This gets tricky if you're also trying to cut google out of your life though. There really is no ethical consumption under capitalism ¯(ツ)_/¯

I didn't say they exist. Though Sweden was making an attempt (before their president was assassinated in the 1970s) simply by giving employee unions more power. If worker/employee owned co ops had more opportunities for startup funding, why wouldn't they form organically and compete with traditional businesses?

Synonyms exist.

Poison the cancer slightly faster than the whole organism! My dad cancer treatment gave him liver disease that eventually turned into a cancer that was way more deadly than his original cancer.

There are non capitalistic economic systems that are also don't require state ownership and are non authoritarian. Literally just incentivizing worker owned coops is an example of how you can drastically shift the economic system without changing the political system. Markets =/= capitalism. The ability to hoard capital and thus power through private ownership is capitalism. I'm not saying that what i described is the perfect system, it's just an example of something possible outside of your argument.

People are uninformed. The reality is that they vote incumbents when they feel good and for change when they feel bad. And, in the end, winning the voter base means being the best at propaganda and swaying how people are feeling. Unfortunately, even if you want to do the right thing, you still have to win people over with propaganda. Pushing for good policy that's too complicated for the average person with the attention span of a small rodent to follow doesn't work. Its why Trump always gets crushed in the debates and still wins elections. People literally think they're voting for the economy which is a net positive for everyone and that Trump doesn't mean the hateful stuff he says. That's how good their propaganda game is.

We don't even have to think the dems are morally better overall and above supporting genocide. They just don't want a full on war with Iran and increased tensions with Saudi Arabia and for this reason would harden on Israel before letting them annex the west bank which will inevitability lead to regional war. Thing would not be going this way with Kamala as president. Anyone who did vote for her out of protest is very privileged not to live in the West Bank. It's time to call our representatives to push back on Trump expansionism in Israel. But I don't have much hope at all.

Trump won. Sadly this means he was the better candidate. Which damning for the Democrats because he's dog shit.

Legit. Fuck Israel. Fuck Zionism. Fuck apartheid. Fuck the genocide of Palestinians. But also fuck antisemitism.

I'm saying people won't be represented. Not just disappointed. Representation is important. That's my argument. I said it very clearly. Representation isn't problematic and my argument is literally that I think representation is more important than the risk of cultural appropriation and exclusion. Tucking away minorities to save them from cultural appropriation isn't it. Its infantalizing. Also, we can fight for inclusion and representation and still call out cultural appropriation when it occurs.

Because its more realistic that the GOP is a wolf and telling the sheep straight up it will eat them. Then the dems would be a bear saying it will become vegetarian if elected. Sure, a bear will eat a sheep if given the chance, but is more likely to sustain its self on scavenging.

Something something if I had to pick a Republican or a bear, I'd pick the bear.

So then they should never have the chance to perform their sports at the Olympics or on an international stage? Representation matters. It wasn't just white ladies break dancing at the Olympics.