I say nothing as a blanket statement as a general rule of thumb, but most democrats are no different then the Republicans. They are just into politics for the lifestyle. But some are genuinely ‘ok’. Much like ACAB, yes there are a few cops that are not the devil, but until they’re is systemic reform changing the whole establishment and preventing bad ones from existing (which are the vast majority), ADAB (all dems are bastards).
I think there’s some difference between tolerating shit colleagues (most of the “non-devil” cops), and actively trying to change the system from within (at least some of the democrats). I guess maybe there are some actively progressive cops, seems like that’d be a hard mission though…
Ok, can we just take a second to acknowledge the fact that you are trying to nitpick grammer in a debate about the moral and ideological quality of political groups. I really have nothing to say except for the fact that those kind of arguements have a history of being employed to try and undermine valid arguements by attacking the ‘intelligence’ of groups such as African-Americans to try and discredit their struggles and pain. (not trying to say it means that mine is more valid because you made that redirection, but please consider the implications of that tactic)
God come off it. Some people would rather have clearly written sentences and a correction is only an attack if you’re so fragile that anything would be.
Even then, there’s some differences between them and within them… I’d happily vote for Mamdani if I was in New York, for instance.
I say nothing as a blanket statement as a general rule of thumb, but most democrats are no different then the Republicans. They are just into politics for the lifestyle. But some are genuinely ‘ok’. Much like ACAB, yes there are a few cops that are not the devil, but until they’re is systemic reform changing the whole establishment and preventing bad ones from existing (which are the vast majority), ADAB (all dems are bastards).
I think there’s some difference between tolerating shit colleagues (most of the “non-devil” cops), and actively trying to change the system from within (at least some of the democrats). I guess maybe there are some actively progressive cops, seems like that’d be a hard mission though…
The problem is, NO ONE gets to the federal level as a elected politican without being a millionaire first.
It’s classism, writ large on the lot.
AOC did it. Absolutely an uphill battle but there are exceptions
Yes they fucking are different.
Also, than*
No? Then is correct in that sentence.
Absolutely not. Than would be correct if the message wasn’t bullshit. Grammatically, then is wrong there.
Ok, can we just take a second to acknowledge the fact that you are trying to nitpick grammer in a debate about the moral and ideological quality of political groups. I really have nothing to say except for the fact that those kind of arguements have a history of being employed to try and undermine valid arguements by attacking the ‘intelligence’ of groups such as African-Americans to try and discredit their struggles and pain. (not trying to say it means that mine is more valid because you made that redirection, but please consider the implications of that tactic)
God come off it. Some people would rather have clearly written sentences and a correction is only an attack if you’re so fragile that anything would be.