TRUE. These days, it's almost impossible to tell. Anger is off the charts, and I admit I've fallen into it myself (mostly despair that people seem so determined to wait for a superhero to come save us rather than saving ourselves, for me). It's frustrating and alarming that truth seems to be gone.
I thought maybe you had, but it's hard to tell sometimes. The anger radiating off that one certainly could solve the climate crisis all on its own.
Such an insult to Bertie Wooster.
A quick look at their profile says you're not.
Bluesky is frying the left's brains just like the former Twitter has fried the right's and it's terrifying to watch, especially because people would rather jump all over you for saying it than consider whether or not you might have a point.
That would require them to be willing to read at all.
It’s not “like” a cult. It IS a cult.
Are you going to name the other(s) that hold the title, then, or are you just going to cast meaningless aspersions for attention all night?
I am. My group tried to get materials and they were outdated. It was very frustrating and we felt pretty demoralized. We did what we could, but we were also braced for the worst as a result. (So yeah, I'm not making up the perceptions we had.)
Honestly, it looked largely invisible from where I was sitting, which was perplexing (at best--scary at worst). My Indivisible group was terrified that she wasn't doing anything. Thrilled to have been proven wrong, but it would have been nice to know there was no cause for alarm. 🤷♀️😁
That's very interesting, and good to know. We definitely did not hear much about it, and I, for one, was (v. pleasantly) surprised--that she won, and by how much. It did not look like she was running a good campaign, and I was very worried that we'd end up with Ciattarelli.
I want to win, too. I just want to do it without continuing the American society's decline into the Hunger Games. You have fun with that.
You seem awfully dedicated to this dangerous status quo, but the rest of us certainly do not have to be, and I’m not interested in debating it with you further. Have a day, sir.
Again, your “facts” are only factual in recent history. Not sure why that’s so hard to grasp. Charisma actually IS a bad thing, because it causes people to act on emotion rather than thought. It’s exactly what Tom talks about in his books as how we’ve made it to this irrational, unserious moment.
I think a big factor in the Latino vote in NJ was likely that they woke up and saw that they’d actually voted against their own interests, but it’s also fair to say the Mikie was not the most exciting personality and she managed a big win anyway.
Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene would like a word, among others. People go into Congress without experience all the time. Congress is where most people get experience in Congress. And I’m having a very hard time finding your actual argument about term limits in there. Is there one?
No, it’s not. Once upon a time this country was capable of seeing leadership in terms of solid governing and decision-making skill, not religious fervor (which is where we get the word “charisma”) and personality. The change has not led us to good places. That’s my point.
Age limits, done right, solve many of the same problems as term limits while also allowing folks to gain experience. Also, did you read the first reply to your original post?
Age limits over term limits. We need experienced people in office. We do not need a gerontocracy.
She must be removed as secretary.
Which has what to do with my point?
🤦🏻♀️ The relatively recent American addiction to charisma is a big part of what got us here.
Without knowing you at all, except for a few posts, I have every confidence that you have far more going for you than he does. I mean, you obviously do not have his exceptionally thin skin, for a start. And you are far more intelligent.
Yep. Can dish it out, but be sure can’t take it. Imagine my surprise.
You “mistyped” is the same way twice. That’s not a typo, dude. Take the L already.
Rich complaining about someone else’s perfectly good English when you can’t spell.
Logic is not strong in this one. (Or, you know... basic observational skills.)
