@yitzi2.bsky.social
200 followers 6 following 4.4K posts
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Reposted
Write out each of those combat rules.

Write out the reason for each of those combat rules; what would go wrong without them.

See if it's possible to have fewer rules fulfill more of those reasons.

That's as much help as I can give without more details about those rules.
Express my displeasure with how the federal government was handling mailing my ballot (or failing to do so).

That's not a lot, but it's not as if Harris needed more votes to win MA.
No. It counts if it has even a slight chance of affecting the outcome.

But, due to the Electoral College, a presidential vote in MA isn't even that.
Disagree.

Some of them are Sliwa wiping the floor with Cuomo.

Or Cuomo just outright falling flat on his face.
Nope. I absolutely did not help ensure Donald took power.
So are you claiming that what we are fighting is *not* an attempt to overturn the Constitution by making the Executive, under Donald Trump, the only branch that matters?

Because that's what I think we're fighting...
People who protect the public from those individuals who would harm others.
Fighting accomplishes something.

Reading something that I already understand just to try to find a source for doomerism does not.
Which is why I do not engage in cavalier voting behavior.

I take seriously every vote that has a snowball's chance of affecting the outcome.

This one didn't.
No, my protest vote did not help Trump, since every one of the electors that it helped determine went to Harris anyway.

If I had lived in MI or AZ, I would have voted Harris, never mind protest votes. Because those votes matter.

But mine didn't, so I didn't.
Real resistance will, one way or another, involve guns. The question is how to get the most advantage (particularly legitimacy) before that happens.
You think *protests* with *signs* is what my idea of resistance consists of?

The protests are a good way to gather support and try to escalate things advantageously, but that's all.
If you don't provide a page number, then even if I *had* read it I would probably have no idea as to how you think they're going to make the situation hopeless.

So either provide the information that you think you have that I don't, or accept that I have a reason for not believing you.
Because when someone says that they are going to achieve something that cannot be achieved by the means that they have available to do so, "magic" is the only reasonable explanation for what is intended.
Getting a *summary* of P2025 is easy. I know a *summary* of P2025.

But a *summary* of P2025 does not support the claim in contention, namely that it is too late to stop it.
I'm a bit further away than you are, but I have also relied on trusted people to say roughly what is in it.

And what I have heard trusted people say is in it does *not* support the claim that it is too late to fight back.

Hence, when someone says that it does support that claim, I want a page #.
Name one thing that you think I would have done differently, that would make any practical difference at all, if I'd read it.
The job that it is (at least for purposes of determining who should be hired and who should be fired) is the job that it is advertised to the public as being.
No; I'm the one who is not in a class and therefore does not accept the project assignment in the first place.
But less than voting Harris without reading it.

(In full disclosure: I actually protest-voted, but only because I knew it wouldn't matter, since there was no way MA was going to be a swing state.)
But that's the thing: *I'm not voting on the P2025 document*.

That document could have never been publicized, and it would *still* be clear what Trump is trying to do and how and that he needs to be stopped.
Me? I'm the one arguing that we *can* fight and dismantle the Trump regime, and suggesting an asset to use in the fight.

Jay is the one saying "everything is hopeless by now".
No. Moot means that it is not of relevance. Something that hasn't happened yet, and can still be prevented, is definitely not "moot".
Yeah. Ruling in favor of Trump's actions often, but against him sometimes.

When he goes ahead and ignores them when they rule against him, that creates a huge weakness in his legitimacy. And a POTUS without legitimacy is just a gang leader and thus much easier to justify opposing.