NauticalNoodle

joined 1 year ago
[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Well, some of the GOP ARE Liberals, although, A few are theocrats. Your loss.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I think your username is probably working against you on this one.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yes, that sounds very much like a Liberal take.

" Punishing farmers (or any industry) rarely punishes those that deserve it"

When did that last happen?

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago

i'm not sure it would make it okay but it might make it ironic.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

This is what frustrates me when Liberals start rallying around illegal farm labor and it's "economic benefits." -I think if we're going to have realistic regulations around immigrant labor then the first priority should start with penalizing the farmers (and other employers) that hire the illegal labor because they don't want to pay a reasonable wage or maintain a safe work-environment

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Yeah, sure but to "steal something" is to imply that you're depriving the original owner use of the thing you stole. This is more like making an exact copy depriving nobody of use of the original thing.

it's more like depriving someone use of roads, sidewalks, and doors because they got caught walking out of Kinkos

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

In theory the IoT could be secure. -In theory.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

By claiming people must vote for the "lesser evil" and nothing else then the party of "lesser evil" implicitly paves the way for people to stop showing up for them, which to that side paves the way for their greater evil to eventually win. -If you think that's selfish and entitled, then that's your prerogative, but if you want people support your candidate then you have to get them to want to support your candidate, be it selfish or not.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

No, not voting is simply not voting. More to the point, not voting is "explicitly" saying you don't care enough to spend the time or energy on casting a vote or you couldn't vote. A person might think it implicitly* says "either choice is equally good", but then I could argue that the Democrat party implicitly considers "either choice equally good" because they didn't attempt to earn the votes.

When it's easier to not vote than come out to vote, then the responsibility is on the candidates to convince their potential constituents to turn out for them.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago

I remember our last election. Most people dont even vote for the "plans and promises." They vote for the perceived "lesser evil." -It's incredibly irritating for those of us who care about policy.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm pretty sure Chaplin was pissed about it too.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 weeks ago

*legal system.

rarely there is ever any "justice."

 

everybody!

view more: next ›