I know what neoliberalism is, but where does it suggest it applies to the majority of boomers?

So you’re so smart, and you’re making these allegations - you tell me how boomers have voted differently than the prior and subsequent generations.

I’m really tired of this narrative. If you look at the prior two elections, boomers only voted conservative by a slight majority, and younger people only voted liberal by a slight majority. The difference isn’t stark. I’m a boomer, and me and my boomer friends are flaming liberals.

There is evidence already coming in that Trump did very well this time with younger people. Stop putting all the blame on boomers.

It’s dumb and pointless, but it’s literally the way a president is elected today. We have had many instances of people being elected president who didn’t win the popular vote. So if you want to try to figure out if third party candidates caused Trump to get elected, you have to look at it state by state.

The other person was making the point that you can’t do it by total popular vote, you have to do it by state and then look at their electoral college votes.

It’s not something anyone can just do. America’s borders are more open than a lot of countries’. You have to apply, and it can be a multi-year process even if you do get accepted. It can cost money too.

I guess you and I just disagree. Yes, for me there’s for sure a “not Trump” aspect to Kamala, but she seems like the most progressive candidate we’ve had for some time.

No one is saying it’s “the wrong time,” like the people who say we can’t talk about gun control after a shooting. What they’re saying is that a third party candidate is fundamentally a waste of a vote, or worse, in a two-party system. It doesn’t move the needle in the direction you want, it takes a vote away from the major party candidate who is closer to your ideals.

The BBC and Reuters have both gone way, way downhill in recent years, but the concept is reasonably valid. AP and NPR are still good. Aljazeera is actually pretty decent for US news, though I’m not sure if that’s true for US news related to the middle east.

Would be nice to think so, but apparently they’re Trumpers.

Reportedly he has a very worth of $50M. If that was just in investments getting 4 percent a year, that would be $2M annually for doing nothing. Kind of gross to stoop to that level for money when you have so much.

Courting the same demographic

No, some whoppers end up with the inside not all whipped and crunchy, but a little chewy. They’re great.

I feel like, if demons were real, they’d be perfectly happy with Tucker.

Are you taking about those weird chewy ones? Because those are my favorites.

I’m not going to say I’m okay with that privacy policy, so not reading the article, but the original complaint is quite a read.

I wonder if that’s related to a user base that skews heavily toward techies.

I did, thanks.

Completely agree. I personally I’m fine with the trade-off I made. There’s even some benefits to a smaller site. I remember on Reddit there were lots of times I didn’t make a comment, even when I had something to say, because there were already literally thousands of comments, some with thousands of upvotes, and I figured anything I said would be lost in the din. Here, if you’ve got something to say, it’s very likely to be seen.

deleted by creator