bon iver is sick and i don’t think there’s really much of an overlap between his music and what is being attacked here (other than drawing on some generic folk tropes or whatever).
bon iver is sick and i don’t think there’s really much of an overlap between his music and what is being attacked here (other than drawing on some generic folk tropes or whatever).
Removed by mod
go fight them then.
Removed by mod
rent free
Everyone’s corny wedding pictures for over a decade now.
Socialism is when you take an archetypical trope, (unrequited love), common to every time and culture, and dismiss it w/ performative, incredibly hamfisted, body-and-spaces discourse (whiteness, toxic masculinity).
Damn if all the romantic poets, pining away for unrequited love, simply realized they were only misogynists. Lol.
deleted by creator
Actually existing socialism is when you have worse inequality than post brexit Britain.
Massive income inequality w Chinese characteristics.
Alumni 🤭
Sending safe vibes dude.
Trumpism, as articulated or gestured at by the Banons/ Oren Casses/Riehan Salams (or those conservatives who reject the fusionist dead consensus), might have some features which are more attractive than Democratic neoliberalism, but however appealing these may be and no matter if you could square these with the evident deficiencies (other anti-egalitarian or bigoted currents/valences), the fact is nothing like Trumpism (working class trade unionism/isolationism, say) is actually on the menu for any actual lawmaker, including Trump himself (a cursory look at his term evinces this).
So no, Trump is bad, obviously so, just like any other Republican, and he’s worse than the libs who are deranged about him, but, to his credit, he’s much, much, much funnier than they are.
Socialism w patsoc characteristics smdh
trump sitting out of the debate was out of strategic calculation.
there is, however, a more interesting question RE his eligibility to hold the office again. Governor Hutch referred to this in the debate, a theory being proffered by some libs and never trumpers in the legal academy, and now by partisans more generally, that section 3 of article 14 of the constitution prohibits Trump from being President again, given his arguably treasonous behavior. (“No person shall be [president], who, having previously taken an oath . . . to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”)
how this could shake out is hard to say, but its notable that the argument is getting mainstream traction, and if trump is found guilty in either of the federal or georgia jan 6 cases ahead of the election, i’d say there’s very likely to be significant litigation on the issue.
Removed by mod
rent free
hutchinson didn’t even have a moment where he responded to the moderator starting w/, "well, as a. . . " followed by a huge mugging to the camera.
huge loser.
Removed by mod