3 ms·

This is a very common human reaction. When things don't change quickly enough, a more radical approach ends up being taken even though it almost never is the r

This is a very common human reaction. When things don't change quickly enough, a more radical approach ends up being taken even though it almost never is the right approach. It's the same reason why people don't like Java. It's Old, verbose and stable, but who wants that. That's why people like Javascript, but at the end of the day, Java is the best. Stable and boring and slow politics is the good politics. Not this shit that's happening right now.

coldpie 2y ago
This has been the Dem strategy for my entire life, yes. You are seeing the outcome of this strategy now. I argue it is not yielding desirable results, and they should try something else.
- ajross 2y ago
  > I argue it is not yielding desirable results, and they should try something else. You actually aren't arguing that. You're just saying the first bit. You need to detail "something else", otherwise you're just throwing bombs with no value to anything except your ego.
  - coldpie 2y ago
    I listed three concrete actions Dems could have taken or attempted, and didn't. You should try actually reading the posts you're responding to. You're angry at someone who isn't me.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- sirolimus 2y ago
  The world is complicated and things take time. The current HORRIBLE alternative is far worse than the undesirable results from the Dem strategy your entire life.
  - coldpie 2y ago
    Yes, obviously. I'm saying the current situation is partly the result of Dems like Biden not taking action to prevent it.
    - ajross 2y ago
      > Yes, obviously. I'm saying the current situation is partly the result of Dems like Biden not taking action to prevent it. That statement is tautological (literally everything happens because something didn't prevent it). It's also not consistent with your much less considered verbiage above that somehow this was "all (not partly) on Democrats".
      - coldpie 2y ago
        > It's also not consistent with your much less considered verbiage above that somehow this was "all (not partly) on Democrats". I didn't say that. You should reply to what I am actually saying, not whatever quotes you made up. > That statement is tautological (literally everything happens because something didn't prevent it). One of the jobs of a politician is to protect the country from its enemies. Dems failed to do that, despite ample warning and opportunity. This demonstrates what I said: they are not up to the task of rescuing the US.
ajross 2y ago
> a more radical approach ends up being taken even though it almost never is the right approach. To be clearer: a more radical approach is being taken. And some people on the left genuinely prefer the situation to a Harris administration. There was never a constituency for... whatever it is the current argument is demanding[1]. It wasn't on the menu, so the next best thing is humiliation for the other members of the coalition. [1] The fact that the framing is "Biden bad" and not "Biden should have X" is telling!

coldpie 2y ago

This has been the Dem strategy for my entire life, yes. You are seeing the outcome of this strategy now. I argue it is not yielding desirable results, and they should try something else.

ajross 2y ago
> I argue it is not yielding desirable results, and they should try something else. You actually aren't arguing that. You're just saying the first bit. You need to detail "something else", otherwise you're just throwing bombs with no value to anything except your ego.
- coldpie 2y ago
  I listed three concrete actions Dems could have taken or attempted, and didn't. You should try actually reading the posts you're responding to. You're angry at someone who isn't me.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
sirolimus 2y ago
The world is complicated and things take time. The current HORRIBLE alternative is far worse than the undesirable results from the Dem strategy your entire life.
- coldpie 2y ago
  Yes, obviously. I'm saying the current situation is partly the result of Dems like Biden not taking action to prevent it.
  - ajross 2y ago
    > Yes, obviously. I'm saying the current situation is partly the result of Dems like Biden not taking action to prevent it. That statement is tautological (literally everything happens because something didn't prevent it). It's also not consistent with your much less considered verbiage above that somehow this was "all (not partly) on Democrats".
    - coldpie 2y ago
      > It's also not consistent with your much less considered verbiage above that somehow this was "all (not partly) on Democrats". I didn't say that. You should reply to what I am actually saying, not whatever quotes you made up. > That statement is tautological (literally everything happens because something didn't prevent it). One of the jobs of a politician is to protect the country from its enemies. Dems failed to do that, despite ample warning and opportunity. This demonstrates what I said: they are not up to the task of rescuing the US.

ajross 2y ago

> a more radical approach ends up being taken even though it almost never is the right approach. To be clearer: a more radical approach is being taken. And some people on the left genuinely prefer the situation to a Harris administration. There was never a constituency for... whatever it is the current argument is demanding[1]. It wasn't on the menu, so the next best thing is humiliation for the other members of the coalition. [1] The fact that the framing is "Biden bad" and not "Biden should have X" is telling!