Grouchio posted:

On account of my mental health and/or blood pressure, can I just ignore whatever poo poo's spewed out of Texas for the rest of the year? I have a feeling this will bite Texan Chuds later.

AtomikKrab posted:

Remember everyone to make time for self care and relaxation, too much politics is not good for your health.

Craig K posted:

I did not realize that these were online, and i am getting bigtime "Pawnee citizens at Town Hall" vibes

e: also, randomly clicking, i've already found four "i am a tobacco retailer that is strongly opposed to this ban because I will make less money because this is a governmental intrusion on personal freedoms" so far

quote:

do not take another choice of Americans away, many people of all colors races chose menthol, people have free will, they know the risks, if you ban menthol cigs, you have to ban all cigs........leave us alone ,let us make our own choices, decisions, stop using race to push this threw, class actions suits to follow of course for the gov violating our freedoms , stop regulating our choices, your not my mamma or daddy, and no i am not black, it affects all races free choices

projecthalaxy posted:

I know its even lower than VP but that kinda sounds like what Sec State or UN Envoy does?

Srice posted:

He wouldn't get mad about CNN/MSNBC/etc the same way Trump does so if nothing else there'd be far less pushback from those outlets. He'd do the same heinous poo poo but in a "respectable" way.

Push El Burrito posted:

But they also get heat vision as a trade off.

Grouchio posted:

Wait a second - these threads have all been in chorus about the impending destruction of american democracy ever since Trump took power (and before). Has much changed in that regard pre vs post-overturn?

And should that mean that I have no choice but to dictate my future as one of doom? I've had a burden complex for the longest time.

theCalamity posted:

I would call it horrendous, especially when somewhere like China (4 per million) and Vietnam (811 per million) have drastically less COVID deaths. Let's not forget that a lot of Democrats were itching to open back up as soon as the vaccines dropped and stayed open while Omicron and Delta killed a bunch of people.

Fister Roboto posted:

No, it's fair. 2 year olds definitely shouldn't be posting here.

Epic High Five posted:

I think it's about time this whole thing got moved to the thread dedicated to the midterms and electoralism generally: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4002330. Maybe some progress can be made on the debate with a little more focus.

Also please refrain from attacking posters directly, if I see any more of it and have to wake my dog up to move rooms to hit they're going to start at 18 hours as compensation to elderly terriers.

Cimber posted:

Is a woman who has an ectopic pregnancy really at risk now because of Roe v. Wade, or is that some hysterical fearmongering.

I legit don't know.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The Hobbs ruling lets states regulate abortion however they want. It doesn't establish fetal personhood, and even if it did, a naturally occurring ectopic pregnancy isn't considered manslaughter in any state under even the strictest fetal personhood law. An ectopic pregnancy is also by definition non-viable.

Tatsuta Age posted:

Gumball Gumption posted:

If anything I just see it as a sign that mods are not proactive enough. Stale arguments are a great reason to probe people here but it's also obvious that if your stale argument doesn't offend anyone it gets by because it wasn't reported. So you can easily get away with a lot of boring and pointless white noise about how politics make you feel as long as none of those feelings are too strong. People should also eat a probe for making a boring post like that when we have many places for boring posts and only one place like D&D for serious discussions. If anything we would benefit from more proactive mods who feel the freedom to kick out any and all white noise posting, not just the angry ones which do tend to lean left here.

Son of Thunderbeast posted:

I think that if the rules were robust enough and set up right, it really shouldn't matter who's doing the probing, and an equal number of probes would be dealt to all "sides" (if we must frame it that way). The current set of rules is definitely a strong move in the right direction, but (from the sidelines) there is a noticeable lopsidedness. I think the rules should be treated as a living document under periodic revision, and every so often issues can be identified, evaluated, and then addressed via addendums to the rules, whether that's by revising existing ones, adding new ones, or removing deprecated ones. Examples and precedent-setting posts can be linked to for the sake of illustration, which would enhance the accessibility and ease of understanding to anyone referencing them, which should reduce overall friction. The rules can be revisited every so often, whatever period the mods decide would be best, until an equilibrium is achieved. That's my two cents anyhow.

Koos Group posted:

The purpose of D&D is educational. Posters are encouraged to ask questions, share knowledge, learn new things, and speculate, discuss, and argue interpretations and ideas. The hope is that participation here will make posters better informed, develop more refined personal ideologies, be better able to argue their positions in real life, and find ways to put their positions into practice with real world activism.

To this end, D&D only has three true rules: Don't impede discussion, make only posts that productively add to discussion, and obey the rules of the SA forums. To make the expectations of how these rules are to be followed clearer, what follows is a list of specific guidelines implied by them, as well as more specific guidelines implied by those guidelines. It is not meant to be be exhaustive, but to cover common ways in which we might be tempted to break D&D's rules. Further explanation of each guideline is behind spoilers for easier readability.

Nix Panicus posted:

Theres a discord where the mods hang out that we can use to get immediate attention?

Which discord is this, and why is it not posted in the rules thread so everyone can join it?

BIG-DICK-BUTT-gently caress posted:

Mods hate me for it, but “nobody likes Hillary” just isn’t based in reality.

Nessus posted:

my aging herbivore eyes

Edgar Allen Ho posted:

Advocating violence: you lose your SA account, but you can still buy a gun in Illinois. Top tier law. People say the mods are bad at making rules but *gestures to USA*

Meatball posted:

In this analogy, though, frog Joe Biden is only temporarily stunned by the poison, and always swims back to the shore. He's given McConnell several rides at this point.

Failed Imagineer posted:

In this analogy (and also in real life) Joe Biden Greenfrog has incipient dementia, retains no memories of previous betrayals, and spends his days in a reverie of when his Dad used to drive the Corvette down to the ice -cream parlour on a summers day

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Rigel posted:

Most of the hormone therapies (especially testosterone) for FTM are already very, very banned by doping rules, for obvious reasons. I guess this hasn't come up yet because they were not going to be competitive anyway at the elite levels against cis men. The only issue has been MTF beating cis women at the elite level.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Rochallor posted:

Galaxy brain legal question: is there anything besides decorum that prevents the President from going, "Actually, I think Marbury v Madison was decided wrongly and therefore judicial review doesn't exist."? It's not in the Constitution and exists only because the SC says it does. As the SC drifts further from public opinion it seems like it would be easier and easier to do.

Gumball Gumption posted:

So should we stop all discussion of police unions or does this mean that it needs to just be more substantive since OP obviously understands now that they were confused about why police unions are not unions?

Josef bugman posted:

So I was reading that Biden has signed an executive order refusing to let striking train workers actually strike? Is this accurate.

Here is where I found out about it, apologise ig that is incorrect or if I am not allowed to comment on it.

https://maritime-executive.com/article/president-biden-heads-off-rail-strike-with-60-day-cooling-off-period

It appears to be for a short time, but why is this acceptable?

squirrelzipper posted:

This is both disingenuous and unrealistic.

First - my question, and the article I posted, is why has Manchin suffered no censure for blocking almost all the major initiatives over the last 24 months. Why is he still a chairman? No-one has answered that really other than ‘oh well we need him’. Ok.

Second - you’re ascribing a level of political intellect and attention to voters that demonstrably doesn’t exist. So the ones who can be swayed by Manchin being disciplined won’t be, because it hasn’t happened, and the ones who just pay attention to the promises missed have no vision for why they should vote again. Did you see todays climate announcement?

The party is failing both the engaged and the apathetic voter, and mark my words, I hope I’m wrong, but they’re going to get loving demolished in the mid-terms. Then they can hold focus groups I guess, and will run Biden again, because you know, he’s electable or some poo poo.

Jarmak posted:

Impeachment is a political act, a criminal prosecution is not a political act but when done to a former president is likely to be seen as a political act unless it has general popular support. Politicians do political poo poo that is generally unpopular but popular with their constituents all the time, whereas DOJ career officials are historically timid about prosecutions that could be perceived as political... arguably to a fault when it comes to politicians.

Exhibit A: Bill Clinton's impeachment was widely unpopular.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

I don't want to speak for Fritz, but you can keep going with it. Just find some angle that isn't a back of forth of "they will" and "they won't" over and over.

Heck Yes! Loam! posted:

Relating it to sexual contact in any manner is irresponsible and wrong. what the actual gently caress.