Sorry, were you around for the past several elections? Perhaps the 2020 elections where, upon the progressives banding with Biden to get him elected with the expectation that we would be able to “push him to the left”, the Democratic party decided that the reason they didn’t win more seats was because Progressives had damaged their chances of winning, and they must be marginalized. Or perhaps the 2016 elections where, the target of a long running hate campaign was preferred by the party over the popular progressive candidate who was then blamed for his supporters not being won over. Or the 2012 elections where the incumbent Democrat failed to deliver on progressive policies and was a high water mark for drone strikes, but progressives helped bring the win over the candidate Republicans weren’t excited for.

I voted for Harris in hopes that she’d beat out Trump despite how much she and Biden before her discarded progressive policy. I was under no expectation of Progressives being able to do a damn thing to reach her.

For whatever reason, when I’m hearing about Dems in the swing state I’m in, I’m hardly ever hearing why you should be excited to vote for the Dem candidate, but instead why the Rep candidate is so awful that you simply must vote Dem to stop them. Like, there was about a week(?) that Harris and Walz seemed to be coming out of the gate going “we’re gonna be so awesome, don’t even worry about the weirdos on the other side”, but then it became “please, it is of Vital Importance you do not vote for Trump, we promise Harris will be better than him”, and I just don’t understand why they changed.

There is a lot of “invisible” work that party orgs do. If you want to see why big names and attention alone don’t work, look at the Green Party. They have name recognition, ballot access and even get a bit of the vote each presidential election. What they’re missing is the “ground game” that gives the presence in nearly every race in every precinct, and the local engagement to actually win an appreciable chunk of elections every year (not just the presidential years).

Signal is moderation.

Generating signal is moderating noise. The first moderator of any message is the person converting ideas into language. Understanding the interplay of how messages get moderated by the various layers they pass through is what media literacy is.

I miss when signal-to-noise ratio was common parlance of the Internet.

Making usable spaces is tough work, but having worthwhile content drowned in an ocean of noise is seemingly the default of corporate controlled media anymore, so much have they abandoned paying attention to what they publish. That you don’t know who is editorializing and moderating the places you frequent and have opinions on the job they’re doing says to me that you’re not doing the work that being media literate requires, which is all the more important when so much of it is generated content with no consideration given to reality.

If you look back at panel 2, there’s a potential third one to research

Then you must be quite frustrated that Israel disagrees.

Netanyahu says Israel will cut Gaza off from Egypt, taking control of Palestinian enclave’s remaining border

Israel seized control of the Rafah border crossing. The impact could be devastating

And Egypt’s borders were not completely open. In part, because they did were not aiding Israel doing a forced displacement of Palestinian citizens. As a reminder, the forcible removal of a people, in whole or in part, is one of the kinds of genocide. Perhaps you might want to consider why you’re advocating for the forced displacement of an entire people. Why Egypt has not fully opened its Gaza border for fleeing Palestinians

You know who look like whales? Problem spenders who spend far beyond their means, and are preyed upon by predatory business practices that use psychological manipulation to encourage people to spend as much as as they can. Like, I’ve literally watched video game developer conference talks where a dev explains in great detail and depth on how to hijack human psychology to milk every last dollar they can. Whales stopped being “those who can afford to spend” a long time ago.

Palestine’s border crossings are controlled by Israel. Early on, Israel stopped allowing border crossing. To the point that a major international concern was the inability for any aid trucks to enter. Additionally, movement within the West Bank has been heavily restricted by Israel’s checkpoints. And Israel has for a very long time actively denied Palestinian refugees the right to return to their homes if they do leave. If it is difficult to understand why this sort of forced movement and controlled borders is an issue, I encourage you to read up on the Trail of Tears and South African Apartheid.

Movement and Access in the West Bank | August 2023 West Bank movement restrictions make life harder for residents and aid organisations

You mean the ones they bombed the following day? They followed evacuation orders. An Israeli airstrike killed them the next day.

Not so much on the fence between Harris and Trump, but on the bench, because apparently a significant demographic in my state is apparently not all that important to winning the swing state, and have been being iced out since before Harris was on the top of the ticket. Perhaps it is a failing of character to be unable to look past the continuing apologetics and support for a genocide and the emphasis on courting the “good” Republicans over the Progressives, but I can’t just set that aside and pour my energy into cheerleading the presidential race. I don’t have an option that I want, I have a choice between the status quo (which we know is leading us into bad places) and actively making things worse.

I’m not sure how “tens of billions of dollars of military aid” counts as not intervening in a foreign conflict.

It is a bit galling to be told endlessly that we must shut up and choose when the choice is “genocide or more genocide”, even when the reason Harris is on the top of the ballot at all is as a result of speaking up about the issues with Biden. I’m not all that comfortable merely accepting that, to escape the chopping block myself, I must remain silent about my family members. I’m sorry that Harris is so tied to Israel’s expansionist agenda that my inability to stomach rampant slaughter is threatening her and the Democratic party’s chances against Trump and the Republican party, but I can’t let some tens of thousands of killing go.

Perhaps they should have left Western style Manifest Destiny in the past.

Not my point. You absolutely can point to homophobic passages of the Bible. You can also point to passages of the Bible that are not talking about homosexuality in specific, but that are commonly interpreted as such. My point is that expecting even Christians to agree with other Christians about what texta constitute the Bible let alone what those specific texts actually say is an exercise in futility.

This is the why of the existence of all the various sects and denominations of Christianity. There are theologians who have done lots of academic work to show how the Bible does not need to be homophobic. There are others who have worked just as hard to justify doing grievous harm to homosexuals. Trying to explain both of those with the One True Reading of the Bible is committing the same error they do.

For my queer ass, if Christians all spontaneously decided to follow the theology of Rev. Fred Rodgers tomorrow, I’m gonna breathe a sigh of relief and leave them alone to be just the nicest people and hope they stay that way.

Expecting Christians to follow a given text to the letter will always be setting yourself up for failure. Not only do people pick and choose the doctrine they follow (or more often have it picked and chosen for them by their spiritual leader), different traditions have different emphasis and even different texts they’re operating off of. Expecting an legalistic following of a specific interpretation will leave you expecting far different behavior that most of your observations will show.

Sorry, but it’s actually pretty hard to dismiss the Romans passage, but it is something that can be chalked up to Paul being sex negative, going so far as to exhort people to be chaste or get married if they can’t control their passion if, as he noted, they were not free from such passion as he claimed to be. The other passages commonly cited don’t reference homosexuality nearly as directly, but it would not be a difficult argument to make that the word choices were specifically defaming homosexuality (especially given how common it is for people to use the same sort of defamation). Which isn’t to say that every denomination adheres to the same interpretation of these passages, but they aren’t on as theologically shaky ground as we might hope.

The Heritage Foundation is wild, and one of the most significant public policy groups with deep ties to American conservatism. Basically, any crazy policy that the Republican party has taken on as a major party plank in the past 50 years has a distressing high chance of having its roots in Heritage’s recommendations.

For example, in 1981:

Among the 2,000 Heritage policy recommendations, approximately 60% of them were implemented or initiated by the end of Reagan’s first year in office.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heritage_Foundation

Yeah, given how much Trump and Republicans lean on Heritage, and Trump has been talking about doing some “light” tyranny on day 1, it’s ridiculous to attempt to write off the Heritage Foundations’ plan to Christian Fascism.

Now tell us how many Heritage Foundations recommendations do the Republicans and Trump take on board! Distancing the Heritage Foundations from them rather undersells the position of one of the most influential public policy organizations particularly within conservative politics.