eirrann | he/him🎩🔵 on Warpcast

Content pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

… https://x.com/mtracey/status/1849468868906897614

13 replies

2 recasts

51 reactions

meta-david🎩 | Building Scoop3 pfp

meta-david🎩 | Building Scoop3

Let’s assume this was a blunder. Curious why you never cast any of Trump’s which are 100x, not just in quantity, but in magnitude? Obama birtherism, attacking McCain for being a POW, calling for a ban of Muslims, FALSELY stating Haitian migrants are eating dogs and cats. FALSELY stating they’re here illegally. Stick with building and stop antagonizing your users. Many of came here to *get away* from it all. Read the room.

3 replies

0 recast

21 reactions

wake pfp

Because he's elon-light and enjoys trolling libs on his own network.

6 replies

0 recast

23 reactions

meta-david🎩 | Building Scoop3 pfp

meta-david🎩 | Building Scoop3

It isn't interesting content. 😂 But hey, if he wants to put that slant on the blockchain and embarrass his descendants, I guess that's his prerogative.

1 reply

1 recast

12 reactions

wake pfp

Agee. If you want an answer to your question, I recommend /moz and their podcast. Worth a listen and will help you understand what's going on.

1 reply

1 recast

10 reactions

Dan Romero pfp

I’m anti-institutions. I think they are incompetent. Washington DC is at the top of the stack. Plenty of coverage of Trump. I find mainstream liberals an easy target because they rationalize their political beliefs to an absurd level. Whereas average conservative is honest: I’m voting for the non-liberal candidate. I don’t care about the rationale or logic. If average liberal: I’m voting because it’s my team and I don’t care about anything else, I would have more respect. Pure tribal affiliation. Politics is to help those you like and hurt those you don’t. Very Lindy.

26 replies

4 recasts

32 reactions

eirrann | he/him🎩🔵 pfp

eirrann | he/him🎩🔵

my policy preferences lean towards progressive, although I've voted across both mainstream parties and independents (but often more Dem than Rep because of progressive values) my view: the two-party death grip on US politics is the single greatest threat to national security, as both parties seek divisive issues to split the electorate (interesting read: "The Polarizers – Postwar Architects of Our Partisan Era" by Sam Rosenfeld) what are your thoughts about the recent chorus of people who view Trump as presenting a clear and present danger to the nation because they have sworn oaths to the Constitution and refuse to swear allegiance to a man who wishes to be a monarch/dictator (I'm biased; choose your preferred term, both are being used among protractors/detractors) or am I rationalizing my political beliefs to an absurd level? context: https://warpcast.com/eirrann.eth/0xeb7fcf77 https://warpcast.com/eirrann.eth/0x8d0edd9f

2 replies

1 recast

7 reactions

logonaut.eth 🎩 ツ ↑ 🍖 pfp

logonaut.eth 🎩 ツ ↑ 🍖

and to the extent that the u.s. remains a major global power, we might even reasonably revise this to say “greatest threat to both national and international security” the two-party system fosters polarization domestically but a convergence toward hawkish action in foreign affairs, it seems to me

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

eirrann | he/him🎩🔵 pfp

eirrann | he/him🎩🔵

respectfully, I think genocidal* and nuclear-armed demagogues like Putin are a greater threat to international security while a second Trump administration could potentially change this depending on the extent to which the US system of checks and balances would perform as intended, I don't think Trump has the capacity to focus on one thing long enough to emulate Putin's level of acting as a global destabilizing force besides, Trump only cares about protecting his own interests Putin wants to restore an empire --- * Russia's war against ukraine has definitively genocidal goals, aiming to eliminate the Ukrainian people under the United Nations convention, genocide includes acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group Putin’s stated goal of ‘de-Ukrainization’ and actions like targeting civilian populations, forced deportations, and attempts to erase Ukrainian identity through cultural suppression and violence clearly fit this definition

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

logonaut.eth 🎩 ツ ↑ 🍖 pfp

logonaut.eth 🎩 ツ ↑ 🍖

Fair point. And I think I'd agree that genocidal and nuclear-armed demagogues like Netanyahu are a greater threat to international security. It's just that while the U.S. has demonstrated a capacity to thwart genocides in certain cases, it more often has taken actions that indirectly contribute to mass killings, especially through prolonged military engagements, support for authoritarian allies, and prioritization of strategic interests over humanitarian concerns. In that sense, I feel like the hawks that dominate both the GOP and the Dems often position themselves at least genocidal-adjacent.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions