It’s so funny to see people who have never lived in a place, and openly do not like visiting a place, bemoaning the choice leadership of the people who actually live in a place, insisting that they should not be able to make that choice. That somehow, someone totally alienated from that community knows better who should run it.
Often times the services have a fleet of accounts, they have them do reposts of old popular posts with titles and some content rephrased, then some of the rest of the fleet copies the top comments and rephrases those and posts them below.
This builds a history of realistic and semi popular looking posts in a way that is fairly easy to automate . Anyone who looks closely could potentially figure out a given account, or even cluster of accounts, is farmed, but it takes effort and time to prove it, more effort and time than it takes for them to spool up another batch of bots.
Lmao, two idiots fighting. This seemed kind of inevitable, they’re not compatible personality types to work with each other.
Elon definitely thinks he has more influence with trump’s crowd than he actually has, but I also think his position at twitter makes him dangerous to trump by undermining his ability to reach a lot of people who haven’t fully crawled down the maga conspiracy pipeline.
I don’t think he’s going to be able to shift much support to Vance ether. Vance and his ilk are just to weird for most trump supporters.
Fun fact, two people, in opposition to each other, can both be assholes.
And you don’t have to like one to criticize the other.
Like how you can criticize the actions of both the USSR and the USA in the Cold War.
More importantly, you don’t have to defend one ass hole just because you like the other less.
The world ain’t fucking a dialectic.
Would be nice
Money for campaigns is important, but it’s a force multiplier. If there is no force of voters to multiply, it is worthless.
Also those people in the back rooms are going to have a lot less money to throw around now, big donors don’t want to give their money to campaigns that have no chance of winning, what good good is buying influence with a politician if that politician has no influence to sell? I don’t think all that money will flow over to progressives suddenly, but the gap in budget is going to be much smaller now.
Exactly, it’s not the job of the voters to convince a party their interests are worth pursing, it is the job of the party to convince voters that they will pursue their interests.
Donor money alone can not win an election and a failure to engage with voters will sure as hell lose it.
I think the current Russian leadership has this detached fantasy of what America’s far right are like, this idea that they’re homebody rural folks who just want to keep to them selves and that if they’re in charge the US will disengage it’s self from the rest of the world, leaving Russia to treat Eastern Europe as a playground for their imperialism.
But the thing is, it ignores the agency of the eastern Europe to oppose them, and it ignores the fact that the the US far right is fundamentally narcissistic and egomaniacal. Ultimately the far right of the US will stay engaged in eastern Europe because they will perceive Russia telling them to get out as an insult and a humiliation. The only way the far right would disengage would be if they could frame it as them “winning” and that framing would be perceived as an insult and humiliation to the Russian leadership, so they won’t allow it.
So they will come to genuinely hate each other. I don’t think this will lead to the US far right suddenly deciding they care deeply about the well being of eastern Europe, but they also aren’t going to disengage completely.
I mean, I think a big part of it is foreign influence efforts landing very strongly with dissenting groups in the US. Then forging influence networks using the extant distrust for the US’s government to dismiss nuance that would paint their patrons in a bad light.
Yah, that’s why people call them tankies. Any criticism of the USSR, or even acknowledging why people criticize it, is a banable offense.
The term tankie get’s thrown around a lot, to the point of dilution, but the origin of it comes from western communist who defended the Soviet Union putting down the 1956 Hungarian revolution, notably using T-54/55 tanks. It later came to mean western communist that would ignore or downplay any criticism of the USSR, as “propaganda”. These days it could even be applied more broadly to “People who call them selves left wing or communists but who will defend the actions of any authoritarian regime so long as it is notionally in opposition to the US and it’s allies” IE people who defended Assad and Putin.
I think hexbear fits even a fairly narrow older definition. Which is why most major instances are defederated from them.
One of the rhetorically effective things about his campaign messaging was how broad and vague it was. Pundits, podcasters, influencers, and those manipulating the algorithms of social media, took that messaging, isolated parts of it and recontextualized those parts for specific audiences.
So while he may have assumed he was being very clear about what he was going to do, the messaging many of his voters got was totally detached from his intentions.
A good example of this is people who thought that the tariffs would somehow be a tax levied on foreign countries, not a sales tax on imported goods. Or those who thought the tariffs would be targeted at specific goods categories to benefit their particular industry, not a blanket tariff that impacts their upstream supply chain.
He told his subordinate on the campaign to get voters to vote for him, he assumed that meant convince them he was right, but that was impossible, the only ones that could get him the numbers he liked were the ones who just twisted what he said till people agreed with it.
You’re right, this article is in fact, clown shit.
Nonsense article. Low key agitprop to cover for trump failing spectacularly to broker a peace.
Holy shit Zelenskyy appears to have seriously triggered them.
I wonder if he said something to the effect of “no i will not participate in your stupid fake peace process, if you want to stop supporting us, say it with your full chest to your own country where I have a higher approval rating than you.”
So, thing is USDA guarantees a minimum price for stuff like corn and dairy, paying the difference between the actual market price and the minimum price to farmers. So the market price for them will drop but production won’t, and chances are, most of the stuff will end up getting thrown out or used in utterly absurd way. Closing USAID just removes a potential useful outlet for the surplus. Rather than corn getting used for subsidizing food costs in other countries, it’ll be up getting used to make potting soil, gasoline and dry wall. Not because it makes economic sense to do so, but because the government will pay the economic losses that are inherent in such wasteful use cases.
So the issue is, that those are two different categories. USAID tends to be food stuff that the US massively over produces, dairy, corn, soy, ect. These are all categories that are highly automated and don’t require much labor (relative to other categories)
The places where the most migrant labor is utilized are things like fruits, vegetables, and meat processing. stuff that can’t be mechanized to the same degree as corn or milk. Stuff that doesn’t tend to get exported as part of USAID because it is in demand in the US.
Definitely, just to prevent it from being normalized. Just like crypto, flying cars, psychics, MLM businesses, this shit will fade in to the into the domain of low skill grifters.
Oh boy can’t wait for them to ban two pipes that fit inside each other and a nail.
Just down load more ram capacity. It the button right under the down load more ram button.
Lmao, damn, trump seems really scared of this guy.
All the conservatives seem really scared of this guy.
Wonder why republicans might be scared of Democratic candidates left of dead center. Almost like a real alternative not slobbering out neoliberal, Chicago school of economics, nonsense could sweep them in a lot of traditional safe seats.
Or at least be really hard to rally their base against if their base actually hears what the policies are.