They make universal flappers now that are actually universal.

And most arms are extendable and can have angle adjusted multiple ways, so basically universal.

If you replace anything else, you might as well change all the internals at once with a set

They’re surrounded by nations who are calling for their extermination

They’re surrounded by countries they constantly attack and stir shit with…

And by “stir shit” I mean commit war crimes, human rights abuses, and outright genocide.

Yet you’re surprised the neighbors don’t like them?

The word has lost its meaning now for a lot of people.

Decades of genocides can make genocide feel normal

Your comment is a perfect example.

Nah, if they didn’t have nukes and US backing (which is likely how they have nukes)…

Then they wouldn’t act like they’re untouchable and wouldn’t commit so many genocides against neighboring countries…

Like, what you’re doing is saying the schoolyard bully has to be a bully because no one likes them. Ignoring the fact that the reason no one likes them is they keep beating up smaller kids.

They can stop being a bully anytime and the situation would improve. Getting mad at the bullied kids because they don’t like the bully makes no logical sense.

Like, you expect people to just ignore when a different country attacks yours and kills your children?

That’s just water under the bridge and they should get over it?

It’s their fault for responding to violence with violence instead of meekly allowing themselves to be exterminated?

Do you even read what you type?

Or do you legitimately just not understand what’s happening?

The International Atomic Energy Agency is expected to vote on a censure resolution against Iran for its lack of cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog.

Correct me if I’m wrong…

But aren’t Israel’s nukes “open secrets” because they’re not legally allowed to have nuclear weapons either?

Everyone knows they have them, we just pretend they don’t

I don’t understand what you’re trying to say, but I’m not expecting you clarifying to help

Years ago they tried to pass a minimum amount of time you had to hold a stock before selling…

It was a fraction of a second and neoliberals and Republicans immediately united to tell everyone how antithetical to America that was.

For some reason, that wasn’t enough to show people that both groups have the same priorities and we can’t fight an oligarchy with fucking oligarchs.

We’ll never win if only a handful of politicians are actually on our side.

But it’s almost impossible to compete against dark money in a primary, and the people running the DNC know that. So they’ll never agree to get dark money out of primaries. It’s the only reason they’re still holding back progressives.

Why that would be huge:

It would incentize the rich to hold stocks long term, this would lead to corporations thinking more than what profits are in 3 months.

Which translates to greater stability for other investors and job security for the people who work there.

But it’s never going to happen as long as Smaug Pelosi and people like her who’s main priority is personal wealth is running the Dem party. Because we all know Republicans will never support it.

But if we don’t purge the Dem party of neo liberals, and fast, we’re all fucked. We can’t keep walking down the path of “the rich always get richer” like nothing is wrong.

Wealth is finite. And without taxes and regulations the people who already have a lot will always accumulate more faster than they can spend it.

With them hoarding all that wealth, no one else has any.

What OP is talking about has been a thing since the 90s and even 80s and earlier with ex-military.

Move to a cheap country where your pension/disability/passive income/whatever makes you wealthy.

Originally places liked it because it was an influx in cash. But then it became too popular and they were gentrifying places to the point locals couldn’t afford to live and these leeches never worked.

It became big again with the internet when people became able to work and American job while overseas remotely. But by now most American companies just won’t pay American wages. If they wanted someone overseas they’d pay them the low wage they always do.

With those younger people they added the “temporary” because they say they’ll move back someday.

What you’re talking about (if the job is in that country) would be a migrant worker.

But they also don’t like that label, they think they’re better than it.

I’d love to see countries mark “expat” as an option on forms…

Just as a trap to filter them all out.

but some folks I put tags on just to see where they pop up.

So years ago on /buyitforlife, someone posted those super cheap work gloves that you’d legit got thru a pair before and after lunch. That’s why they never sold single pairs and you had to buy like a 10 pack.

Dude gets roasted in the comments, but I RES tagged him “ole softhands” and for years after I’d just randomly see the account somewhere and genuinely laugh out loud.

I don’t know why people want to have the same arguments with the same people, over and over again knowing it’ll never be productive.

For them social media is just a pvp arguing arena.

I don’t have the energy for that, if someone just doesn’t get something after 3-5 replies I stop replying, if it keeps happening elsewhere or they act like a dick, I just block them.

Why waste your time on something that you know is only going to fail and likely cause yourself aggravation?

Tradition…

It’s another one of those things where we’re not going to codify it because Republicans want it as a pocket ace, and moderates control party policy and they just have a phobia of admitting anything actually needs fixed, let alone fixing it.

But the electors in a lot of states can do what they want

32 states + DC are legally required to vote for the party that nominated them as electors tho.

So some are “locked in”, the rest can pretty much do what they want. I know some states are on an “interstate compact” where once they get enough states it triggers them having to vote for the national popular vote winner.

But I’m not sure what the overlap is with the ones who already have the requirement to vote for the party that appointed them or how that will shake out.

These are the orchestrators of the Armenian genocide, so this barely makes the top 10 of reason the ruling family (basically a monarchy) are cunts.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azerbaijan#Government_and_politics

Especially since they’ve restarted the genocide:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/11/asia/nagorno-karabakh-armenians-genocide-intl-hnk/index.html

Make posts to them…

Lots of people browse by /all and /new because of lack of content.

Which means it’s relatively easy to get a sub to catch on

But you need to actually make posts so people see them. Try to space it out tho, 15 posts in 15 minutes will just get people to block it due to spam. A couple spaced out thru a day tho will start getting more interaction, go for quality not quantity and hope eventually other users start submitting stuff for the quantity part.

someone who thinks both party’s won’t help

So this entire slog I’ve went thru to help you understand…

Is because when someone says:

Apple pie is delicious

You take that as a statement of fact and not their opinion because they didn’t say:

I think Apple pie is delicious.

There is nothing I can do to help you here or with anything else you may have difficulty with in the future.

Can you point out where they say “if wage earners think both parties won’t help”?

To avoid confusion because it seems likely:

If you’re a wage earner in this country, your life does not change in any significant way based on who we elect, so why skip a badly needed day’s pay to vote? There’s just no point

A more indepth response:

What you linked:

Weird. A bug in the app switched up my replies.

What I intended to say was:

I can understand. If you’re a wage earner in this country, your life does not change in any significant way based on who we elect, so why skip a badly needed day’s pay to vote? There’s just no point.

And when you point this out to other people, all you get in response are excuses.

They’re explicitly saying that the people whom didn’t vote, didn’t vote because both parties are too similar and won’t help. They’re saying those people need more than “not trump” to vote D.

I’m struggling to see where your confusion is coming from.

If this still doesn’t make sense, can you try asking for clarification in greater detail?

It just seems so obvious to me.

And this isn’t a new conversation, we’ve been having it since 2016, it’s been 8 years man… Hell, really 12 because we started seeing the drop in 2012 when we realized Obama wasn’t who he said in 08

What aren’t you getting about this?

Like, this is the bare bones basics of modern political history in America… Go back decades and the most likely response from a non voter about why they didn’t vote is “neither party will actually help”.

You never learned any of this stuff, like, ever?___

So, the issue is you’re not understanding what people are saying…

You’re thinking they said something they didn’t and you’re getting upset about nothing.

Did you link the wrong comment?

What you linked is just someone saying they can understand why someone who thinks both party’s won’t help, won’t be likely to vote.

I think you’re confusing me for someone else

I voted D like I always do, so have most progressive on here from what I’ve seen them say.

What me, and them, have been saying is that Biden and Harris had our votes, but every indication show d they wouldn’t get enough to beat trump.

It’s fine to be upset about that, we are too. Probably more than any moderate, we’re literally losing more than you all, that’s why we care.

But what’s scary is this has all happened before. Moderates refuse to acknowledge they’re unpopular with Dem voters, and rather than reach out to progressives for help reaching non-votera…

You all just seemed obsessed with turning more Dem voters away from the party.

Maybe if you stopped focusing so much on the negatives, and started promoting positive change, people wouldn’t argue with you so much.

The change we need is better Dem candidates, how the absolute fuck will that happen if we’re not allowed to acknowledge we keep running shitty candidates?

Do you even remember how a fair and open primary is supposed to work?

How is one of those ever possible if no one is allowed to criticize the party’s favorite?