u/hivoltage815

He could’ve called the timeout 35 seconds prior if he wanted time on the clock. He obviously just wants OT which deserves ridicule. If they called TO at start of fourth down they would’ve had 45 seconds and a timeout to get a field goal — to not even try is nuts.

You’re just repeating propaganda from dominant narratives that we know for a fact isn’t true because we’ve had decades to see reality.

Corporations don’t spend trillions on these technologies for the hell of it. The point is to eliminate the expense of workers. That’s always been the story. Any gains in productivity are not shared — lookup what a K shaped economy is.

Ask former unionized factory workers with benefits and pensions if they are happy with the low wage gig economy jobs that took over. Or tell them they need to go get “upskilled” to the next thing that got eliminated a decade later.

The real reason for any optimism if we want to find it is we have basically reached the end game where it’s unsustainable. It’s fine to eliminate the jobs just demand that we all get to share in the benefits. Reduce hours and increase wages. The future is here, let’s all get to share in it.

Don’t buy into the propaganda, demands what’s yours.

There are only two things I can't stand in this world: People who are intolerant of other people's cultures, and the Dutch.

Chris Rabb hasn’t taken a dime of corporate money. If you’re going to start having the federal government serve working people then electing someone like him is a good place to start.

Luxury doomsday shelters are big business. Here's a good podcast episode on it.

I started /r/agency 15 years ago because /r/marketing was such garbage.

Now here you are with this.

It’s like a microcosm of the entire internet.

The circle of shit.

It’s a joke that’s sadly been beaten to death here on Reddit about this race.

I'm not sure what country or planey you've been living on but passing legislation through compromise and coalition building......is not a thing here.

It's not much of a thing across the aisle of the parties in recent years but it's certainly a thing within the parties.

You don't pass landmark pieces of legislation like the recent infrastructure bill with both Bernie Sanders and Joe Manchin voting for it without a ton of compromising and coalition building. In any parliamentary system those guys would be in very different parties.

And yeah, it's not like government is working so well right now operating from this place of political performance between the two parties instead of...actual governance.

As for the rest of your comment, I am with you. I disagree with American imperialism / world policing and certainly giving money to Irsael. I agree that we should spend less on the military. I agree that race (and also class, with race often being used as a wedge to prevent class solidarity) weigh into certain decisions.

None of those facts should be a permission structure to push these over-simplistic and unsubstantiated narratives like the original post is doing. It's the continue post-truthification of our discourse where we flatten everything into symbols of our beliefs and then perform at one another, congratulating ourselves for belonging to the right tribe.

I would venture to argue the U.S. is probably the best country in the world at disaster relief regardless of whether we send money to Israel. We don't have to undermine the challenges and hard work of helping the people of North Carolina today to score quick political points on social media. That post is clearly about egos and clout and not actually making our world better.

That's really deeper subtext of me sharing that anecdote. This stuff isn't easy, let's not make everything into a binary.

It just needs to be flipped around then it works fine.

The passive action is not voting, which could result in all the bad things on the red track in addition to the continued deaths of Palestinians.

The active action is voting for someone you feel is complicit in the genocide in order to ensure the less destructive outcome.

Those who choose not to vote believe not touching the switch is the moral action because it means their fingerprints aren't on whatever the trolly ends up doing.

Deny it as genocide all you want, it's still the death and displacement of an entire group of people, most of whom have nothing to do with the terrorism of Hamas.

The more we get past the symbolic and performative nature of these conversations and just talk about our actual shared values — in this case, wanting all the suffering to end — we might actually build a coalition instead of just shouting at each other online while the fascists takeover.

There's been plenty of "pushback" on everyone, all the time, to go around.

To believe the VP nominee who is selected to make Kamala more palatable to blue collar white’s pro-Israel stance is going to cost votes is a pretty odd take tbh

Oh yeah this is sooooo incoherent: https://www.instagram.com/reel/C9lGDnpO4-w/?igsh=djRtNWE2NDAwd2Rm

You can’t even attempt to find a Biden moment this directly on message and clear in the past 6 months.

Mind you this entire fight kicked off with him dodging a punch from the fastest man alive.

I seriously just don’t understand their powers. But then again, this is satire on other capeshit and they all suffer from this problem.

This is bordering on a strawman.

Nobody is demanding the results be “thrown out”. They are asking for the guy who got those votes to voluntarily step down because the more the election unfolds the more he is starting to show he may not be up to the task.

Let’s not act like that this was some open democratic process either. He was effectively unopposed and never debated (or even acknowledged) those that did try to run against him like Dean Phillips.

He also has barely done interviews or press conferences. Him not doing the Super Bowl was a huge red flag.

If he were to voluntarily step down and the delegates at the DNC chose a candidate that would be perfectly in line with the Democratic process. We’ve had many brokered conventions in this country’s history.

Lastly the argument that the last 4 years should be the proof and not his recent performance is also completely missing the point. The train moves forward. He’s only getting older and the presidency is famous for aging people. He’s very clearly in a different spot today than he was a few years ago, don’t gaslight us into thinking otherwise when we can see it with our own eyes.

Here’s one from Sam Morril

https://youtu.be/duzAOV0RkY8?si=X_NsnFYi7PducSxY

That’s what primaries are for, not general elections.

Men are beating the shit out of each other for sport — with a very public discussion about the massive amounts of brain damage it causes that lead to things like murder-suicides — and it’s the yelling in the heat of the moment that bothers you?

I can buy the argument that directing animation is a different process than directing live action, so it’s hard to put them in the same category together.

One - the way character performances are shaped is vastly different considering so much is being done in software. You lose a huge human element that is the art of coaching your actors, which is often the power of great auteurs.

Two - your blocking and pacing is shaped differently too. In live action your best case scenario is being David Fincher and getting 90 takes to dial it in before you have to move on to the next scene. In animation you effectively get to make everything exactly as you want it pixel by pixel, frame by frame.

Three - your constraints are very different. Production days are super expensive for live action so most of the work on a film happens in the planning before hand while in animation the whole process is quite a bit more holistic and iterative.

If we see directing as just making choices then sure they are almost the same. But if we also see directing as captaining a ship through the various challenges of making a film they’re going through very different experiences

The movement is not going to recruit anybody if it participates in stupid culture wars and brands itself as the Republicans lite.

It’s also a show with writers and directors and editors. Says more about our culture at the time than it does about him.

As a straight young man in this environment I’m pretty sure I’ve said some gross things. Luckily I wasn’t on tv.

No he owns 2% of an entire generation’s wealth as you literally just said in the preceding sentence, not 40%.

You don’t divide 2 by 5 here. He doesn’t have 2% of all national wealth.

Edit: y’all his claim is just wrong, stop downvoting me. Zuck does not own 40% of millennial wealth. His net worth is $110B. Millennials have at least $9.38T according to a simple Google search.

It’s owned by Warner Discovery, a massive publicly traded media conglomerate whose top shareholders are all massive funds like Vanguard and Black Rock. Who specifically are you speaking about?

Black Rock by the way is hated by right wingers who believes it’s push for ESG / corporate responsibility among the companies it invests in is feeding “wokeism”.

CNN is part of Warner Discovery conglomerate which is publicly traded and has hundreds of properties including HBO and DC entertainment. Are you calling them a “right wing media group” or am I missing something?

They did shed their more liberal tendencies under the new CEO and started platforming more Republicans as part of a strategy to try and win more market share but he just got fired last week because it wasn’t working.

Except when profoundly excellent but outside of mainstream films like Moonlight win, way more people end up seeing it.

He wasn’t exclusively into young men. I know because I have friends in their 30s who were hit on by him in the early 00s. His sexuality (and his alcoholism for that matter) were not a secret for those working in the industry.

So I don’t get why you would evade the truth of his sexuality. If anything you are doing the opposite of what you seem to intend by directly tying his sexuality with his pedophilia when they are two separate parts of who he is just like it would be for a straight man.