Svenosaurus
svenosaurus.bsky.social
Svenosaurus
@svenosaurus.bsky.social
230 followers 360 following 300 posts
I drink moderately and know things excessively https://svenosaurus.substack.com
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Also, why would Democrats want to emphasize the procedural win that’s unpopular save for the unique circumstances?
Swept everything from Abigail to Zohran!
It makes no difference if it’s a citizen or not.
Honest politicians make two types of promises - (immediately) realistic and aspirational. If they are competent communicators, voters can tell which is which. Limiting yourself to only one of the two types is political malpractice.
Yet, discounts for military/veterans/students/retirees are fairly common. Discounts for civilian government employees less common these days, but not unseen.
Free market is woke radical leftist
Moreover, individual after-tax income isn’t well defined for joint filers, so framing it in individual terms strongly suggests one is speaking about gross income.
Reposted by Svenosaurus
Trump deported Iranian Christians with open asylum claims for religious persecution four weeks ago.

He expelled other Iranian Christians, including children, to Panama in February.
Democratic presidential nominee won a higher percentage of the vote in 2016 than in 1968, so why are we talking about causes of an effect that didn’t happen?
More like Hitler Afterlife, considering Tucker is older than Hitler ever was.
We can (and do, I think) do both.
Yes, but that is a risk we can’t avoid. In the circumstances, the would-be dictator overplaying his hand gives us the best chance to eventually reclaim democracy and rebuild institutions.
There’s nothing democratic about the supermajority requirement. Scrapping it would be a good thing in the long run.
You misspelled “We are imbeciles.”
I need to stop reading replies to this or I’ll spend all day blocking people.
That’s if the parliamentary system started in 2016 or 2024.

If it had been in place for a long time, imagine what Democrats could have accomplished when they had a majority. There would have been much less chance for Trump to emerge.
Not sure about the legal implications, but reading the article, it sounds like “Trump is trying to bully states out of wiping medical debt” might be a more accurate description.
This sounds more like the list of problems with the *Obama* administration that were still problems, but to a noticeably lesser extent, during Biden’s term.
This sounds more like the list of problems with the *Obama* administration that were still problems, but to a noticeably lesser extent, during Biden’s term.
Yes, any policy that changes the status quo will have negative approval if people haven’t thought about it and weren’t given sufficient context. It also depends on the wording: “End taxation without representation” would surely poll a lot better than -13%.
DNC should sue the authors for defamation.
I think we should lower the voting age, but I’ve never heard of a single Democratic politician mentioning that.
Reposted by Svenosaurus
Dems are responsible what Bluesky user RedMaoist1918 says in the comments replying to a NYT reporter says, despite that RedMaoist1918 would rather saw his own nutsack off than ever vote for a Democrat

Rs aren't resonsible for what their president and cult leader says