In your mind, what classifies as an assassinatiom attempt? What are the criteria that needs to be accounted for to consider something g an assassination attempt?

Math literally has everything to do with it. There are entire branches of mathematics dedicated to figuring out ideal voting systems.

Terrorism is actually a pretty simple but specific definition. Terrorists use unlawful violence and threats of violence to influence the government or an international governmental organisation, or to intimidate the public. They do this in pursuit of a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.

It doesn’t take much money or many resources to engage in violence or even make threats. Certainly having money and resources at your disposal make you more effective but it’s a rather low but still specific bar to cross to be considered a terrorist.

Data was also wasn’t a replacement for human labor to enrich the capitalist class. I think AI would be cool if the tangible benefits made everyone’s lives better rather than just lining the pockets of rich people.because they fan pay less on labor.

If you’re not going to take the effort type “can a government use patents” into Google and look at the top link. It took me less than a minute to find that government using a patent is just baked into the patent system. There’s not additional law around it. So it might be better to go the WD 40 route and never actually file a patent to the formula to avoid sharing the formula publicly.

That’s… not how eminent domain works…? Like it’s scope only applied to stuff like building sidewalks, roads, bridges, and other infrastructure.

Because it’s a lot easier for Disney to churn out mickey mouse cartoons than it is for General Electric to come up with an entirely new rotating joint for the helicopter mounted motorized minigun

You’d have a point if this were good faith encouragement of civic duty, but it’s not, it’s a surreptitious attempt to gain control over the mechanisms of power at the expense of everyone else.

Ooh yeah that’s another good potential use case too!

At the end of the day the choice fulfills a bunch of roles, probably even beyond just the sound bite splicing challenges and poking fun at conservatives.

Absolutely, there’s a lot of planning that goes into events like this down to the wardrobes people on stage are gonna wear. Was it planned because Republicans lost their shit over the tan suit during the Obama administration and it was a jab at that? Maybe, probably, and it also serves as a way to more quickly identify shich day a soud bite is taken from and a bit harder for oppositional propaganda to stitch disparate quotes together to push an alternative narrative.

Well… were not on the other side of this yet. Were still in the sort of early 1930s Germany era where the real problems people face haven’t gotten all that much better, and the fascists have made many decently successful smaller attempts at power but haven’t quite succeeded in that big push for power. like the stuff that is planned in project 2025.

I don’t think fascism is capable of producing competent longterm leadership. Like the ideology preselects for loyalty above all, it’s rabidly anti-intellectual and scorns anyone perceived as being an intellectual elitist. It’s purely emotion driven and requires ever escalating emotional rhetoric to keep the based angry at external all-powerfully weak enemies (lazy mexicans stealing your jobs, sneaky jewish bankers crashed the entire economy, thuggish high school dropout gangbangers in the inner city are criminal masterminds responsible for all the drugs flowing through rural communities who would overrun everything if they were smart enough to unify, take your pick of contradictory scapegoat.)

That’s not to say incompetence means harmlessness, there’s a lot of blood that has been spilled throughout history due to incompetence.

Poes law in name has been around for about as long as 4chan, but Nathan Poe was making an observation based on a Christian forum in a debate on creationism and before Poe made his observation and became the name of the law, Jerry Schwartz posted advising against using sarcasm unless you put something marking it as satire on Usenet in 1983. This effect was known well before 4chan, dating back to the days of Usenet.

If you don’t say you’re joking on the internet, someone will take something at face value without getting the joke.

Poe’s Law is a law of the internet for a reason. Unless you indicate tone text alone can easily be mistaken for genuine opinion.

We’re outside of presidential norms whenever there’s a conservative president.

It’s a lot more purple than you’d believe, but the state is gerrymandered to hell and uses every voter suppression tactic in the book to make sure the final winner takes all vote goes red.

You are downplaying Trump. The op comment said Biden flooding Israel with weapons, I pointed out that it will absolutely be worse under Trump and trump’s rhetoric is promising that it will be worse. Then you came along and got pissy that I’m pointing out that genocide absolutely will get worse under Trump. I don’t deal with absolutes, I prefer to to operate under the assumption that things can be complicated and to varying degrees of goodness or badness and I push for minimizing overall harm. Biden and the US government overall is providing weapons to a genocidal state because of the treaties ae have, Trump will absolutely send more regardless of treaties.

I don’t like genocide. If the feasible options presented were between no genocide or yes genocide, I’m going to pick no genocide. But those are not the viable options, it’s slow rolled equipment deployment to a genocidal state vs enthusiastic floodgates of weapons to a genocidal state. And I’m going to choose the one that is the least harm.

Aeronmelon is right about Sisko, and Janeway was forced into a desperate survival situation while still doing her best to maintain the ideals of the Federation.

The only people pushing the genocide Joe line while also downplaying how trump will actively be worse has always been trumpers trying to discourage liberals progressives and leftists from voting.