There's no question in my mind that the oligarchs in the U.S. want to encourage racism and culture wars, in order to keep lower-class Americans at each others' throats rather than united against the bourgeoisie. It's also true that populist dictators have leveraged, and continue to leverage, anti-immigrant and other racist viewpoints in order win support and push their twisted ideologies on their entire country. Trump is, without question, an example of a would-be dictator who's in the pocket of billionaires and is appealing to Christofascists in hopes of going back to the White House in lieu of jail.

That being said, articles like these which insinuate that Trump's campaign is primarily about racism is a repetition one of the key, fatal mistakes that Hillary Clinton's campaign made in 2016. It's also not a good way of fixing the "us vs. them" environment that allows the oligarchs to keep thriving.

While it's hard for us to understand their motivations for doing so, some voters in the black, Latino and Asian communities still support him. It's irresponsible and short-sighted to pretend these voters don't exist, so it becomes necessary to concede that while many of Trump's supporters are indeed racist, there are still some legitimate ideological reasons why certain people continue to embrace conservatism. And if you actually want long-lasting change in this country, you have to engage with those people and not dismiss them as being just as deplorable as the rabid Trump cultists.

Granted, it's getting harder with each passing week to justify supporting Trump for non-racist reasons, as seen by the fact that some conservative influencers have started walking back support for him. That being said, there remains a perception (no matter how invalid) that Kamala Harris is an insider, a cog in an inherently corrupt political machine, while Trump is the guy who's going to drain the swamp. I know perfectly well that Trump is way more corrupt than Harris, but the 'drain the swamp' narrative sticks because some Democrats have been just as subservient to the oligarchs as Republicans. Even when they controlled the White House and Congress, they didn't undo the Reagan-era tax cuts for the wealthy, or cut the billions of dollars in spending on defense contractors, or pass any reforms that would make our government more accessible to non-elites (like term limits or ranked choice voting).

The status quo isn't working out too well for the majority of Americans, and the Democrats represent a continuation of that status quo. A lot of these disaffected Americans just want to see the system "shaken up" in hopes of seeing an improvement. The "vote them all out" sentiment is popular for a reason. Hopefully, those people realize we already gave Trump a chance in 2016, he didn't fix a damned thing, and it's not going to be any better for them if he gets a second term. However, Democrats in the U.S. (just like Labour in the U.K.) are going to have to deliver some significant improvements in the quality of life for the common folk instead of serving the oligarchs first and foremost. Otherwise, we're just going back to conservative leadership in a few years, and the next would-be dictator might be less incompetent than Trump was in staging a coup.

As the article points out, the original lyric from American Idiot is, "I'm not a part of a redneck agenda." They changed it to, "I'm not a part of a MAGA agenda."

...Can this even be considered a significant change? It's more like a modernization of the original language. Whose agenda did they think Green Day was previously referring-- oh, right. They probably didn't do any research, did they? It's just manufactured outrage, so they can pretend that the left is just as vile as they are.

This was the right decision in 2023. Making it now, a month before the DNC, means they have completely circumvented the primary elections and robbed voters of their chance to select the nominee. We've gone from millions of people having a voice in the nomination process, to a group of less than ten thousand, and that is disenfranchisement on a massive scale.

Don't get me wrong, I would vote for a dead raccoon before I'd vote for Trump. But we deserve better than to have Trump's opponent hand-picked on our behalf like this. I'll vote for whoever that is, but we should absolutely give the Democrats hell once this is all over. The duopoly in our elections needs to end, if they can't be trusted to honor the basic fundamentals of the system.

I don't expect impartiality from an outlet like Bloomberg, but it's important to point out that this isn't new relief, just a further step toward fixing a fundamentally broken program that was supposed to provide this relief years ago. Personally, I have nearly sixteen years of qualifying employment but still haven't had my loans forgiven due to mishandling by the companies, and deliberate sabotage of the program by Betsy DeVos.

And her reasoning was, of all things, that the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith was illegal. I would have expected her to say that relocating the classified docs to Mar-a-Lago was an official act, done while Trump was still President, but no. She based this idiotic decision on even shakier legal ground. Doesn't this mean that the appointment of Special Counsel David Weiss was illegal too? Shouldn't Hunter Biden's conviction be expunged, based on Judge Cannon's logic here?

Looks interesting, but I gotta be honest: when I click on the Steam page and the first thing I see is a cash shop to buy "Epoch Points" for this early access game? That's an instant turn-off for me. I'm sure it's not as predatory as what Blizzard did with D4's monetization, but I don't want it in my games, period.

Re-Logic (Terraria's developers) have already gone on record saying, "even if Unity were to recant their policy and statements, the destruction of trust is not so easily repaired.” That's the stance I think every developer should be taking. Unless you have a Unity game that can be released by the end of the year, all devs need to seriously consider switching engines.

My wife is a music nerd, so I asked her this question. Her answer: Summer Nights from "Grease". The entire song is perfect for what it is, except for the very last word. John Travolta switches to his falsetto range to sing the word "nights" in a style that reminds me of the Bee Gees, and it just doesn't fit with all the vocals that came before it. It's literally a sour note to end what's otherwise a perfectly good song.

I doubt Ashton and Mila apologized because they actually regret writing those letters; this is just damage control because they got caught defending a rapist. Also, Scientology isn't a religion, it's a criminal organization, and it ought to be treated as such.

I was disappointed to hear that Kurtwood Smith wrote a letter in support of Masterson too. I really liked him in RoboCop... but I guess there's a reason why he was so good at acting like a total bastard.

I only have a small amount of experience with generating images using AI models, but I have found this to be true. It's like making a photocopy of a photocopy. The results can be unintentionally hilarious though.

Her seat is not in danger, but there's infighting over who will replace her. If Feinstein resigns, California's governor gets to appoint her replacement, and Gavin Newsom is likely to appoint a black woman if given the opportunity. Rumor has it that Nancy Pelosi wants Adam Schiff to replace Feinstein though, so she is pushing for the 90 year old Senator to finish her term.

Feinstein's caretaker also happens to be Pelosi's daughter. That's not a conflict of interest at all.

You run the risk of being ostracized by a conservative social group if you share any opinion that contradicts the teachings of the church school. I'm straight, but the hicks I went to high school with shouted every homophobic slur they knew at me anyway, because my opinions sounded "gay" to them.

That being said, you could tell her that the church has held opinions in the past, which they decided to change when we learned more about the world. The church persecuted Galileo for suggesting that the Earth revolves around the Sun. They called Leonardo da Vinci a necromancer for studying human anatomy. And 98 years ago, Christians wanted to hang John Scopes for teaching evolution in Tennessee.

Basically, if you can't tell her directly, you can at least suggest that the church is not infallible when it comes to certain topics. Again though, people will consider you subversive even if all you're doing is relaying pure, historical facts. There's no safe way to contradict a zealot.